Monday, March 13, 2006

A Tip of the Hat to IMB Trustees and Some Help Requested from Grassroots Southern Baptists

I have attempted to keep the focus of this blog on the International Mission Board and the exciting future direction of the Southern Baptist Convention. I have desired to be very positive about the work of the IMB in every area, including that of our trustees, and any impartial reading of my posts will give evidence of that positive outlook. Yes, I have disagreed with the two new policies at the IMB, but I have attempted to show that disagreement in a spirit of respect toward my fellow trustees. I have a deeply held belief that Baptists can disagree but continue to cooperate, and that has been at the forefront of my efforts to express my opinion but remain kind to everyone involved. This is the Southern Baptist way!

There are some very gifted men and women who have been chosen to represent the Southern Baptist Convention as International Mission Board trustees. Evidence of their wisdom can be seen in the Manual of Trustees, a self-imposed policy trustee manual, proposed and adopted by the trustees themselves. It was this book that was given to me last June, and the one I studied diligently before I ever attended my first meeting in July of 2005 as a new trustee. I believe that all trustees really do desire to perform a work that is honoring to Christ, regulated by policy that is based upon Scripture, and of course, one that is primarily concerned with the spreading of the gospel of Jesus Christ by appointing God-ordained, Spirit-filled believers called to the mission fields of the world.

Some of the good common sense of my fellow trustees is seen in several statements within the blue book that include:

(1). The International Mission Board's power can never exceed that of the convention itself. (page 1)

(2). Each trustee is to fill a servant role and represent the total constituency, not any particular segment within the geographical United States. (page 8)

(3). Ideally, the total constituency is to be informed on matters related to the work of the International Mission Board. (page 10)

(4). Trustees are expected to support the president in the effort to build a quality institution known for its excellence . . . (page 10)

(5). We will not enter lands with attitudes of haughtiness or superiority, but with humility and love. (page 22)

(6). The board never does its work in secrecy, but through openness. Baptists abhor hidden corners in its denominational operations. They expect a constant flow of communications and interpretations. The only times executive sessions of the board should be held are when human life is at stake, or tedious personnel problems must be handled. Instead of a secret approach, Baptists demand a program of information and want it to be kept up to date. (Page 22)

(7). (Trustees) must feel and act on their own best judgment. (page 26).

(8). Trustees are to decide and implement what is best for the institution and the churches served by it. (page 26).

(9). Careful and complete records are (to be) studiously kept of all actions and decisions of the board and its administration. (page 29).

(10). A trustee is to bring (his/her) voice to the meetings when serving, but is to also take (his/her) interpretations back to the people after adjournment. (page 33).

As you can tell, these are some excellent, wise policy statements, and there are many more!

How can so many wise people misunderstand my motives with this blog? I honestly think some of the trustees were initially just simply confused about the nature of a blog. Some made the mistake of attributing comments in a blog to the author of the blog. Rather than viewing blogs as a very positive way to get input from the grassroots level of the Southern Baptist Convention, some misunderstand a blog as a way to gossip. I think trustees are now beginning to see the value and benefit of blogging, and it does not include gossip.

However, to be fair, there does need to be some rules regarding blogging for trustees. I am asking you, my friends in the blogging world, to read the the excellent policy statements above regarding the protocol of trustees, and come up with similar statements regarding blogging. I will be in New York City tomorrow and Wednesday with my son and his sixth grade class, so I will be unable to post comments on a regular basis. However, please type your comment, and as soon as I have an opportunity, I will post it.

I would like to take your suggestions and formulate a "blue book for blogging." Maybe in the future this tool can be used in a powerful way to get all our Southern Baptists involved in the plannign and direction of the ministries of our convention.

Again, I express my faith in my fellow trustees at the International Mission Board and you, my blogging friends in the Southern Baptist Convention. Our best days are ahead.

In His Grace,

Wade Burleson


Hiram Smith said...

[2nd send, previous send was not confirmed on my screen feedback]
Dear Wade,

This blog is pure gold. Thank you for it. What I have written below pertains to what appeared in your last two blogs. It differs from what I sent earlier and is intended to replace that blognote.
Congratulations, Wade. Now you are practicing Baptist polity in its best form. You have replaced a three-months-long string of complaining “Whereas’s” with two sound “Therefore be it resolved’s.” Your two proposed policies are constructive steps in the right direction. In this new approach you exemplify the best of historic Baptist polity. You propose concrete solutions for the problems now facing the IMB and it’s parent SBC. And, like the 2000 BF&M Committee, you invite and provide opportunity for all Southern Baptists to directly express their advice and consent or dissent on what you propose. Too bad the IMB failed to do a similar thing in adopting the two new policies.

But, of much more importance, you demonstrate that blogging on the Internet can be used constructively in the deliberative processes that are essential to sound decision-making in the governance of SBC agency-entities. You have cracked open the cloistered counsels of the governance of an SBC agency-entity. You have given Southern Baptists who care enough to study, evaluate and participate in this new form of deliberating, an opportunity to contribute their views on issues to one trustee, who can then incorporate this grass-roots level of Baptist views in his voice and vote on decisions of an SBC agency-entity. Southern Baptists who hold no office have heretofore been simply left out of the decision-making processes of convention agency-entities. Earlier I wrote you about this importance aspect of your initiative.

How long before the next step? Years ago foresight and experience led to the development of procedural rules for our annual meetings. These rules continue to be modified from time to time. The rules and changes in the rules you have applied to your blogsite reflects your own keen recognition of the need for procedural rules in this dynamic new forum. Now I hope the entire Convention, including all agency-entities, can be convinced of the merits of establishing a comprehensive system of official informative blogsites that appraise Southern Baptists of what is happening in the early stages of decision-making for Southern Baptists. On these blogsites, information and advice can be given out and accumulated from the grass-roots level of Baptist life. If done well they may become powerful instruments for helping us understand how small our differences are, and how vast is the breadth and depth of our agreement on what is important, and how united we are on matters that are really important.

Ten years from now, I can see this form of give and take communication being a major factor in developing consensus and agreement among Southern Baptists on questions that must be answered in the processes of SBC operations. Jimmy Draper has said much about the need to engage young leaders in Convention decision-making. Wade, by example, you have solved the problem that Dr. Draper only called to our attention. You have single-handedly introduced a new kind of forum that provides opportunity for all who see themselves as young SBC leaders to immediately become constructive participants in SBC decision-making. It also allows into those processes we who are neither leaders nor young. It opens an avenue for all seventeen million Southern Baptists to contribute our advice on issues confronting the Convention at any given time. However, the development of reasonable and responsible procedural rules for this powerful new form of SBC deliberating is crucial for it to fulfill the promise that your gritty initiative has established. Congratulations for your great contribution to opening up Baptist deliberations and decision-making. Some day blogging will likely be a key part of SBC procedures for formulating convention-wide decisions and decisions within all SBC agency-entities.

I look forward to the day when trustees will develop solutions in the sunshine for most issues that require board action. After only three months and very little fumbling, you have demonstrated that Baptists can do business in the bright openness and full disclosure of Internet blogging. I am sorry that you have had to endure so much stress in the process. But, thank you for paying the price for all Southern Baptists.

PS: Your two proposals would be better understood if they were presented beside what they are intended to replace.

I thank the Lord for your stellar leadership in helping move the SBC into the 21st century of information exchange and shared participation.

Bob Cleveland said...


Item 10) says it well:

A trustee is to bring (his/her) voice to the meetings when serving, but is to also take (his/her) interpretations back to the people after adjournment.

That's precisely what you've been doing. We're "the people".

I have personally served on Deacon bodies and I am aware that, many times, they do not want decisions made in private, made public. That's one thing where personal issues or morality are concerned, but quite another in matters of principle. Most of the times I've bumped into that thought, it's been based in a desire to avoid justifying a decision. And all of them should be justifiable to anyone and everyone.

I very much admire the way you've avoided making things personal, even when (I surmise) you may have felt they were just that on the other side.

I think any guidelines should simply follow the biblical admonitions regarding wholesome speech, gossip and the like. Haven't had time to look any of them up, but I shall try.

In the meantime, "stay the course" seems apropos.

Alan Cross said...

A blog is meant to be more than just a single-issue news post. I learned about blogging from Andrew Jones,, who was/is really the pioneer in the evangelical/emerging church world. Through the IMB controversy (I found out about it from a link on Andrew's blog) I have been introduced to SBC bloggers that I didn't even know existed. I am looking forward to hearing from these folks on other issues after this controversy is dealt with. But, here are a few suggestions:

1. Realize that EVERYTHING comes out much harsher in print than in person. Whereas in person, you might be real straight forward, in print, nuance is often missed because there are no facial expressions or ability to respond. This is why emoticons are so helpful.
2. Misunderstanding is much easier in the blogosphere than in person. Take time to make sure that you really want what you are saying to be out there for the world to see. Would you really say that an hour from now? This is especially true in the comments of other blogs where you have no control.
3. Seek to represent Christian character in all you say or do. Too many "Christian" blogs are full of attack and ugliness. We should be loving, even when we disagree. We can have sharp minds and soft hearts at the same time.
4. Check your facts. Within seconds of posting information, it can/does go to the ends of the earth. If you are wrong, people may not read your retraction and it can spread like wildfire. "Consider what a great forest is set on fire by a small spark" James 3:5. This is especially true about blogs.
5. Admit when you are wrong. If you mess up, recognize it and ask forgiveness. It is better to represent humility than to win your point. Stop arguing so much, anyway (God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble - James 4:6). Jerry Corbaley really showed Christian character when he did this recently.
6. Have fun. Sometimes, as Christian bloggers, we get so serious because we deal with life and death issues. It is good to introduce some levity into your blogging, like some recent discussions about the best BBQ at Kevin Bussey's and Marty Duren's blogs.
7. Be a real person. No one wants to be around a know it all, or someone who isn't real. Show your heart and be genuine. Let people know about your other interests so that you will be more approachable - like your son's basketball victory, Wade!
8. Be a peacemaker through your writing - I think that Jesus said something about that in the Sermon on the Mount!
9. Defend the cause of those who cannot fight for themselves. Blogs are a great means of advocacy for causes and for people who have no voice. Make their case known so that others can pray and act on their behalf.
10. Lift up Jesus. When people are finished reading your post, will they be edified in their hearts and minds, or just more cynical and frustrated? Even when dealing with problems, we can do it in a way that builds up, draws issues to the light, and offers solutions, rather than just tearing down. The best way to do this is to point people to Christ in everything and show how God is working through every problem.

As I look at these suggestions, I see that I have not always been consistent in what I believe to be true. Sometimes I get off base and stray because of emotion or just the flesh. Thanks for calling us to this, Wade, because it causes us to be more consistent in our ethic when we put it in print.

Anonymous said...

What is real is not a blog. But I applaude the first step.

A bulletin board without need for censure is the next step.

Jon B.

Ken Dare said...

THANK YOU, thank you,
thank you, Bro. Wade for
the comments on trustees.
So many of our comments
are lengthy and I have to
try to speed read them .
But I still take delight
in them and do read them.
I am a deacon in my church and am in the
processing of moving to
a new church area in the
Tulsa area so things will
change but I continue
reading ALL your blogs
and the comments made.
I am in communication
with some missionaries
and friends and share
these blogs with them
from time to time. Trustees are just THAT.
TRUSTEES...they are to
be trusted, trusted,
trusted and your are
bringin home that point
beautifully, Bro. Wade.
Love, in Christ...........Ken Dare.

art rogers said...


Is this a contest?

We realize that communication in our rapidly changing world is not governed by strict rules that may become irrelevant in a short period of time. However, the issue of electronic communication, with its diverse potential, must be addressed so that we have some sense of what is appropriate and acceptable in this area. In light of this, please consider these guidlines...

1. All things written should bear your name. Your willingness as a Trustee to speak to delicate issues is enhanced by your willingness to stand by your words. It helps us to choose our words carefully when we know that we will have to answer for poorly chosen ones.

2. Comments to "bulletin boards," weblogs, or personal web pages should be moderated. While this form of communication is public discussion and you must not foster a spirit of censorship, you also must not allow a place for personal attacks.

Personal attacks are differentiated from sincere disagreements by their tone and content. If the content is unreliable or not verifiable, it is suspect. If the tone is derrogatory or incindiary, it is suspect.

3. Not all comments should require that the "poster" reveal his or her identity. There will be some, for whatever reasons, who would not contribute valuable ideas if not for the opportunity to speak anonymously. However, there are others who use the veil of secrecy to vilify or degrade. This is obviously something that you must not allow.

When taking on the responibility of hosting such an electronic conversation, there will be a commitment of time and energy that goes beyond simply participating in conversations. We are grateful for any desire you may have to help Southern Baptists communicate with one another concerning issues important to us all.

As to your personal comments, the rules that govern all communication concerning the Southern Baptist Convention and the International Mission Board apply to this arena as well.

blaize said...

"We will not enter lands with attitudes of haughtiness or superiority, but with humility and love"

Absolutely beautiful. I can't thanks the IMB enough for that one.

Evangelical Orthodoxy said...

Pulling together several comments ... has anyone paid attention as to what is going on with NAMB? An insider told me there are less than 50 missionaries in North America ... probably the fewest since the early decades of the convention. I do not mean to chase a rabbit; but there are more issues besides the IMB controversy.

Anonymous said...

With reference to the question about the NAMB read . The Christian Index is the state paper of Georgia baptist.

GeneMBridges said...

Blue Book on Blogging:

Rule 1: Trustees are free to blog.

Rule 2: Trustees must not disclose material from closed meetings. Public meetings are fair game.

Rule 3: Trustees are free to differ with the minority or majority of any board and blog about their differences in a fair, charitable, and accurate manner. Lies, innuendo, and unfalsifiable assertions will not be tolerated.

Rule 4: Apropos 1,2,and 3, any trustee blog template must include, on the front page a visible disclaimer stating that the views and opinions expressed herein are not necessarily the opinions of the other trustees.

Rule 5: Accusations of inaccurate reporting of events, meetings, and other communication must be substantiated in writing and investigated by a neutral third party to be agreed upon by both the blogging trustee accused of impropriety and his accuser/s.

Rule 6: Apropos 5, any material found to posted in such a manner must be, upon the verdict of this 3rd party, be removed and a public, written apology made on the blog and to those involved.

Rule 7: Apropos 6, in keeping with the admonition to forgive those as Christ has forgiven us, charity must be exercised. However, repeat offenders are subject to sanctions to be determined privately by the board of trustees on which they serve. A single incident may be a legitimate error. A repeated, documented pattern may indicate a serious problem.

Rule 8: In the event sanctions are ruled necessary, a complete record, including the actual charges must be presented, in writing to the person accused of impropriety. In addition, in the event a trustee is sanctioned publicly, this same record must be made publicly for the readers of the said blog in the event those readers in turn address the issue themselves. In this manner, all interested parties will know the exact, documented reasons for the sanctions.

Rule 9: As blogs are public and written, if sanctions are deemed necessary and the documented errors are deemed to rise to a level that fulfills the legal definition of "libel," a board, if all attempts to act redemptively have failed, may charge the person accused of libel in accordance with the appropriate laws. Such a decision requires the approval of the Convention, as does the removal of any trustee.

mixilmash said...

I am puzzled about why you think there needs to be some rules on blogging about meetings that are supposed to be open and transparent. It seems to me that if a process is open and transparent, there isn't a need for rules....and if the process isn't, rules won't help anyway because integrity will have already taken a hike & truth will have alreday left town too!

ANY rule or policy, whether about blogging or rescinding the emeritus status of retired missionaries if they say something the IMB BoT don't like, (yes, check the policy manual, it's there! What a DISGRACE to treat those who've given their lives to the Master's cause this way!!)is only as good as the people who implement such.

Again, I reiterate, UNLESS there is a corporate cultural change from the current leadership paradigm FROM the over/under, "big dog" philosophy TO the servant leadership paradigm modeled by and commanded by Jesus in Matthew 20, the ONLY result that is possible from all the recent uproar will be which "big dog" is gonna lord it over the other "little dogs".

IF we can ever recover appropriate spiritual leadership, then corresponding spiritual blessings will be bestowed.

Anonymous said...

Just to answer the comment on NAMB, according the report on NAMB's website there are 5,126 missionaries funded from different sources (such as state conventions, namb, & whatever).

Anonymous said...

To add to what Mixilmash said...I, too, deplore the fact that for no given reason can an Emiritus missionary's status be revoked. Also, the fact that any missionary may be terminated and no cause need be given...this is apalling. Obviously, due process has yet to come to the IMB

Anonymous said...

The NAMB question. If you want to know what the Christian Index (Baptist paper of Geogeria) has to say you need to read

The article states:
In 9 years the number of funded missionaries is down 10%. Of 5364 missionaries 2942 are funded by the NANB--- 2422 or 45% are self funded volunteers.
Also, a decrease of $32,000,000.00 in reserve funds in 7 years. And a conflict of interest in outsourced work after a number of NAMB employees were terminated.
There are more problems noted in the article than I have listed here. The editor of the Georgia Baptist paper stands behind the article and said it was written at the request of Georgia pastors.

Anonymous said...


Your blog has done wonders to really begin to open up communication. I must admit--most of the time I have to work hard to TRY to shut down what is happening in the States. It can really become a frustrating and heart wrenching distraction. I am currently serving in Western Europe and thought you might like to see what is being talked about on this side of the world ( This one isn't mine---but the latest post is one with a ton of current relevance. Have a super week!

Evangelical Orthodoxy said...

According to what I was told - you can take it or leave it, I understand how these things go - that NAMB is counting people as missionaries who traditionally would not have made the cut to be labeled "missionaries." These might be BSU personnel, state convention officials, etc. if the SBC is paying a part of their salary or benefits. There are less than 50 traditional - i.e. full time - missionaries operating in North America. I mention this only to alert you guys that care about another crisis. I think pulling back the curtain might reveal more than a single slight of hand. An example - not to pick on Paige Patterson - is how Dr. Patterson bragged about how much growth he generated at SEBTS. What is not said is that he started an entire new undergraduate school. These types of "new definitions" seem to be common. Just FYI for those of you concerned.

Anonymous said...

Everyone seems interested in blogging in the SBC take a look at several of the workshops available for free streaming at conference. The workshop specifically on blogging and its description is Steve Knight & Panel - Reaching the Connected Generation with Blogging. What is a "blog"? What does it mean "to blog"? And how can blogs be used to evangelize on the World Wide Web? Find out answers to these questions—and more—as this panel of bloggers discusses the emerging medium and what it means for the future of ministry on the Internet. You'll hear from Steve Knight (Billy Graham Evangelistic Association), DJ Chuang (, Nick Ciske (, Will Samson (, and Stephen Shields (

Anonymous said...


Blogging is current technology. But who knows what is coming tomorrow?

IMB policies for trustees need to be written as principles, not technologically oriented procedures.

One of the principles in the current "trustee blue book" that may need creating or enhancing is in regard to feedback and input from the SBC constituency. The closest thing to this in the current policies may be the principle that trustees are to represent the entire constituency, not just their particular state or region. But reality has been that communication from the IMB and its trustees is primarily one way: outward.

Until recently, the possibility for feedback was limited to those in privileged positions or personal acquaintances of trustees. Blogging has opened a door for meaningful feedback and dialogue. That door should be made wider as other technological means emerge.

Anonymous said...

If it is true, what 10-40 Worker said that “for no given reason can an [Emeritus] missionary's status be revoked. Also, the fact that any missionary may be terminated and no cause need be given” I agree with the writer that this is appalling. Does revoking emeritus status mean the retired missionary would lose their pension?

I have been told that my state is an “at will” state which means a worker can be fired for any or no reason with no recourse I think that is bad enough in the secular world, but shouldn’t Christians hold to higher principles? Or is it just that if a current missionary or retired missionary does not change with every change put into place after they were approved and sent out they are so guilty of heresy that they do not deserve any consideration?


mixilmash said...

What is going on with NAMB? It appears that what we have is a Baptist version of ENRON.

Is this yet another example of a flawed leadership that stands in stark contradiction to what the Master modeled and commanded in Matthew 20?

The deeper one looks at the SBC picture, the more one sees the necessity for an intense work of the Holy Spirit upon us corporately as a prelude to being able to receive the spiritual blessings that our loving God wishes to bestow upon us.

Connect the dots. IMB Bot involved in an unprecedented power grab by a few, NAMB has serious difficulty, baptisms are down across the board, CP giving not keeping pace with inflation.....

ONLY a deep sin-killing, power distributing work of the Holy Spirit can break the intoxication of power that the current leadership paradigm expresses.

When will we wake up and see that ALL the denominational contortions we are experiencing are reflections of a core spiritual deficiency? When will we cease listening to the siren song of those who would whitewash our situation with a version of Norman Vincent Peale's power of positive thinking? When will our leaders cease treating the deep wounds on our corporate body as minor things?

mixilmash said...

Wade, this is in answer to Susie's questions in her most recent blog:

The retirement pensions of retired IMB missionaries can't be touched as they are subject to federal law...however, something at least as evil is implicit in the policy; an abuse of authority in the name of HIM whom they served by being threatened for speaking contrary to the "party line"! This intimidation tactic would exclude retirees from attending IMB functions, etc., thus denigrating their place in the shared corporate life which served to replace the lost family ties due to their service overseas!! ABOMINABLE!!

Again, this is reflective of a flawed operative paradigm of leadership that represents the "rule or ruin, dominate or destroy" mindset of the current "powers that want to be".

This alone should alarm us as to how far we've drifted from our Master! This alone should alert us to our need for spiritual cleansing from God!

Anonymous said...

Since there have been references to IMB policies on terminations and revoking of emeritus status, here they are:

The Manual for Field Personnel policy MFP-801 2.e states "The board confers emeritus status on retirees who have at least 15 years of service. Only retirees receiving emeritus status are eligible to participate in emeritus recognition activities. The board retains the right to revoke the emeritus status of a retiree for any reason satisfactory to the board. The reasons for such revocation may be disseminated to third parties at the discretion of the administration of the board.

The policy on termination of active missionaries is MFP-226,
"The IMB is a Christian organization with spiritual purposes and a commitment to relate to field personnel in loving, fair and humane ways.

At the same time, the board is an employer with a responsibility to relate to secular laws. The board’s intention is to abide by the employment laws that are relevant to the rights of field personnel.

As is true with any employer-employee relationship, it is appropriate for the board to clarify its expectations of field personnel, to take administrative action to correct deficiencies and, if necessary, to separate itself from those who are unable or unwilling to perform their assignments in accordance with the character and purpose of the agency.

Certain conditions will be considered as career threatening in that they preclude continued employment relationship to the IMB. They may be summarized as follows, but they are not all inclusive, and the board always retains the right to terminate any field personnel (career, associate, apprentice, Journeyman, and International Service Corps) for any reason satisfactory to the board without disclosing to the person the reason for the termination.

1. Failure to exhibit Christian lifestyles in keeping with the calling and responsibility of field personnel.

2. Patterns of failure in relationships resulting in negative impact on the achievement of the purpose of the board.

3. Ongoing failure to perform adequately in assigned responsibilities.

4. The persistent insubordination in relation to supervisors and/or stated policies.

5. The persistent advocating of doctrinal opinions inconsistent with the Bpt Faith and Message (BF&M).

6. A persistent emphasis of any specific gift of the Spirit as normative for all or to the extent such emphasis becomes disruptive to the fellowship.

7. The continuing misuse of narcotics, tobacco, drugs, other addictive substances, and the use of alcohol as a beverage.

8. Dishonesty in the handling of money or other resources.

9. Immoral sexual activities, including but not limited to rape, sexual assault, sexual harassment, pedophilia, sexual relations outside of marriage, use of pornography, etc.

10. Homosexual activities.

11. A divorce following appointment.

12. A resignation or termination for any reason by one spouse.

In the case of urgent situations that need immediate attention, regional leaders are authorized to bring field personnel to the U.S. for administrative consultation pending a recommendation to the trustees for termination."

Anonymous said...

Do you feel like you have a tiger by the tail? That tiger being truth, knowledge, wisdom, and
expression. Your blog is making possible “expression.” Without expression the others
accomplish very little. Its been said, “Truth needs no defense. It only needs to be heard.” I see
your blog of “grace and truth” accomplishing more than you could have ever accomplished as
being just another IMB trustee. I say that because TRUTH is being heard. When we have
freedom of expression we have Baptist beliefs in action.
Truth will be voted on at the SBC instead of ‘you’re out of order, that’s not a legal motion,
that will be refereed to the Executive Board, etc.” When truth is squelched, churches loose hope
of accomplishing anything at the SBC. That’s why attendance is low. Why attend if you can’t be
Sorry, didn’t mean to start meddling because I wanted to bring out the importance of your
blog. But then again, I believe your blog will bring changes to the SBC. I see you resigning as a
trustee because you will be too busy spreading truth. Truth is lifting up Jesus. Jesus is not for
closed doors and secrecy. Because of that Jesus would say the BFM 2000 is illegal. That
churches were omitted in achieving this creed. Without churches knowing, their messengers
were unqualified to vote. Because the BFM 2000 was passed by unqualified voters, it is null and
void. How’s that for logical thinking? The 2000 takes away INDIVIDUAL priesthood and the
autonomy of the church. In short, it is a ‘ball and chain’ to missions.
I don’t know how “hits’ work but as your blog approaches 100,000, is it possible to identify
the person who reaches that mark? I hope someday it will reach a million.
Rex Ray