SBC Today: What do you think are the greatest challenges facing the SBC?
Frank Page: I think the challenges confronting the SBC today are different than they have been in decades past. I think one of the issues which is a tremendous challenge for us is the theological divide of Calvinism and non-Calvinism. Everyone is aware of this, but few want to talk about this in public. The reason is obvious. It is deeply divisive in many situations and is disconcerting in others. At some point we are going to see the challenges which are ensuing from this divide become even more problematic for us. I regularly receive communications from churches who are struggling over this issue.
I believe we face serious methodological challenges. There is an increasing divide between those who are more traditional, more contemporary in mindset, programming, and funding methodologies. Sometimes this division is between age groups, but more often between people of various philosophical positions. This is leading to deep questions about what we should do, what we should not do, and how we should do what we decide we should do. I believe this is the area of greatest challenge concerning the SBC at this present time.
There are also cultural challenges which are facing us. Demographics are shifting dramatically in many ways. Culture is affecting our churches far more than it should as far as mindset, understanding, and acceptance of certain lifestyles. Instead of us dramatically affecting our culture, I am afraid it is having an opposite influence.
SBC Today: What do you think are the greatest opportunities opening to the SBC?
Frank Page: I believe there is a great opportunity opening to the SBC right now. Having gone through the GCR Task Force, I can assure you that for the first time in a long time, people are seriously evaluating all that we do as Southern Baptists. Personally, I think this is good. I think we have an opportunity to do better than what we are now doing. I believe we have an opportunity to effect Kingdom change for Kingdom issues. I believe for the first time in a long time, we are seeing a change in how people perceive the Cooperative Program. I believe there is a window of opportunity for the building of relationships, the rebuilding of trust that will allow us a great ministry future together. While I may sound like a denominational servant expressing hope for a program, I have hope for the Kingdom!
SBC Today: What is your vision for the SBC?
Frank Page: I believe my vision for the SBC is expressed in some of the answers already given. However, let me also say that I do have a vision of a body of believers who may not always agree methodologically or even theologically, but who are joining together for a common cause of winning a lost world to Christ. I am cautiously optimistic that this can happen. We are in difficult days. The difficulty of the days ought to pull us together to support what we can support together and that ought to be missions, evangelism, church-strengthening, and planting.
SBC Today: What is the toughest lesson you have learned in ministry?
Frank Page: The toughest lesson I have learned in ministry is that sometimes we are called to leave people we love the most. This has been very difficult, as I have had to move from time to time. Some avoid this lesson by not getting close to people, but I have never been able to do that.
SBC Today: What is one of the key mistakes you see pastors and other staff members making in their ministries which causes them problems in their churches?
Frank Page: Obviously there are many mistakes that pastors or staff members make that cause problems in churches. However, the one I see more often than any other now is the lack of relationship building on the part of pastors and staff members. There is less pastoral work going on now than ever before. There is less relationship building with church members and lost people than I have ever seen before. While we all deeply want and need relationships, I see more of a corporate model and pastors believing that as long as they preach great messages, that is all they need to do to build up their church. I can point to many gospel preaching pastors over the years whose churches have been dying rapidly. I believe this is the number one mistake I see in our day and time.
SBC Today: What is the key to being a faithful/effective/successful pastor?
Frank Page: The key to being an effective, faithful, and successful pastor is in an ongoing closeness to the Lord Jesus. Depending upon Him, being close to Him, and seeking to be like Him is that which helps make one fateful, or effective, or successful. Let me also add one other key. A key to true success in the pastorate is not to believe what your small group of inner circle people tell you about how good you are. Unfortunately, I have known many seemingly successful pastors who could “strut sitting down.” Unfortunately, they have begun to believe what their inner circle of followers are telling them. I am not talking about good advice from trusted counselors. I am talking about believing the flattery of those who are enamored with a seemingly successful minister. It is best to stay close to the Lord and listen to what He says and His advice will always be appropriate and balanced.
SBC Today: How do you balance ministry and family responsibilities?
Frank Page: Balancing ministry and family has always been a challenge. However, I have often balanced that by blocking off time well in advance for date nights, family time, and certainly vacation time. My family has always been very understanding when emergencies come up, but I have tried to be sensitive to their needs. Also, I rarely took work home when my children were small. When I got home, I wanted to be there for them in every way.
SBC Today: You have had to work through a heart-wrenching grief experience in the untimely death of your daughter. How did you find your way through this painful experience?
Frank Page: This question is obviously difficult. The question you have asked is how did I find my way through this painful experience? Honestly, I have not yet found my way through this experience. It is an ongoing journey that I believe I will be on the rest of my life. My daughter and I had a deep and special relationship. Because of that, I miss her terribly and have not come to the point where the waves of grief are in the past. Someone said that grief does come like waves on the seashore, but a decrease in frequency and intensity over time. I have not yet found that to be true. That being said, let me also be honest in saying that even though the grief remains, God’s grace has been truly sufficient. He has ministered to me, and my wife and my other girls in powerful ways and I know He will be faithful in the days ahead.
SBC Today: Who are some of your heroes in ministry?
Frank Page: Some of my great heroes in ministry are Dr. Charles Page, First Baptist Church of Charlotte, North Carolina, Dr. Jim Henry, First Baptist Church of Orlando, Florida, and Dr. Jimmy Draper, former president of LifeWay.
SBC Today: What are your two or three favorite TV shows? Movies?
Frank Page: I rarely watch television and almost never go to movies. I think the last movie I saw was True Grit, which I did enjoy. My wife and I do watch NCIS on occasion. I do not even have time to watch my Andy Griffith Shows anymore.
SBC Today: What do you do for fun?
Frank Page: This is a difficult question for me. I have little time for fun. Is that good? Absolutely not! I do like to read novels and spend time with family. Other than that, I do not fish nor golf or anything else fun. My wife and I are hoping to start playing tennis once again. Truly, free time is usually spent traveling to see grandchildren or daughters.
SBC Today: Thank you, Frank, for your transparency and the leadership you are bringing to Southern Baptist life.
Frank Page: I truly want to say thank you to Southern Baptists for their love, support, and prayers. I never sought after this job, but believe God put me in this place to encourage, to challenge, and to lead. I wish to thank God’s people for praying for me.
Dr. Page,
Thank you for being brave enough to mention the “Elephant in the Room” that few wish to discuss openly and objectively — Calvinism and Non-Calvinism in the SBC and its future implications. Blessings!
I wonder why such statements as these were prompted at this point. It is for this very reason, Calvinist head-hunting, that I left the SBC Today fold. If we are trying to lead the SBC into the future, we need to deal with these issues even-handedly. That begins by admitting that the theology is most often not the issue, it is personality or integrity. That ‘slap’ could be applied to any pastor, etc., who is not forthright in stating his convictions and discussing the implications with his church or prospective church. A continuationist could be just as guilty. An egalitarian could be just as guilty. An open theist could be just as guilty. I’m tired of the stereotyped Calvinist boogeyman crusaderism taking place.
In a time in which these differing view points regarding soteriology are becoming more like Whitefield and Wesley than Gill and ‘just about anyone else,’ I am once again trouble by this interview and Dr. Page’s responses to the questions placed before him.
SolaGratia!
SAGordon,
I think you have sorely over-reacted to this piece. Dr. Page grieved over “the theological divide of Calvinism and non-Calvinism,” not Calvinism in toto. Moreover, no other issue within the SBC is causing such a great divide as incognito Calvinist pastors. When have we ever heard of an incognito “non-Calvinist” or Arminian Southern Baptist pastor causing dissension in any SBC church? We don’t, which is very telling. I think your offense at this piece says way more about you than it does about the “SBC Today fold.” God bless, brother.
“no other issue within the SBC is causing such a great divide as incognito Calvinist pastors”
I wouldn’t mind seeing some support for this statement.
Are you being serious? You have not heard of stories in the SBC of churches being divided because incognito Calvinist pastors are hired without telling the churches of their Calvinist theology?
I’ve heard some third and fourth hand stories that relate something like that. There is probably some truth to them. But a few anecdotal stories, re-told 2nd, 3rd, or 4th hand hardly rises to the level of:
“no other issue within the SBC is causing such a great divide as incognito Calvinist pastors”
Now you are certainly entitled to your opinion, but if you are going to suggest that the greatest source of division in the largest protestant denomination in the word is incognito Calvinists, then it might bolster your opinion if you had some facts to back it up. I’m not doubting that such scenarios have occurred, but claiming it is the greatest source of division in the SBC strains the credulity a bit without something to back it up.
Scott,
I think the problem is not so much with Calvinists. At least, its not with me. The problem is with aggressive, obsessed Calvinists. And, thru out my life, even before this all became such a big issue in the SBC, I have found the AOC’s (aggressive, obsessed Calvinists) to not want me, or any other non-5 point Calvinist, to be a part of the SBC. In fact, what gave me such a bad taste for the AOC’s was that I was told often by these types that I was not preaching a true Gospel…I was preaching a works salvation…I was not really believing in the sovereignty of God…I was denying the Scriptures…etc, etc, etc….
I have had 2 good friends of mine….good, godly men, who love the Lord…to be black balled from being DOM’s by the AOC’s. You wanna know the reason why they couldnt be DOM’s in these associations? according to the AOC’s who thwarted their moves? because they werent 5 point Calvinists! One of these AOC’s told the DOM Search Committee that he would not ever vote for anyone to be the DOM of that Association, who was not a 5 point Calvinist. I think that would be the attitude of most of the AOC’s whom I’ve run across.
Scott, you’re my friend. I love you. But, for me, this is about the AOC’s…not about plain, ole Calvinists like you.
David
The problem is actually twofold: 1) those who wear Calvinism on their sleeve, for whom that is their moniker, message, and motivation; 2) those who wear anti-Calvinism (Arminians) on their sleeve, who seem to have a radar for Calvinism, find it under every rock, and are ready to come to blows (figuratively) at a moment’s notice. In my experience, I come across more agressive anti-Calvinists than Calvinists EVERY DAY — and I don’t ever look for it. I don’t keep a record of who has ever espoused a Calvinist position or quoted a Calvinist in a sermon or book. I don’t want to join the ranks of those who say, “I am of Calvin,” or “I am not of Calvin.” If you can demonstrate and defend your preaching and teaching on the basis of solid biblical interpretation and exegesis, you and I probably have a WHOLE lot more in common than in conflict regardless of where you fall in those categories. Why is it so much easier for Arminian Southern Baptists to have fellowship with Presbyterians than with Calvinist Southern Baptists? The real problem is the way we treat one another in the face of our differences.
David,
I posted a similar response on Peter’s blog. I hope you see that most Calvinists (read: not aggressive, obsessed in your terms) see these types of non-Calvinist’s statements such as Frank Page’s in a way that feels similar to witch-hunting. As I stated on Peter’s blog, I know a DOM who blackballed a pastor from his association’s (and nearby one’s) churches because of his Calvinism. Is that any different that what happened to your DOM friend? Isn’t that just as deplorable?
Many of the normal Calvinists I know could see the problem much like what you actually wrote, but switching the non-Calvinists/Calvinist up.
“The problem is with aggressive, obsessed non-Calvinists. And, thru out my life, even before this all became such a big issue in the SBC, I have found the AONC’s (aggressive, obsessed non-Calvinists) to not want me, or any other 5 point Calvinist, to be a part of the SBC. In fact, what gave me such a bad taste for the AONC’s was that I was told often by these types that I was not preaching a true Gospel…I was preaching a man’s salvation…I was not really believing in the human responsibility…I was denying the Scriptures…etc, etc, etc….”
I have actually been told these things about Calvinism even though I don’t follow John Calvin (preaching a man’s salvation – well, I’m actually just a layman, but the point is the same), I do believe in human responsibility, and I don’t deny the Scriptures (John 3:16 or any other passage). Isn’t this just as deplorable as how you’ve experienced aggressive, obsessed Calvinists?
I just wanted to share my perspective from the other side of the fence.
Thanks,
Jason
The calvinist issue has affected our family greatly. As a southern baptist I do not want my tithe supporting calvinism. I do believe this is a doctrinal issue and should not be taken lightly. Our former pastor wants us to all just get along, but where do we draw the line on doctrinal issues. I can not be a member of a church where anything goes. In our former church Bible school age children were told that some of them might not be elected to go to heaven. This is why we can not all just get along. As I was explaining how to be saved to my grandson recently, I realized that if I were of the calvinist doctrine I could be dishonest in telling him that God loved him and wanted him to be saved because he might not be one of the elect. This to me alone is evidence of the fallacy of calvinism. We need to know where we stand on this issue as a convention because it is a very serious issue.
Thanks,
Timothy
It is interesting that Dr. Page says that the divide between Calvinists and non-Calvinists is presenting a “challenge” and people immediately reinterpret that statement into “Calvinism is a problem”.
I will just say that I didnt hear much of anything, at all, about anti-Calvinism attitudes, until after this wave of aggressive, obsessed Calvinists hit the scene in a bigger way. I mean, a lot of people thought that the Founders types where out there on the fringe. But, really, little attention was paid to them, until we started having all of these AOC’s going into Churches ingognito, in an attempt to change the church. Then, a lot of people started getting very, very upset.
Also, I cant begin to tell you of the Pastors I’ve talked to, who’s “preacher boys” left their church to go to seminary….only to come back and tell their beloved Pastor, a Pastor who loved them and thought the world of them, and the young, preacher boy come home to tell that Pastor that they didnt believe he was preaching the true Gospel….had lost respect for his ministry….didnt believe that Pastor was doing a good job in leading the church, etc. etc. etc. I cant begin to tell you of the Pastors I’ve talked to, who’s hearts have been hurt by this kind of thing.
After all of these type things happening….then, a lot of anti-Calvinists sentiment began. And yes, there are some people, now, who are overreacting about Calvinists… but its only after all the churches which have been filled with strife by AOC’s, split by AOC’s, AOC’s telling their Pastors that their Pastor is not preaching the true Gospel, and is not leading the Church in a NT way, etc. etc. etc.
And, that’s just the plain, ole, unedited truth of the matter. Believe it, or not.
David
Bill,
The “stories” I’ve heard have not been 2nd, 3rd, 4th hand. Also, our president of Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, Dr. Danny Akin, has told us in chapel that this is a problem in the SBC, as he’s heard first-hand accounts. He has told us all to demonstrate integrity and be very up-front with churches about our theology. We are to trust in God to pair us with the appropriate churches instead of intentionally hiding the more controversial details of our theology in order to get a church (and in some cases, in order to convert a church to Calvinism).
I suspect that you are trying to down-play this event, and do so to make the situation appear as though it rarely happens. That’s how it appears anyway. I hope not. I hope I’m wrong.
Nonetheless, what do you see currently as one of the main causes of division in SBC churches? From the Internet, to chapel messages, to various Baptist presses, etc., this single issue is currently offered as the main topic causes division in SBC churches and even in our convention. The fact that we are even having this discussion should raise both of your eyebrows.
If this issue is actually not the main issue causing division in SBC churches, then please, inform us as to what is.
“If this issue is actually not the main issue causing division in SBC churches, then please, inform us as to what is.”
I have no idea. I’m only one person and even with all I read and everyone I talk to, I can only know a fraction of what goes on in the SBC. So I’m not qualified to make declarative statements as to what is the biggest issue causing division in the SBC.
The only thing I’m trying to downplay is your statement, which you cannot reasonably support. That there are pastoral candidates who hide their theology from pulpit committees, I have no doubt. And it is a problem, whenever and wherever it happens. But until I see some empirical evidence, I’m not willing to concede the point that it is our biggest problem.
If I were to go solely on my firsthand experience, I would say that Independent Baptists joining and pastoring SBC churches and charismatics are the biggest causes of division. But of course I can’t say that, because I don’t know that. It is only what I have seen.
And yet we are not hearing stories in various Baptist presses or on-line or through other venues to the effect that Independent Baptists joining and pastoring SBC churches and charismatics are the biggest causes of division. What are we hearing that is causing division? Incognito Calvinists infiltrating SBC churches. Hmmm … that is very telling.
What is telling is that you made a declarative statement about what is the biggest divisive issue in the SBC and I asked for support. So far you haven’t provided any. What you have provided is second hand accounts of some people who have experienced the problem you describe, which no one is denying anyway. Let’s also keep in mind that the anti-Calvinist blogosphere is more circular than linear. So a single story or statement gets picked up and repeated, sometimes by several blogs. We’ve seen it with this very article. I doubt we can get any meaningful data from blogs.
Since this isn’t going anywhere, perhaps I’ll ask you this: What is your solution? How can the SBC solve its biggest divisive issue? I’m very interested to know what the non-Calvinist solution is to the problem of Calvinism in the SBC.
Bill,
I could provide you with link and after link of reports of incognito Calvinists infiltrating SBC churches, but you would respond with the exact same conclusion: it’s all bunk because stories are repeated and become inflated, etc. I thought about providing you with such links but then clearly understood the futility of it.
There is no solution to “the problem of Calvinism in the SBC.” There have always been Calvinists and “non-Calvinists” or Arminians in the SBC and there will always be such. Baptists have historically always been either Arminian (General Baptists) or Calvinistic (Particular Baptists). There is no more a “solution” to Calvinism in the SBC than there is “non-Calvinists” or Arminians in the SBC.
Where a solution is needed, however, is the problem of Calvinists who get hired as pastors to “non-Calvinistic” churches, not informing those churches of their Calvinistic theology. The solution, of course, is integrity. When the time comes for me to apply for the pastorate, I will be completely honest with my Arminian theology. I trust the Lord to pair me with a church of like-minded believers and worshipers of Christ. I have nothing to hide. Would that Calvinists, such as Roy Hargrave of Riverband Community Church (a Calvinist Southern Baptist church in Florida), do the same.
I’m afraid you still don’t get it. It’s not all bunk. I never said as such. You say you can send me link after link. How many do you have that recount first hand information? A dozen? Two dozen? I suspect you could not find me two dozen plausible first hand accounts of incognito Calvinists splitting churches (something I’ve never denied occurring). But even if you could: The SBC has what; 16 million members? 44000 churches? How many of those churches are experiencing some type of divisive problem (or have)? Of that number, how many are caused by deceptive Calvinists?
For the last two questions, I suspect you don’t have an answer. I don’t either. Because I don’t, It would be disingenuous for me to declare that I know what the majority of those divisions are over.
I see. So, in order to substantiate this claim, we have to interview all 16 million members among 44,000 churches in the SBC? Right.
Or, we might consider not making claims that cannot be substantiated.
Look, to whatever extent it is happening, it’s a problem, and not to be taken lightly. All pastoral candidates need to be honest with prospective churches, and all pulpit committees need to be rigorous in their vetting of candidates.
Agreed.
Well, I don’t have a dog in this hunt. But I tend to think that Bill Mac is right. Assertions should be substantiated.
That said, Dr. Page did say, “I believe we face serious methodological challenges…I believe this is the area of greatest challenge concerning the SBC at this present time.”
Here’s an idea. Why not mandate (I know, autonomy) that churches actually examine candidates on their theology before calling them. Way back in 1987 when I was ordained in the SBC, my ordination exam was really for me to give my conversion testimony. There was not one question about my theological convictions. Not one.
Later when moving to a different church, no theological questioning. I was a Calvinist. I wasn’t hiding it. But no one asked me.
So I say churches should do a better job of vetting the candidates. If a man lies or obfuscates, well then you have a much greater problem.
Les,
To go into a church…knowing that you are going to do something that could be very controversial and could cause strife and division in the church…is unwise, in the least…and its unethical, at worse. For someone to go into a church, knowing that their 5 point Calvinism is not what that church believes….and knowing that they may not like it being preached…is either ignorance on the behalf of the potential Pastor, or else he has a hidden agenda and does not care if he hurts that church, or not.
And thus, we have the problem in the SBC, which Dr. Page talked about.
David
Of course, many, if not most, pulpit committees are really just feeling their way through the process. They don’t know what 5-Point Calvinism is, so it’s not on their radar screen, they don’t know if they should be for it, against it, or somewhere in between. To hear people today talk about it, they would think it’s something new, they don’t know that it’s been part of Baptist life for centuries. They don’t really know what they — or their churches — believe. They only know when something sounds “a little off” to them. It’s like the saying, “I don’t know much about art, but I know what I like.”
David, I’m sure there is a problem…to some degree. I have no idea. In my case back in the late 1980s, I had no idea there may be a problem. These days, there may be much greater awareness. And if a man is deceiving churches, whether he is Calvinistic or Arminian, that is a huge problem in each case. How widespread something like that is, no idea.
BTW, Vols vs. Bama. Could get ugly.
Yep, it could get ugly for the Vols in Tuscalooooooooooosa, tomorrow…. especially with our 2 top offensive players out with injury…Justin Hunter and Tyler Bray.
Anyway, I’m hoping for a lot of turnovers on the part of the Tide….and a huge upset!
David
I feel your anticipated pain. My Auburn Tigers have to go to Red Stick and play the Bayou Bengals. Ouch!
ouch is right…
Brothers,
I have read all of the comments. I did not find a single comment that appeals for an irenic, gracious and accurate treatment of this supposed divide EXEGETICALLY.
The Holy Spirit is not schizophrenic. Each passage of Scripture has one and only one intended meaning as given by the Holy Spirit. Scripture has internal consistency. The message of redemption is unified and consistent. That meaning is discovered not by interviews, polemics or mushy appeals like Rodney King – - can’t we all just get along?
As long as this issue is kicked around like the ball in a rugby match there will be no resolution. I suggest a series of well orchestrated forums in which competent leaders address the key passages exegetically. Put the text on the screen in diagrammatic format. The text yeilds to only one correct interrpretation. That is our privilege as pastor/shepherds – - to lead out into the open the correct meaning of what our gracious God has made known to us. Anything less will continue to promote this childish and nauseating ‘tit’ for ‘tat’ squabbling that causes the world to look at us and say?????
I have repeatedly made this appeal in a variety of venues. To date we have chosen to act like immature children and ‘hide’ behind innuendos and veiled posts in various publications. It is past time to:
1. clearly define the issue(s)
2. prayerfully with the utmost humility and hope establish the places & participants
3. systematically examine the text of Scripture that is specifically applicable via accurate in context exegetical precision
4. embrace and publish the results of our deliberations.
I believe this can and should be accomplsihed for the Glory of the God we serve.
In Grace,
Tom
While I am not a member of the SBC, I am very interested in this conversation. It is hard to understand how the SBC can exist allowing two very different theological views about the doctrines of God, Jesus, man, the Holy Spirit, and salvation. I agree that to continue as a legitimate body the SBC must take a public theological stand on the issues and handle them exegetically. That being said, Thomas Nettles has already addressed the issues fairly and honestly in his very helpful work “By His Grace and For His Glory, A Historical, Theological and Practical Study of the Doctrines of Grace in Baptist Life.” It is worth a careful read for all interested in understanding the exegesis of the passages in question and the history of the matters in baptist life. Again, it is my opinion that an organization cannot honestly exist allowing two very different theological positions on such foundational issues.
You wrote: “While I am not a member of the SBC, I am very interested in this conversation.” Truth be told, none of us are members of the SBC. Individuals cannot be members of the SBC. And therein may lie one of the answers to your question. The SBC is made up of congregations who cooperate for the purpose of taking the Gospel to a world that needs it, a purpose shared by Calvinists and Arminians. The same is true with regard to state conventions. The SBC isn’t a denomination in the sense that others are and so doesn’t prescribe or proscribe theological positions with regard to predestination, dispensationalism, etc. That has to happen in local churches and associations. If local churches are okay with such nuances, then by default the SBC will be. It may be difficult for others to imagine how Calvinism and Arminianism can be maintained within a single organization, but it has since 1845.
A pastor’s call is to shepherd a flock, not divide it. If a person is willing to divide a flock based on his or her own ambitions, that person is unfit to be a pastor. Any given congregation is liable to be made up of some Calvinists, and some Arminians, but mostly of people who don’t know what that’s all about. We must shepherd the whole flock. Many here see the issue as black-and-white one way or the other; they don’t or won’t — or can’t — allow for the tension that exists between faithful, but opposing interpretations of Scripture, and so the other side is demonized.
I see shepherding a flock as guiding them in the truth. I think that what SMiller is saying is that the two views are not in tension, but rather they are in oppostition in some very foundational doctrinal issues such as the nature of man and the sovereignty of God. It isn’t biblical shepherding if one doesn’t teach the truth and confront false teaching. Allowing both views to stand as equal is not honest exegesis.