BaptistLife.Com Forums.

Convention votes on the report of the committee. I've never see the preacher changed although I do recall an attempt to substitute from the floor. It failed.

The issue will be whether or not enough messengers show up at the first gavel on Tuesday morning.

So far PP is silent. He should volunteer to step down.

Wpost say at least one woman in this mess is coming to the defense of Pagie, has blogged to that effect questioning the nuances of the most damaging accusations against him, especially the SEBTS woman story about the security guard. It's kinda like Jenny Shaver of Cherokee Co Alabama, daughter of a pca preacher whose husband is the sheriff coming to the defense of Judge Roy moore last fall when I talked to her in the presence of two local cops at the Turkey trot. Saw the same two when I voted today in the Republican Primary here in Collinsville and had a good civil war discussion.

Religion dispatches piece today is in the vein of Molly last week. Calls Mohler's theology "rotten". I tend to agree.

Had a good chat about it all over the weekend with a Furman grad at a wedding in Auburn, a recent president of the American Hymn Society and the son of a nineties pastor of FBC Greenville. People are studying all this from several vantage points.''I would love to see the SBC invite the Right Reverend Jeremiah Wright to come speak on that Verse in the Old Testament about the Chickens Coming home to Roost, since RG Lee is deceased and nobody could do Pay Day Someday like He could!!!!!!!

The order of business committee doesn't have the authority to undo a decision made by a majority vote at a previous convention. I suppose the order of business committee could make a motion to replace Patterson with the alternate preacher, but they would have to do it during the business session that the convention approves the order of business

The SBC, which is made up of the registered messengers for the two days of the year the convention is in session, reserves these decisions for itself.

The SBC is unique in some ways here, ways that most SBs don't grasp. Primarily, in that the whole SBC for those two days is the group assembled. For the other 363 days of the year the SBC Executive Committee, 75 people with a paid staff HQ in Nashville, makes decisions. The SBC decision in 2017 was to have PP as the convention preacher. Only the group can reverse that decision.

It was notable that very soon after PP was fired, SBC president Steve Gaines explained the method by which he could be removed as the convention preacher: either he resigns that task or the SBC votes to remove him.

We're an odd bunch, but you already knew that.

This particular issue doesn't seem to be predictable. My prediction is that Patterson won't step away from the invitation. There will be a concerted effort among SBC leadership from various quarters who also happen to be elected messengers, to make the change in the appropriate business session. You have those who look at this as a long-time conspiracy to "get" Patterson by his enemies. You also have many conservatives who never liked him, never approved of his methods or actions, thought he used the influence he built on the boards to get both seminary presidencies and will celebrate when he's out. The annual meeting is in Dallas, Patterson's home turf, but also a state where he's not popular with a good sized segment of Southern Baptists. I'd be more willing to predict the winner of the hotly contested presidency race than whether or not the messengers pull the plug on PP.

I would be interested in seeing what sort of keynote sermon Patterson would give under such a cloud of hostile witnesses.

All of the above post is out of date, since it appears Patterson has withdrawn from any and all potential speaking engagements at the SBC, including the Evangelism Task Force report, and the Annual Sermon.

Southern Baptists leadership must be breathing a collective sigh of relief.

https://www.christianitytoday.com/news/ ... allas.html

So, did the Convention extend his tenure? Or can him?

The trustees? Extended, I guess:

The deal was that the SBC when meeting officially during the two days of each year in annual session, can summarily dismiss trustees by simple majority vote. This is what was proposed for the ten SWBTS trustees on that board's executive committee. Such a motion was properly made, scheduled for action, and debated. The move to dismiss trustees was defeated by around 98% and only 2% or so in favor.

Trustees dribbled out more reasons for their earlier action to fire PP and strip him of the emeritus status, remove him from the payroll, and not allow him to have a retirement home on campus. Reasons were generally insubordination, refusal to obey trustee instruction and orders, along with financial issues. I expect that more info will be forthcoming.