SAN ANTONIO—A new San Antonio nondiscrimination ordinance likely will prevent the Southern Baptist Convention and the Southern Baptists of Texas Convention from holding annual meetings in the city’s convention facilities because the law requires all city contracts to include a statement that the contracting party will not discriminate based on sexual orientation or gender identity, said an attorney who represents both conventions.

“The likelihood is that if there is any ambiguity in the minds of the conventions as to what it is they’re agreeing to, that city will simply be bypassed. Or at least the city-owned facilities will be bypassed,” James Guenther, general counsel for the SBC and SBTC, told the TEXAN.

The ordinance, passed Sept. 5 by an 8-3 vote of the City Council, also allows city officials to be removed from office if they discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity and forbids businesses in the city, with few exceptions, from discriminating based on their opposition to homosexuality. An earlier draft of the ordinance that would have made it illegal to demonstrate “bias by word or deed” was removed in the final version in favor of the term “discrimination.”

Religious organizations, according to the text of the law, would be exempt from the law’s hiring requirements.

The SBC last met in San Antonio in 2007 in a city-owned convention hall. The SBTC met in San Antonio last year, but at Castle Hills First Baptist Church.

It’s not clear how the new ordinance would apply to a convention leasing the city’s facilities, Guenther said. One possible interpretation is that no official statement of the convention would be allowed to denounce homosexuality. Another interpretation is that the convention would only be barred from denying seating to homosexual messengers.

Either interpretation is problematic, Guenther said. Neither SBC nor SBTC governing documents specifically exclude homosexuals from being messengers, he said, but they forbid churches that affirm homosexuality from sending messengers.

The SBTC constitution, article IV, states, “The SBTC will not consider for affiliation or continued affiliation any church that has taken action affirming, approving, or endorsing the practice of homosexuality. Such actions include but are not limited to the licensure or ordination of homosexuals, marriage or blessing of homosexual relationships, and endorsing homosexuality as an acceptable lifestyle.” The document only allows affiliated churches to send messengers to annual meetings.

The SBC constitution, article III, states, “The Convention shall consist of messengers who are members of missionary Baptist churches cooperating with the Convention.” It goes on to specify, “Among churches not in cooperation with the Convention are churches which act to affirm, approve, or endorse homosexual behavior.”

Whether either convention “discriminates” against homosexuals is a “nuanced” and complicated issue, Guenther said.

“If someone walks in off the street and is not a messenger but is known to be homosexual somehow, he’s still welcome (at an annual meeting),” he said. “Obviously if he misconducts himself, then he’s not welcome. But we do not, to my knowledge, bar the presence of persons who are homosexual per se in the meeting.”

But “if a church sent a person as a messenger and that person was known to be one who himself was homosexual or one who championed homosexual causes, that would raise the question of whether the church is in friendly cooperation. And if the church is deemed to be not in friendly cooperation, as evidenced by the church’s selection of that messenger, then the convention could act to deny the seating of that messenger,” Guenther said.

Other cities have nondiscrimination ordinances, but neither the SBC nor SBTC has been forced to sign a contract for an annual meeting promising not to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation, Guenther said, adding that the San Antonio ordinance is particularly problematic.

“When one reads the San Antonio ordinance, I think one would conclude that the convention commission, or whoever operates the convention center that a convention wants to lease, would have no authority to execute a contract unless it contained this provision,” he said.

The SBC and SBTC are “very sensitive” to the development of nondiscrimination ordinances and will “take care on the first occasion” that a contract is presented barring discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, Guenther said.

“We have discussed this development with both conventions, and those officers who make convention arrangements are sensitive to them,” he said. “We’ll simply have to wait and see how these ordinances get interpreted.”

Multiple groups have announced plans to file legal challenges to the ordinance, and efforts are underway to recall Councilman Diego Bernal, the measure’s author, and Mayor Julian Castro, who supported it. Elected officials, including U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, and Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott, have raised concerns as well.

Under the law, wedding-related businesses, such as photography studios and caterers, could be targeted for legal action if they refuse to participate in homosexual commitment ceremonies, for example, said Jonathan Saenz, an attorney with the conservative Texas Values. Printing businesses could also be cited if they refuse to print literature or articles of clothing for gay pride events.

“Primarily, you’re going to see small businesses targeted,” Saenz said. “They don’t have the type of support or financial ability to withstand any type of attack or challenge on these types of issues.”

Businesses that deal with the city government must include in their city contracts a statement that they do not discriminate based on sexual orientation or gender identity. Violation of the law by businesses or property owners is a Class C misdemeanor.

“People that want to advocate [the homosexual] lifestyle and silence the other side from opposing it” plan to use the ordinance “as a weapon to make people be quiet and force them to either forego their religious beliefs and essentially support the homosexual lifestyle or go out of business,” Saenz told the TEXAN.

Legal challenges could be triggered if the ordinance is enforced against a business or city official. A challenge could also precede any alleged violations if a lawsuit claims the law violates free speech and freedom of religion, Saenz said.

City officials received 11,000 opposition emails in the weeks leading up to the vote, and five City Council meetings on the ordinance drew hundreds of residents who expressed their opposition. In an Aug. 28 meeting, city officials appeared confused about the measure’s legal consequences, as the city attorney struggled to answer questions and expressed concerns that he was embarrassing himself.

In addition to recall efforts, Saenz said the measure’s supporters could face challenges in the next election and may have strained their credibility with San Antonio residents.

The ordinance prohibits any “appointed official or member of a board or commission” from engaging “in discrimination against any person, group of persons or organization on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, veteran status, age or disability, while acting in their official capacity, while in such public position.” The council voted separately on adding “veteran status,” with that language gaining approval 9-2.

“Violation of this standard shall be considered malfeasance in office” and the City Council is “authorized to take action as provided by law to remove the offending person from office.”

Last-minute amendments clarified that the measure does not require businesses to allow transgendered persons to use restrooms or locker rooms intended for people of the opposite sex—a change that angered some of the ordinance’s supporters.

Several previous amendments attempted to calm the swell of opposition. Thanks to one amendment, a “religious corporation, association, society or educational institution” may limit employment to members of the same religion. Another amendment added the qualifier, “Nothing herein shall be construed as requiring any person or organization to support or advocate any particular lifestyle or religious view or advance any particular message or idea.”

-30-

Is anyone else dizzy or disoriented? The last six months of cultural developments have come across the plate with the heat of a Nolan Ryan fastball. Step outside the batter’s box and get your bearings if need be. We’ll all understand.

In fact, just since June when the Supreme Court overturned the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), the changes have seemed to accelerate. Without DOMA, chaos is coming, sooner or later, to every state where the federal government does business. Emboldened, homosexual activists and their enablers are on a cultural blitzkrieg.

There are other problems we could get ulcers over. Our economic system is on borrowed time, nearing $17 billion in federal debt, a currency that is increasingly weak and a looming federal healthcare law that looks from here like an iceberg 20 feet from the bow. Then there’s the Syrian problem, which is potentially cataclysmic.

Worst of all and most fundamentally, our homes, and by extension, our churches, are struggling too. Researchers tell us about the rise of the “nones.” We hear that Christian parents are not giving children a sufficient biblical worldview that is “owned” by the kids when they leave home. One speaker I heard recently said the most looming challenge for the church is a fading belief in the exclusivity of Christ among the young.

Depressed yet?

If Christian believers were to get discouraged right about now, who would blame them? Far as the eye can see, things are not friendly toward the things of God. But our walk is by faith, not by sight. And remember, we are citizens of two kingdoms, the current one being temporal, even vaporous, the Word tells us.

It would be easy to hold grudges, to put up our dukes for a cultural fistfight. Certainly, we contend for truth and do well where we can. That involves cultural and political engagement in a fashion that does justice and loves mercy. We are, after all, our brothers’ keepers. But winning the culture war is not the aim of the church. Winning souls is. The two endeavors may aid each other at times, but they are not equally important.

As Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission President Russell Moore said in his inauguration sermon, we cannot be reaching back for Mayberry, as if we could. If we ever were a moral majority, we aren’t now. The kingdom of God is “not made up of the moral. The kingdom of God is made up of the crucified,” Moore reminded his audience.

We have nothing to say to a haughty and rebellious culture if our own lives are rotten, if our marriages are fleshy, if our pulpits lack a prophetic voice—in short, if we are not living crucified lives.

If the sky is falling, we may be the cause of it. But if the sky does fall, be of good cheer, Jesus said. He’s overcome all of it. He’s our Mighty Fortress and Strong Tower.

I like how Martin Luther said it, translated to English, of course: “Did we in our own strength confide, our striving would be losing; Were not the right Man on our side, the Man of God’s own choosing. Dost ask who that may be? Christ Jesus, it is He; Lord Sabaoth, His Name, from age to age the same, And He must win the battle.”

This is no time to fear. Nor is it a time to retreat from the mission of the gospel. We rest under a Mighty Fortress in the temporal with the expectant joy of a new home to come. We grieve for those who have no such hope and bring along as many as will come into our shelter. We have a rescue mission.

Jesus was clear at the end of the Great Commission in Matthew 28:20 that he is with us always, “even to the end of the age.” There is no depth or height and no power able to separate us from his loving grasp (Romans 8:38 and John 10:28-30). David found strength in the God of Israel while breathlessly on the run from oppressors. Paul was tested and perplexed but not defeated. Stephen in his martyrdom uttered God’s words and glowed with God’s glory.

So rest easy and stay on mission. The Creator of the cosmos has got this.

Several groups have declared October Pastor Appreciation Month. One that is humorous to me is the Hallmark greeting card company. While Pastor Appreciation Month is a worthy project it just seems a little odd to me that a company that stands to profit from the observance would be promoting it. Just send your pastor money. It is better than a card.

The pastor is God’s man for the church. This is not a sexist statement. Women are gifted to serve in many capacities in the church but the office of pastor is reserved for a man. Some churches have a multiplicity of elders but there is really only one lead elder in the church. Too many examples in Scripture show us that God has “a” man to shepherd the church. The role and responsibility of the pastor is diluted when he becomes an equal among many. The pastor is answerable to God for what he teaches, how he lives and who he is in his home. Being a pastor is not for the weak or wimpy. It calls for the highest level of leadership. I am grateful for the unique calling of the pastor.

Almost 20 years have passed since I was a pastor. I was privileged to pastor some of God’s choicest people. I learned more from my favorite chairman of deacons about ministry than from my seminary education. He taught me how to navigate the sometimes turbulent waters of pastoring people.

During my early years of pastoring I think I received more than I gave. Caring, loving people provided food, money and encouragement when I needed it most. Godly church members supported me through my educational endeavors. Praying intercessors lifted me to the Lord during dark times. I remember scores of church members traveling over 200 miles to attend my dad’s funeral. They wanted to say I love you. Their ministry of presence more than returned the visits that I made.

My wife was not the only one who endured pitiful sermons. Church members listened to sometimes doctrinally questionable messages that had to be corrected later. They occasionally heard rants about personal hobby horses. It is a wonder that I didn’t get voted out of every church. The longsuffering of God’s people is amazing.

Perhaps the most rewarding moment for me as a pastor was when a church member finally got it. They understood what it meant to follow Jesus. They began a walk of faith that would give them victory over a certain sin or that would enable them to follow through with an act of obedience. Pastor appreciation came in those times when the sheep lived out what the under-shepherd had been trying to model and teach.

I now serve the Lord in a different capacity than pastor. I have a pastor I want to honor. He is a good and godly man. He is young enough to be my son yet I respect him for being God’s man. I pray for him regularly. My wife and I express occasionally in a tangible way our gratefulness to God for having a faithful pastor. My wife personally spends time with our pastor’s wife. We are blessed.

You know how to express appreciation. Do something thoughtful. Do something financially helpful. Do something personal. The most important part of pastor appreciation is that you show that you care. Give your pastor the permission to be human. Above all else pray for him to be God’s best for God’s glory.

Plano law firm asks Fox Sports to reinstate Craig James

Continue reading →