The propaganda continues…

I have just read Frank Page’s full statement regarding the New Baptist Covenant. As usual, his full statement was excerpted for maximum critical effect. When one reads his full statement, you get the picture that the folks over at Baptist Press picked portions of it to characterize the Carter-Clinton initiative in the worst possible light. Before I provide the link to the full statement, I want to make several observations:

1. Frank Page did not say that Presidents Clinton and Carter are motivated by a leftwing liberal agenda in this New Baptist Covenant, as Baptist Press suggests. He did say he would not be a part of such an effort, if indeed one existed. That is a far cry from the way BP characterized his comments.

2. Frank Page acknowledged that some of the Covenant participants are themselves guilty of negativity and critical spirits. He did not, however, suggest that such perceptions were insurmountable for Christians who seek to work together.

3. Frank Page did not suggest that Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, and Bill Underwood believe a false gospel, or have succumbed to a social gospel. He merely reinforced his own belief that the Gospel is primarily concerned with overcoming men’s separation from God, without denying its social implications.

4. Frank Page did not denounce the meeting, as BP Editor Will Hall originally titled his article. He did reinforce, however, the value of Christian collaboration and dialogue for mutual edification.

5. Frank Page did not suggest that Southern Baptists have focused satisfactorally on social needs. He did, however, illustrate the many commendable ways that Southern Baptists are involved in these kinds of ministries, while calling for greater involvement.

6. Frank Page did not suggest that the New Baptist Covenant was an unfruitful and unworthy effort. He did, however, pray that the efforts would promote biblical mandates among its participants and encourage others to do the same.

With that in mind, go read Frank Page’s full statement and place it next to the Baptist Press story. If the President of the Southern Baptist Convention can’t expect his own denominational press to accurately present his words, how on earth can we expect the secular press to do any different? Baptists get miffed that the “secular media” doesn’t give us a fair shake. Today, however, it seems that BP has fallen down on its job by cutting and pasting Frank Page’s balanced and careful statement so as to publish a news story with hostile tones.