How to be a Sneaky Racist for Fun and Profit

It seems to be a week for West Coast Baptist College around here. Before I get into the new story, however, it’s necessary to give some background…

Way back in the day, Bob Jones University lost its tax-exempt status because it refused to change its policy on interracial (whatever that means) dating. A lot of other fundamentalist institutions beheld this debacle from afar off and were severely torn between the love of two different kinds of money: 1) money in tax savings and 2) money from the racist parents of students at their schools who didn’t want their little girl dating one of “those people.”

So somebody came up with a VERY CLEVER compromise called the “parental consent” rule which said that any dating relationship on campus has to have parental permission. This kicked responsibility up the road a bit so that the administration could claim “We’re not racists — we just follow the wishes of racists parents who pay us money!”

This is all rather strange because in no other area does the administration of a fundy college allow the whims of parents to set its policy. In fact, when I was at a very similar Fundy U I was told that my parents calling and complaining about the rules or asking for exceptions to policy would be seen as rebellion by ME and that I was to ask my parents not to call.

With that in mind, here’s a West Coast Baptist College memo from 2001 (PDF) in which Paul Chappell attempts to quash feelings of unease in his staff about a dating policy that is put in place specifically to cater to racism. The page numbers in the pages that follow indicate that the material is from some kind of official handbook.

There is a fully symphony of dog whistles here with references to words like “compatible”, “unequally yoked”, and “exotic relationship.” We’ve seen this kind of thing before and it stinks to high heaven.

237 thoughts on “How to be a Sneaky Racist for Fun and Profit”

  1. The “Fulfilling The Pastor’s Vision” section is also really bad….heretical even. Chappell really seems to want to set himself in the place of Jesus in the lives of his staff. IMHO this is why they felt the need to follow his racist policy without question. They would not want to fail to “capture the heart” of their pastor.


    1. “…adopt Pastor’s dreams as our own.”

      Ho-lee crap. Did he actually mean to put that in writing?

      I mean sure, I’ve seen some form of the preface to that, “We need to die to our own aspirations…” plenty of times, but it’s typically followed by something about living for Christ, replacing our lives with the life of Christ, etc. Die to yourself, live for Christ. It’s the basic formula, right. I know plenty of pastors think they’re God incarnate, but they’re not supposed to actually put it in writing.

      1. Christianity’s obsession with leadership figures is bizarre. They’re always looking for someone to tell them what to believe. Most people jump around from one pastor/author to another. In my days, it was Giglio, Chan, then Donald Miller who disappointed me when I realized he was just a regular guy like me. Christians want con-men, and I mean that by the very definition of term -confidence man- someone who speaks with confidence about things we don’t know and never bothered doing the research on. Instead, for some stupid reason, we were raised to believe that these guys have some kind of exclusive access to interpreting the Bible, when really they’re just parroting the same BS they memorized in order to get their degree, and are now heavily vested in it, be it because of job security or the illusive eternal security.

        This submission to leadership is cult-like and it’s partially what drove me away, after (ironically) reading book called “Second Hand Jesus”.

        1. They’re classic “authoritarian followers” in Bob Altemeyer’s formulation of Right Wing Authoritarianism.

        2. Please, don’t blame Christianity for this; this is more cult-like than Christian.

          Christianity is that BOTH the Pastor and the staff should be trying to honor and exalt Jesus Christ. When it becomes “all about the pastor”, they have crossed the line.

        3. I understand what you’re saying, Guilt Ridden. And I would have been right there with you back in the day. But which Christ are both the pastor and staff supposed to honor? Which Christ are they supposed exalt? Christians are still subject to their leader’s interpretation of what is Christ honoring and exalting.

          Francis Chan thought that giving up your family for Christ was the ultimate form of Christianity. My old pastor thought that giving up yourself for your own family was the ultimate form Christianity. Is it Christlike to forgive your attacker? Or is it Christlike to confront him and bring him up for disciplinary measures. Is it Christlike to not drink alcohol in order to prevent your younger brethren from stumbling? Or is Christlike to spend time in the bars talking to the unsaved while having a good drink. etc. All these items are subject to interpretation by you and I and those who have been hired to be leaders in a church building. Where do we get that interpretation from? From other leaders, writers, people who are really good at presenting their point of view.

          Trusting someone to reveal truth to you because we apparently don’t have that ability as laymen is cult-like. Mainstream? sure, but still cult-like.

      2. It’s always amazing to me, given how successful Paul Chappell has been (as much as it pains me to admit it), to see how utterly insecure he is.

      3. I have quite a bit of experience at WCBC and LBC and that is EXACTLY what is expected. Zero self-aspiration. Full devotion to the pastor. Complete trust. Complete loyalty. Nuff said.

  2. They really do try and hide the reason for the parental (preferably the father’s) permission–its required for all relationships and then quoting Scripture about honoring parents.
    WCBC’s students are considered old enough to get jobs, serve in the military, vote, apply for credit cards or car loans, live on their own according to society. But they need daddy’s permission to be in a relationship.
    I see in this behavior the grooming of young people to simply follow the MoG no matter what. The system doesn’t allow the students to think for themselves or become a real adult. Instead everything is dictated and all decisions must be passed through the hierarchical threads of family, school, or church.

    1. What about young people with no parents? I know two 18 year old twins that have been taken by the state from their home. The state is in process of revoking parental rights.

  3. Ha! Apparently I’m in a “Sugar Daddy” marriage. And yes, we have differing tastes in *Energy levels, tastes in hobbies and recreational activities…” – something that makes our marriage awesome. It was my “Sugar Daddy” husband who introduced me to the rockin awesome 80s bands. Something that wouldn’t have happened if I had married someone who wasn’t 12 years my senior.

    6 years happily married…and counting.


    1. I absolutely did not at all understand the “sugar daddy” relationship thing. Everyone else ON THE PLANET uses that phrase to refer to a relationship where a woman has sex with an older man, who in turn showers her with wealth. Maybe he should have used the term “age gap”. Having said all that, my father’s side of the family came from Scotland and England, and most of the marriage records from 1000-1400 or so list the husband as 35-40, and the wife anywhere from 14 to 40. The man had to win enough honor to be granted a wife, while the wife was either a maiden (young), or a wealthy widow (hence the large age range). Historically speaking there is no evidence that an age gap is in any way taboo, or influences the quality of a marriage.

      1. Matters of course differed greatly with station. The nobility only comprised about 3% of the population, and the Church accounted for about 11%. For the 86%, marriage was about money. You couldn’t marry until you had money to set up a household of your own. And it you were of servile status (peasants, as opposed to tradespeople or the middle class) you often had to pay fees to the lord for permission to marry- a fee called merchet. One of the reasons why older men married younger women was that older men were more likely to have money. And they needed a younger woman to boost their chances of suitable heirs. So they could hand down what little they had and start the wheel turning again…

        1. Interestingly, while my family (father’s father’s side) held land since perhaps 8th century, they were mostly involved in trade and merchandizing. Definitely not a warrior family. They seemed to have carved themselves out a niche in the middle class. One of the odd (to me) things that thy would do is follow a circuit each year attending various large tournaments, mostly in Europe, and fix things for the contestants or sell equipment etc. Apparently this was seen as very bourgeoisie.

  4. I have never understood why so many fundies chose this particular hill to die on. Even in the mainstream South interracial marriage is becoming a non-event.

    1. An outsider’s perspective: Much of this subculture is built on absolute control and conformity within a small group (except, of course, for Pastor’s favorites). The smaller and less diverse the group is, the fewer competing perspectives there will be, and the more control. Even something as simple as “We don’t eat that where my family comes from, we eat this instead” can be seen as rebellion, after all.

      Also, it’s a bit difficult for people to preach the awesome perfect selfless Godliness of our IFB-via-time-machine Founding Fathers when there is somebody in the class who can raise his/her hand and say, “Actually, I am descended from Sally Heming, and . . . ” or “As best we can tell, my ancestor was one of the totally unpaid people who build the Capitol.”

  5. Sixth! (I think…too early and I haven’t had coffee…)

    So…someone REALLY seems to want to lose their job over there. This is the second internal memo leak in a week! I always wondered what was in that huge binder of a staff handbook Bro. Weaver trotted out to illustrate that they had more rules to follow than us….

    Anyhoo, on WCBC and interracial dating, while it’s clear that this memo frowns upon it, I know that they won’t forbid students to date interracially. During my time there, I saw quite a few interracial couples of all sorts, with no real fuss given by the faculty. And I have a bit of experience in the area as well….

    Freshman year, the Christmas banquet came, and I had asked a good black friend of mine to go with me. After the fact, I found out that the speaker they invited for this shindig had written a couple dating books vehemently against interracial dating, so…being the contrarian that I can be sometimes, I wanted to see his reaction to flagrant disregard to his policies. After his message, we went up to greet him, make small talk, etc, and I have never seen a preacher go from warm and friendly to cold, curt, and dismissive so fast in my life! It was pretty darn funny.

    And the ending bit when it switches gears to the stuff about following the pastor…that could almost be it’s own post, sheesh! Anyhoo, I am rambling….need moar coffee, and to get to work here.

  6. To use the verse about being unequally yoked with unbelievers as a proof text for avoiding interracial dating implies one of the two people is not saved. WTH?

  7. Gotta love the last page. It references the business meme at the time of “soaring like eagles” vs. “standing around like turkeys”. I remember many a motivational poster like that.
    But this is where they fail……..they reference Proverbs 13:20 which talks about keeping wise company vs. foolish company. They are trying to say that you must be an “eagle”, a go-getter, on fire for God (although I think they really mean the pastor) in order to be wise. And that is false. One can be content not to soar, and yet still be wise.

    I also cringe at the first bullet point under the Proverbs reference: “Loving the Pastor until death”.

    1. Hey Scorpio,
      The obvious sermon outline about Jonathan’s armourbearer from their leadership book looks awfully familiar. In fact, a pastor from WNY that we are both familiar with used to preach it almost verbatim, as early as the mid to late 90’s. Just wondering if that resonated with you, since you’re from the same area.
      Makes you wonder who plagiarized whom.

    1. It would be interesting to watch her spin this into something political between democrats and republicans, or find the anti-socialism in this….

  8. “Some people fall in love with the idea of being in love with someone totally different from themselves.”

    And hey! Guess what? Some people actually fall in love with someone totally different from themselves.

    Or to parse it a bit further, WCBC is focusing a bit on the externals here. It’s entirely possible for two people to come from different cultures, or different races (which doesn’t necessarily imply different cultures in the US) and – shock! gasp! – not be “totally different.” It’s possible, likely even, for those two people to find plenty of character traits in common, plenty of common interests, plenty of common ground on which to build a relationship.

    Exotic? Please. That loaded term probably embodies all the projection and fantasies of the old white men who wrote and approved this little diatribe.

    1. Yeah… and to think they allow dating of different genders. Now THAT causes way more compatibility issues than cultural or ethnic discrepancies.

    2. Aye! I’m pretty sure that if two people are both drinking the fundy “skool-aid” such as this, that they have mostly the same goals and ideas about life and these “differences in culture” would be close to nonexistent.

      As for the rules about respecting the pastor and such. Never have I seen such a blatant example of how fundyism is a cult. Share my dreams. Share my goals. Share my wives… oh wait…..

  9. That last page is scary as heck. Here’s their logic:

    Quote John 15:13 — a verse that speaks of Christ’s love and laying down of His life for sinners — and apply it as, “we need to die to our own aspirations and adopt Pastor’s dreams as our own’.


    1. Dear LifeSchooled:

      Coming on the eve of Jesus’ execution, Jesus words in the first place refer to him and his readiness to hay down his life for his friends.

      Applied in the current situation, this text indicates that the pastor should be ready to die for his followers. Of course, it is also possible that the pastor is not a shepherd in the Jo 10 sense, but a hireling who runs at the first sign of trouble [also in the Jo 10 sense].

      People who act like this should be met by 6-8 sober members in the narthex who explain to the pastor, ‘Jo 15:13 doesn’t say that … you know that as well as we do … and we want you to handle God’s word with some basic respect. Can we expect that of you in the future, Reverend?’

      Christian Socialist

  10. The idea that the “unequally yoked” concept stretches to apply to all these types of relationships is laughable. Of course, I’d always heard it applied to salvation – don’t go dating an unsaved girl! – but I could buy a case for it applying to two people who are vastly different in interests and outlook. Call it the eHarmony philosophy.

    But people change. The person you marry won’t have exactly the same opinions, the same habits, the same interests in middle age, in old age, as when you tie the knot. Especially if you’re a 19 year old college student, thinking about a lifelong committment. But hey, every date is a potential mate, amirite?

  11. “Jonathan made a decision to knit his heart to David’s
    We need to decide to knit our hearts with Pastor’s.”

    Well that settles it. That right there is logic.

  12. Sometimes I see the Fundy U posts, think about my experience at a Southern Baptist college and say, “I can relate to some level.” This week? Not so much. Our school was obsessed with making sure we didn’t have “the sex” but definitely didn’t do anything like this. I’m not saying there wasn’t some racism present, but not in terms of any sort of dating policy. The school didn’t care who you dated, for the most part.

  13. I’ve heard people on here talking about how the Pastor is put in the place of Jesus, but I never thought it was so blatant. I feel suffocated just reading this thing. Thank God I dropped out of all things fundamentalist in high school, this brings back bad memories!

  14. “I am here to reflect Pastor.”

    I don’t have words here. Abomination? Antichrist? Blasphemy?

    Ok, I guess I do have words. God have mercy on these folks.

  15. Can I just say that, race issues aside, the idea that parents own their adult children and can make or negate decisions for them – important, life-changing decisions like where they go to school and who they have a relationship with, is really horrible. It’s just evil.

      1. Uncle Wrench Turner:

        Oh what a relief! It’s so good to hear that you are alive and still in use. We haven’t seen or heard from you in years and were afraid that you had rusted, broken, or been discarded to the “Great Toolbox” in the sky. Where are you hanging your tired wrench head these days? Hopefully you are able to be housed comfortably in a secure tool box or at least hanging in place on a warm, garage wall (and not just tossed thoughtlessly on work bench). Well, please keep in touch and I will let papa pipe wrench and mother hammer know that you are still alive.

        Yours truly, Nephew Screw Driver.

        1. just as clarification… I’m phillip (not those crazy brothers of mine: allen or torq)

        2. Also, I surely hope you have kept to the fundamentals of our faith/purpose. Our family has always prayed that you did not go the way of the evil graving tool (as described in Exodus 32:4) that was willing to assist Aaron with designing the graven idol calf:

          Exodus 32:4 “And he received them at their hand, and fashioned it with a graving tool, after he had made it a molten calf: and they said, These be thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt. ”

          When you first left, we heard that you were going to the Church of Divine Slumber- officiated by Pastor Pillow.


        3. Dear Bald Jones Grad: Unfortunately you are correct sir. That’s what years of fundamentalism will do to you.

    1. Correction: Pastor. Capital “P”. Yeah, they use it like “Pope”. By the way, if you want to spend a pleasant and stimulating afternoon, grab a legal pad and pen and count all the ways that IFB is similar to Roman Catholicism (not a knock on my catholic friends at all, this is only fun because catholics are often treated like satan’s minions in IFB).

        1. Actually, that is quite OK by the rules of grammar.

          If you are using a position in place of a name, it should be capitalized: thus, if one says that one’s mother gave permission to date (heh), one could say “I have permission to date from my mother” or “I have permission to date from Mother”.


          “I spoke with my pastor about dating the Lithuanian girl” can also be “I spoke with Pastor about dating the Lithuanian girl”. (in both cases, he said “no; you’re married”, so I changed supporting churches, and then carried on with the girl. Where’s Jack Hyles when you REALLY need him?)

          Sorry for that… thoughts starting wandering…

        2. It might be grammatically correct, but referring to a pastor by his title rather than his name indicates that he (thinks he) is something more than just a man. My old pastor encouraged people to do that. His wife and adult kids called him Pastor rather than “Robert” or “Dad”. It was just one symptom of a very, very sick system.

  16. Noticed this memo is from 2001. Is this still the policy at WCBC? A lot has changed culturally since then. I would think most IFB’s are more concerned with same-sex relationships than interracial relationships. Am I wrong in this?

    Having said this, a family left our (overwhelmingly white) church recently because an interracial couple started attending, was welcomed by most everyone else, etc.

        1. No doubt he just can’t stand having to get rid of his Flat Earth Map and replace with one of those blasphemous globes. 😀

        1. I don’t know, but my former church is a WCBC wannabe, and they never admit that they’re wrong. They just change and pretend it was that way all along. If WCBC has changed, my guess is that’s how it’s been handled.

    1. Having grown up there from the time I was 10 until I decided to try this whole “think for myself” thing and left LBC and PCBBC, I can almost guarantee you that this policy will never change. I could ask my mom, who works there, but I doubt I’d get a straight answer.

  17. I was reading along fine smiling thinking all these dating relationship types would make a good comedy bit. Then comes to pastoral vision. This may be the first time in my 37 years that I have ever literally had my mouth involuntarily drop open from disbelief.
    How does anyone read that and think “well these verses here do teach this so I better get my heart right”. How does anyone write that without realizing how arrogant that is?! I would be afraid to write that as a joke.
    In the interest of critical thinking, are we certain that Chappell wrote that as well and that it wasn’t the leaker’s notes from a Pastor’s Conference or something?

    1. I have heard that “Jonathan’s armourbearer” message preached verbatim, so I am pretty sure that truly made it into a leadership manual of some sort. If they’ll preach it in a Sunday night service, they’ll print it in a book for staff.
      The reason I remember this message is because it gave me my first WTF moment in fundamentalism. At the time, I just thought I was horribly back slidden and hard-hearted.

  18. Who cares about the dating thing? The cult-like requirements to follow “Pastor” are what is legitimately frightening here. Paul said in I Corinthians 11:1 to only follow him as he followed Christ, and in Acts 17:11, the church searched the scriptures to see if what was being taught was legitimate. This simple “follow me” business completely cuts out Christ and any individual responsibility to have reflective, independent study or a relationship with Christ. It really is quite sad.

  19. On parents’ permission: I never attended a school that asked for such a thing, but if I had needed it, I’m pretty sure both of my parents, not being completely insane, would have signed a letter saying “Gary has permission to date anyone he wants to. The school does not have permission to butt into his love life at any time.”

    1. Yeah, it reminds me of a time at one of the ATI training centers that I worked at that they tried to revive an old disciplinary policy of making everyone call their parents to confess some minor rule infraction (being in each other’s rooms, as I recall – this would be guys in other guys’ rooms, NOT girls’ rooms). Almost all of the parents laughed it off and said who cares. They never tried that tactic again.

  20. 1) The inclusion of cute little gems like “lick the lint of Buddha’s belly button” indicate a level of puerility and immaturity that keeps grown up people from taking this seriously.

    2) Why would anyone accept as legitimate the “relationship categories” found here? There are hundreds of thousands of scholarly, peer-reviewed journal articles on the dynamics of human peer bonding to source.

    3) The part about worshipping a pastor is probably more funny to me than it should be, since it is very wicked. Yes, I am mocking.

    4) The comparison to David and Jonathan is probably not the best choice here, since if David and Jonathan were alive today they would almost certainly be called gay. I’m not saying they had sexual relations, since we don’t have any evidence of this, but any two men that behaved that way in our culture – let alone WCBC culture – would certainly be called gay.

    1. “The inclusion of cute little gems like “lick the lint of Buddha’s belly button” indicate a level of puerility and immaturity that keeps grown up people from taking this seriously.”

      My thoughts exactly…how in the world is someone to take them seriously with a sarcastic, juvinile comment like that?

      1. It’s one of thousands of little one-off sayings that every IFB pastor peppers his language with. The fact that no one else in the world talks like an IFB pastor only reinforces their “differentness” and how “set apart” they are. The mantras of my childhood can always give me flashbacks – and that is what they are for; they are verbal hooks to pull your consciousness into a specific place.

  21. I work at a secular university where the President wrestles with budgets, long-term planning, faculty issues, fundraising, public relations, and campus expansion. The Presidents of fundy colleges write 7 page memos about their students’ dating lives. Yikes.

    1. Budget stuff is easy. You just beat your sheep until they bleat out a chorus of “Yes, Pastor” and bleed their wallets dry. Faculty stuff is easy. You harangue your slaves and guilt them into working more and more for Jayzus. PR is easy because whatever you say is like a Papal bull. (Of course, it’s really bovine fecal material, but you can’t tell them that.)

  22. Are these pages notes from separate messages or something? Because apart from the horrifying ideas being taught, I can’t get past the non-sequitur structure. It’s like: “Here’s who you’re allowed to date. Because Pastor is your God. Because Eagles! Whoooo!”

    1. OK, answered my own question, by looking more closely at the page numbers and titles at the bottom of each page. Excerpts from different places. Fair enough. It was jarring when I thought this was a continuous document.

  23. On his “Soaring as Eagles” page, I notice he never addresses the fact that an eagle is not only a hunter but an opportunistic, scavenging carrion eater.

    Maybe too close to home for a mog?

      1. If Franklin had succeeded, then the WCBC pages would have gassed on about how great turkeys are and how we all need to be humble turkeys for our MOG to feast on. Because the words of the founding fathers are the Apocrypha of the IFB.

      2. Franklin’s argument was that eagles have bad moral character, while turkeys are true Americans who mind their own business and eat a wholesome diet.

        He wrote:
        “For my own part I wish the Bald Eagle had not been chosen the Representative of our Country. He is a Bird of bad moral Character. He does not get his Living honestly. You may have seen him perched on some dead Tree near the River, where, too lazy to fish for himself, he watches the Labour of the Fishing Hawk; and when that diligent Bird has at length taken a Fish, and is bearing it to his Nest for the Support of his Mate and young Ones, the Bald Eagle pursues him and takes it from him.

        “With all this Injustice, he is never in good Case but like those among Men who live by Sharping & Robbing he is generally poor and often very lousy. Besides he is a rank Coward: The little King Bird not bigger than a Sparrow attacks him boldly and drives him out of the District. He is therefore by no means a proper Emblem for the brave and honest Cincinnati of America who have driven all the King birds from our Country…

        “I am on this account not displeased that the Figure [in the Great Seal of the United States] is not known as a Bald Eagle, but looks more like a Turkey. For the Truth the Turkey is in Comparison a much more respectable Bird, and withal a true original Native of America… He is besides, though a little vain & silly, a Bird of Courage, and would not hesitate to attack a Grenadier of the British Guards who should presume to invade his Farm Yard with a red Coat on.”

        I don’t know if Franklin wrote this, but there’s also the fact that Eagles were used as symbols of empires, such as the Roman Empire, the Hapsburgs’, and the Romanovs’.

        Several years earlier, Franklin had proposed a rattlesnake as the national emblem. The fact that he apparently considered rattlesnakes to be more virtuous than eagles gives one pause.

        Oh, and here’s what an eagle’s majestic cry really sounds like:

        1. Stephen Colbert’s eagle cry on his show is actually that of some kind of hawk.

    1. No kidding. I live around eagles. They are scavengers who dumpster dive, swoop down and kill the occasional small dog or cat, and in general are nuisances. And you can’t even shoot the damn things.

    1. That is such a scary thought/ teaching/ mandate. How do you twist making disciples into die to our own aspirations and adopt Pastor’s dreams as our own? Isn’t the idea of making disciples to help people experience God on their own? If we are making disciples, then they should be like the disciples–able to vision, think, dream, minister on their own?

      1. He is making disciples. Disciples of his personal god, Paul Chappell. The twisting came when Chappell placed himself in the position of worship and substituted himself for Jesus Christ.

        Hubris, narcissism, and megalomania come to mind, but not humility.

        1. Yes, he has clearly put himself in the place of Christ. IMHO staff and others are willing to go against their own conscience to please their pastor-god. I thought of that when I saw the news article about Jeremy Whitman where an assistant pastor clearly lied to the press when he said Whitman had worked at LBC as a clerical worker (instead of being an asst. pastor).

  24. “Fulfilling the Pastor’s Vision” part makes me more sick than all the other stuff. Yep! That’s the whole purpose of dating…to fulfill your pastor’s empire fantasies!

  25. As someone in a long term and very happy inter-racial marriage this kind of stuff makes me sick. It made me sick when my Pastor wanted my wife and I to read that drivel from John Rice before we got married and it makes me sick now. The latent racism in the IFB movement needs to be addressed en mass

  26. Fulfilling the pastor’s vision and making his dreams my dreams?? Where is that in the Bible? A little Greek lesson would teach these idiots that the “obey” in “obey your leaders” isn’t implicit but simply being teachable. The heck with that whole individual soul liberty doctrine thing. Who needs liberty when we can be yoked a pastor? This is EXACTLY the kind of loyalty that gets extra years in “ministry” for a pervert who likes to propagate certain basic life principles.

    This reminds me of the drill sergeant in Forrest Gump. ” What is your mission in life?” ” To do whatever you tell me to do….pastor drill sergeant.”

    1. Why in John 15:13!

      Oddly enough, as a ministerial student, I wastold that I shouldn’t aim to be “friends” with the flock. I was to be their “pastor.”

      1. Because you’d hate for any of your flock to trust you enough to share their struggles with you.
        And you wouldn’t want them to know that you struggle too.
        Sheesh, you’d start to have a mutually accountable and healthy relationship with your parishioners.

  27. Dear Stuff Fundies Like Reader:

    While plenty of differences exist, I keep thinking of the elders’ tradition controversy. Jesus told some Pharisees that they set aside and invalidate God’s commandments. On pain of death, God required that parents be honored and forbade speaking evil against them. Yet Jesus said that they violated this commandment by designating as gifts to God what assistance their parents might otherwise have received. They decided what they wanted, concocted a pseudo-pious rationale on entirely different grounds for doing it, and then did what they wanted. Jesus added that ‘you do all kinds of things this way’ [Mt 15 3-9; Mk 7:6-13].

    Christian Socialist

  28. actually, on the matter of unequal yoking and not being able to change someone, I can’t help but assume that this is applied somewhat, shall we say, unequally – thinking that women probably are treated like magical devices to reform men and told that if they are resistant to this role they are being unchristian – thinking of women whose husbands or whose courtship partners/boyfriends are abusive but whom are told that they just need to try harder or not be so rebellious, etc. of course, surely there is an element of classism and racism to this, too, since if the abuser is from a socioeconomic class deemed undesirable or from a different ‘racial’ background, well, first of all, you got what everyone tried to warn you about because they were never going to change, and if you’re not married, well, grovel a sufficient amount during lectures about unequal yoking and you’ll be allowed back…

    but, like I said before, I sincerely doubt that this is a standard that is applied equally to men and women

    1. Google “A Christian Wife’s Marriage Catechism” for a disturbing take on this. Sadly, it’s not even from the IFB. It’s from a reformed Baptist.
      (I’m technologically deficient and don’t know how to put the link in here, but it’s not hard to find.)

  29. I couldn’t get past the first few paragraphs, because by then they had defined what a date was and how many time constituted going steady.

    I think even a Mishnah scholar would think that smacked a bit of legalism.

  30. This memo would have been complete with the first page (bad as it is). The rest is just the pastor’s opinion, which he obviously equates with God’s.

  31. Are you sure Jack Trieber isn’t involved with this? Or even Jim Vineyard? Vineyard’s a racist and everyone knows it.

    Looks like David Gibbs better tell some more jokes and take down the Jim Crow laws.

      1. Spiritually speaking:

        Hyles “begat” Trieber.
        Trieber “begat” Chappell.

        However, the relationship between Trieber and Chappell, and therefore between NVBC/GSBC and LBC/WCBC is strained at best. Mainly because Chappell’s church, college, conference, book & music publications outshine Triebers’ at the present time.

        Both camps are scrambling to rapidly plant small fundy churches across the west coast, and there’s a big competition between them. Chappel’s tried to modernize fundyland and make it more appealing with screens, and beat-free CCM. LBC/WCBC is seen as more modern, newer, more exciting, and perhaps even providing a superior level of education than the NVBC/GSBC camp.

        The implied message of the LBC/WCBC outfit is that we’re not bat-stuff-crazy! Come see the softer side of fundamentalism!

        But, based upon the section recommending being a brainless automaton who’d love “their pastor unto the death”, the nut doesn’t fall far from the tree and Hyles, Trieber, and Chappell are still cut from the same cloth.

        1. But it was still a good reply, and a good bit of information. It does seem to be as you painted it. Time will tell.

    1. Samson and Delilah?
      David and Abishag?
      The Song of Solomon relationship?
      The Young Fool in Proverbs and the Married Woman (whose goodman is on a journey)?

      I’m speaking somewhat tongue-in-cheek, here.

  32. My children are not allowed to date horse people. They should stick to their OWN KIND. 😀

    Seriously….this is all pure bunkum. I’m the result of an interracial relationship and as far as I can tell I’m not cursed or otherwise messed up (except for that prejudice against horse people of course).

  33. I went to WCBC for a time, and a white friend of mine was dating a young African American lady.

    When a staff member found out, he went to her, told her that she would basically be ruining his ministry, as many people would not go to church where the pastor in a mixed marriage. He counseled her to break up with him, which she did.

    I don’t know if he spoke for the staff, or his own personal biases, but I lost MUCH respect for him that day.

      1. I’m not sure I see what David Gibbs has to do with anything that I said.

        Are you thinking that he heard about interracial dating going on at the school, contacted them and had a staff member go break it up, or that he heard it wasn’t allowed and contacted them to say “Be cool about it”?

  34. In my grandparents (and even my parents) day..Lutheran kids didn’t get too serious with Catholic kids. Everyone knew that if it got serious and marriage was a possibility, those little kids would be turned over to the Pope. (I’m being facetious a tad.)

    Even in the 80s in high school I remember a guy that one of his wife’s brothers was going to marry an African American. This guy was freaking out over having to go to this wedding. Mind you, this was not was the upper midwest.

    Thankful times have changed. Who cares about black, white, it doesn’t and shouldn’t matter. Same with beliefs.

    1. Actually, I think it is unhelpful to conflate resistance to marriage based on race to resistance to marriage based on religion or closely held beliefs. I know this isn’t how you meant it, but it makes it sound like rejecting someone based on their skin color is the same as rejecting someone based on different opinions.

  35. I guess because I didn’t grow up with a lot of racism around me, I don’t “see” it in the memo; Darrell’s background was interesting, but I don’t see racism here.

    The closest thing to it is the description of the Exotic Relationship, which was pretty broad and could easily describe someone from the Deep South dating someone from New York City.

    While I agree that such a marriage can bring extra stress and trouble, they didn’t forbid it – just recommended against it.

    I’ve never understood how, if they preach against dating/marrying a black person, why they aren’t just as much against dating/marrying a Chinese/Japanese/Korean person?

    I’ve also never seen it justified from Scripture; the supporters keep pointing to verses in which the Jews and Christians were forbidden to marry unbelievers. That’s all. Nothing about the race they were.

    The last three pages were really scary – it seems clear that “Pastor” has replaced “Jesus Christ” on these pages. As a good pastor once said, it is NOT the Pastor’s job to conform the members of the church to his way of thinking; it is his job to preach Jesus Christ, and EVERYONE should be concerned about honoring Him.

    1. Click on Darrel’s “dog whistle” link at the top. The dog whistle of racism is heard by those raised in a racist social milieu. Sarah Palin was a master of dog whistle politics. The old white southerners heard her clearly.

      The WCBC document whistles loud & strong. You just have to have the ears to hear it. Be glad you weren’t raised in racism. A lot of us were.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.