Thread by @lukeholmes

A short history about attempting to remove trustees of the SBC.

At the 1985 Meeting in Dallas, James Slaton made a motion to amend the Comm on Comms report by substituting the present state conv presidents and and state WMU presidents

in order that as “more inclusive and representative group to serve Southern Baptists as the Committee on Boards.”

Slatton hoped to slow down the conservative resurgence by putting more “moderates” on the Committee since they in turn appointed people to the Comm on Nominations, which in turn appointed trustees of all SBC entities.

SBC President Charles Stanley ruled the motion out of order. He ruled that nominations would have to be dealt with on a state by state basis. After some discussion and protest at the ruling, current parliamentarian Wayne Allen explained the rationale.

Slatton appealed to the messengers on a point of order and a vote was taken on whether or not to sustain the chair, first by standing vote and then by ballot. 11,801 or 48.4% voted to sustain the chair, and 12,576 or 51.59% voted not to sustain the chair

Later in business when the vote was announced, the motion came to the floor again. The parliamentarian explained the bylaws and the Chair ruled Slatton's motion out of order. The original motion from the Comm on Comm’s came to the floor for a vote, by raised hands then by ballot

The vote to approve the report came to 13,123 or 57.8% in favor and 9,581 or 42.2% against. The original report of the Committee on Committees passed. But that was not the end of the debate over the ruling.

Later three people sued Stanely, the SBC, and the SBC EC in Atlanta court, charging that the plaintiffs were “irreparably harmed” by “erroneous rulings” of Stanley as a representative of the SBC

& that Stanley violated their “rights” by “depriving” them “of the opportunity … to vote” on matters relating to the Committee on Committees.

The lawsuit asked the court to declare the election of the Comm of Nominations invalid, and to force them to let anyone be nominated from the floor.

The court case, whose defense was paid out of CP funds, was defended by James Guenther, who argued that the state had no jurisdiction over the SBC on religious matters.

Later in the meeting, John Sullivan and Winifred Moore made a motion that “the report of the Comm on Comms not be discussed further during this convention. “ The motion passed.

The following year the EC recommended a change to the bylaws that said that “no person shall be allowed to nominate more than one person at a time. “ 1986 Annual, page 37

Over the years trustees have been replaced from the Committees report one at a time, but no more than a few in total. Typically the messengers trust the committee reports and do not have the patience to sit through more than one or 2 replacements before wanting to move on.

Watch the 1985 Annual meeting, starting around 2:31 to see the relevant discussion

Read this short summary of the lawsuit (from which I quoted several times)
mbcpathway.com/2005/12/02/art…

Read the lawsuit against the SBC yourself.
openjurist.org/828/f2d/718/cr…