Thread by @bartbarber

I've seen a lot of people asking questions about how @RickWarren came to address #SBC22. I don't know the whole story, but I know a little bit about it.

I was seated, waiting for the first part of the Resolutions Committee report. The Credentials Committee report was before us.

A member of the Committee on Order of Business came up to me and asked, "If @RickWarren wanted to address the Convention, would that be in order, and how would one go about that?"

"Rick's here?" I asked?
"Yes."

Well, being acquainted with Article XII of Robert's Rules of Order, I was pretty confident that Rick had the right to address the body.

And although I knew that a lot of Southern Baptists might not personally want to hear what he had to say, I'd seen them tweeting so much about due process over the preceding few days that I knew they'd be really upset with me if I didn't make Rick aware of his Article XIII rights

So, I answered that Rick had a right to address the body that that he should, if he wished to exercise those rights, inquire of the parliamentarians. Then the amendment went to a ballot vote.

I'm assuming that between then and later he did what I had advised.

Now, some of the perpetually-angry will throw a fit about this, but before you read what they say, understand this: I gave sound parliamentary advice to probably a dozen people related to declined resolutions.

I disagreed with them about their resolutions, but I helped them to understand and exercise their rights as messengers.

I disagree with @RickWarren about complementarianism and ecclesiology, but I helped him to understand and exercise his rights as a messenger.

So, I'm sure that a reasonable answer will settle the whole thing down, right?

^^There's an 'I' missing up there. Article XIII

By the way, it is my understanding that he actually WAS a registered messenger.

A brother challenged me on the “perpetually-angry” part of this, and he’s right. I apologize.