Posted: 10/19/07

BGCT presidential nominees
discuss challenges, relationships

The two announced nominees for president of the Baptist General Convention of Texas answered questions posed by the Baptist Standard.

Joy Fenner, executive director emeritus of Woman’s Missionary Union of Texas, and David Lowrie, pastor of First Baptist Church in Canyon, responded by e-mail to a list of questions submitted by the Standard.

Joy Fenner	David Lowrie

Fenner, a former missionary to Japan, was elected first vice president of the BGCT last year. She has been endorsed by leaders of Texas Baptists Committed, a political group created to protect the BGCT from the fundamentalist movement that gained control of the Southern Baptist Convention in the 1980s and early 1990s.

Steve Wells, pastor of South Main Baptist Church in Houston, will nominate Fenner, who led Texas WMU from 1981 to 2001.

Lowrie has been pastor of five Baptist churches since he entered the ministry in 1982—First Baptist of Canyon in West Texas, First Baptist of Mabank in East Texas, Timbercreek Baptist in Flower Mound, First Baptist in Roanoke and Northwest Baptist in Milwaukee, Wisc.

Bill Wright, pastor of First Baptist Church in Plains, will nominate him. Both Wright and Lowrie have expressed the desire to see an “open” election, as opposed the process of the last 20 years in which every president was the Texas Baptist Committed-endorsed nominee.

Here are Fenner’s and Lowrie’s verbatim responses to the questions posed by the Standard:

• Why are you willing to be nominated for the BGCT presidency?

Fenner: A number of respected people encouraged me to be a nominee for two primary reasons—to cast a vision of missions for a new day, while still valuing our cooperative missions heritage; (and) to validate the leadership of women at the convention level. In addition, I have a deep personal gratitude for Texas Baptists for the support given me as a missionary and a missions leader.

Lowrie: Our convention stands at a crossroads with a chance to bring unity and healing to Texas Baptists. My background and experiences have uniquely prepared me to lead our convention as we bring Baptist believers together under a common quest for cooperation. We need fresh eyes to take a hard look at our struggles and a fresh voice to call us to action.

• What distinctive perspectives would you bring to the president’s office?

Fenner: A recognition and value of our diverse churches, a network of relationships, multi-cultural experience, administrative skills for leading volunteers, an understanding of the role of president, and a passion for missions.

Lowrie: I have the unique opportunity to be a second-generation BGCT president. I grew up with a deep love and devotion to our convention’s unifying mission. In addition, I have had the honor to serve Texas Baptist churches for over 25 years. I have served churches in East Texas, West Texas, Central Texas and the Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex. Ordinary, yet remarkable, believers filled the pews of these churches. These experiences gave me a unique understanding of the diversity of our great state, its churches and how its members sought to make a positive difference in the world. Plus, I have been a church planter and a sponsor church pastor in every church I have served, so I understand the nuances of starting new churches from the inside. I also serve a loyal BGCT church that has a working relationship with the SBC.

• What should be the BGCT’s primary emphasis in the coming year?

Fenner: Cast a vision compelling enough that will engage our congregations to do something bold in missions and ministry that would impact each unique local community and the world.

Lowrie: As in every year, our emphasis needs to be mobilizing the greatest missionary force in Texas to touch our communities, and from there, the ends of the earth. Unity comes as we listen for the voice of God emerging from the voices of the ordinary and remarkable voices of Texas Baptists. The BGCT’s leadership has the unique challenge to regain the trust and confidence of our churches so that we can move forward together. We can do this by aggressively dealing with the issues that have undermined our trust, while casting a bold vision of how we can start more churches, reach and keep more people, encourage our struggling churches, train and equip our students, and minister to the least of these together.

• What is the greatest challenge facing the BGCT?

Fenner: The challenges are many—apathy, perceived irrelevance, a need to regain trust.

Lowrie: I believe we have lost connection with many of our churches. During the days of in-fighting, too many of our people watched from the sidelines but were not active participants in the solution; at times they felt like no one was listening. During that time, our vision and direction were determined by a dedicated handful of well-intentioned leaders. If we are going to move forward, I believe we need a unified voice of the many.

In addition, we are losing a generation of young leaders who believe the BGCT is out-of-touch and irrelevant. Our younger generations came to those unfortunate conclusions by growing up watching us fight among ourselves for position and power. They want a mission worth dying for and only see us struggling over who is in control of a slowly sinking ship. By bringing fresh eyes to the BGCT, we can cast a vision around which our young can rally.

• How should the convention and it leaders address that challenge?

Fenner: Communicate openly, focus on the basics of what it means to be a Christ-follower in word and action, maintain strong and effective accountability processes.

Lowrie: If we want to connect with our churches, we need to cast an aggressive vision of reaching Texas and the world with the greatest missionary force the world has ever seen. We need to cast a vision that is big and bold and will demand commitment rather than compliance. However, for us to be heard, we need to listen to our people and learn from each other.

I don’t think there is one specific leader who has the solution to our problems, but I am convinced that if we work together, we will be able to address our problems and claim our future together.

• How should the BGCT relate to the Southern Baptist Convention, the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, the Baptist World Alliance and other national and international groups?

Fenner: During recent years, churches have increased their network of relationships; each voluntarily relates to a number of different entities. As an advocate of freedom, BGCT should celebrate that.

Similarly, BGCT may relate in multiple ways to various entities through networking, partnerships, formal covenant agreements, or simply through a shared vision of a mission to be accomplished. The world is too lost and too needy for us not to work with other believers for the larger cause of sharing the redemptive love of Jesus.

Lowrie: The BGCT should function as an autonomous full partner with other Baptist organizations. We need to look for points of cooperation with them—unity that advances the work of the kingdom. Yet, we need to remember we should have our own distinct voice rather than being a mouthpiece for any other organization. God did not call us to be a minor-league farm team of another organization but to be his people on mission for his glory.

• How should the BGCT relate to churches that also relate to another state convention in Texas?

Fenner: A Baptist church has the freedom to relate as it chooses; therefore, we are grateful for those who choose to relate to BGCT and respect their decision to relate to other partners.

I would like to see our churches make their choices based on accurate information, knowledge of Baptist distinctives, and on divine leadership for that unique body of believers. We should rejoice with those who are about Kingdom business.

Lowrie: A BGCT church is a church that sacrificially gives to the mission of our convention. What they do with the rest of their offerings is between them and God. There is no such thing as a dually aligned church.

• What role would you play in defining the BGCT’s internal and external relationships?

Fenner: Many do not realize how widespread and complex BGCT is, not only with about 5,700 cooperative congregations, but with its universities, child care institutions, and health care ministries that are located on more than 100 sites in the state. All need to be recognized, valued, supported and celebrated.

In some areas, we need to clarify governance. For example, the elected trustees of a given BGCT institution have the governing and fiduciary responsibility for that specific institution. The BGCT elects an Executive Board from our diverse congregations; that board has specific responsibilities, one of which is to employ an executive director who has responsibility for the Executive Board staff. All of this is BGCT!

Lowrie: I see the president serving the convention as a leader democratically chosen by the people. The president works with the executive director to shape and to cast the vision for our future together and to re-establish the trust of its people. The president’s job is not to oversee the Executive Board staff, but rather to assist the executive director in the implementation of our common vision.

• What role should Texas Baptists Committed play in BGCT life?

Fenner: Texas Baptists should be grateful for the significant contribution of TBC for the past two decades. One part of TBC’s mission is “to uphold historic Baptist principles,” and their changing role to focus on that will be a service to BGCT. When individuals and congregations understand and embrace what it means to be Baptist—priesthood of the believer, autonomy of the local church, soul competency, separation of church and state, religious liberty—that strengthens BGCT and its mission.

Lowrie: The TBC should continue to be a voice into the life of our convention reminding us of our distinctive values as Baptists. I believe this organization of highly committed Texas Baptists should continue to play a role in our future because they have earned a seat at the table by their leadership and sacrifice for our future.

• A new executive director will be selected in the near future. What advice would you offer the new executive director? What is the first thing the new executive director should do upon assuming the position?

Fenner: Pray for God’s wisdom and courage! Gain the trust, confidence, and respect of the leadership of BGCT entities. Travel the state and get to know our diverse congregations; listen! Engage the next generation of Baptist leaders. Seek collaborative ways to maximize ministries that can impact this state; for example, school drop-outs, immigration, restorative justice, family life, abuses, healthcare issues, hurting people, as well as the fact that half the population is unchurched.

Lowrie: I would encourage our new executive director to lead from the middle and to avoid the dangers of being too highly identified with either one of the extreme elements in our convention life. I would encourage the new executive director to begin immediately casting a vision of how we can do more together than we can as a polarized people.

The executive director needs to come into this job with his eyes and ears open and seriously evaluate our current challenging financial situation. He needs to listen and learn quickly so he can act decisively.

Restoring trust to the middle should be a high priority. If he determines staff changes need to be made, I would encourage him to surround himself with men and women who embody our common values and have skills that complement his unique strengths and weaknesses.

Posted: 10/19/07

RIGHT or WRONG?
Old or New Testament

Christians call themselves New Testament people. I hear so many moral arguments based on the Old Testament, though. Is there any way a layperson can find some kind of consistency here? I want to be biblical in my thinking and doing.

This ultimately is a question of authority. We Christians believe authority comes from God. We also believe God has revealed himself in history and guided the recording of his revelation in the Scriptures. As we read the Scriptures, God reveals himself to us through the Holy Spirit.

The Scriptures show God didn’t instantaneously reveal everything about himself and his will for humanity. Instead, his revelation unfolded over time and was recorded in the Old and New Testaments. He began by revealing himself through his covenants with people like Abraham and continued through his covenant with Israel. The Bible clearly asserts the fullest and clearest revelation of God came in the Lord Jesus Christ (see John 1:1-18 and Hebrews 1:1-4).

In the gospels, we find great tension between Jesus and those who wished to uphold the details of the Old Testament law, along with all its oral and written interpretations. Jesus said he came not to set aside the law, but to fulfill it. He claimed to have authority superior to what we call the Old Testament, and at times, he set aside or went beyond the laws found in it (see Matthew 5:17-48). Later in the New Testament, we find that God through the Holy Spirit set aside Old Testament ceremonial laws like circumcision (see Acts 10:1-48; 15:1-35).

What does this mean to us as we seek to determine our authorities for moral decisions? First, it means that we affirm the Old Testament as authoritative Scripture. It tells the story of God’s redeeming work that led up to the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ. Christ himself affirmed the authority of the Old Testament and worked from its theological and moral framework. To say that the Old Testament has no authority over us is to commit the same error as the Gnostic heretics in the early church. They went so far as to say that the God of the Old Testament was different from the God of the New!

Second, it means that Jesus Christ is our ultimate authority. His life and teachings are recorded in the New Testament, so it must have primacy in our moral decisions. For example, some Christians base their moral decisions about war and violence on passages like Deuteronomy 20:10-18, which call for “Holy War.” Yet they don’t take into account Jesus’ commands in passages like Matthew 5:38-48.

Perhaps the last line of the article on the Bible in the Baptist Faith & Message of 1963 sums it up best, “The criterion by which the Bible is to be interpreted is Jesus Christ.” We must make all our moral decisions through God’s revelation in him.

Robert Prince, pastor

First Baptist Church, Waynesville, N.C.

Right or Wrong? is sponsored by the T.B. Maston Chair of Christian Ethics at Hardin-Simmons University's Logsdon School of Theology. Send your questions about how to apply your faith to btillman@hsutx.edu.

Posted: 10/18/07

DBU president hospitalized
with acute form of leukemia

Dallas Baptist University President Gary Cook was diagnosed with acute myelogenous leukemia during his annual physical Oct. 12 and immediately was hospitalized.

“AML is a form of leukemia which is very aggressive, and once someone is discovered with this disease, they are required to begin treatment immediately,” according to a statement posted on the DBU website.

“Unlike other forms of cancer, AML does not necessarily have stages associated with it, and it is still very early in the process to know what the overall diagnosis is. … Early test results seem to indicate that the particular form of AML that he has will respond well with treatment. Also, since Dr. Cook has remained in such good shape over the years, we are very optimistic about his treatment and recovery.”

Cook, 57, received a platelet transfusion Oct. 13 and began his first round of chemo-therapy the next day. He had a second chemotherapy treatment Oct. 16, and he was placed on oxygen. A third round of chemo-therapy was scheduled Oct. 18.

Due to his low platelet count and the treatments he is receiving, Cook cannot see any visitors. He also is unable to receive flowers, food or phone calls.

Cards can be sent to the president’s office at DBU, 3000 Mountain Creek Parkway, Dallas 75211-9299.

“The best thing that anyone can do is to pray for Dr. and Mrs. Cook, as well as the Cook family,” David, Mark and Nicole, a statement on the DBU website said.

“We serve a mighty God, and over the years, Dr. Cook has turned to God in prayer, and God has been faithful to answer these prayers. So Dr. Cook trusts in the power of prayer, and he has humbly asked for others to pray for him during this time.”

For daily updates, visit http://www.dbu.edu/pr.

Posted: 10/18/07

Gunter resigns as BGCT
chief operating officer

By Ken Camp

Managing Editor

Ron Gunter, chief operating officer for the Baptist General Convention of Texas and the person most responsible for implementing the Executive Board staff reorganization over the last two years, has resigned, effective Nov. 30.

Gunter—a former foreign missionary—joined the BGCT Executive Board staff in 2002 as regional associate in the Houston area. In 2005, the associate executive director’s position was expanded to become chief operating officer, and Gunter was tapped for the position.

During his time in that role, congregational strategists were deployed throughout the state to work alongside regional church starting consultants.

The staff reorganization Gunter spearheaded also included creation of a service center to handle incoming and outgoing calls, a research and development office and a congregational leadership section.

But the reorganization has drawn criticism—along with Gunter’s role as part of the executive leadership team who recently eliminated 29 positions on the BGCT Executive Board staff.

“What we have achieved in these years (of Gunter’s tenure as chief operating officer) is really phenomenal, though it has been difficult,” BGCT Executive Director Charles Wade said.

He and Gunter “had a continuing dialogue about the challenges of the reorganization and leading the changes that were involved. Ron came to feel that this was the best time for him to make this decision,” Wade said.

In his Oct. 18 letter of resignation, Gunter alluded to the need for a new executive director to have the freedom to enlist his own associate. Wade has announced plans to retire Jan. 31, 2008.

“Significant, and at times difficult, adjustments have been made which have positioned the convention for further growth and greater service to the local church. As the transition is made to a new executive director, he will now have the opportunity to select his associate and assemble the team that will best serve the convention under his leadership,” Gunter said.

In recent days, some Texas Baptist pastors who are unhappy about decisions made by the Executive Board and its staff leaders discussed numerous motions they might introduce at the BGCT annual meeting in Amarillo, Oct. 29-30.

One reportedly called for the immediate resignation of the Executive Board staff’s executive leadership team—Wade, Gunter and Chief Financial Officer David Nabors. Gunter’s resignation announcement came 10 days before the start of the annual meeting.

In an interview, Gunter said he recognized he has been in “a controversial role,” and if the announcement of his resignation could “help calm things down” in BGCT life, he wants what is best for Texas Baptists.

Wade expressed appreciation to Gunter for his dedicated service in a difficult role. He brought to the post “a passion to shape our staff to be closer to, more responsive to, and more accountable for our work with local congregations,” Wade said.

The chief operating officer’s position is “one of the most difficult jobs in any organization,” he added.

Gunter “has been the one charged with bringing change,” he added. “I am grateful to him for his love for our work, his devotion to help implement the mission, vision, values and priorities adopted by our convention and his absolute reliance on God to sustain and guide him. I am confident God is going to continue to use Ron in remarkable ways.”

In his letter of resignation, Gunter expressed his appreciation for the opportunity to serve five years on the BGCT Executive Board staff.

“I cannot say enough wonderful things about the BGCT and about all the people I have encountered in my five years of service with the convention,” he wrote.

He also affirmed both Wade and Nabors for their leadership.

“I have especially enjoyed the opportunity work with you, Dr. Wade,” he wrote. “I consider you to be a true statesman, as well as a good friend and mentor. It has been an honor to serve on your executive leadership team. I have appreciated your personal and professional advice over the years. It is my hope that we will continue to have opportunities to serve together in the future.

“Also, I would like to say a ‘thank you’ to David Nabors and all the members of the operational team for their support and encouragement, and for their diligence and steadfastness as we have strived to move forward to fulfill the mission of the BGCT.”

After Gunter leaves his position as chief operating officer, the BGCT Executive Board operational team directors will report directly to Wade through the end of January. Dan McGee will become interim director of the congregational leadership section. Gunter had been serving an interim director of the area.

Gunter served in Eastern Europe from 1994 to 2002 with the Southern Baptist International Mission Board. He resigned when the mission board required missionaries to sign an affirmation of the 2000 Baptist Faith & Message doctrinal statement.

During his time with the mission board, Gunter served as a church planter, director of missions, strategy coordinator and mission administrator.

At the time of his resignation from the IMB, he was a regional strategy associate, managing Southern Baptist missions operations in the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania and Moldova.

Before he went to the foreign mission field, Gunter was pastor of First Baptist Church in Henrietta and River Oaks Baptist Church in Fort Worth, as well as churches in Kentucky and Tennessee. He also was a volunteer hospital and police chaplain.

He graduated from Austin Peay State University in Clarksville, Tenn., and Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Fort Worth.

Gunter and his wife, Cynthia, have three sons—Samuel, Lee and Andrew.

With additional reporting provided by Ferrell Foster and John Hall

Posted: 10/18/07

Bible Studies for Life Series for October 28

RESPECT–Find out what it means

• Matthew Matthew 5:33-48

By Steve Dominy

First Baptist Church, Gatesville

In Matthew 5:21-48, Jesus gives us six specific examples of his radical new ethic. For Jesus, it is not enough to think rightly; we also must act rightly. The kingdom of God is about more than following a set of rules or agreeing with a certain set of principles. It is about living as a citizen of God’s kingdom in this world.

The implication of Jesus’ teaching in this section is that his followers will live differently than the rest of the world. The six examples in this section give concrete form to being salt and light and having a greater righteousness than the Pharisees and the teachers of the law.

Last week, we covered the first three of Jesus’ examples; this week the second three. All of these are more than just high ideals Jesus sets for us. Each of these deals with the means of transformation in very real situations. The worst form of Christianity is one that is disassociated from real life—one that makes no connection with the way that we live in the real world. Jesus will have none of that. Each of these examples deals with real-world situations and a Christian response in them.

Matthew 5:33-37 deals with our integrity. Most specifically, it deals with integrity in our speech. There are times when our interpretation of this passage focuses on the wrong verse. If we focus on verse 34, “But I tell you, Do not swear at all …,” then the emphasis quickly becomes negative—do not swear or take an oath.

Some Christians have refused to ever swear an oath. The Quakers in particular come to mind. But an oath is needed only if our word is not reliable. Jesus’ teaching here is not so much a directive against taking oaths as it is about truthfulness and integrity.

The imperative in Jesus’ teaching is that our speech has integrity. In each of the examples in this section, Jesus goes beyond the normal expectations. He moves from actions to the motives behind those actions and goes to the root of our negative actions.

Our speech is no different. Jesus makes the point here that our speech gives evidence to who we really are. If we need to take oaths because our word is unreliable, then the implication is that it is not our speech that can’t be trusted; we can’t be trusted. Jesus makes this point abundantly clear in Mark 7:20-23: “He went on: ‘What comes out of a man is what makes him ‘unclean.’ For from within, out of men’s hearts, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance and folly. All these evils come from inside and make a man ‘unclean.’” When we are being transformed by the grace of Christ, it is evidenced in every area of our lives. Our speech is evidence of that transformation.

There is an apt saying, “Revenge is a dish best served cold.” We can take that several ways, but the best may be that we are not to strike out in the heat of the moment, but take the time to reflect on what happened. Matthew 5:38-42 deals with revenge. As we go throughout the Bible, we see a standard applied that is more and more strict. The passage Jesus quotes is from Deuteronomy 19. It sets a higher standard than had previously been the law of the land. It expressed the principle of exact retribution and served to restrain revenge, to limit it to what had been taken. But even this did not stop the cycle. It did not deal with the symptoms of revenge.

Jesus takes this principle a step further, insisting on an attitude that refuses to claim our rights. The Apostle Paul deals with a similar issue in 1 Corinthians in two places. In chapter 9, Paul goes into detail about the rights he has as an apostle of Jesus. He concludes: “But we did not use this right. On the contrary, we put up with anything rather than hinder the gospel of Jesus Christ.”

He applies that same principle in chapter 6. When the Corinthians boast everything is permissible, his response is, “But not everything is beneficial.” Matthew 5:39-42 provides illustrations of that attitude, not legalistic rules. All deal with the benefit of the kingdom and transform revenge to restoration.

Loving those who love us is easy. Loving those who reciprocate is something everyone does; it is expected. But Jesus raises the stakes here. We are to love those who desire our harm. The problem with this is that the Sermon on the Mount is not the only time Jesus tells us this is what we are to do. This passage is the peak of the section and reveals to us what exceeding the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees really looks like. Our righteousness must exceed theirs in including others in love.

Jesus gives us some clues on how to begin to practice love for our enemies. The first clue is prayer, yet that is usually our last option. Praying for our enemies allows God to have his way with us in that relationship. Praying for our enemies opens the door for God to have a say in the way we respond. Praying for our enemies opens the door for God to strengthen us in the way that he wants us to respond. Praying in this way opens us to love as God loves and marks us as his people.

Discussion questions

• How would your life be different if you were not a follower of Christ?

• Which of these three examples have been most convicting to you?

Posted:10/18/07

Explore the Bible Series for October 28

Centered on Christ

• Matthew 16:13-28

By Travis Frampton

Hardin-Simmons University, Abilene

In Matthew 16:13-28, Jesus asked his disciples, “Who do people say that the Son of Man is?” Their responses ranged from John the Baptist, to Elijah, to Jeremiah, to one of the prophets. But Jesus probed deeper: “Who do you say that I am?” Peter boldly answered, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.” As we’ll see, Peter had the right answer, but the wrong understanding.

Jesus as a political messiah?

Ever since the Babylonian exile of 587 B.C., Israel anticipated the return of a Davidic king to the throne in Jerusalem. No longer politically autonomous, Israel lived under subjection to foreign rule. Only briefly during the Hasmonean Period of her history—when Demetrius II, king of Syria, granted her independence in 142 B.C.—did Israel achieve political and religious autonomy from Gentile rule for about 80 years. In 63 B.C., however, the ascension of Roman power in the Graeco-Roman world ended the brief establishment of nationhood for the Jewish people. In fact, during the life of Jesus, the Romans still occupied the land of Canaan.

First-century Jews were awaiting the coming of the messiah (which means “anointed one” in Hebrew). According to the prophets of old, the “anointed one” would be a Judean from the line of David. The messiah would establish Israel once again as a mighty nation, as it had been during the days of David and Solomon, when the walls of Jerusalem were God’s mighty bulwark, and the capital city was his holy mount.

These two kings represented the height of national supremacy in Israel’s history. David was a mighty king. Solomon ruled his country with wisdom and, among his many construction projects, had built the first temple in Jerusalem. Those were golden years, with Israel at her strongest militarily, economically and politically. Was Jesus to recreate this picture for Israel? Was he the one to raise the sword against mighty Caesar?

Peter’s answer to Jesus’ question, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God,” was correct, but he completely misunderstood how Jesus would fulfill the messianic role. Jesus came not to re-establish the glory days of years past. He came not to lead a military uprising against the Romans in order to usurp Caesar’s dominion in Judea. Instead, Jesus preached he came to commence the reign of the kingdom of God: “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is near” (Matthew 4:17).

Jesus as Messiah for the kingdom of God

What was the difference between the kingdom of God and a restored and rejuvenated politically autonomous Israel? To answer this question in detail would take a separate monograph. To briefly provide a preliminary answer to the question, however, let us look at how David and Solomon failed as kings.

Although both kings initially epitomized hope to restore Israel to obedience under the Law, these two kings ultimately failed miserably at bringing justice in their lands and worshipping the Lord. For starters, David committed adultery with Bathsheba, murdered her husband, Uriah, and did not maintain justice in the land when his sons attempted to wrest power from him. Solomon, for all his wisdom, violated every one of the Mosaic laws given to Israel’s kings.

In Deuteronomy 17:14-20, Moses instructed the Israelites regarding what sort of king should rule over them once they entered the land: the king must be a full Israelite; he must be chosen by God; he must not amass silver and gold in great quantities; he must not acquire horses for his chariots, nor go to Egypt to obtain them; the king must not have many wives.

King Solomon violated each of these proscriptions:

• Solomon’s mother was Bathsheba (she’s never mentioned as an Israelite, and her first husband was Uriah the Hittite).

• Nathan and Bathsheba tricked David in order to secure a place for Solomon on the throne, and God never chose him like he did Saul and David (1 Kings 1).

• More than any other king of Israel, Solomon amassed silver and gold in great quantities (1 Kings 10:16, 17, 18, 21, 25).

• He acquired hundreds of horses for chariots and went to Egypt to obtain them (1 Kings 10:26, 27, 28, 29).

• He had 700 wives and 300 concubines (1 Kings 11:1-4). The writer of 1 Kings also recorded that “as Solomon grew old, his wives turned his heart after other gods, and his heart was not fully devoted to the Lord his God, as the heart of David his father had been” (v. 4).

After Moses told the Israelites about the Lord’s regulations placed on the king, he explained what the kings of Israel should do. They should copy the law and teach it to the people. “It is to be with him, and he is to read it all the days of his life so that he may learn to revere the Lord his God and follow all the words of this law and these decrees and not consider himself better than his fellow Israelites and turn from the law to the right or to the left” (Deuteronomy 17:19-20).

Peter had not dropped his fishing nets to follow a teacher-king. He, along with several others who followed Jesus, expected the messiah to be one who would take up the sword, lead armies and restore Israel to her previous position of glory.

Yet Jesus did not meet these expectations. He taught that he had to undergo great suffering, to be put to death, and to be raised again on the third day. Peter exclaimed: “Never, Lord! This shall never happen to you!” But Jesus rebuked him: “Out of my sight, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me; you do not have in mind the things of God, but the things of men” (Matthew 16:22-23).

How could Jesus, who had just given the keys to the kingdom of heaven to Peter, call the foundational rock upon which the church was built Satan? Peter’s word would compromise Jesus’ mission, requiring the messiah to equate military strength with godly power. The kingdom of heaven, however, was not about political might, but about sacrifice, servanthood and love. In God’s dominion, love, not weapons of war, conquers. Jesus came not as a king like David or Solomon, but came as the Son of God, a servant and a teacher. In this way, Jesus fulfilled the Mosaic Law in ways David and Solomon did not.

Discussion questions

• Who do you say Jesus is?

• In what ways do we expect Jesus to be a political messiah still?

• What does it mean to be a citizen of the kingdom of God? Of America? Are the two the same? Different? Explain.

• Why does Jesus rebuke Peter?

Posted: 10/17/07

Carolyn Porterfield
resigns as Texas WMU chief

By Ferrell Foster

Texas Baptist Communications

DALLAS—Carolyn Porterfield announced her resignation as executive director-treasurer of the Woman’s Missionary Union of Texas in an Oct. 16 letter to the organization’s board of directors.

“I have come to realize that the skill sets required for the position that I now hold do not match well with my gifts and abilities,” Porterfield said in the letter. “It is time for me to step aside in order for the next leader to come who can most effectively lead this wonderful organization into her future.”

Texas WMU is an auxiliary of the Baptist General Convention of Texas, partnering with the state convention but governed by its own board of directors. Porterfield’s resignation was effective immediately.

“Carolyn Porterfield has given deeply spiritual and passionate leadership to WMU of Texas,” said BGCT Executive Director Charles Wade.

“She has provided many moments of spiritual insight and blessing as she has led the BGCT staff in worship through prayer, message and song. I am very sorry that the new BGCT executive director will not have the chance to serve Texas Baptists with her.”

In an interview, Porterfield explained the executive director job requires a great deal of management skills, but said, “My gifts are more in the area of leading and speaking and being with people.”

Serving with Texas Baptist women has “been a great joy,” she continued. “They have been a personal blessing to me. I see God at work in their lives, and that inspires me. I see women who persevere for the sake of God’s kingdom.

“I pray that they will just stay committed to reaching teaching and discipling all the nations with the good news of Jesus Christ.”

Porterfield joined the Texas WMU staff in 1992, and was named executive director-treasurer March 1, 2001.

During her time of leadership, WMU redesigned its promotion materials for the Mary Hill Davis Offering for Texas Missions, which funds the WMU of Texas and many critical ministries of the BGCT.

Texas WMU is “positioned better for the future as a non-profit organization because of governance changes that are being put into place, ” Porterfield said.

In 2006, WMU launched multiple regional events called Awakening to replace the long-established statewide Texas Leadership Conference. Attendance at the 2006 events reached 3,600, compared to 750 at the last statewide conference in 2005.

Porterfield, a member of Lakeside Baptist Church in Dallas, is unsure about the specifics of her future but said she hopes to be involved in missions in some way after taking some time off for rest and rejuvenation.

“I know my future is sure because it’s in God’s hands,” she said.

Posted: 10/12/07

Bible Studies for Life Series for October 21

The heart of the matter

• Matthew 5:21-48

By Steve Dominy

First Baptist Church, Gatesville

In Matthew 5:21-48, Jesus gives us six specific examples of his radical new ethic. For Jesus, it is not enough to think rightly; we also must act rightly. The kingdom of God is about more than following a set of rules or agreeing with a certain set of principles; it is about living as a citizen of God’s kingdom in this world.

The implication of Jesus’ teaching in this section is that his followers will live differently than the rest of the world. The six examples in this section give concrete form to being salt and light and having a greater righteousness than the Pharisees and the teachers of the law.

Jesus’ model in his teaching is to call attention to the Old Testament teaching. All of his followers there would have had at least a passing understanding with each of these teachings. Jesus then calls his disciples to an even higher standard than the law did.

This is the place where we usually get hung up. It is apparent to anyone who reads the Old Testament that Israel, and the rest of the world which they represented, was by no means capable of maintaining even the original standards of the law.

How in the world are we supposed to live up to this higher standard? This is precisely the problem that has caused us to skip over the Sermon on the Mount, or to view it as an ethic for a different time. I hope that by looking at each section, we can see Jesus did not give us an unrealistic standard to live up to but taught us how to begin to live to that standard.

We might best title Matthew 5:21-26, “Dealing with Anger.” Jesus starts by saying, “You have heard it said, … ‘Do not murder,’” but Jesus goes further by getting to the root cause of murder, “But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother is subject to judgment.”

First, Jesus in no way says a Christian should never be angry. In order for us to never be angry, we must be apathetic; it means that we don’t care. When something that we value is hurt or in some way diminished, it causes us to be angry. When someone, or something, causes our family to hurt, we are angry. Anger comes because we care deeply about someone or something. That is the reason church fights are the worst. We care about the church, we love the church and that is true of both sides. What Jesus does here is tell us how to be delivered from that anger and live together as brothers and sisters in Christ. In short, Jesus tells us how to keep our anger from causing us to sin.

In Kingdom Ethics, Glen Stassen and David Gushee call Jesus’ teaching “transforming initiatives.” Jesus does not give us a command without telling us how to fulfill it. Jesus gives us a specific way to deal with our anger, to keep it from getting out of hand and leading us to sin. Jesus says if there is a brother who has something against us, we are to go and be reconciled. We are to take the initiative in making the relationship right. Jesus moves us from allowing anger to take over our lives to living in grace and restoration.

It should not surprise us that this is the method Jesus prescribes for us. It is exactly what God has done for us. Romans 5:8 says: “But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.” God does not allow his anger to go unchecked but gives us every opportunity for reconciliation. He calls for us to do the same. Jesus does not ask us to do what he has not already done, and in doing so, sets the example for us.

Matthew 5:27-30 deals specifically with sexual lust. It follows the same pattern as the previous section. Jesus reminds them of the standard, sets it higher and then tells us how to live it out. Once again, Jesus deals with the issue in the germinal stage. Adultery hasn’t yet happened, but the seeds are there. Lust is best defined as looking with a desire to conquer or possess. It does not mean appreciating beauty. It is normal for us to admire people of the opposite sex who are beautiful. Sin comes in when that admiration is twisted into something other than what God desires.

Jesus prescribes radical action for dealing with lust. Gouging out an eye and cutting off a hand could not be described as anything less than radical. Jesus tells us we need to take radical action to remove the cause of temptation. With the Internet, cable and satellite TV, we have access to temptation at our fingertips. For some, action as radical as doing away with Internet or cable at the house might be necessary. For others, software for which only our spouses have the password might be necessary. The point Jesus makes here is this: do what is necessary to remove the temptation.

Jesus is fully aware of the power of this temptation. He places the responsibility squarely on the man’s shoulders. In that culture, women usually were blamed for lustful relationships. Not much has changed in our day. The women still tend to take the brunt of the blame. Jesus placed responsibility for their actions, habits and practices squarely on the shoulders of the men. Men in particular need to step up and take the responsibility to change those actions which lead to lust.

If we have not experienced personally the difficulty of divorce, then we certainly have seen it in the lives of our friends and family members. It is no different now than it was then, we still are looking for ways to justify divorce. Jesus’ emphasis was different; it focused on how we can reconcile broken relationships rather than looking for ways out. This does not mean there are not reasons to legitimately divorce; it does mean we first seek reconciliation and restoration. Jesus deals with this in greater detail in Matthew 19:3-9. It is a good idea to consult this text in conjunction with Jesus’ teaching in the Sermon on the Mount.

Posted:10/12/07

Explore the Bible Series for October 21

Practice genuine purity

• Matthew 15:1-20

By Travis Frampton

Hardin-Simmons University, Abilene

The way we read the Bible affects the way we treat other people. Needless to say, interpretation of Scripture is an extremely important matter.

The Pharisees were teachers of the law. They were popular among the Jewish laity and primarily were responsible for explaining Scripture and relating the law to the daily life of first-century Israel. When Jesus began his ministry, several Jews in Galilee and Judea were amazed by the power of his teaching and by his ability to heal invalids. Jesus’ understanding of the requirements of the law, however, ran counter to that of the Pharisees.

As Jesus’ followers increased in number, the Pharisees felt threatened by the burgeoning popularity of the Nazarene. As we have seen in previous lessons, they even resorted to looking for opportunities to kill him.

Do you remember their confrontation with him about Sabbath observance in Matthew 12? After Jesus declared “the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath” (v. 8) and healed a man on the Sabbath (vv. 9-13), they went out and plotted to destroy him (v.14).

At stake in several disputes between the two was the interpretation of Scripture. Although the Pharisees declared on many occasions that Jesus and his disciples violated the letter of the law, Jesus insisted mercy was better than sacrifice: “If any of you has a sheep and it falls into a pit on the Sabbath, will you not take hold of it and lift it out” (Matthew 12:11)? Jesus prioritized love and mercy over strict observance of the Law.

In Matthew 15:1-20, Jesus and the Pharisees are again in a dispute over the application of Scripture. “Why do your disciples break the tradition of the elders?” The Pharisees raised this charge against the disciples. Jesus replied, “And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition” (Matthew 15:3)?

Jesus pointed out to his religious opponents that even though they openly demanded strict observance of the law, they themselves interpreted it loosely whenever it was to their advantage. His intention was not to demand stricter observance from them but to show their tradition interpreted passages from Deuteronomy in a way that was not explicitly stated in those texts. Essentially, they were adding to the law.

Jesus explained that according to Scripture, Israelites were instructed to “honor their father and mother” (Exodus 20:12; Deuteronomy 5:16) and that anyone “who curses their father and mother is to be put to death” (Exodus 21:17).

Yet the Pharisees were not encouraging strict obedience in either of these cases; they extrapolated from the text, showing various ways in which these verses could be understood. Jesus called them hypocrites for demanding meticulous observance of the tradition of the elders while they themselves did not strictly adhere to the commandments of God. He quoted from the book of Isaiah: “These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me” (Isaiah 29:13).

Jesus then drew attention to Jewish purity laws, particularly those found in Leviticus regarding clean and unclean foods. Jesus’ use of this example displays the heart of his perspective about Scripture. Jesus fulfilled Old Testament law. He completed it, and it was summed up in him. In Christ, purity, cleanliness, and holiness were given new emphasis and meaning. Outward ritual lost importance when compared to one’s moral and ethical behavior.

Even his disciples seemed perplexed by Jesus’ teaching, and Peter asked for clarification. Jesus answered: “Don’t you see that whatever enters the mouth goes into the stomach and then out of the body. But the things that come from out of the mouth come from the heart, and these make a man ‘unclean’” (Matthew 15:17-18).

This rather graphic illustration of food entering the body, going through the digestive tract, and then excreted “out of the body” demonstrated well that all food, whether clean or unclean, went to the same place. How could anything that entered the mouth and exited the body make a person pure? Instead, Jesus reversed the process. In this way, a person was pure based on the condition of his or her heart. Jesus put it bluntly: “For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander” (Matthew 15:19). These rendered a person unclean.

Each of these sins—perhaps with the exception of “evil thoughts”—involved wronging or violating another human being. This passage resonates well with Jesus’ command to love one’s neighbor as oneself. From the perspective of the Pharisees, they loved God, and they loved the Scriptures.

Yet something was lacking. Jesus demanded more. From his perspective, in order to “love God,” one must love his or her neighbor. When Jesus summed up the Law, it precluded loving God without also loving one’s neighbor. Loving God and loving your neighbor go hand in hand. To separate the two as distinct from one another—as the Pharisees did—would be contrary to Jesus’ teaching. We show our love and devotion to God by honoring our parents, by bringing justice to the poor and oppressed, by not slandering a good name, and by loving others (even those who have wronged us). Indeed, the way we read the Bible does affect the way we treat other people.

Discussion questions

• How does the way we read the Bible effect how we treat other people?

• What do you think it means to be pure according to the Pharisees? According to Jesus?

• How is it possible for us to honor God with our lips and, at the same time, be far from God?

• How do we love God and love our neighbor? Which is more difficult? Why?

Posted: 10/12/07

Spirituality in architecture
gets boost from revival of arts

By Greg Warner

Associated Baptist Press

FALLS CHURCH, Va. (ABP)—Architect Larry Cook believes “any building completely devoid of art is devoid of spirituality.”

The Virginian is one of a growing number of architects who welcome the return of symbolism and spirituality to church buildings. After decades of sparse modernist buildings and symbol-less megachurches, many Christians and congregations are craving a return to more overt spirituality and symbolism in their houses of worship, according to some theologians and artists.

The search for authentic spirituality and uniqueness in church architecture is aided by another trend—a rediscovery of the arts by Christians.

In today’s image-driven culture, the Reformers’ fear of idol worship has given way to new visual and artistic expressions of the gospel, whether video, drama, painting, installation art—even tattoos and graffiti.

“The spoken word does not have quite the same content for generations growing up on television,” said architect Douglas Hoffman of Cleveland, Ohio.

There is a new collaboration between artists and architects, Hoffman said, that eventually will improve the spiritual aesthetic of America’s churches. “There are always religious artists at architectural meetings, and they’re raising the bar for the interplay between artists and architects,” he said.

One group leading the way, Hoffman said, is the Christians in the Visual Arts organization, which encourages Christian artists to make a difference in the church and ultimately the secular world.

Some congregations, in addition to making their worship spaces more artful, are advocating a more indigenous faith, one that reflects their geographic setting and culture. So they are turning to local artists to decorate their buildings.

Whereas a worship banner and a framed print of Sallman’s Head of Christ might have passed for art a couple decades ago, churches now want homegrown artists—whether professional or amateur, Christian or not—who will paint or sculpt something unique for their buildings.

Large-scale original murals, custom furnishings, even art galleries are part of the fabric of some congregations, particularly those reaching younger adults and those with ties to local arts communities.

“Churches realize they don’t have to choose their art and furnishings from a catalog anymore,” said Judith Dupré, a writer and design consultant for churches. “They can fill their worship space … by looking locally, realizing that, for the same price as picking out a lectern from a catalog, they can get something marvelous and unique, a one-of-a-kind furnishing.”

Ironically, despite their new openness, Christian churches trail the secular world in promoting spirituality in art, several observers said. There is a movement, evident worldwide but especially in Europe, to seek spiritual meaning in nonreligious art, said Cook, the architect from Falls Church, Va., near Washington.

See Related Articles: • The Spirit in Stone • Spirituality in architecture gets boost from revival of arts • Stained-glass windows tell stories of faith • Timeless grace: After 52 years, chapel continues to bless • Historic sanctuaries: To be or not to be?

That reality was brought home dramatically on a recent visit to Washington’s National Gallery of Art, Cook said. The rooms containing pre-Reformation paintings were packed with people “seeking spirituality in secular art,” he said.

In contrast, 30 years ago, when Cook was studying art and going to the National Gallery, he said, those same rooms nearly were empty.

Inevitably, any effort to make a church building spiritually expressive, architectural unique, or artistically plentiful will run into a common roadblock—cost.

“Churches are very conscious about cost,” said Michael Crosbie of Essex, Conn., who is chair of architecture at the University of Hartford. “Art tends to add costs, and sometimes it’s a likely thing to be cut.”

“If a church building project is being driven by economics, then all of those (artistic) ideas can fall on deaf ears,” echoed Hoffman. Likewise, a well-entrenched sense of tradition can “act like cement on their feet” when church leaders are considering radical changes to the worship space, said Hoffman, a former architect for the United Methodist Church.

Hoffman and Cook see a stark contrast with the Gothic cathedrals of the Middle Ages, which took decades and untold fortunes to build.

The Gothic churches of Europe represent “the epitome of artistic achievement” for church buildings, Hoffman said, and citizens who donated to the construction “paid for a full-life experience,” from birth to death.

Of course, civic envy played a large role. The objective was “to outdo the neighboring town” by building higher, said Cook, who has designed more than 200 churches.

But the cathedral “used to be the finest work of architecture in a community,” added Tim Blonkvist, an Episcopal architect from San Antonio.

While the Medieval faithful often “gave their last penny” to the cathedral construction, he said, Christians today “would rather spend money on themselves than give it away.”

“When everybody’s individual house is built with a higher quality than the house of God, I think we’ve got things backward,” said Blonkvist, who designed the award-winning, $12 million Riverbend Church in Austin, a Texas Baptist congregation.

However, the architects say, a growing number of churches—like Riverbend—are willing to spend money on artistically unique and spiritually inspiring sanctuaries.

“Some congregations are willing to spend money on buildings that are more permanent and expressive,” said Crosbie. Custom stained glass, sculpture and other art forms are now on the shopping lists of a few congregations.

The Riverbend facility won an annual award competition sponsored by Faith & Form, a magazine about religious architecture, which Crosbie edits.

“The point of the awards program is to show others what a high-quality worship environment can be like,” he said.

Blonkvist cites the biblical story, told in Matthew 27, of a woman who poured a flask of expensive perfume on the hair of Jesus. While some of the disciples complained the woman was wasting money that could help the poor, Jesus called the woman’s act “beautiful.”

“Jesus said, ‘I am worthy of you spending money to adorn me,’” Blonkvist said.

He admits “there are good arguments both ways” about spending money on church buildings or ministries. “There is a place for both,” he said. “I am most comfortable in the middle.”

When building a place for the worship of God, he advised, Christians should ask themselves: “Do you want to invite God here? Do you want it to be the finest or the cheapest we can build?”

Posted: 10/12/07

Stained-glass windows tell stories of faith

By George Henson

Staff Writer

FORT WORTH—If every picture tells a story, the stained-glass windows of Broadway Baptist Church tell countless tales of grace, sacrifice and love.

Stained-glass windows hearken back to a time when many worshippers could not read the Bible, but they could look at ornate windows that told the story for them. They knew what the symbols meant and knew what various numbers and colors were to call to mind.

If they saw four panels, they would look for symbols of the four evangelists—a man for Matthew, a lion for Mark, an ox for Luke and an eagle for John.

With this rich history in mind, Sunday school classes raised money to pay for the stained-glass windows of Broadway more than half a century ago. Building Chairman Bill Henderson had seen the stained-glass windows at Riverside Church in New York City and brought that vision to the table when plans for the building were discussed.

The view over the baptistery is of the invitation window, where Christ stands with open hands inviting all to come. The upper windows on the south side of the entrance tell the creation story—the creation of light, plants, man and animals are depicted in three windows—and the fall of humanity. The lower windows on the south side tell the stories of stalwarts of the Old Testament—Abraham, Moses and David.

Around a corner are windows depicting women of the Old Testament, with a huge rose window above them, which calls to mind symbols of the major prophets and minor prophets.

Looking to the north side upon entrance, the upper windows depict the Sermon on the Mount, the parables of Jesus, the miracles of Christ and stewardship. The lower windows show Christ knocking at the door, as the Good Shepherd, in the Garden of Gethsemane and at the ascension. Around the corner, the transept windows depict the nativity, Christ’s presentation to the shepherds, the holy family at Nazareth, the boyhood Christ in the temple, Christ calling children to himself and calling his disciples.

The “fellowship” stained-glass window at Broadway Baptist Church in Fort Worth calls Christians together for encouragement. (PHTOTOS/David Clanton)

Above the transept windows is another rose window depicting symbols of the 12 disciples.

When worshippers turn to leave the sanctuary, they face the large stained-glass window that instructs Christ’s disciples to go forth and make disciples.

Each of the richly colored windows is filled with symbols, spinning numerous tales woven into the tapestry of faith.

While people today do not have such a keen insight into the symbols used in the depictions, it in some ways makes the windows more personal in their meaning to each individual, said Claudine Marion, Broadway’s minister of hospitality and the arts.

“We’re very aware that the colors teach, the symbols teach—and that they inspire,” she said. “People remember what they see and take different things from those colors and symbols. Some may say, ‘Oh, the red is the blood, and the blue is the color for righteousness,’ but for someone else it may mean something else totally. Everyone comes in bringing their own story and translates the symbols of the windows using that story.”

The windows also make for a different worship experience, Marion asserted. “When you walk into this building, you are bathed in the light that comes through these windows, and it prepares you to receive the light that God presents to us,” she said.

Pastor Brett Younger agreed. “I’ve worshipped in rooms that had a variety of purposes. That can be a good stewardship of resources, but there is also something indescribably sacred about worshipping in a room that couldn’t be anything but a sanctuary. It’s clear to worshippers that we have come to give ourselves to God,” he said.

The scenes from the past displayed in such a visual manner also help give a clearer vision of what God can do in the present, Younger said.

“When we’re surrounded by the stories of the Bible, the heroes and heroines of our faith, it’s obvious that we are there to take our place in the story,” he said.

One of the chief benefits of the windows is in casting a crystal-clear spotlight on what the focus of worship is supposed to be about, he continued.

“I have been in services where the sermon, the music and the Lord’s Supper seems to be the center of worship, but in a sanctuary with stained glass and high ceilings, the sacred nature of the room makes it more likely that the presence of God becomes the center of worship,” Younger said.

“Stained glass is marvelously impractical. It costs too much, and you can’t see through it. But stained glass surrounds us with the stories of impractical saints who chose to follow Christ, no matter the cost.”

Posted: 10/12/07

Timeless grace: After 52 years,
chapel continues to bless

By Miranda Bradley

Children At Heart Ministries

ROUND ROCK—As the population north of Austin has grown exponentially over the last five decades, longtime residents have looked to the familiar stained-glass windows and limestone walls of Hankamer-Fleming

Stained glass windows in the Texas Baptist Children’s Home chapel depict the life of Christ and show biblical characters raised by people other than their biological parents.

Chapel at Texas Baptist Children’s Home as an enduring landmark.

“The chapel sits in the heart of our campus, just as Christ is at the heart of our ministries,” said Jerry Bradley, president of the children’s home and chief executive officer of Children At Heart Ministries. “It’s more than a building. It’s a reminder to everyone of who we are and what we stand for.”

See Related Articles: • The Spirit in Stone • Spirituality in architecture gets boost from revival of arts • Stained-glass windows tell stories of faith • Timeless grace: After 52 years, chapel continues to bless • Historic sanctuaries: To be or not to be?

Built in 1955, the chapel started as a place of worship for orphans who lived at the children’s home.

Today, children on campus attend Sunday morning services in the community with their cottage families. But on Sunday nights, residents still gather for worship inside Hankamer-Fleming Chapel.

The structure was patterned after a church in North Carolina, down to its distinctive chandeliers. Stained glass was hand-selected to send a specific message of hope and comfort to kids in care.

Louis and Billie Sue Henna-Cariker donated the original land and the first five buildings to start the children’s home. She chaired the board that oversaw the chapel’s building process.

“I think it’s wonderful that the building has withstood the test of time,” she said. “I’m glad to have been part of it.”

Five stained-glass windows on the east side of the chapel depict a different child in the Bible who was raised by someone other than his parents, including Daniel, Moses, Joseph, Samuel and David. The five west windows represent important milestones in Jesus’ life, and a large back window shows Jesus welcoming the little children into his open arms.

“Each of these windows is a reminder to everyone that God loves children and welcomes anyone with pain and suffering,” said Keith Dyer, executive director of Texas Baptist Children’s Home.

The chapel also is a standing representation of community partnership. When the need for the structure first arose, Curtis Hankamer and William Fleming provided the money to build it. Money for the windows was provided by Broadway Baptist Church of Forth Worth and Second Baptist Church of Houston, along with major gifts from individual donors in Houston, Fort Worth and Taylor.

Nearly 20 years after it was built, the chapel received another significant contribution. After losing their 16-year-old daughter in a fatal car accident, Diane and Stanley Williams decided to purchase bells for the chapel.

“We wanted to do something to honor children,” Diane Williams said. “I love that the bells are not only a witness for Christ, but they are also a legacy for my daughter.”

The bells ring every hour and half hour throughout the year and play Christmas carols during the season.

“I’m thrilled that other people can enjoy them,” she said. “Giving is even more special when you know those blessings continue every day.”

Besides being a highly sought-after site for weddings and funeral services, the chapel also has been a source of comfort during times of national tragedy. On Sept. 11, 2001, area residents gathered there to pray, reflect and grieve the lives lost in terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, D.C. Every year, it also is the site of Round Rock’s National Day of Prayer services, inviting visitors to fellowship.

Throughout its 52 years, Hankamer-Fleming Chapel has been witness to tears of joy and pain, all from its highly visible location on the corner of Highway 79 and North Mays Street.

“This city has grown and evolved,” Dyer said. “But this chapel will always be here as a silent reminder of God’s timeless love and grace.”