The absurdity of such a charge is obvious to anyone who reflects on the margin by which our resolution was defeated. Mainstream Baptists have no "power" and the task of facing "F"undamentalism is more like taking up a cross than "play." Mainstream Baptists stand only on the moral authority of our spiritual convictions.

A week later, the Baptist Messenger published a story about harmony and commitment to missions that accused us of creating "disharmony."

Our resolution was presented as an act of conscience. Only issues of biblical interpretation and doctrine were raised. We did not attack the character or integrity of anyone. Our appeal was to the consciences of the messengers present at the convention.

Most of those who challenged our resolution did so with equal respect and civility. One pastor, however, tried to discredit our organization by vilifying the people with whom we associate. His remarks were not germane to the issue, but constituted a passionate and inflammatory, verbal assault on the character and convictions of member of his own congregation. For which he received audible affirmation from other messengers.

This was the real dissonance at BGCO.

How, in good conscience, can a pastor defame the character of a member of his own congregation from the platform of a state convention?

How, in good conscience, could a pastor do this when the person named was not present to defend herself and was, at that very hour, grieving and making funeral arrangements for a young relative?

How can anyone say "Amen" to that?