What Do We Do with the ERLC? An Open Letter to Southern Baptists

Somewhere near the end of December (2024), I noticed a definite uptick in my email inbox. On what seemed like a daily basis, the Ethics and Religious Liberties Commission (ERLC), the public policy and lobbying arm of the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC), sent requests for donations, updates on their activities, videos highlighting their mission, and introductions to new staff members.

With a mixture of annoyance and amusement, I would scan these emails before archiving them. Maybe some of you did the same. In my subjective estimation, daily emails from public ministries are an annoyance. And a sudden proliferation of emails that cheerlead the same are an amusement, because it invites the question, “When did they hire a PR firm?”

When things are not going well in an organization, there are two paths to take. The first is to admit the problem publicly and to work toward a resolution with observable improvement and quantifiable change.^[1] The second is to run a public relations campaign, where instead of admitting wrong and defining the changes that the institution has made or will make, they launch 1,000 pastel-colored balloons to draw attention away from the problems.

1. Later this month David Mitzenmacher will provide a longform addressing this very question: What can the ERLC do to make noticeable change and improvement?

In the case of the ERLC, I don’t know if they hired a PR firm to help them rebrand for 2025, but it is certain that they would have had good reason to do so. In June 2024, at the Southern Baptist Convention annual meeting, pastor Tom Ascol presented a motion to abolish the ERLC, stressing the way in which the ERLC has “become increasingly distant from the values and concerns of the churches that finance it.” For more on the reasons why Tom Ascol made this motion, and why twenty-five to forty percent of the messengers (estimates vary) voted for it, you can listen to this interview below.

Later, in August, when Megan Basham’s book Shepherds for Sale came out, she also highlighted concerns about the way previous ERLC leader Russell Moore “pull[ed] the denomination to the left on issues ranging from immigration to ostensible racial injustice.”^[2] While Moore resigned in 2021, his impact on the ERLC remains.^[3] And so do the concerns of many Southern Baptists.

Making matters worse, in between June and August of 2024, the ERLC’s Board of Trustees “announced [on July 22] that its president Brent Leatherwood suddenly lost his job—only to retract the statement the next morning.”^[4] In the aftermath, Kevin Smith, the chair of the board, resigned his position, which only led to more confusion and concern. What is going on with the ERLC? And how can Southern Baptists trust this entity going forward? Even more, what would the best version of the ERLC look like?

4. Kate Shellnut, “ERLC Retracts Announcement Firing President Brent Leatherwood,” Christianity Today, July 23, 2024.

Those are the questions that the editors of Christ Over All had as we entered the fall of 2024. Then, as we planned for the new year, we pitched this month’s theme: The Ethics and Religious Liberty Conundrum. And this essay outlines some of our concerns and questions that we have posed to Brent Leatherwood by personal correspondence and now share publicly.^[5]

5. For those who read Christ Over All and are not (interested) in the SBC, we ask for your patience. As pastors and professors located in the Southern Baptist Convention, we want to do the most good for our convention. And for the last three years, we have dedicated one month each year to help address convention matters.

Over the next few weeks, we will take a biblical, historical, and practical look at what Christians, and specifically Southern Baptists, have done and could do to engage the public square. We will consider the biblical foundations for engaging kings and those in political offices. We will also present some of the history of the ERLC and its precursors. We will examine what the ERLC has (and has not done) in places like Washington, D. C. And we will offer many constructive proposals for ways to improve.

Along the way, we will address many of concerns that Southern Baptists have voiced regarding the ERLC, its leaders, and its direction. Yet, we will not simply offer thirty days of outrage. Instead, our aim is to facilitate a serious discussion among Southern Baptists about the ERLC—its past, present, and future ministries. And, as I wrote to Brent Leatherwood, president of the ERLC, in January, we are inviting you to participate in that discussion, if you would like.

Do You Really Want Honest Feedback?

To move from the general wave of emails to just one email, on February 11, the ERLC sent out a one-minute survey to gauge the interest of Southern Baptists in their work (see below). Leaving aside the merits of such a strategy, I dutifully responded and gave my feedback. However, I also gave far more feedback in an email that I sent to Brent Leatherwood and his chief of staff on January 16, inviting him to write an article for Christ Over All. That invitation still stands.

In my email, I told Brent of this month’s theme, some of the authors who will be contributing, and some of the subjects we will be covering. Then, as I shared above, I offered some of the rationale for addressing this subject and our aim to facilitate a conversation about what the ERLC could be, unburdened by what it has been.

In a word, I gave detailed feedback that far exceeded the one-minute survey. Perhaps, that feedback will be factored into the ways the ERLC hopes to move forward in 2025. Or maybe not. I would not be offended if my email was dismissed, because long emails, with detailed questions, can be just as annoying as daily emails from those ministries. Full disclosure: I did ask the ERLC to take down all the articles I wrote for them when I was an ERLC Research Fellow (still on the books until last year). And so perhaps, my honest feedback was not well received. I don’t know.

But the offer to Brent Leatherwood, or anyone else from the ERLC, remains. Christ Over All really does want to stimulate a conversation about the ERLC, and having constructive dialogue is part of that process. With that in mind, the questions that follow are ones that need to be answered—either by the those leading the ERLC or someone else. These questions are directed to the ERLC, but they are good and necessary for all Southern Baptists to consider.

Eight Questions for the ERLC

1.     What is the ERLC doing to regain trust in the SBC?

From Russell Moore’s intentionally leaked letters in 2021, to the 2024 vote in Indianapolis to abolish the ERLC as an entity, to the challenges faced with the ERLC trustee board and leadership in July of 2024, there are many voices in the SBC that are calling for the termination of the ERLC. What is the ERLC doing to repair trust with member churches in the SBC? And what can you say to those who have voiced opposition to the ERLC?

2.     Who is funding the ERLC?

In Shepherds for Sale, Megan Basham reported that funds were coming into the ERLC from places other than the Cooperative Program.^[6] This leads to the questions about who is funding the ERLC and what impact does that have on its ministries. Specifically, has the ERLC received funds from any organizations outside of the SBC over the last three years (2021–2024)? If so, which organizations, how many times, what amounts, and for what purposes?

6. The Cooperative Program is the main funding mechanism for Southern Baptists. Southern Baptist churches give to this fund, and then the money is allocated to the various SBC entities for their particular missions.

Financial transparency is a critical matter for the convention at large. And it is one that the ERLC could provide assistance with, as pastors like Rhett Burns have called for greater fiscal responsibility and accountability. For the ERLC itself, what can you share about who is funding the ERLC?

3.     What is the ERLC’s position on abortion?

In 2020, the ERLC hosted an event at McLean Bible Church called “Evangelicals for Life.” In that event, speakers extended the pro-life concern from babies to immigrants, refugees, the elderly, and beyond. We believe that arguing for a ‘whole life pro-life’ position compromises the fight against abortion because it takes the focus off those who are being killed—children in the womb. Does the ERLC believe the same, or does it maintain the same position as 2020?

Similarly, in 2022, the ERLC sent a letter to oppose a bill that would have abolished abortion in Louisiana. Acknowledging the way that abolitionists and pro-life Christians take different strategies to fight abortion, why did the ERLC work to kill this bill in a state where abolition had strong support? Would it do so again? Or, would the ERLC acknowledge this as an error in judgment?

More broadly, does the ERLC continue to believe that women who kill their children and “shout their abortions” should not be prosecuted under the law? If so, how do you defend this biblically? Additionally, do you still focus your pro-life efforts on clinical abortions only? Or, with the rise in chemical abortions, has that changed your focus?

4.     How does the ERLC engage immigration and national security?

In 2016, Russell Moore infamously rebuked a Southern Baptist pastor for asking about the ERLC’s decision to write an amicus brief in support of a New Jersey mosque. Would the ERLC do that again? Does it regret that decision? What is the status of inter-faith dialogue? And, in light of Pro-Palestinian protests in America calling for our nation’s downfall, how has and how does the ERLC plan to address Islam?^[7]

7. This is the one of the questions that we will answer this month, as the rise of militant Islam is a threat to churches across the globe, but especially in nations like Nigeria and Great Britain. Left unchecked, Islam will harm the witness of the gospel in America, too.

More broadly, while participating in the Evangelical Immigration Table (EIT), many believe that the ERLC has only focused on making it easier for illegal immigrants to enter America. As you may know, the EIT is housed within the National Immigration Forum, a secular, Non-Governmental Organization, and Influence Watch has described EIT’s mission as “advocat[ing] for granting legal status to most illegal immigrants already in the United States and staunchly oppos[ing] border enforcement policies.” Given this background, why has the ERLC continued to take a leading role within the Evangelical Immigration Table? Does the ERLC’s policy goals regarding immigration align with the National Immigration Forum’s goals, and if not, why does the ERLC have a leadership role in one of the National Immigration Forum’s entities?

Similarly, questions about national sovereignty and secure borders remain unaddressed. Has the ERLC publicly supported securing our borders, or confronted the rise in crime rates as a result of Biden’s nearly open border policies? Or has the immigration position been one-sided, namely a vision of humanitarian aid that does not enforce the rule of law and the protection of the America border? Or, does the good of the “asylum seeker” trump the good of protecting Americans?

Getting specific, in light of recent revelations about Pakistani grooming gangs in the United Kingdom and recent terrorist attacks involving Muslims, does the ERLC hold a different position today than it did in 2017, when Russell Moore opposed Donald Trump’s policy on immigration? Or, prospectively, as the second Trump Administration moves to enforce deportations and limit immigration, what position will the ERLC take? 

5.     Do the current leaders in the ERLC have in-roads to the Trump Administration?

After Russell Moore took a very public stand against Donald Trump, what relationship does the ERLC have with the Trump administration? What relationships are extant? What aims do you have in lobbying / working with the Trump administration?

6.     How does Resolution 9 and the selective use of critical theory inform the ERLC?

Or to change the language, in what ways is the ERLC working to implement or encourage diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives? Are all the efforts given to increase diversity, erase ethnic hostility, and promote racial reconciliation? Or are there equal efforts to recognize the sinful partiality of anti-racism and the ways that DEI initiatives are harming institutions across America? How does the hostility towards white Americans, as chronicled in Jeremy Carl’s book, The Unprotected Class, fit into the ERLC’s initiatives?

The same question could be posed with respect to the diversity and inclusion of female leaders in the church. As the Southern Baptist Convention continues to chafe with respect to the place of women serving in the church, and some institutional heads are looking for creative ways to keep the SBC’s Baptist Faith and Message while inviting high capacity women to take leadership roles in the church, what is the ERLC’s position? What assurances can you give Southern Baptists that the ERLC is looking to affirm and not undermine biblical complementarianism?

7.     What does lobbying currently look like?

Beyond filing amicus briefs, publishing op-eds, and offering comments to news outlets, what on-the-ground work is being done by ERLC staffers in Washington, D. C., or other state capitols? To get most specific, I have received reports from Christians in Washington that the ERLC is not present and active to stand for the interests of Southern Baptists. So, are there staffers on the Hill who can contradict that report and confirm ERLC involvement in specific bills?

Finally, how do you work with other Christian groups to effect legislative change? Are these groups demonstrably conservative or progressive? And does the ERLC have a stated policy for how they partner with others?

Outside of lobbying legislators, are there initiatives to work directly with businesses, corporations, or stockholders to impact the public square and engines of culture to bring legislative change (by way of these private sector organizations)? Acknowledging the need for manpower, if you had more staff, where would you target your efforts to effect Christian influence in culture?

8.     Make a case for the best version of the ERLC.

This revisits the first question about trust, but also includes anything else you would like to say to Southern Baptists related to past, present, and future work of the ERLC. In light of the recent call for abolition and the questions about leadership at the ERLC, what do Southern Baptists need to know about the ERLC? What is the best version of the ERLC going forward?

Moving Forward Together

These are some of the questions that Southern Baptists have for the ERLC. And if you have read this far, you may feel a certain kind of annoyance. Like, why do we have to be so particular about these things? Why can’t we just get along and work to reach the culture with the gospel of Jesus Christ?

To those who have such a sentiment, my response is simple: Ethics matter. And if the ERLC is worth its salt, it will be happy to give clear and unequivocal statements on its ethical commitments. To be sure, it doesn’t have to give the final word about everything. But it needs to say enough in its messaging to Southern Baptists to give convention messengers confidence that when the ERLC lobbies politicians and speaks in the public square, it will do representing the “values and concerns of the churches that finance it.”

Without waiting for the ERLC to answer many of these questions, Christ Over All will take aim to answer many of them in the coming month. And we hope that you will join us for this important conversation, as we consider the Ethics and Religious Liberty Conundrum. By God’s grace, as we move towards the 2025 Southern Baptist Convention in Dallas, these essays will provide messengers an honest and informed appraisal of the ERLC and what we could do together to make it better.

In truth, there are many other pressing issues in the Southern Baptist Convention, but among them is the status of the Ethics and Religious Liberties Commission and what its present and future mission is. Truly, what Southern Baptists need in this hour is something more than a barrage of pastel-colored emails. We need to trust that the ethical actions of the ERLC match the biblical and conservative convictions of the Southern Baptist Convention.

That is the question of the hour. And for the next month, we will be searching for good answers. We hope you will join us.