The Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) Executive Committee (EC) has released a statement responding to the criticism of an amicus brief that was quietly submitted on its behalf to the Kentucky Supreme Court earlier this year. In the brief, lawyers representing SBC entities argued against statute of limitations reform for sexual abuse survivors attempting to sue non-perpetrating parties who failed to report abuse.
SBC EC Responds to Uproar Over Amicus Brief
The EC, which was listed on the brief alongside the SBC, Lifeway Christian Resources, and Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, said in its statement on Friday (Oct. 27) that “not one SBC Executive Committee trustee was involved in the decision to join this amicus brief.”
The statement went on to say that the EC is “wholly committed to engaging with survivors and working toward eradicating sexual abuse from Southern Baptist churches, institutions, and entities, and to bringing about meaningful abuse reform across the SBC.”
The EC then explained that it “joined a brief making legal arguments to the Supreme Court of Kentucky on a discrete legal issue that has a direct impact on the Committee’s and Convention’s legal and fiduciary interests,” adding that the EC “must continue to defend itself, and its interests, within the judicial system as appropriate.”
RELATED: SBC Lawyers Side Against Sexual Abuse Survivor in Amicus Brief to Kentucky Supreme Court
The statement argued that the goals of “eradicating sexual abuse and legally defending itself are not mutually exclusive.”
“While there are issues about which we will not agree,” the statement added, “we remain steadfast in our desire to fulfill the will of the messengers and to implement meaningful sexual abuse reform within the Southern Baptist Convention. Tension and disagreement on one matter are not reasons to abandon the broader effort to eradicate sexual abuse from all Southern Baptist churches.”
In an attempt to provide further clarity, the EC said both it and the SBC “are currently facing multiple lawsuits in Kentucky.” Further, the brief was requested by their legal counsel with the intent of focusing “the court on a discrete legal issue that has significant impact on pending and potential future litigation in the state of Kentucky, namely, whether or not the Kentucky legislature intended the extension of the statute of limitations to apply to non-offender third parties.”
“We recognize and respect survivors’ strong feelings, opinions, and statements on this issue and will continue to work with them as reform efforts move forward,” the EC said.
RELATED: SBC Sexual Abuse Survivor Tiffany Thigpen: The Four Pastors Have Done Johnny Hunt ‘A Disservice’
“We can disagree and have meaningful discussions,” the statement continued. But “we do, however, want to be clear about the brief and the limited position it advocates for. The amicus brief does not take a position on the underlying litigation, and it is not a lobbying effort to restrict statutes of limitation. Rather it urges the court to apply the current Kentucky statute as it was drafted and intended.”
 Executive Committee (EC) has released a statement responding to the criticism of an amicus brief that was quietly submitted on its behalf to the Kentucky Supreme Court earlier this year.){kind=link}