;)
Dear SBC _________________
Posted by Chris Johnson in Baptist Life
I was involved in another blog string the other day that brought up an interesting question. It seems that many people that care about the SBC have a myriad of expectations of what the SBC should be doing or should be expected to do.
If you could write a letter to all the churches that are cooperating with the SBC, what would your letter look like? What would be your top three themes that express what you believe the SBC should be about doing and why? But then, and possibly even more important,…What would be at least three things that you would say…hey, this is way beyond what I would like to cooperate with and lets get rid of these three things. (things or programs that already exist.)
Give it some thought. Six things. Three things you are excited to be involved in with cooperating churches and why…..and three things you would like to see leave the SBC that if absent would bring about unity in a more profound way.
Blessings,
Chris
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
Three Things We Should Be Doing
1. Engaging local churches in the Southern Baptist Convention annual meetings via electronic / internet participation and voting.
2. Decentralizing all authority and power structures … refusing to even entertain the notion of combining the IMB and NAMB into one huge Southern Baptist “battleship.”
3. Outlawing all faddish, branded, over-used, predictable Southern Baptist catch phrases and acronyms (i.e. EKG – Experiencing Kingdom Growth, GCR – Great Commission Resurgence, GPS – God’s Plan of Salvation, etc…, etc…, etc…). It’s getting a bit ridiculous.
Three Things We Should Get Rid Of
1. Local Southern Baptist Associations. There’s no need for them – we have cars and telephones now. (Unless an association is actively engaged in church planting … then we can call it a church planting network.)
2. Catch phrases and acronyms … wait … I already mentioned that one.
3. Stop equating giving money with “doing missions.” It’s a sad practice. And it’s not really missions…
4. (Chris, I know you said three, but I can’t stop!) State convention office buildings – there are plenty of church buildings with empty wings for them to use.
Question regarding acronymns:
How does NAMB’s GPS fit in the GCR initiative? Also, what happened to EKG?
Yes, it does seem like we go from one thing to another, doesn’t it?
Three things that we should emphasis are:
1) We must have Church planting as our main emphasis.
2) We must emphasize winning souls.
3) We must emphasize good, sound, expository preaching and teaching of the whole Bible.
Three things that we should stop right now are:
1) We should not spend one moment wasting any time or money or effort on environmental issues.
2) We need to downsize in the SBC agencies, and in the state convention offices. The local Associations could do a lot of what the state conventions are doing. Thus, more money would get out to the mission field.
3) The SBC needs to quit getting swayed by the culture of our day to go off into every new fad and thought that comes along. We go from patriotism to True Love Waits to environmentalism. We go from fighting abortion to influencing the govt. to drinking alcohol. Whatever is the big faddish thought of the day in the world, is what a lot of preachers are preaching from their pulpits for the next six months. Why cant we just be excited about Jesus and His plain, simple Word? There’s a thought!
David
Alan,
David
Three things we should be doing:
1. Creating a program of accountability and discipline for our leaders, churches, associations, conventions and institutions that has real consequences.
2. Discipling instead of converting.
3. Encouraging pastors and congregations to cooperate with other local Christian churches to do missions, evangelism and good works.
Three things we should get rid of:
1. Equating giving money with being an active participant in the church.
2. The name “Southern Baptist Convention” for something more inclusive.
3. unChristlikeness
Men,
Great comments…. I see several themes already!
Where are the women? I’d love to hear from them!
Blessings,
Chris
Three things we should be doing:
1. Using a portion of our international missions resources to build seminaries and other permanent support structures for churches overseas. It is nearly impossible that indigenous pastors can be consistently trained and supported if we continue the myopic focus on church planting.
2. Developing a statement that defines the common doctrinal ground necessary for us to cooperate with other denominations and parachurch organizations, and then cooperating with them.
3. Combining NAMB and IMB for the purpose of doing missions oriented toward people groups instead of geography.
Three things that should be eliminated:
1. The word “Southern” in our denomination’s name. I live in Colorado, and it is not helpful here.
2. The strictly American nature of our denomination. Why do only churches in the United States get to have their members on trustee boards? Why do we ritualistically honor the US flag at our annual meetings as though it were the duty of every Christian?
3. Most local associations. Not every county needs its own association. They could be combined into or replaced with regional associations.
Brothers,
Here is the rundown so far:
To summarize the thoughts,(I took the liberty to translate some a bit, let me know if it is not truly a “thought for thought” translation..
The Priorities List,
1. Church Planting
2. Soul Winning
3. Right Preaching
4. Make Disciples
5. Include the greatest number of cooperating churches by using electronic tools and media.
6. Hold leaders, churches, associations, conventions and institutions accountable with real consequences. (This can be done by local cooperating oversight btw,…I have some ideas that would root out political motives)
7. Build International seminaries for training around the world.
8. Find clear doctrinally supported common ground for cooperation with other denominations where possible.
9. Use more efficient means to engage mission initiatives locally, regionally and around the world.
The Get Rid of List,
1. The need for Centralized and Institutionalized Authority and Power. (in other words,…reduce the dependence on the institution and increase the dependence on one another.)
2. The use of “spooky and creative” acronyms as marketing ploys.
3. The implication that giving money somehow equates to effective missions.
4. The environmental “Al Gore” approaches to planet rehabilitation.
5. The need to chase fads, the next cultural wave of excitement and the like.
6. The name “Southern Baptist Convention”. (ask the churches to support a better banner)
7. Our need to be American instead of Christ follower.
8. Clutter and overhead of Associations that serve no purpose.
Chris,
Good line of thinking there my friend. Very challenging thought on 3 things to rally around and 3 things to eject from ourselves.
Let me begin with ejecting what I believe are the greatest negatives.
First, as has been mentioned already – let’s get rid of this idea that giving to missions means participating in missions. We need to get our people into the highways and byways compelling people to come into the kingdom. We need to push short term mission projects for our people involving them in local, state, national and international works. Also, along this line – why not offer college tuition grants to our young people who are willing to give two years of mission service either here in the states or overseas? Seems like someone is doing that … hummmm, wonder who that could be.
Second, again, as has been mentioned – let’s get rid of our current model of state conventions/ local associations. I would be in favor of eliminating the state convention altogether, but only if the local associational structure were beefed up. If we simply eliminated both the state and local bodies we would have an over-bloated national body. There are just some things that are handled better in the smaller bodies. The only problem with this idea, however, is that the State Conventions and the Local Associations are all autonomous from the National Convention. So when dealing with SBC issues, that doesn’t necessarily involved these other two bodies.
Third, let’s get rid of the idea that mega-churches must be doing things better than anyone else. I personally believe that mega-churches are an abnormality in the Kingdom of God. What I have always taught is that when a church reaches four, five or six hundred (yes, I know, to most, THAT IS a mega-church, but bear with me) people in attendance, take one or two hundred of those and start a new church. Don’t spend millions of dollars building a building that stands empty five or six days a week. This not only plants strong churches (as opposed to the ever popular “split a church to start a church mentality”), but builds discipleship and accountability.
Now, what shall we rally around?
First and foremost is: missions. This is at least what everybody says. The truth is we’re not really serious about missions in the SBC as a whole. I have a niece who is at present in Richmond preparing for a two year journeyman appointment. She told us recently that during a meeting with Dr. Rankin, he made the comment that “Even if we meet our Lottie Moon goal, which we won’t, we still won’t have enough to send out all the people we could.” We have men, women and families waiting for funding but we’d rather build new gyms. Something is really goofy about our priorities. True, sending money alone is not what it takes, but the SBC was (and still is in my mind) the means through which our churches have agreed to cooperate in sending out missionaries. Many together are stronger than one alone.
BTW, I strongly oppose the idea of combining the IMB and NAMB. I do believe that NAMB should be reworked, but not as a department of the IMB or some other super mission agency. We need to stop treating NAMB like the proverbial step-child and put some serious funding into church planting and ministry services.
Second, theological education – true, this should begin in the local church. However, I do believe as with missions, when we cooperate together the results are much better than when we try to do it ourselves. I also like the idea mentioned earlier of working to extend theological education into the mission field. This would not be an effort to Americanize national churches, but to strengthen the leadership of these congregations where they are.
Finally, we should rally around “Christ and Him crucified.” I don’t mean to sound like a cliché but the truth is that when we rally around Him – well, everything else seems to fall into place.
Sorry it’s so long, but you did ask …
Grace,
Brother Wes,
Great thoughts my dear brother,…
Interesting info on the State and local associational affiliation. Also, the mega church comment is right on target.
I hope your getting some rain in Coahoma!
Blessings,
Chris
Brother Chris,
“I hope your getting some rain in Coahoma!”
ROFL … oh, wait, you’re serious! No, can’t say we are. The sky is as clear as … well, as clear as a West Texas sky. We did receive some nice rainfall over the weekend, but do keep us in prayer for more rain. It’s going to be a long hard summer without it.
Grace,
Wes
BTW, The dissolutions of the state conventions and local associations are what I hear most often when people talk about changing SBC structure. The problem is that the state conventions are all independent and autonomous from the national SBC. The same is true of the local associations within each state. We have historically agreed to cooperate together with the national body taking certain responsibilities to free the states to work in certain other areas and the associations working in still other responsibilities. It’s not that way anymore. Particularly among many of the state conventions who object to the national convention. For example, the BGCT keeps about 79% of its CP receipts in state to fund various programs normally left to the national convention such as international missions and theological education. Think about it, when the typical BGCT church gives $100 to the CP, $79 dollars stays in the state of Texas and only $21 dollars goes to the SBC. That means, while the average Baptist church member in Texas thinks they are supporting missions, the truth is that less than $10 is actually going to the mission field.
Again, something is really goofy (I know that’s such a great theological term) about our priorities.
Wes
Three things to emphasize:
1. Developing relationships with our neighbors that don’t begin with the motive of just getting them to church
2. Discipleship that is meaningful and last beyond the 4, 6, or 8 week courses.
3. Leadership with accountability and that’s okay to disagree
Three things to see disappear:
1. Good ole boy network of pastors
2. The stifling of creativity and immediate shutdown of trying new things within the church.
3. Catch phrases and the “Get Saved” mentality (see my number 1 up top)
What I would keep:
1) The Cooperative Missions Program – with all its warts, its still the best around.
2) Our Confessional Fellowship – fellowshiping around the basic doctrinal parameters of the BF&M.
3) Expository preaching – where it is being done. The Spirit of God uses the Word of God to do the work of God in the people of God.
Get rid of (perhaps nothing new here)
1) “Southern” Baptist Convention. If we want to be a national convention, we should have a national name.
Many do not realize what a hindrance the name is outside the deep south.
2) Fad programs and strategies. About every 2 years NAMB or Lifeway comes up with a new structure, strategy, program or jingoistic name that is supposed to change our nature.
If you call a cow patty a chocolate sundae, it won’t change the taste!
Renaming things doesn’t change those things. FAITH. EKG. GPS. Am I supposed to get excited about the new one when the old one, which we were told would change the world two years ago is so soon being abandoned?
I have served two churches in Iowa for the last 18 years. We are a NAMB-dependent state. In that time, NAMB has changed its name once and its philosophies and strategies about 700 times.
3) Boston Red Sox fans in our churches. We have to take a stand against compromise.
And I am ready to ask the question that is raised above, “Do local associations fulfill any real Kingdom purpose in this world?”
Good subject for a post sometime!
(I guess I’m gettin to be a crotchety, complaining old guy!)
I would do away with quarterlies, subject studies, Beth Moores studies, all those other guided studies and curricula, in which we study what someone thinks about God’s Word instead of just opening the Bible.
“in the old days” (I am getting ancient) we had “Bible Studies” – we actually studied the Bible, not what someone else said about the Bible.
i promise to stop ranting now, Chris!
Brother Dave,
Rants are good today only! half price….
Excellent points my friend.
Blessings,
Chris
Great discussion Chris!
I’ll weigh in on a couple of things. I am very excited about the idea of restructure. We have a lot of money floating around and I am anxious to see it well-spent. I have attended a NAMB sponsored event in my state where there were 5-6 presenters speaking to a dozen participants. In my opinion, that is not a good use of CP funds. Someone mentioned the autonomy of the individual associations and state conventions. While it is true that they are autonomous, it is also true that the same churches potentially participate in all three levels. For example, I am extremely active in my local association serving on the Administrative Team. I am also active in my state convention having served on the Executive Board and currently serving as one of the officers. I have been an active participant in pushing for change in both entities. We reorganized our state convention executive board recently and will be forming a task force to look at reorganizing our state convention in the near future. Our association has gone through a reorganization and is currently looking to sell our associational office building. Though both entities are independent, I am involved in serving both of them. If given the opportunity–I would willingly work to streamline the SBC as well. Duplication is a BIG problem in my opinion. I would like to see less administration and more boots on the ground.
I don’t know if everyone has seen Baptist Press today. This from Geoff Hammond, president of NAMB:
“For these reasons, I am asking one of my senior associates, Steve Reid, to convene and co-facilitate a specially called North American Great Commission Task Force that will seriously study the actions and activities that will impact this continent for Christ in more effective ways. Ed Stetzer, director of LifeWay Research, has agreed to co-facilitate this group. Together they will be meeting with representatives from the different and diverse partners in Southern Baptist life, including local churches, associations, state conventions and entities representing constituencies from all across our denomination.
They will begin their study at the 2009 convention in Louisville and have regular meetings throughout the next year. I will be actively connected to this group and plan to announce the task force’s findings at the convention in 2010. I have shared this with Johnny Hunt and thanked him for his leadership. He has enthusiastically affirmed this idea as we respond to his Great Commission call.”
You know, I heard something that truly saddened my heart the other day. I know some of yall keep saying that we shouldnt emphasize giving to missions, but that we should go…BUT, what about the career missionaries who are out there serving, who are depending on us? I just heard of a family that were doing the 2 years thing, with the option of going career at the end of that two years. The man quit a good paying job. They sold thier house. They went to the mission field with every intention of becoming career missionaries after the 2 year deal. They are being called home now, after just one year on the field, due to the economy. Here, we have a family quitting thier job…selling thier house….and going. But now, they will have to come home due to the economy.
Also, here in my state, we have the TN Baptist Children’s Homes. They had to lay off 14 people not too long ago…due to the economy. 14 people who were committed to working with neglected and abused children! And, the Children’s Home had to back off of thier plans to expand into the NE corner of TN as well. Had to back off of ministering to more abused and neglected children. If I’m not mistaken, I believe they have 125 children on a waiting list…children who need to come to the Children’s Home…but they cant come…..due to the economy and the lack of giving of the Churches.
This is sad. This is what happens when Churches dont give to the CP, and they dont give to Lottie Moon Offering, Annie, etc. I mean, yes, more people from the Churches should go to the mission field. But, should we neglect the career missionaries, who are staying on the field for years, rather than just one or two weeks a year? Should we neglect the people, who are committed to working with troubled children, in order to go on a mission trip once or twice a year…for a week? When they are devoting thier lives to the mission field?
I hope that this trend to lower CP giving and giving to the mission offerings will stop. Career missionaries and committed workers for the Lord are suffering from it.
David
David,
I want to be sure I understand what you’ve written. Are you recounting that a couple who was serving under ISC or Masters appointment applied for a career position and was declined because of a lack of funds?
Brother David,
You are right,…the priority, at least from this string of guys, is that missions are what all of us want….and I agree that one of the great strengths of cooperating churches as SBC is to be able to keep men and women in the field.
One thing is certain, the SBC machine created by the SBC dollars… for whatever reason, has lost its passion for missions and has gained a passion for “other things”, “comfort”, and “worldly pragmatism”. Several important things to remember:
1…is that local churches have money and if they are encouraged and understand the need for mission, the Christ follower’s will give.
2…..local churches are also filled with Christ followers that are not confident in large organizations spending money on whatever passions or rabbits that come along (just this list of “get rid of’s” bear that out). But churches will give to ministry that is clear and understood,…not some marketing scheme that “may” promise results or yield to the latest environmental or pragmatic scheme. Clarity comes from a more local approach, because it is the responsibility of the leaders to explain to the flock the need for money…not just talk about an offering that comes up several times a year, or a percentage of budgets. There must be a real or authentic connection.
The accumulation strategy of these SBC monies and operational requirements for distribution can and should be drastically reduced. This will keep men and women in the field working the ministry, but it will also send “some” of the SBC machine into the marketplace to find work. We must understand the difference and distinction of where ministry takes place though,…it is in the field. Sometimes we convince ourselves that the money spent in the machine is more important.
Blessings,
Chris
Stuart,
I was told by this man’s cousin, who is a member of my Church, that this family was a year into thier ISC, or Journeyman appointment, or whatever you call it….with the hopes, of course, of becoming career missionaries at the end of the 2 years. But, they were told that they had to come home due to finances, or the lack of. All I know is what I was told.
David
Yeah, David … I would never call for a reduction in giving to our missionaries. Quite the contrary, my experience is that people who go make the best givers.
But what ticks me off is that so much of what we now have under the umbrella of “Cooperative Program” has little to nothing to do with missions. The average church member, faithfully dropping his or her dollars in the plate each Sunday, feels satisfaction for giving to “missions” through the cooperative program … yet less than 50cents from each of those dollars even make it out of their own state convention building … and even less makes it to the real mission field. Most SB’s don’t have a clue. At least the events at NAMB a couple of years ago opened a few eyes.
There are simply too many hands sticking out, too many lavish office buildings, too many executives on high-dollar salaries with fleet cars and expense accounts. Piles of money create the opportunity for waste and excess.
I support Lottie … big time! But if what I’m reading on the web is true, we may need to start mailing our gifts straight to Richmond instead of sending them to our state conventions.
Of course, if God’s people would stop spending God’s money on themselves, then this wouldn’t be an issue would it?
But I still believe that far too many SB’s “hide” behind the proxy of the offering plate. It’s just too easy. The Great Commission instructs the church to go and make disciples of all nations. That task cannot be accomplished by hiring 5,000 or so people to go and “do it for us.”
It takes both. We need balance.
Geoff,
I agree that it takes both…balance. I agree that the SBC could be streamlined….state conventions could be streamlined as well. I agree that people at the top are making too much money. But, at the same time, the 50% of CP giving that doesnt make it out of many state conventions support things like Church planting in that state, and children’s homes. So, while I would agree with you that streamlining and not raising exuberant salaries at state levels would get more out to the mission field, let’s not forget that some really good ministries and outreach efforts take place at the state level. They have to have money to exist and do the work.
David
Geoff:
I am the lowest guy on the SBC totem pole so I was not going to say anything but this issue of the “children’s homes” that Volfan has brought up been bothering me also. In fact, it has been troubling me for the last two weeks since this call for “cutting bureaucratic waste” came up when the GCR came out. The fact is that these homes are not cheap to run. Here in Oklahoma we have deep-pocket Christians that give big time for capital needs of the homes. However, there are still “significant” salary expenses involved in running these homes. In Oklahoma there are several homes — both boys homes (called “ranches”) as well as other children’s homes. There is one here in OKC and also one is Owasso and maybe some others. I think any proposal involving tossing out “waste” in the state conventions has to address this issue specifically to be creditable.
If it could be demonstrated that “missionaries” from local churches would volunteer their time 24/7/365 to manning these homes (and that is what it takes) then I think the CP is likely to be the only viable tool to finance these homes. But I’m open to listening to any proposal anyone might have.
I’ve signed on the the GCR document, but not to the elimination of the children’s homes.
Roger K. Simpson Oklahoma City OK
On Tuesday, May 19th, I made a determination to not continue to actively either “support” or “not support” the GCR document. I decided to no longer advocate a position either way in any public medium including the web.
It is a matter of public record that I signed the GCR web page. This was done a couple of weeks ago before my decision to disengage.
My previous comment does not violate my self-imposed embargo because my comments are only addressing the children’s homes in Oklahoma as they relate to CP funding. I only mentioned the GCR document in passing because the advent of the CGR document served as a stimulus to cause me to begin to think about funding various ministries here in Oklahoma into the 21st Century.
I am not drawing any conclusions as to what, if any, linkage there may be between the funding for the Oklahoma children’s homes and some outworking of the GCR document and/or any commission that arises to implement Section IX of the document.
I’ve become aware that there are negotiations going on “behind the scenes” relative to the GCR document. As a layman, there is simply no way for me to know what is going on with the negotiations so obviously
I can’t be constructively involved. Any comments or advocacy on my part would be uninformed and not helpful.
Once something is on the table for public comment then there will be a time for “guys in the pew”, like me, to weigh in. It is my expectation that after Louisville there will be at least “something out there” laymen like me can begin to discuss as the “restructuring committee” (or whatever it is going to be called) starts its deliberations.
Roger K. Simpson Oklahoma City
Brother Roger,
There is no gift of “laymen” in the church. It sounds to me like you may have the gift of teaching and are able to lead. Everyone cooperating in the SBC is a voice. I hope you continue to have your voice heard.
Blessings,
Chris
David,
Yesterday’s BP articles included a story about new ISC appointments being halted until at least the beginning of 2010. If the person you were told about was trying to re-up for ISC, then he may indeed have been not reappointed for budget reasons. I wasn’t questioning the veracity of your story. It just didn’t seem to fit. In light of this sad news form the trustee meeting, it now makes sense.
Stuart,
It is indeed sad. From what I understand, they had already been appointed for the 2 year appointment. They had just completed about a year when they got the news. They are coming home soon, and they will live in Bellevue Baptist’s mission house for a couple of months in Memphis until they can get things worked out. That’s all I know…all I was told.
David