Blog Archive

In what may be the most controversial component of the progress report, the task force is calling for an overhaul of the North American Mission Board. There has probably been more discussion on this component than any other. It’s easy to understand why.

When the task force remains in the realm of theory, when they’re calling Southern Baptists to a change in attitude or to certain core values, pretty much everyone can agree with that. There’s no cost. But when change to structure and funding models enters the picture, thats when reality sinks in. The rubber hits the road in Component #2 with some recommendations for remaking NAMB into a more effective organization.

The Text of Component #2:

We believe in order for us to work together more faithfully and effectively towards the fulfillment of the Great Commission, that our North American Mission Board needs to be reinvented and released. Therefore, in order to do this, we will ask Southern Baptists that the North American Mission Board prioritize efforts to plant churches in North America and to reach our nation’s cities and clarify its role to lead and accomplish efforts to reach North America with the Gospel.

The task force is recommending that the restructuring be centered around a strategy for church planting. They call for at least 50% of NAMB’s budget to go toward church planting. The church planting should focus on metropolitan areas (especially outside the Southern Baptist South) and underserved people groups (pioneer areas of North America).

In addition to church planting, the task force envisions NAMB:

• assisting churches in evangelism and discipleship
• assisting churches in leadership development
• assisting churches in having a missional impact in their various contexts
• becoming the leader in Southern Baptists’ strategy to reach North America
• becoming streamlined in order to be a true leader in reaching North America
• directly appointing missionaries to fulfill NAMB’s strategy
• mobilizing existing church to plant new churches in metropolitan and pioneer areas
• become decentralized to serve more efficiently
• be released to budget for a national strategy (including ending cooperative agreements, see below)
• developing a Leadership Center of North America

So a few minor changes should take care of things, right? Absolutely not, and that is one point I think the task force is trying to convey. NAMB is broken, complicated, messy, confusing, and inefficient. Do they do some good things, and even some great things? Probably so, but that misses the point. Overall the organization is in turmoil (see recent leadership turnover) and lacks focus. Major restructuring is necessary to stop the bleeding that has been going on for some time now.

I like the fact that the task force is calling for a major renovation to NAMB. There are specifics in these recommendations that I still have questions about. There are some I would either like to see dropped and given totally to state conventions, or have state conventions get out of the business and leave it entirely to NAMB in order to avoid duplication. But the emphasis on church planting is rightly placed. That is where the resources for a “home” mission board need to go.

On Ending Cooperative Agreements
The most discussed aspect of Component #2 is the recommendation to phase out cooperative agreements over a four-year period. NAMB currently sends back over $50 million to the state conventions for various projects and staff. Some have argued that the state conventions will be dramatically harmed by this elimination. Let’s be honest here: The larger state conventions will feel the difference, but it will not be dramatic when considered in light of the size of these organizations. The smaller state conventions, those in pioneer areas, may actually be seriously harmed by a decrease in funding in this way.

One of the points of emphasis of the task for is how we can better reach pioneer areas, so at this point I am giving the task force the benefit of the doubt that they have considered and will have some answers as to what will happen to replace this revenue stream to the smaller state conventions.

There is no doubt in my mind a better system can be invented and implemented than the current system. In reality, the 14 largest state conventions (represented in blue on the map to the left) do not need money returned to them. They are large enough to support themselves completely and should be called on to do so.

It is exciting to think of the possibilities of a reinvented North American Mission Board. I think the task force’s recommendations could still use some tweaking here and there, but overall the vision cast in Component #2 is sorely needed and a breath of fresh air for those of us who want efficiency with our resources and deep impact on our continent for the gospel.

Something dawned on me as a wrote about GCR Component #1. I realized how important it is, if we are going to work together from the vision cast by the task force, that we have a common understanding of what it means for us to have a missional approach to our churches and ministry.

A few weeks ago, I preached on What Does it Means to Be Missional? I set up a list of contrasting attitudes between missional thinking and conventional thinking. I thought it may be helpful to post that list here.

The Great Commission Resurgence Task Force released a progress report back on February 22, 2010. They have made clear this is not the final report, that some changes and adjustments will be made. The final report is scheduled to be released a little more than a week from now, so some of what I write in this series may become obsolete pretty quickly. But I still think its worth walking through the six components of the progress report and examining each one.

I write as someone who has been supportive of the GCR movement from the beginning. I voted last year (along with around 95% of messengers) for the task force to be named by Johnny Hunt. I was pleased, for the most part, with those chosen to be on the task force, especially after a few were added. After seeing the progress report, I am still supportive of the movement. All that’s just to let you know the perspective I’m coming from.

Even though there has been relatively little discussion of it so far, it’s difficult to underestimate the importance of Component #1. This is foundational to the other components. It’s in many ways, I believe, a summary statement of what the rest of the components seek to accomplish.

The Text of Component #1:

We believe in order for us to work together more faithfully and effectively towards the fulfillment of the Great Commission, we will ask Southern Baptists to rally towards a clear and compelling missional vision and begin to conduct ourselves with core values that will create a new and healthy culture within the Southern Baptist Convention.

There are two aspects that deserve highlighting: First, a missional vision, and second, a new and healthy culture described by eight core values.

A Missional Vision
Component #1 calls Southern Baptists to a “clear and compelling missional vision.” Some might point out that using the words ‘clear’ and ‘missional’ together is a little ironic since it might be hard to define ‘missional’ with any kind of clarity in the first place. It’s a word that’s been used by people in different ways and with a wide range of intended meanings behind it.

So what does ‘missional’ mean and what does the task force mean by it? Missional means, in my understanding, being wrapped up in the mission of God as a lifestyle. In other words we see the Great Commission, the spread of the gospel of God’s reconciling sinners through faith alone in Christ, as the job of every Christian, not just the jobs of pastors and missionaries. It means we see our own places (towns, cities, workplaces, families, etc…) as mission fields. We have no home field. Everywhere we go is an away game. You look at your life and every day as a mission trip whether you’re on another continent or living in the same community where you were raised.

So for Southern Baptists to have a missional vision is for us to see ourselves as missionaries and the places we go daily as mission fields. This is emphatically not to the exclusion or to diminish those full-time, vocational missionaries we send various places. In fact, we we understand ‘missional’ correctly, we are going to see the importance of missions all the more. But there’s a shift from the us (non-missionaries) and them (missionaries) mentality to a way of thinking that says we’re all on the same team, working toward the same goal, only in different locations.

‘Missional’ is a newer term and therefore its definition is still somewhat fuzzy to many Southern Baptists. And its also been misused at times by people who do not have the gospel as the focus of their message to the world. But these shouldn’t keep us from rallying around this concept. Can you imagine what the SBC would look like if our people and churches grasped this vision? It’s staggering to imagine the impact we could have.

A New and Healthy Culture
Al Mohler reminded us recently that we have a reputation and tendency to be grumpy. Some might say it’s easier to define Southern Baptists by what we’re against than what we’re for. We could point out examples of where our interaction with each other is filled more with sarcasm and cynicism than love and trust.

Our Southern Baptist culture, in many areas, is not a healthy example of how Jesus’ disciples should act toward one another. The eight core values we should operate with are, according to the task force: Christ-likeness, truth, unity, relationships, trust, future, local church, and kingdom. When we are at our best, these items describe us well. But until these qualities begin to describe the norm instead of the ideal, we will rightfully keep our reputation as a grumpy, disagreeable group.

The Bible tells us that we should live at peace with everyone, so long as it depends on us. Too often we look like we’re ready to pick a fight with anyone available. Mark Driscoll, Disney, calvinists, Ed Stetzer, Barak Obama, private-prayer language practicers, bloggers, anyone who’s not ‘Baptist enough’, Rick Warren, etc… When it comes to other believers, when will Southern Baptists emphasize what we have in common more than what separates us? Can’t we rejoice loudly at how many lives Rick Warren has touched with the gospel and have some quiet, private discussions if we wish he used a different methodology?

I’m thankful for the task force for calling us to put aside abrasiveness for a new, healthier culture.

If you want to hear the task force report on Component #1, watch the video at http://www.pray4gcr.com/ between 26:08 and 31:30. You can also download the audio file of the report here.

Here are a few things you might want to be aware of…

• A lot of discussion about the GCR Task Force’s Interim report. My plan is to jump in the discussion with several posts examining each of the 6 components. This will lead up to the May 3rd release of the final report by the task force.

• Les Puryear is launching an initiative to have more small church pastors elected and appointed to leadership positions in the SBC. He’s explained what difference he thinks it will make. I’m not opposed to having more small church types in leadership, I just don’t think the problem is as pressing as he thinks it is, and I don’t think it will help solve the issues to any real extent. Besides, we have more important issues to deal with right now.

• Ergun Caner has a lot of splainin’ to do about some inconsistent statements he’s made about his past. Even some questions about whether or not he even knows Arabic like he claims (Youtube video of him speaking some gibberish, passing it off as Arabic). No such explanation seems to be forthcoming, at least not yet. We should expect better from someone who’s president of Liberty University’s Theological Seminary.

• Baptist21 has announced the details of their lunch and panel discussion on Tuesday of this year’s SBC Annual Meeting. Sarah and I attended last year and it was a highlight of our trip. You can see the details and reserve a spot here. If you’ll be in Orlando, don’t miss it.

The web design software I use has left behind the old commenting system (thankfully!). You should see the new one active now. The only thing I dislike about the changeover is there is no way to bring over the old comments (not that there were very many anyway!), so we’re starting all over. Hopefully this system will be much more convenient and reliable.

Feel free to let me know your thoughts on this new system.

via Danny Burk

The criticism of Tim Tebow for filming a Superbowl commercial has been hard to miss. For what? Reports indicate the ad tells the story of Tebows mother, who decided to have Tim instead of abort him like the doctors were recommending because of an illness she contracted during pregnancy. It sounds like the ad doesn’t even mention abortion. But for many in the pro-“choice” movement, evidently hearing a story that encourages women to keep their babies is inappropriate for national TV. The National Organization for Women has condemned the ad and CBS’ decision to let the ad run during this year’s Superbowl.

There’s a great article of the nonsense of all that written by Sally Jenkins, who described herself as a feminist and pro-choice. Take the time to go read it.

In addition to that, Denny also posted a link to a video of some of the 1986 Superbowl Champion New York Giants who decided to film and anti-abortion segment. It talks about the game itself and has several players making an appeal for us to put an end to the killing of our children. Its good to put in perspective that Tebow is not the first nationally recognized football player to take a stand like this, and in actuality, Tebow’s looks to be a more positive statement on the value of life rather than a condemnation of abortion. (Both of those are necessary, BTW.) Here’s the video:

Via The Resurgence, (HT: Justin Taylor) R. C. Sproul gives advice on preparation to young men who plan on entering pastoral ministry. What I noticed about his answer is that it likely applies just as well to someone already in ministry who feels they a lacking the power of the Holy Spirit, or just not accomplishing anything of lasting value.

They have to get in the Word. They will only be as good in the pastorate as their mastery of the Word of God. That’s what people really need. There may not be many people who really want it, but its what they need.

I think there’s a huge need for pre-ministry preparation. In addition, even just two years out of a great seminary and college experience, the need for continual growth and learning is apparent in my own life. Here’s the video:

In part 1, I mentioned the different aspects of the state convention that could encourage greater attendance numbers. Now I want to put some of those thoughts together; then offer a few suggestions more making the state convention a more compelling event.

When it comes to people making the decision of whether or not to attend, I think most of the evaluation comes down to the different categories I mentioned yesterday: voting (unity & apathy), information, good speakers, good music, friends, exhibits, and breakout sessions. For each of these, I argued that none of them by themselves were enough to get the average pastor or layperson to the meeting.

I can imagine someone pointing out, rightly, that individually they may not be a compelling enough reason to attend, but together they should add up to enough that people should want to be involved. And I think that’s mostly right. It’s obviously enough to get about 2,000 people there this year.

Take a look at this interest scale. Think about each different aspect as a drawing point and having a certain value. When you add those vaules up, you get the final interest level. I think most pastors are somewhere between “only if you drag me” and “looking forward to it.”

The question for raising attendance numbers is simply raising the interest level in a few or all of the different aspects. This will help bring in people that may be on the fence about whether or not to attend.

By the Way… Duty Won’t Work
A note for anyone out there who thinks people should attend the state convention out of a sense of responsibility or duty: It won’t work for the younger generation. Younger people are not going to attend just because “they should.” Thinking that way or promoting that idea will likely just alienate them more. The job is yours to make them (us) want to attend.

Some Suggestions
So how do we raise the interest level for the different aspects of the convention? I don’t want to simply throw stones or criticize without throwing my own hat in to help with a solution. Here are a few ideas:

Speakers
Focus on getting one or two nationally recognized speakers or pastors and feature them. Let them preach two or three times, lead a breakout session, and make them available to those in attendance several times. Mark Dever came close to this last year with the convention sermon, a breakout session (or two?), and his willingness to stand out in the foyer and talk with everyone who wanted to wait around long enough to speak with them.

Worship Time
Make two or three worship service type gatherings. No business, no promotion. Just worship music, Scripture reading, prayer, preaching of the word. Set aside an hour or an hour and 15 or 30 minutes.

Business Sessions
Do them as quickly as possible, then get out! This is an important part of the convention, but it needs to be done efficiently. I think they do a good job of this in some ways, but having different parts spaced out so much makes it seem longer and more drawn out than it is. Have two or three intense business sessions, apart from everything else, and get everything done, including election of officers, in those times.

Breakout Sessions
Work hard on getting breakout sessions with excellent leaders, interesting topics, then publicize ahead of time. Make this a true time of equipping for ministry. I think this happens to a certain extent already, other than the publicity. Take it from good to great. We also need descriptions on these sessions. Last year I went to one that ended up being nothing like the title suggested – and I had wasted one of the sessions when there were other things I would have rather attended.

I hope these will provoke some thought and be a help to our leaders. If the BSCNC is going to continue to make an impact in this state over the next 20 years, something is going to have to change that inspires the under-40 generation to get involved.

I’m hardly an expert here. I’ve been in North Carolina for just under two years. I had no exposure who what was going on with North Carolina Baptists before I moved here in February 2008. There are, no doubt, many who are more qualified to speak to this issue. But here goes anyway… (aren’t blogs great?)

This year’s BSCNC total attendance was announced as 2,053, compared to 2,373 in 2008. According to @njameson, editor of the NC Baptist state newspaper, the 2008 number was low itself. Playing off a question he asked me ealier in the convention about officer nominees, I asked back if the declining attendance numbers were a sign of unity or apathy. My answer to that question is its probably some of both.

Unity
The state convention is partially, if not primarily, a business meeting. We all know that business meetings normally only get interesting when people start arguing with each other. That may be sad, but I think its true. There is now a great amount of unity among those active in BSCNC. This equates to most votes being uncontested, with little discussion. In other words, the business sessions are going to be boring. Which leads to… apathy.

Apathy
Most people who might attend realize their vote is probably not going to matter. They plan on not approaching a microphone to debate. It appears as if the convention assembles to rubber stamp what the various committees recommend. (And this isn’t necessarily a bad thing when committees are making good recommendations!) People understandably take the attitude that “my attendance doesn’t make a difference.” And they are pretty much correct. Sure, if I were to attend, it would help the attendance numbers and help the conference hall look a little more full, but these are hardly compelling reasons to drive a few hours and stay two nights in a hotel for the convention.

Information
Attending the state convention meeting does help someone stay informed about what is going on among NC Baptists, but not enough to cause someone to attend. I can stay home and watch the video feed to help stay informed. I can follow blogs and the state newpaper to stay informed. I can talk with other pastors to stay informed. All this on top of the fact that staying informed about state convention activities is nowhere near the top of the priority list for most pastors, let alone church members.

To Hear Good Speakers
The sermons at this year’s convention were very good. But as conferences go, the lineup at most any state convention meeting is going to fall flat. Take one local example. In February 2010, three months away, SEBTS is hosting the 20/20 conference. The speakers are Danny Akin, Matt Chandler, J. D. Greear, David Platt, and others. We don’t have time to do everything, and if my schedule forces me to choose either the BSCNC or 20/20, there really isn’t any question which one I’m going to attend.

To Hear Good Music
I think the convention did a great job of representing different musical genres and getting some very talented musicians. But I can listen to good music on my iPod. The draw for music at a convention/conference is the opportunity to engage in a corporate worship experience. Its hard to cultivate an atmosphere of worship with one song, then a vote, two songs, then a report. When music is used like that, it becomes much more entertainment than worship. And I can pretty much guarantee that a Baptist state convention is not going to entertain well enough to make me drive 4 hours. (Though the web design video was pretty funny.)

To Catch Up with Old Friends and Meet New People
The convention is a good time for this kind of thing and is definietly an added bonus of choosing to attend. But again, its not enough to get me there.

Convention Hall Exhibits and Breakout Sessions
The exhibits are something else interesting and useful, just not compelling. Its fun to walk about and see all the booths set up and talk with the people involved in different ministries. It’s a great way to find some ideas and resources. Breakout sessions are another good addition to the convention experience, but as with the other things I’ve mentioned, aren’t enough to make me want to attend.

I’ll post a part two that puts all of this together and then offer some suggestions for what might make an event that more people would make a priority to attend.

I didn’t go the the state convention in person this year, but did get to watch a lot of the event via webcast. Sarah and I went last year and really enjoyed the meeting, the people we met, and the time together. This year we went to the SBC in Louisville, so didn’t want to spend the money to attend a second convention in the same year.

That said, I’m really glad for the ability to watch what was taking place. It was also fun to use twitter to update and give some thoughts on the event as it occured, which I probably wouldn’t have done if I had been there in person. You can see tweets about the convention by going to twitter.com and searching for #bscnc09 or just click here.

Here are a few of my thoughts about the convention so far…

1. The convention messages I heard were good. I really appreciate the themes and emhases we heard from Milton Hollifield, Rick Speas, Danny Akin, and others. You can tell they have a heart for bringing gospel-centered renewal to our churches. I am happy about the direction of the BSCNC if these messages reflect who we really are.

2. The church planting commissioning service was a breath of fresh air for one main reason. I’m thankful for church planting work, but it wasn’t exactly that. It was the fact that there were several black church planters, and hispanic church planters, and some from other ethnicities as well. As the group stood on stage, it reflected the kind of racial diversity I wish our whole convention and our churches had.

3. The financial aspect of the convention stands out as well. There had to be significant budget cuts this year because of declining giving from churches. There are several reasons for this decline in giving. Some is due to the economy, no doubt. I expect some churches stopped giving when the option was taken away last year to direct funds to the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship (the moderate/liberal baptist convention). I also imagine some churches have been directing their giving around the state convention. All this equals a budget that needed to be about $5 million smaller than what was expected income for 2008.

Even in the midst of many budget cuts (and even some staff layoffs!, a terrible but probably necessary step) the budget included an increase in the percentage of funds being forwarded to the national level. For the last five years the BSCNC has increased by half a percentage point the amount that goes to the SBC. It doesn’t take a math genius to see that means the state convention gets less. They stood by that goal, showing it is a priority, and for that they are to be greatly commended.

4. J. D. Greear’s absence really stands out in my mind for some reason. I’m not sure where he was. He may have attended and was never invited to the platform. Maybe he was at the Acts 29 meeting going on this week. It seems to me that the BSC leadership would have going out of their way (and they may have) to make sure J. D. was a part of this meeting. Is the convention serious about attracting young pastors? I have to say that, looking at the platform, it doesn’t seem to be a priority. It’s nothing about J. D. personally, he’s representative of the kind of leader that might cause young pastors to participate. Last year, I was planning on not attending until I heard Mark Dever would be preaching the convention sermon. That alone made me make the trip. Now, like I said above, I enjoyed the convention and there were a lot of good things about it, but there was one thing that got me “out of my seat” and it was the chance to hear someone like Mark Dever speak to a group like the BSCNC.

5. I was glad to hear the positive allusions to GCR Task Force. Several speakers mentioned that work either directly or indirectly. Most, if not all, seemed to be affirming and not antagonistic to the work going on.

6. Officer elections are a mere formality. Most are uncontested. We have very little information about any of the nominees. We hear a two or three minute speech that tells us how many kids they have, they are great husbands, and their churches are really growing. Even when there is more than one nominee, I would have no idea which to vote for.

If these elections are meaningless, then there’s no problem here. Move on folks, nothing to see! But if there is actually something important for us to know about these nominees or which direction they would like to see the convention move, we really need a way to know about that. And sooner than 30 seconds before the vote. This really does need to be changed, IMHO.

7. This is still one big business meeting. Sure there are a few sermons, music, and breakout sessions to spice it up a little, but the purpose of this meeting is to debate and vote on things. Someone on twitter was ripping the convention meeting because it was boring. He said our churches would be in trouble if our worship services looked like the BSCNC meeting. Well he’s right – except for the fact that the BSCNC is not a worship service.

Voting on bylaw changes is boring, yes. But it needs to be done and this is the only place to do it. The leadership has done a good job of providing listening sessions at other times so questions can be answered and the main session is as short as possible.

That’s something that could be changed in the future. We could make the main meeting more of a conference type event with the business sessions sidelined. Or maybe we could stop “decorating” the business sessions with music at the beginning and end. Have a cut and dry business time, and then a more intentional worship time. There are some possibilities – but there is a lot of business to get done and not much time to do it. Maybe some of us just need to grow up and realize sometimes boring stuff is necessary. Just don’t criticize a business meeting for being a business meeting.

From my computer screen, it looked like a good meeting and convention. I hope the priorities of our churches will reflect the things we heard about and saw on the platform.