A "Great Commission Resurgence" task force appointed to recommend ways to revitalize the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) made a progress report to the SBC's executive committee Feb. 22. You can find news stories at the SBC's own Baptist Press and at Associated Baptist Press, or you can download a PDF of the full 32-page report here.
The report, presented mainly by task force chair Ronnie Floyd, pastor of First Baptist Church in Springdale, Arkansas, begins with almost three pages of pleasantries, followed by a nine-page sermon based on Joel 2:12-17, a memorable call for abject repentance, which Floyd used as a challenge for all-out evangelism.
Floyd said the 22-member task force was making six recommendations, which he called "components of this vision we are asking Southern Baptists to champion for the future."
The first recommendation is a call for 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." The missional vision churches should adopt, Floyd said, should be "As a convention of churches, our missional vision is to present the Gospel of Jesus Christ to every person in the world and to make disciples of all the nations."
Three observations: first, it's interesting that some SBC leaders have now embraced the term "missional," which the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship (CBF) has been using for years. Second, while CBF and other self-designated "missional" Christians define the term as a holistic call for churches to live and minister to all as Jesus did, the GCR task force defines it in terms of evangelism alone. Third, whether you define "missional" in terms of holistic ministry or propositional evangelism, it's easier said than done, and certainly can't be implemented by decree.
The second recommendation is a big one: it calls for the North American Mission Board, which has been in disarray for more than a decade, to be "reinvented and released" to focus on planting churches and evangelizing North America. Such efforts would require a wholesale reorganization of NAMB, along with a major disentangling of NAMB and the state Baptist conventions. Floyd noted that two-thirds of the Cooperative Program funds received by NAMB are spent in the Bible belt, much of it in kickbacks to the state conventions, where many staff members are dually employed by NAMB and the state convention. This is where the term "released" comes in -- the recommendation is that NAMB be released from its financial obligations to the state conventions so it can redirect most of its funding to "the lost and dark areas of America" where most of the population "is lost and perishing."
Look for lots of push-back to this recommendation, as it means state Baptist conventions in the South -- many already cash-strapped while being leaned on to send more money to the SBC -- will see fewer of their Cooperative Program dollars coming back to their state, while having to assume full funding of some staff who are partially funded by NAMB. In some states, that's a significant percentage of personnel.
Look for resistance from NAMB, as well: the recommendation calls for the organization to become decentralized from its large office complex north of Atlanta, and to set up seven regional offices with smaller staffs whose primary focus would be to "serve and mobilize churches to plant churches."
The third recommendation could lead to friction between NAMB and the International Mission Board (IMB), as it calls for the IMB to cross over into NAMB territory, appointing missionaries to
people groups who originated overseas but now have a substantial presence, through immigration, in North America. This could be compounded by the sixth recommendation, which calls for IMB funding to go from 50 to 51 percent of the Cooperative Program pie, a symbolic indication that reaching the world should be the SBC's first priority.
Recommendation four frees up money for that additional percent by reassigning the tasks of Cooperative Program promotion and stewardship education from the SBC's executive committee to the state conventions, which traditionally had those responsibilities until they were taken over by the executive committee in recent years. Note, however, that the state conventions are being asked to be the prime promoters of an SBC budget that will be flipping fewer dollars back to the states, so the move could easily backfire.
The fifth recommendation promotes a historic change in nomenclature, promoting the traditional "Cooperative Program" as "our central means of supporting Great Commission ministries," while also urging Southern Baptists to "celebrate" designated contributions to convention agencies, state conventions, and associations as "Great Commission Giving." This move appears directed toward minimizing the regular criticism of influential SBC leaders whose churches give a paltry percentage through the Cooperative Program while making larger designated to gifts to specific projects through the IMB or other agencies.
By shifting bragging rights from "Cooperative Program Giving" to "Great Commission Giving," the committee could open the door for some new leaders to emerge, but it could also lead to a serious decline in giving through the traditional Cooperative Program channel. Many churches are accustomed to giving a designated percentage to missions, including a set amount to the Cooperative Program, which has been the gold standard mark of SBC faithfulness. If the emphasis shifts to "Great Commission Giving," removing the stigma of low-percentage contributions through the Cooperative Program, many churches will likely rejigger their giving to designate more funds toward the ministries they like most, leaving a smaller amount for the no-longer-preeminent Cooperative Program.
The bottom line? The rationale behind the recommended changes is understandable, but the reality of implementation could prove daunting. On page 15 of the report, Floyd described the current culture of the SBC as more like 1 Corinthians 3 (which was directed to immature, quarreling Christians) than 1 Corinthians 13 (a paean to unselfish love). "Envy, strife, and division needs to become unacceptable," he said. Given the major structural shifts, blurring boundaries, and financial redirection called for in the task force's preachy-toned report, the outcome is likely to be more strife and division in the SBC, not less.
When the response to their report proves to be underwhelming, perhaps the task force can take comfort in remembering that Joel didn't get much of a hearing, either.
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)



5 comments:
The Great Commission giving ploy will also reduce revenue to the state conventions. One goal in all of this has to be to decrease the power and influence of the state conventions and enhance the power and influence of the national organizations. That is what will happen if the giving through the Cooperative Program is reduced in favor of designated gifts to the national entities.
Will be interesting to see how Adrian Rogers son David and his friends at SBC Impact come down on all this.
This morning Rogers while honoring the protocol of the SBC, seems to be taking exception to Richard Land and the inordinate amount of political activity of other SBC Princes.
Will be an interesting SBC this summer if the platform were to open discussion of Land's political activity, most recently in the Mt Vernon statement; were to open that discussion to the floor to see if the Conservative Resurgence seeks to continue CP funding of Land's politics.
Tony: Second, ... the GCR task force defines it (i.e., missional) in terms of evangelism alone.
bapticus hereticus: Whereas the report refers to 'missional vision,' Barber, on his blog, refers to it as 'mission statement.' Unclear to me is whether this language is intended to replace Article 2 (Purpose) of the SBC Constitution. A comparison follows:
Current Mission: It is the purpose of the Convention to provide a general organization for Baptists in the United States and its territories ...
Proposed Mission: As a convention of churches, ...
Current Mission: ... for the promotion of Christian missions at home and abroad ...
Proposed Mission: ... our missional vision is to present the Gospel of Jesus Christ to every person in the world ...
Current Mission: ... and any other objects such as Christian education, ...
Proposed Mission: ... and to make disciples of all the nations.
Current Mission: ... benevolent enterprises, and social services which it may deem proper and advisable for the furtherance of the Kingdom of God.
Proposed Mission:
The proposed mission statement has a more global, less nationalistic, orientation, and the main thrust of the current statement is unchanged (i.e., evangelism and education) in the proposed form; but a varied ministry approach is no longer emphasized. Whereas the proposed SBC mission emphasizes Matthew 28, it appears to ignore Matthew 25. The proposed absence of the latter, of course, the current rationale for many ministries that the public holds in esteem, may faciliatate an even more doctrinally-oriented organization that the ministry-oriented, less doctinally-oriented member is comfortable.
I am always amazed that somehow the historic SBC states are excluded from the description "lost and dark areas of America". What merits this description? Those of us who live in the southeast US live in the very region of the nation with the highest divorce rates, domestic violence rates, infant mortality rates, murder rates and the highest percentage of children without preventive health care. We even practice capital punishment with a fever pitch - an implicit acknowledgment of the crime and violence of our region. By any measure, those of us who live in the South need to recognize how ridiculous it sounds to describe other sections of the nation as "lost and dark". Perhaps we should come to terms with the myth we live by and recognize the futility of a missions program that sees the splinter in "the other's" eye while blinded by the moat in our own.
Well summarized, Tony. I can only hope that our pastors are not so cynical as to see this redefinition of CP giving as an avenue--finally--for them to gain convention leadership.
As for your third observation that Great Commission ministry is "easier said than done and certainly can't be implemented by decree," that's what got us into this predicament in the first place(re: Matt 28:18-20).
Post a Comment