In his recent President’s Address, Walter Price called for Californian Southern Baptists to seek a radical “new way of doing cooperation” that will streamline our resources and narrow our focus on missions, education, and mercy. These are the three areas where Southern Baptists can accomplish more together than we can individually.

Recently, Bruce Ashford and Danny Akin wrote a series of posts called “The 21st Century SBC.” It’s the best summary I’ve seen so far of where the SBC probably needs to head if it is to regain effectiveness and attract a younger generation of leaders. Here’s an excerpt which gives specific examples of what the “new normal” may look like…

Through four centuries of history, Baptists have displayed a remarkable continuity in doctrine and practice. With historic Christianity, we have confessed that God is Triune, that his Son is fully God and fully man, that salvation comes by grace alone through faith alone, and that the Scriptures are the very words of God. In addition, we have held that the church is regenerate in its membership, autonomous under the headship of Christ, and free from state control. These last three distinctives relate to the doctrine of the church. Baptists have always been serious about church and specifically about the local church. It is through his churches that Christ disciples his children, directs his mission to the lost, demonstrates his glory to a watching world, and extends his kingdom.

What does this mean for the Southern Baptist Convention? The SBC was formed as a network of local churches who partnered together for the sake of mission. In the last 50 years, however, she has become more and more of a denominational bureaucracy. We must help our denomination return to her roots. The SBC of the twenty-first century must be a missional network, just as the churches of Acts were a missional network. Our focus must be the gospel, and our means of cooperation must be primarily “churches partnering for the sake of mission.” Thom Rainer has urged our churches to simplify and streamline so as to maximize their effectiveness, and we think that this applies to our convention as well. The roadmap for revisioning the SBC, as well as any institution or entity within the SBC, will always involve two ideas: local church and missional cooperation.

What then will the Southern Baptist Convention look like if we re-vision it for the 21^st century? That is, of course, a very difficult question to answer, a question that exceeds our abilities of and the scope of this post. However, we can point out the broad contours of what it might look like, and raise some pertinent questions along the way. One issue that we might examine is our name. We are the Southern Baptist Convention, but “Southern” neither describes who we are or who we want to be. Perhaps we should modify our nomenclature to better describe our nature as a transregional network of churches. A second issue that our churches might agree upon is that the Cooperative Program needs to be continually re-examined to make sure that it is serving the churches in the best way possible. One of the great motivators during the Conservative Resurgence was the fact that 60 cents of every dollar went to a moderate/liberal bureaucracy. One of the great motivators for a Great Commission Resurgence is the fact that often 60 cents or more of every dollar never leaves the state and often goes to bureaucracies that spend not nearly enough of it on missions and church planting (regardless of whether it is North American or international missions).

What are some challenges ahead for the seminaries? One challenge the seminaries face is how to locate as much of our education as possible in the local church. Is there a reason not to return certain courses of study, such as pastoral ministries, to their native environment in the local church? Another challenge we might face is how to provide the most affordable seminary education. Are there ways we can streamline our institutions? A third challenge is for the seminaries to reject the temptation to be divisively competitive and instead commit to being a network of truly cooperative campuses. Such a network could, for example, provide a combination of on-campus and distance education to international missionaries in a way more beneficial that what is offered presently. A final challenge is for the seminaries to remain vigilant to ensure that our professors are doing theology primarily for the church and secondarily for the academy.

What are some challenges ahead for the International Mission Board? The International Mission Board has taken major steps to re-organize for its 21^st century mission. One challenge for the IMB is how to continue to restore mission initiative to the local church, just as our churches must repent for ceding all mission responsibility to the IMB. Local churches must become Great Commission churches who recruit, disciple, and support their members as they go on mission. They must stop recommending candidates who are unfit (morally, spiritually, or otherwise) for the field, and must stop sending candidates to the field while never really intending to support them. Further, our churches must realize that the IMB is not the true “sender” of missionaries. The local church is. Churches send missionaries. Some churches will be able to call from their midst a team of church planters and handle all of the discipleship and team dynamics as they go to the field. The IMB provides oversight, further training, and strategy. Other churches may send only one member to the field, in which case they may partner with other churches in putting together a team to reach a particular people group, and to hold that team accountable. Regardless, we must work hard to help our churches blossom into Great Commission churches.

What are some challenges ahead for the North American Mission Board and the State Conventions? It is the charge of both the NAMB and the state conventions to reach the United States of America with the gospel. How might they partner together in order to serve the church and further the church’s mission in a 21^st century context? A detailed answer to this eludes our grasp, but some things are certain. The state conventions must have a renewed focus on church planting and renewal, and NAMB must be a handmaiden who provides resources for that task. Unless there are major changes in the state conventions and at the NAMB, it is doubtful that younger pastors will give their money to the CP or seek the resources of the NAMB. They will bypass the CP and give straight to Lottie Moon, if they give at all, and they will seek church planting advice and training from sources other than the NAMB and the state conventions. This type of bypassing has already begun to take place, and at a rapid rate.

Our state conventions must streamline and focus themselves. They must get rid of whatever unnecessary bureaucracy exists and focus their energies on church planting and church renewal. If they refuse, they will be forced to reduce their budgets drastically because a younger generation of churches will not give to the state conventions merely out of a sense of loyalty. Likewise, the NAMB has its work cut out as it adjusts to the 21^st century context. Many of our younger church planters are bypassing the NAMB for other church planting networks and resource centers. In terms of resource-access, these networks have become functional substitutes for the state conventions and for the NAMB. Perhaps a revisioning of the NAMB-state convention relationship would look something like this: The state conventions reorganize, streamlining their operations so that at least 50% of it goes to the national convention, while at least 30% of the in-state remainder goes to in-state church planting and renewal. At the same time the NAMB reorganizes, ceasing to become a mission-funding organization and instead becoming a small, sleek, and efficient group of church planting and renewal consultants who provide resources for the state conventions (as the state conventions focus primarily church planting and renewal themselves). This is a radical suggestion, for sure, but radical ideas are needed for our future effectiveness. All options need to be put on the table for careful and deliberate consideration.

What will be the role of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission in a 21^st century context? Southern Baptist churches have long been involved in public square issues, and the ERLC was formed to serve our local churches in that facet. Three challenges in particular lie ahead for the ERLC as it serves our churches in the 21^st century. First, the ERLC, alongside of our churches, must stand strong in the midst of an increasingly relativistic culture. Nowhere is such relativism more evident than the controversies surrounding life, death, and sexuality. Second, it must seek to bear witness to the gospel, and to the implications of the gospel for our society and culture, in a way that is gracious, prophetic, and compelling. It must be prophetic in its willingness to point out evil and its consequences. It must be gracious, or else it will contradict the very message of grace. And it must be compelling, seeking to win and persuade our society to what is true and good. Finally, we must not tie ourselves to any one political party, because to do so would distort and domesticate the gospel: “Inappropriate is the only adequate term,” writes Paige Patterson, “to describe purely partisan politics or the use of the pulpit to endorse personalities running for political office.” Likewise, I (Danny Akin) have argued: “Our hope is not in Republicans or Democrats, Congress or Capitol Hill. Our hope, the world’s hope, is in Calvary’s hill and a crucified and risen Savior….” The gospel cannot be domesticated to fit the agenda of any one worldly political party.

What are some of the challenges facing local associations in upcoming years? In the years of horse-drawn buggies, local associations provided resources for pastors who could not travel to the state convention offices for assistance. In the ensuing years, local associations have also become facilitators of fellowship for pastors in the local associations. For some churches, their closest ties are to their local association. In the 21^st century, however, many pastors and churches are able easily to find resources outside of the local association and look for fellowship based on affinity as much as geography. In light of the present situation, perhaps we will see local churches choosing their associations rather than having their associations chosen for them. In addition to county seat-based associations, will we see the creation of voluntary, affinity-based associations, formed for the sake of mission? This would give local churches the freedom to align with an association that best fits their needs, or to align with multiple associations. One could easily see a larger church that is part of a national megachurch network (that ministered to the unique needs of larger churches) as well as a local association with churches of all sizes (that is focusing on planting churches in a tri-county area, for example). The upshot of this discussion is that local associations, like state conventions and national entities, exist to serve the local church and further her mission.

The original article with footnotes can be read here and here.

I’m sure the Great Commission Resurgence Task Force will deal with some of these very issues in their report next June, but it’s good to start thinking about them even now.

Related posts:

• Pastors: the key to a Great Commission resurgence
• SBC needs to get back to the basics

At the close of the California Southern Baptist Convention annual meeting a couple weeks ago, Dr. Walter Price gave a wake-up call to our convention which I’ve dubbed “The Titanic Sermon.” He was gracious in tone, but gave a very strong and necessary warning to our state convention.

I am including the full transcript below, which has already appeared on the Baptist TwentyOne blog here and here.

These issues are not unique to California, but other state conventions will no doubt be watching to see how we respond. The Great Commission Resurgence Task Force is already hard at work researching and developing proposals for our national convention. I pray California will lead the way in initiating state and associational reform.

Dr. Price has courageously laid the issue out on the table and pleaded for a conversation to rethink cooperation in the 21st century. Will we seize this opportunity and circumvent the approaching disaster?

I love the Southern Baptist Convention…. Sometime around the middle of January, 1947, I attended Harrisburg Baptist Church in Tupelo, Mississippi, for the first time. I was born nine months later. Yes, I was a Sunbeam. Now, your age, will determine your reaction to that statement. Some will rejoice. Others will stifle a yawn. But in the words of Ulysses Everett McGill: I am bona fide (as a Southern Baptist).

I love the California Southern Baptist Convention….Through the ministry of a CSBC church this life-long Baptist boy was truly converted by the grace of our glorious God. The majority of my adult life has been as a part of the CSBC. I am a California Southern Baptist.

I love my Association….I’ve had some world class DOM’s in the Inland Empire Southern Baptist Association, brothers whom I love and deeply respect.

I love the California Baptist Foundation….Through the ministry of the CBF helping our folks with their wills and trusts over $3.5 million has been committed to Kingdom work through the FITP Church in Beaumont.

I love California Baptist University….Cut me I bleed blue and gold; I consider myself a walk-on alumnus. Three of my five children have degrees from this school. God willing the fourth will this year and Omega will next year.

I’ve said all that because it’s important that you know from whence I come. I am fully aware that some, perhaps many, will not like what I have to say today. I can’t help that. But I do not say it as an outsider. I have simply prayed for God to help me say what needs to be said and to say it with a humble and gracious spirit.

TEXT: 1 Cor 3:1-9

[He then asked people to sit down as he called out their age group. By the time he reached age 40, only about a dozen were still standing.]

Danger Ahead

In his challenging new book on spiritual disciplines entitled Soul Shaping, Jim Wilson tells the story of how the loss of one little key to a lock was a major contributor to the sinking of the Titanic. “Historical accounts say his superiors reassigned second officer David Blair, the owner of the key, to another ship at the last moment. In his haste to leave the ship, Blair forgot to give the key to Charles Lightoller, his replacement. Because Lightoller didn’t have the key, he couldn’t open the locker that held the ship’s binoculars. Without the binoculars, lookouts in the crow’s nest had to rely on their unaided eyesight to scan the horizon for dangers. Because they didn’t see the iceberg in time, they couldn’t warn the captain of the impending danger.” (Jim Wilson, Soul Shaping, p. 24)

So far in this convention you have heard some wonderful heart-warming reports of great ministry taking place. I am deeply grateful. In every way I affirm all that God is currently doing through us. But that is not my purpose today. Today I want to try to be somewhat prophetic. Our situation as a state convention is critical and we are partying on the Lido Deck. This is one man’s meager attempt to get out the binoculars.

Please hear my heart. I am not here today to claim the demise of the CSBC. It hasn’t happened…yet. What I am here to say is, ‘There’s an iceberg off the starboard bow and we better wake up.’

What is the iceberg? You already know. You saw it yourselves when I asked you to stand by age groups. The time has come for someone to sound the alarm. I do not purport to speak for the younger generation. They are eloquent in speaking for themselves. But the signs that I see are not encouraging. For all intents and purposes, except for a very few exceptions, we have lost those in their 20’s and 30’s.

If that statement causes you to react against them from under your gray hair, you are way off the mark. These young Baptists are passionate for the Kingdom of God. They are passionate to see people from every tribe and tongue and nation gather round the throne and worship our Holy God. Theirs is not a youthful rebellion. For them it is a matter of (and this is my word not theirs) stewardship. Is this convention the way that God wants me to invest my life, my time, my energy, my resources? I’m afraid many of them are finding little reason to answer in the affirmative.

That doesn’t mean they don’t want to cooperate. They love the way we do missions, real missions, not the labeling of anything that moves as missions. They love our cooperative approach to education. They long to stand alongside others in compassion and social justice ministries. But they don’t want to be a part of what to them appears to be a bloated, wasteful bureaucracy.

We have bemoaned the absence of the young crowd for years now. The discussion in the hallways, bookstore and exhibit area has often centered on this concern. We have said we need to get them involved. But what we have most often meant by that is we need to get them involved to do things the way we’ve always done them. I think I can safely say to you today, they are not interested.

Another very subtle nuance to what I hear from the next generation is the object of their focus. When they do discuss the future of what we are doing in a positive light; when they do offer insight and hope into how the ship might continue to sail, their primary interest is focused on the long term of the national SBC, not the State Convention. We should pay attention.

Prediction

Here is my prediction: First, without radical transformation soon, within 15-20 years (optimistically) the CSBC will be either extinct or impotent. We will be, at best, a loosely knit convention of various ethnic associations. I am in no way being critical of ethnic associations. They are already here and are doing wonderful things for the Kingdom. If anything, we should learn a lesson from them regarding our Baptist polity, and that is that it’s okay to have an Association based on something other than geography.

Secondly, without radical transformation, the Cooperative Program, as we know it, will no longer be a viable tool for cooperative Kingdom work. Some will accuse me of criticizing the Cooperative Program. They will be incorrect. I am deeply indebted to the Cooperative Program for many things in my own life. I love the genius of the Cooperative Program. But my indebtedness to and love for the method is not the issue. The issue is whether those who are coming behind us believe that this is the best way to use their time and resources. If they do not, it will die a natural death and it probably won’t be slow in the greater scheme of things.

What’s At Stake?

Let’s remind ourselves what is at stake? Evangelism/Missions: We live in a state with almost forty million people who are more un-evangelized than many other countries even in the 10/40 Window. With only twenty-one hundred churches we desperately need to work together to increase our witness.

Education: Also, we own one of the greatest Christian universities in the world. We must be ever diligent to maintain CBU as a distinctly Christian university, confessional in its nature, with a biblical worldview. I love the fact that our university identifies itself as a Great Commission University. But, lest we ever forget, the Great Commission is about the spread of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. And I for one, to my last breath, will strive to keep it true to its calling.

Compassion: Disaster relief; concern for the poor and hurting; these are the kinds of areas where so much more can be accomplished as a community of churches rather than individually. In each of these areas I would suggest that our focus needs to be less on what the state convention can do for our churches and more on what our churches, together, can accomplish through cooperation.

Response?

How should we respond? First, some wrong ways. In Isaiah 39:1-8 we have the unbelievably selfish story of Hezekiah. When the representatives of the King of Babylon came to offer gifts to him he took them into his treasure house and throughout the land and showed them all that he possessed. Isaiah came and asked him what on earth he had done. Then he prophesied that everything Hezekiah had, everything he had shown them, would be taken to Babylon along with his own sons who would become eunuchs there. Listen to Hezekiah’s response: “The word of the Lord that you have spoken is good.” For he thought, “There will be peace and security in my days.”

Some in my generation seem to have the myopic attitude of Hezekiah. Just don’t inconvenience me. Let someone worry about it when I’m gone. The CSBC has worked great for a long time. Don’t worry, it’s fine. Legend has it that’s what was said about the Titanic, even after striking the iceberg.

Another wrong response: Sadly, there are those in our national SBC who are already publicly positioning themselves to oppose the report of the Great Commission Resurgence Task Force, without even knowing what the report will say. Indeed, it hasn’t even been agreed upon or written yet.

Often our polity is at one and the same time our greatest strength and our greatest weakness. It is strength when the various autonomous entities work hand-in-hand for the good of the Kingdom of God. But it becomes a deep weakness when cooperation devolves into competition, togetherness into turf protection and synergy into selfishness.

I’d like to paraphrase my text from 1 Corinthians 3:

1 But I, brothers, could not address you as spiritual people, but as people of the flesh, as infants in Christ.

2 I fed you with milk, not solid food, for you were not ready for it. And even now you are not yet ready,

3 for you are still of the flesh. For while there is jealousy and strife among you, are you not of the flesh and behaving only in a human way?

4 For when one says, “I am of the National Convention,” and another, “I am of the State Convention,” and another, “I am of the Association,” and another, “I am of the Executive Board,” and another, “I am of the Foundation,” and another, “I am of the University,” are you not being merely human?

5 What then are all these, Servants through which the churches do kingdom work as the Lord has assigned to each.

We are all Southern Baptists. And please don’t respond with another tired joke about Baptist bickering. The time has long since passed for us to be ashamed of that reputation. That’s one of the main reasons the younger group has no interest in showing up at these conventions.

We do not need a new program or new slogan. Slogans can be effective rallying cries. Programs can be useful tools. Slogans and programs might have their day once again. But now is the time for transformation. We desperately need the guidance of the Holy Spirit to give us wisdom. My prayer is that God will do that. I do not presume to know the mind of the Lord. I can only hope and pray that He is not finished with us yet.

A New Way of Cooperation

On October 2, 2006, the unthinkable happened. “Charles Carl Roberts IV carried his guns and his rage into an Amish schoolhouse near Nickel Mines, PA. Five schoolgirls died that day, and five others were seriously wounded.” (Amish Grace, Kraybill et al, p. xi)

In the aftermath of that horrendous event there was talk of the school children and, indeed, the entire Amish community finding what psychologists call a “new normal.” When there is a catastrophic crisis nothing will ever be the same. The situation demands a new normal.

That’s what I’m proposing today–a new way to do cooperation. We must find a new normal. If we do not become pro-active in this endeavor, the crisis is coming, the iceberg is dead ahead. It’s not a question of if it comes but rather when.

In the aftermath of the sinking of the Titanic some very disturbing facts came to light. Perhaps the most significant was that the ship was not designed to withstand the rupture of the watertight compartments below deck. From the moment the problem became known, the designers of the ship knew it was doomed. It will not be enough for us to simply change course to avoid the iceberg. We need nothing less than a redesigning of the ship

What is that new normal? What is the new way of cooperation? I wish I knew. I wish someone else knew. But I have yet to talk to anyone who seems to have the answer. What I am crying for is the conversation. I’ve tried to begin it this year. Every time I’ve had the opportunity to address one of our entities I’ve said the same things I’m saying today in abbreviated form.

We need the right people in place to lead the discussion and we need to bring the right participants to the table for the most profitable input. All of us need to be willing to see radical change. On a larger scale than just us California Southern Baptists we need to find a way to transform the entire fleet, that means national, state and associational, not just our ship. But again, our autonomous polity will probably prevent that from ever happening.

Recently, I had the privilege of sitting down with two different groups of young pastors in their 20’s and 30’s. To say that I was deeply impressed by their hearts and their insight is to make a gross understatement. But there was one particular moment in one of those meetings that stands out to me. I want to leave you with this thought.

I asked the question: “If everyone in a position of any kind of leadership in our state convention age 50 and older dropped dead today, what would happen?”

For a few moments there was an intense silence. Then one of the young men said very quietly, “Well, I guess we’d have to start over.” To which another responded, in an almost anguished tone, “If we wanted to.” And they all nodded their heads.

I beg you. Let’s give them a reason to want to.

In light of new missions cutbacks, Dr. Rankin made some excellent comments last week to the IMB trustees:

“If you define the Great Commission as anything and everything we do as a denomination, an increase in baptisms, more healthy churches, greater cultural impact on our society, there’s not going to be a lot of change because we will just continue to do anything and everything the best that we can,” Rankin said. “But I am convinced that God has blessed Southern Baptists, He has raised us up in numbers and resources, not to take pride in being a great denomination and how many programs we can implement and how well we can do them but to be His instrument to reach a lost world and fulfill His mission…”

“…We must be very careful of how we speak of other entities in our denomination. I know the leadership of our state conventions, our SBC entities, how conscientious they are, how sincerely dedicated to serving the Lord … and the wonderful job they are doing. That’s not the issue,” Rankin said. “If we are to have a Great Commission resurgence, we’ve got to be willing to ask, ‘How does it all stack up in relation to reaching the nations and getting the Gospel to the ends of the earth.’”

That last statement is so critical. The real question is how it all stacks up to reaching the nations. As SBC entities, state conventions, associations begin to think about radical reform, reallocation, and restructuring, we won’t be talking about good programs vs. bad programs. We’ll primarily be talking about good programs vs. the best programs.

There will be some very hard decisions in the months and years ahead. We will need to ask, “What are the best and most effective ways to plant and strengthen churches, and to bring the gospel to those who have not yet heard?”

News from the IMB in the last week has been disheartening, but the very fact we are admitting there is a problem and have bold leaders in place who are addressing the issues is reason to be thankful and encouraged.

You can read more of Rankin’s comments here.

Lest we need more proof that the SBC is in trouble and that a major overhaul is going to be necessary, the IMB has released this heartbreaking news:

In a day of unprecedented global missions opportunity and great harvest, Southern Baptists will be forced to draw down their overseas missions force in 2010 by as many as 600 missionaries, IMB (International Mission Board) trustees were told Nov. 10…

…Because economic realities are forcing IMB to retrench its efforts, the organization must deliberately plan to have fewer missionaries — with implications for a lost world that should distress Southern Baptist church members, said Gordon Fort, IMB vice president of global strategy.

“When doors are swinging open all over the world, when our work force is finding great harvest in some of the most difficult places in the world, we are drawing our force down from 5,600 to 5,000. It just shouldn’t be,” Fort told trustees. When Southern Baptists collected $11.1 billion in offering plates in 2008, according to the denomination’s Annual Church Profile, and 2.77 percent “finally arrives to support the vision of reaching a lost world, and when [Southern Baptists] are structuring ourselves in a way that guarantees we will fail in our mission, it just shouldn’t be,” Fort said.

You can read the whole article here.

May God give great wisdom to the Great Commission Resurgence Task Force and our own California State Convention as we seek God’s face and look for more effective ways to cooperate and do missions in the 21st century.

Last night at our annual meeting, the Inland Empire Southern Baptist Association unanimously adopted a resolution to pray for the Great Commission Resurgence Task Force and its work; to pray for an outpouring of God’s Spirit in reviving churches; and to recommit ourselves to the comprehensive work of making disciples according to the Great Commission.

It was a joyful moment that made me thankful and proud to be part of our association.

While we don’t know what recommendations the Task Force will bring to Orlando next summer, I expect they will be truly bold and innovative. Still in the research phase of their discussion, Dr. Danny Akin has penned a number of helpful articles to dispel some of the more popular “Task Force myths.” He concluded his series this morning. Here are links to all the articles:

• Intro: Dispelling Myths Related to the Great Commission Resurgence
• GCR Myth #1: The goal of [particular members of] the Task Force to get more money to the nations is only a smoke screen to get more money to the seminaries.
• GCR Myth #2: The goal of [certain members of] the Task Force is to turn North American church planting over to Acts 29 or to at least enter into a formal partnership with them.
• Myth #3: The Great Commission Resurgence Task Force is attempting to influence and even control the search committee process at the Executive Committee, the IMB and NAMB.
• Myth #4: The goal of the Great Commission Task Force is to dismantle if not destroy the Cooperative Program as we know it today.
• Myth #5: The GCR is actually a grand Calvinist plot to infiltrate the SBC and gain control or at least greater influence in the Convention.
• Myth #6: Many members of the GCRTF are fundamentally opposed to the work of local associations and state conventions.
• Myth #7: The GCRTF is about diluting our Baptist identity and distinctives so that we begin to look more like the American Evangelical Convention than the Southern Baptist Convention.
• Myth #8: The GCRTF plans to abolish NAMB or dissolve it into the IMB.
• Myths Concerning the GCRTF: A Postscript

Akin concludes his series by saying,

One more time the bottom-line is simply this: the nations need to hear the gospel. Without it they are eternally lost. We have the gospel and God has graced us with the personnel and resources to get the good news of Jesus to them. The question we all must ask and answer is this: what will I do to see this happen? Let’s not live wasted lives. Let’s not be a wasted Convention of churches. Jesus deserves better. Those who have never heard the gospel deserve better. I believe, by God’s grace, we can step up and be better. Dear Lord, please make it happen!

Related Posts:

• Mohler on the future of the SBC
  
• New GCR website has launched