Dr. Terry wrote an op-ed that responded to my study. It can be read here.
First, it should be said that I do not understand how any long-time Southern Baptist can mention the late L. Russ Bush in the context of his proposals for the Southern Baptist Convention without at least acknowledging the great contender he was for the faith within our Convention. How one can blast the co-author of Baptists and the Bible, such a linchpin in the history of the Convention, without even noting Dr. Bush's contributions is bizarre. L. Russ Bush should be a hero of any Christ-exalting Southern Baptist.
Fact check number 1
Terry writes, "It should not be missed that Akin wanted more money for the seminaries, including Southeastern, and he wanted it at the expense of missions and ministries carried on in the various state conventions."
I am sure that Dr. Akin would like more resources for Southeastern, but this is not at all the thrust of his Axioms for a Great Commission Resurgence. Indeed, in the actual address, he declares that if Southeastern must be merged with another seminary or eliminated to make us more effective as a Convention for the gospel that he is willing for that to happen.
Fact check number 2
“The size of the state convention staff has decreased 20 percent in the last 10 years.”
While Dr. Terry would certainly know, his claim misses the point.
Let’s take a look at the distribution of receipts in Alabama for the past 10 years between the state convention and the SBC. The chart below is a little difficult to read. You can view the receipts and percentages for Alabama here as well. Scroll to the bottom to see the past 10 years if you visit the link.
Year CP Reciepts State % SBC %
1999 $ 35,857,235.12 57.7 42.3
2000 $ 37,444,267.21 57.7 42.3
2001 $ 38,675,161.00 57.7 42.3
2002 $ 39,344,546.00 57.7 42.3
2003 $ 40,567,575.61 57.7 42.3
2004 $ 40,835,283.00 57.04 42.96
2005 $ 41,140,217.00 57.71 42.29
2006 $ 42,633,104.00 56.70 43.30
2007 $ 44,115,402.00 56.13 43.87
2008 $ 44,983,974.00 58.02 41.98
To be sure, Alabama does better than many states in the south. They have not, however, moved a greater proportion of receipts out of the state in recent years.
Alabama’s contribution to the SBC national (not inclusive of special offerings Annie & Lottie) has not increased over the past two years. Gross receipts are 20 percent higher today than they were 10 years ago.
I wonder how the monies that were used to pay those 20 percent of state convention personnel are now used. They are not being sent to the SBC national.
Shedding positions while still spending money in state will not help us plant thriving churches to the ends of the earth.
Fact check number 3
Terry writes, “Our leaders are God-called ministers, not “bureaucrats.’”
This is a false dichotomy. Our leaders are not either God-called or bureaucrats. They are God-called bureaucrats. There’s nothing wrong with being a bureaucrat/administrator/leader for the glory of God.
As I write in my study, the vast majority of the men and women working in state conventions surely do so from a genuine heart for the Lord. The question is not about the motives of state convention personnel but about whether we are presently deploying our resources in a maximally effective way. Could God be calling some state bureaucrats to serve Him in another way so that more resources may go for establishing thriving churches among the nations? Psalm 67 suggests this is precisely right.
Fact check 4
Terry writes, “Even though Palmer is now backing off his use of the word “skimming,” the charge that state conventions are somehow breaking faith with their ministry partners regarding the CP is a serious charge.”
I am not backing off, I am apologizing and clarifying and have done so publicly in the Florida Baptist Witness. A link to the apology and clarification would have been appropriate. Fraud and “breaking faith” were never in view in my study.
While I should have chosen a better word than skim (and have, therefore, revised the study), the original study in its entirety should have been sufficient to clarify that a charge of “fraud” was not in view.
I write, “I do not wish to malign the men and women currently serving in state conventions or to impugn their motives.” If I had reason to believe people were being fraudulent, I would have been right to question motives. I did not believe that, and I did not intend to convey that meaning.
Fraud was never in my mind.
Better allocating God’s resources along with a theological rationale for appropriating those resources was in my mind, and it still is.
Fact check 5
Terry writes, “Churches decide what portion of their undesignated receipts they will share for missions outside their local area. Those funds are channeled through state convention offices, and in annual session, messengers from the contributing churches decide what portion of the funds received by the state convention will be used for missions in the state and what portion will be forwarded to national and worldwide missions causes through the SBC.
Messengers to the SBC annual meeting then decide how those funds will be used for missions and ministry causes.
It is a clearly delineated and open system. There is no fraud or skimming as Palmer charged.”
That I am keenly aware of this delineated and open system is clear when I make my recommendations. The first sentence in my recommendations reads, “First, we must vote at our state conventions.”
Fact check 6
Terry writes, “It also should be remembered that in 1925, when the SBC first urged a 50–50 split of CP funds, the total included special offerings as well. . . . Using the original standard, Alabama Baptists long ago surpassed the 50–50 goal.”
Is the way we spend convention money today more beholding to a formula in 1925 or to the need for the gospel to reach the ends of the earth? If it is the former, have we not placed tradition before theology? Status quo before Scripture?
The “original standard” is found in the heart of God not in the founding of the Cooperative Program.
We have been planting and sustaining churches in the Southeast for 85 years through the Cooperative Program. If we’ve been at all successful, should we not endeavor to send a greater proportion of our receipts to reach the countless billions who need to hear the Good News?
Spending 50 percent of proceeds in a state with many thriving churches and 50 percent on a world with few thriving churches is still an inversion of our mandate.
I appreciate the calls and e-mails of encouragement in recent days and I thank you for your fellowship in the gospel. I cannot change anything, but God can turn hearts.
There is a missionary couple I know from Alabama who is waiting to be commissioned as I write - waiting for enough funds to send them. Pray for them; perhaps Alabama will be the state who makes a way for them to go.
