Special state missions offerings are not Cooperative Program (CP) gifts. I wonder if such offerings will be minimized in states in order to promote the Cooperative Program and "cooperation." This would be logically consistent in light of recent statements made regarding the recent election of the new NAMB president and the giving strategies of his church. I doubt we will see such consistency.
When states commit to getting to 50/50 as a starting point and do not take up special offerings other than those for Annie and Lottie, consistency will be found.
Saturday, September 18, 2010
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
Fabricated, False Dichotomies
I am about as Southern Baptist as one can be. I was born in Fort Worth while my father attended Southwestern. My father was partially supported by the Home Mission Board during his first pastorate.
I was saved and immersed in an SBC church. I was called to preach through the ministry of an SBC church. I recently graduated from Southeastern. When I join a church, I make sure a minimum of 10 percent of the budget goes to the Cooperative Program.
I remember well the posters my father displayed in the halls of my home church announcing that 95 percent of CP receipts go to support missions and theological education. I was proud of that.
However, along the way, I earned a Master’s of Public Administration and Policy. During the program, I could not deny that the SBC was laden with inefficiencies – built more like a government bureaucracy than a conduit for the gospel.
Nine years later, inefficiencies remain. Some have recognized challenges within the SBC structure(s) and have included this concern in a Great Commission Resurgence Declaration.
The Declaration includes ten articles. Among these articles is the attention-grabbing Article IX.
Article IX reads: We call upon all Southern Baptists, through our valued partnerships of SBC agencies, state conventions/institutions, and Baptist associations to evaluate our Convention structures and priorities so that we can maximize our energy and resources for the health of our local churches and the fulfillment of the Great Commission. This commitment recognizes the great strength of our partnership, which has been enabled by the Cooperative Program and enhanced by a belief that we can do more together than we can separately.
Because Article IX challenges us to examine SBC "structures and priorities," some have claimed Article IX is unnecessary because it is non-spiritual. Morris Chapman, for example in his article at sbc.net claims, "Article IX and its commentary stood starkly apart from the other nine articles. It suddenly departed from biblical affirmations . . . " (emphasis added).
Throughout his article, Chapman fails to acknowledge that reorganization, structure, and methodology are inextricably linked to stewardship. Is there an SBC pastor willing to proclaim “stewardship is not a biblical issue?” That is the essence of the claim that Article IX “depart[s] from biblical affirmations.”
Much of Chapman’s rebuttal is based upon this phantom dichotomy of revival versus reorganization or spiritual versus organizational. The statements mount.
"Revival and spiritual growth are the greatest needs in our Convention and our nation. . . . Reorganization is not."
Revival versus reorganization.
"Effective and efficient organization is critical to any corporate endeavor . . . . But revival in our churches and appointing a task force to study Convention structures are not two parts of one whole. They are two separate objectives . . . . to put the two objectives together is like trying to mix oil and water."
Revival versus convention structures.
Two separate objectives.
Oil versus water.
When Chapman asks, "What are our choices?," he offers only two.
“On one hand, calling for a study of the Convention is very likely to create highly-charged polarization. On the other hand, if our people come together under the guidance of God’s Holy Spirit, Southern Baptists have the potential to mount such a powerful witness to the saving grace of our Lord that God will pour out His blessings upon our efforts.”
On the one hand versus the other hand.
Convention study versus Holy Spirit.
He continues, “Perhaps some have the mistaken notion that if we get our stuff organized first, then God will pour out His blessings. . . . Are there biblical examples . . . that would lead us to expect this? . . .” (emphasis mine).
The Bible provides ample examples. Jethro's advice to Moses in Exodus 18, or the selection of the first deacons in Acts 6 should suffice. Sometimes God does not pour out His Spirit until we are prepared for the change He wants to effect.
But, a deeper problem exists.
If we are poor stewards, we are failing in spiritual matters. If the SBC avoids issues of stewardship when they are raised, we may hinder a fresh anointing of the Spirit.
Article IX is no less spiritual than any other. Christ's rule and reign extend to every corner of life - even Convention life.
Relegating administration and stewardship of dollars given for missions and theological education to the realm of the non-spiritual or less spiritual is to knowingly accept a false dichotomy and to defend an indefensible status quo.
Every ounce of life is to be lived for God’s glory. The SBC cannot accept a false dichotomy (revival v. reorganization) and claim they endeavor to worship God in everything (Col. 3.17).
Chapman urges that we wait “until the time is right.” The time, however, is now.
The more than 3,800 Southern Baptists who have signed a declaration including Article IX, cannot be callously dismissed as those with a “mistaken notion.”
In the not-too-distant past, the SBC faced a real dichotomy. Affirm the veracity and sufficiency of God's Word, or become a denomination doomed to forever doddle in a morass of lifeless liberalism.
Today, we must not let a fabricated and phony dichotomy deter us from continuing the steady advance for the gospel.
I was saved and immersed in an SBC church. I was called to preach through the ministry of an SBC church. I recently graduated from Southeastern. When I join a church, I make sure a minimum of 10 percent of the budget goes to the Cooperative Program.
I remember well the posters my father displayed in the halls of my home church announcing that 95 percent of CP receipts go to support missions and theological education. I was proud of that.
However, along the way, I earned a Master’s of Public Administration and Policy. During the program, I could not deny that the SBC was laden with inefficiencies – built more like a government bureaucracy than a conduit for the gospel.
Nine years later, inefficiencies remain. Some have recognized challenges within the SBC structure(s) and have included this concern in a Great Commission Resurgence Declaration.
The Declaration includes ten articles. Among these articles is the attention-grabbing Article IX.
Article IX reads: We call upon all Southern Baptists, through our valued partnerships of SBC agencies, state conventions/institutions, and Baptist associations to evaluate our Convention structures and priorities so that we can maximize our energy and resources for the health of our local churches and the fulfillment of the Great Commission. This commitment recognizes the great strength of our partnership, which has been enabled by the Cooperative Program and enhanced by a belief that we can do more together than we can separately.
Because Article IX challenges us to examine SBC "structures and priorities," some have claimed Article IX is unnecessary because it is non-spiritual. Morris Chapman, for example in his article at sbc.net claims, "Article IX and its commentary stood starkly apart from the other nine articles. It suddenly departed from biblical affirmations . . . " (emphasis added).
Throughout his article, Chapman fails to acknowledge that reorganization, structure, and methodology are inextricably linked to stewardship. Is there an SBC pastor willing to proclaim “stewardship is not a biblical issue?” That is the essence of the claim that Article IX “depart[s] from biblical affirmations.”
Much of Chapman’s rebuttal is based upon this phantom dichotomy of revival versus reorganization or spiritual versus organizational. The statements mount.
"Revival and spiritual growth are the greatest needs in our Convention and our nation. . . . Reorganization is not."
Revival versus reorganization.
"Effective and efficient organization is critical to any corporate endeavor . . . . But revival in our churches and appointing a task force to study Convention structures are not two parts of one whole. They are two separate objectives . . . . to put the two objectives together is like trying to mix oil and water."
Revival versus convention structures.
Two separate objectives.
Oil versus water.
When Chapman asks, "What are our choices?," he offers only two.
“On one hand, calling for a study of the Convention is very likely to create highly-charged polarization. On the other hand, if our people come together under the guidance of God’s Holy Spirit, Southern Baptists have the potential to mount such a powerful witness to the saving grace of our Lord that God will pour out His blessings upon our efforts.”
On the one hand versus the other hand.
Convention study versus Holy Spirit.
He continues, “Perhaps some have the mistaken notion that if we get our stuff organized first, then God will pour out His blessings. . . . Are there biblical examples . . . that would lead us to expect this? . . .” (emphasis mine).
The Bible provides ample examples. Jethro's advice to Moses in Exodus 18, or the selection of the first deacons in Acts 6 should suffice. Sometimes God does not pour out His Spirit until we are prepared for the change He wants to effect.
But, a deeper problem exists.
If we are poor stewards, we are failing in spiritual matters. If the SBC avoids issues of stewardship when they are raised, we may hinder a fresh anointing of the Spirit.
Article IX is no less spiritual than any other. Christ's rule and reign extend to every corner of life - even Convention life.
Relegating administration and stewardship of dollars given for missions and theological education to the realm of the non-spiritual or less spiritual is to knowingly accept a false dichotomy and to defend an indefensible status quo.
Every ounce of life is to be lived for God’s glory. The SBC cannot accept a false dichotomy (revival v. reorganization) and claim they endeavor to worship God in everything (Col. 3.17).
Chapman urges that we wait “until the time is right.” The time, however, is now.
The more than 3,800 Southern Baptists who have signed a declaration including Article IX, cannot be callously dismissed as those with a “mistaken notion.”
In the not-too-distant past, the SBC faced a real dichotomy. Affirm the veracity and sufficiency of God's Word, or become a denomination doomed to forever doddle in a morass of lifeless liberalism.
Today, we must not let a fabricated and phony dichotomy deter us from continuing the steady advance for the gospel.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)