The Need to Return to Serious Intentional Prayer

Our January associational SUMMIT (which I was not able to attend because of sickness) focused on the issues of prayer and spiritual renewal. This is the first of several monthly articles concerning prayer and spiritual renewal/spiritual awakening that David Franklin and I, with the help of some of YOU, will be writing in the near future.

My association is in Illinois, across the great Mississippi River from St. Louis Missouri. We just received some new stats: the St. Louis Metro area is now estimated to be 85% unreached. I am guessing the percentage of lostness is on the rise in your area too. The Southern Baptist Convention, the greatest evangelical denomination in the United States, has been sleeping. It is time to awaken the sleeping giant.

If you have read any of my previous articles, you may recall that it is my firm conviction that we all live in a dysfunctional church culture. Even more, over the past 100+ years we have even been taught things that are not really scriptural, all of which has caused us to lose the spiritual fervor that our forefathers once had for reaching the lost for Christ.

I see many churches marginalizing prayer. We have been taught to rely on our own initiative and our own intellect to conduct church growth activities that will reach the world for Christ. Well, it hasn’t worked. I know; I participated in the church growth movement. My churches, where I was on staff, grew, but, we never saw New Testament kinds of results. I long to see 3000 people saved as told in the NT. It is time that we get beyond marginalizing prayer and make it a central part of our lives, both in our churches and in our daily individual lives as we redevelop a renewed relationship with the Lord.

David Franklin had a great idea. Let’s set aside the first Friday of every month for serious intentional prayer for DoM’s in America. On that day let us, as a group of DoM’s in the USA, pray and fast for each other as we lead our churches to intentional prayer and renewal. In addition, I want to recommend a small book to you that will help us refocus on prayer. I am reading it now and I highly recommend it to you. The book is Walking With God by John Franklin. It is a 30-day training in serious, intentional prayer. It can be ordered from www.johnfranklinministries.org.

By the way, if you want to be a part of a group to help think through the ways NoBA can assist DoM’s as we try to facilitate revival and spiritual renewal in our churches, send me a note and your e-mail address and we will begin a dialogue to develop a strategy for renewal for our churches (it won’t be easy and it will require serious, intentional prayer). larryrichmond@gatewaybaptistassoc.org.

Dr. Larry Richmond, Director of Ministries
Gateway Baptist Association
Granite City, Illinois

Convention Killers

• Greed
• Politics
• Arrogance
• Self-centeredness
• Self-reliance

These are the fruits of OUR spirit. They rest at numerous places throughout our convention. I would love to give several examples, but I will refrain. Look at where we are! Our thinking has brought us to extreme ineffectiveness and decline. After all, we have gone through over the past years we are still a divided lot. God is obviously not pleased. To my understanding, he has withdrawn His blessing from us as a national convention. We have become a convention that has been resistant to evaluating its own effectiveness; possibly, we have been in a mode to keep the status quo, regardless of the limits of our effective operations. Many of our churches are so inward focused that He surely is not pleased. And I believe that will continue until we repent and return to Him. We don’t need men’s thinking; we need to follow God as He leads.

Some of our past leaders have tried hard to focus us in the right direction. It is just extremely hard to accomplish spiritual work within an ingrained political system that seems to fail to consult the Lord on much of anything. It seems to me that the thing that we have failed to do is consult with God. If you believe that God has led us, then surely it is His wish that we exterminate ourselves.

Should we be so surprised at our condition? Looking at the Old Testament should give us all the proof that humans have a tendency to depart from God. We want to do things our way instead of His way. So what is needed? Another reorganization? I don’t think so.

The operative word is repent. True, gut-wrenching, honest to goodness, realization of our spiritual ineptness and complete confession that we have really messed things up. That is the first half of repentance. The second half is a change of direction. That is, stop the greedy, political, arrogant, self-centered, self-reliant thinking and get back to Jesus. I know that sounds trite. Everyone says it, but few actually do it.

What we really need is to see our own personal sin the way God sees it. I tried it and He really got my attention. Know what I found out? Repentance is really hard. But, it is the greatest thing once you realize that repentance becomes an ongoing discussion with God. Once you get in the repentance mode (humility is a key thought here), there is a freshness brought by the presence of God that can’t be found anywhere else. “Repent therefore and return that our sins may be wiped away, in order that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord.” Acts 3:19

It seems we have departed far from the Lord. We have grown to become dysfunctional at all levels of our organization, from the church level up. As God reveals to us the folly of our work, we need to continually repent of our own sins (some of which are listed above) and submit totally to Him who desires to lead us. In fact, I believe He is waiting to lead us. If we could only get back on the same page with God, I am totally convinced that He would begin to do some amazing things through the SBC—things that only God can do. Wouldn’t that be great?

Who will lead us to consult with God again? Who will lead us to a renewed and radical obedience to the Lord?

I suggest that we DoM’s cooperate to begin a joint effort to attempt to facilitate spiritual renewal for pastors and churches. We can’t bring revival, but we can plan some activity where God has a chance to work in the hearts of people.

So, let me suggest something. Stop and Repent. And then let’s work together to set out in a new direction—not one of our own making—but a new direction where God is leading us and allowing His power to flow through us to get His work done. Repentance has to start somewhere. Let it start with DoM’s throughout our country. Let us regain our passion for God and for His work. Let’s model it for our pastors and our churches, and let’s pray as we have never prayed before to plead with God for His divine intervention into our lives and the lives of our churches.

Dr. Larry Richmond, DoM
Gateway Baptist Association
IL

Critical Issues Concerning Southern Baptist Structure

With three key presidential vacancies at hand, pardon my analogy from paganism when I suggest that the planets may have aligned for sweeping changes in Southern Baptist Convention structure. Whether this will prove a blessing or a curse is a question. Bureaucratic structures are tenacious under assault. Just consider the repeated attempts at federal tax reform, resulting in an IRS more bloated and a tax code more confused, complex and convoluted than ever before. There is no guarantee that a new denominational structure will be an improvement over what we have now. If recent reorganizations are any indication I'm not optimistic. Would anyone seriously suggest that the Executive Committee has better preserved Baptist history than the old Historical Commission once did? With the debatable exception of disaster relief, has NAMB improved on any of those tasks once the responsibilities of the Brotherhood and Radio and Television Commissions?

Ask any church consultant what happens when two churches merge. In most cases within less than five years the combined congregations will shrink to the size of the larger of the two churches prior to the merger. Mergers of any kind—be it churches or corporations—are hard to pull off. Efficiency does not necessarily equal effectiveness. Yet some suggest that it's time to merge the International Mission Board and the North American Mission Board into one all-encompassing mission agency. At first glance it's an appealing concept.

The Southern Baptist Convention first organized in 1845, primarily for the purpose of giving birth to two mission agencies, known then as the Foreign Mission Board and the Domestic Mission Board. After a series of name changes and reorganizations we ended up in 1997 with the current North American Mission Board, to serve the needs of the United States and its territories, along with Canada, and the International Mission Board to serve the mission needs of the rest of the world.

In 1845 it was perfectly logical to divide up the denomination's missionary task into the two big categories of foreign and domestic. Those were the days when a clipper ship leaving the East Coast of the United States would take half a year or more to reach Shanghai. Missionaries boarding those ships said goodbye to family members on the dock not expecting to meet them again this side of heaven. In most of the world in those days people group locations corresponded reasonably well with national boundaries or if not, the people group was typically contained within a contiguous region that included one or two adjacent nation states. In few cases were people groups widely scattered across the globe. (The main exceptions were those European peoples, such as the Irish, who were immigrating to the United States and Canada.) Most people on the planet were born, lived, and died within a few miles of the same cross-reference of latitude and longitude. Most people still lived in rural and small town settings. The few larger cities that did exist were fairly homogeneous in makeup.

In 1845 there were still significant areas of Africa, Asia, and South America that were unknown and unvisited by any American or European explorer. The challenges for missionaries in those days tended to focus on daunting logistical barriers. Crossing oceans, rivers, mountains, and deserts; confronting often hostile native populations who spoke languages unknown to the missionary or his or her sending agency; disease, hunger, snake bite, and isolation; the list goes on and on. IMB Strategy Facilitator for the Western Amazon Valley of Brazil, Victor Nickerson, once told me about his study of the early missionaries to the Amazon. When he examined the historical records he discovered one quality that more than any other determined the success or failure of their work: a natural resistance to malaria. Most of those early missionaries died within two years of their arrival.

Today in many profound ways we live in a radically different world. The world is now more urban than rural. Populations are growing and constantly shifting. A few years ago IMB adopted a people group-based strategy around which to organize its missionary efforts. We stopped talking about sending a missionary to reach Djibouti. We now speak of sending missionaries to reach the Somalis or the Oromo or the Afar people. But the problem is that people groups today represent moving targets. A generation ago missiologists coined the term 10-40 Window as a convenient way to talk about the most unreached region on earth. But population migration has made the term less useful than it was twenty years ago. We once spoke of the Window as defining the people groups within the region between 10˚ north and 40˚ north latitude across Africa and Asia. Today significant pockets of the Window live in London, Paris, Frankfurt, New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Minneapolis, and in thousands of other cities, towns and rural locations. The 10-40 Window, like the people groups associated with it, has torn lose from its geographical mooring. We must redesign our strategies to conform to these new realities.

So while once the work of the two mission boards could be neatly compartmentalized, a changing global scene has now hopelessly entangled their missionary tasks.

Nonetheless until recent years there has been very little deliberate contact between these agencies. While both are charged with expanding the Kingdom of God under the Southern Baptist banner, they have done so using distinctive approaches and with very different corporate cultures. There isn't even uniformity in definitions and terminology. At IMB CPM means church planting movement. At NAMB it means church planting missionary. Our boards don't even speak the same language.

The differences between our domestic and international mission agencies run far deeper than the geography of the regions they serve. The corporate cultures of the two boards are as different as those of Apple Computer and the Marine Corp. Short of firing everybody from the vice presidents all the way down to the secretaries and starting over with a blank slate (Who can forget that seamless transition from HMB to NAMB and its resultant body count?) such a merger cannot help but be incredibly messy and stressful.

Just consider the difference in how salaries are structured. At IMB salaries are determined by two factors: tenure of the missionary with the agency and an adjustment to reflect the local cost of living. Consequently if your spiritual gifts equip you to be an effective church planter you have no economic incentive to seek transfer to an administrative role in some regional office—a job for which you may not be gifted. At NAMB and in virtually all state convention offices, salaries are determined in a hierarchical structure similar to that found in the secular corporate world. Church planters are typically at the bottom. Strategists rank higher. State convention salaries run higher on average than those of associational workers. And as for any cost of living adjustments, often missionary salaries in high cost of living areas such as the big cities of the Northeast and the West Coast are actually lower than their counterparts in old convention areas such as Mississippi and Alabama where the cost of living is greatly reduced. It is not surprising that such a system would encourage people to move from regions of great spiritual need but where compensation for ministers is stingy to areas of the country with a much stronger gospel presence but where the pay is better. In the same way field missionaries sometimes seek promotion to better-paying administrative roles for which they may be ill-suited, often leaving a ministry that they love and in which they were very effective. In our unthinking adoption of a secular corporate model of compensation, we have inadvertently proclaimed that the spiritual gift of administration is more valuable than that of evangelism. But in my 37 years in Southern Baptist ministry I have yet to hear anyone admit this.

Complicating this different approach to determining salaries is the fact that IMB missionaries work exclusively for IMB. NAMB missionaries, with only a handful of exceptions, are jointly commissioned and funded by NAMB and one of 42 different state conventions or with the conventions of Canada or the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. These joint funding arrangements are determined by 44 different cooperative agreements.

The two boards embrace profoundly different operational philosophies. This reflects the enormous differences in the nature of their respective tasks. IMB has a monolithic structure that relates to other Baptist groups around the world much the same way that a megachurch in Texas relates to some association in Minnesota in order to co-sponsor a new work in the Northwoods. No matter how gracious their manners or benevolent their intent, they will tend to overwhelm their Minnesota partners—and in the end they will control the decision-making process.

While NAMB exercises considerable power in dealing with the weak and cash-strapped conventions of the north, it must also work with some old line conventions possessing far more resources than NAMB, conventions that send more money to NAMB through the Cooperative Program and the Annie Armstrong Offering than NAMB will ever return.

Risking a very unbiblical metaphor, the role of the state conventions is the joker in the deck that complicates any hypothetical merger of IMB and NAMB. They are autonomous bodies that cannot be ignored nor can they be dictated to by any SBC board, agency, or study group. The only way to circumvent them would be to adopt a radically different approach to missions in the United States, abandoning the concept of joint funding and making all domestic missionaries the direct employees of NAMB or of some new global mission board. Such a move would almost certainly spark a civil war in the Southern Baptist Convention resulting in a catastrophic drop in CP giving.

If we were designing a new denomination in 2009 would we approach it differently than we did in 1845? Assuredly. But we have not the luxury of simply ignoring 164 years of Southern Baptist mission history. We are, at least to some extent, the prisoners of our own past. So while I agree that to do nothing but continue as we are is a long-term strategy for decline into irrelevance we must move forward with all the care of a man traversing a minefield. I believe that rather than approaching this "Great Commission Resurgence" with sweeping changes that could easily cost the denomination more in lost good will and trust than any gains won in organizational efficiency, we ought to focus on the most egregious flaws in the current system and address them one by one. I suggest starting with the following items:

• Some structure or system must be devised that results in ongoing, meaningful communication between IMB and NAMB at multiple levels from the presidents all the way to the field missionaries. The people group strategy of IMB must become truly global. When a Somali man moves from Mogadishu to Toronto to Minneapolis to London to Seattle (and in the case of a Somali that is not as unreasonable a hypothetical scenario as you might think) it is absurd that he not remain the focus of the same strategy coordinator whose team is seeking to reach all Somalis everywhere.
  
• We must develop missionary recruitment and training strategies that work across existing agency boundaries. We need an expanding pool of cross-cultural missionaries. The cultural skills required of a native Minnesotan trying to reach Somalis in Minneapolis are far greater than those of American leading an English-speaking congregation in Aberdeen, Scotland. Some years ago the US military began requiring joint command training for all their senior officers. Before promotion to general officer rank, all army, navy, marine and air force officers must serve a tour where they work side by side with officers from other military branches. Such cross-training would be invaluable for missionaries both foreign and domestic, especially for those serving in the great global cities of the earth.
  
• Domestically we must address the disparate salaries of missionaries doing similar work for dramatically different levels of compensation. We have never attempted to seriously address the economic factor in our miserable track record in evangelizing high cost-of-living urban areas such as New York, San Francisco, Los Angeles, etc. It is not uncommon for a Director of Missions for a small city in the South to make tens of thousands of dollars more than his counterpart in a city like San Francisco. The home that the Southern DOM bought for $150,000 could not be touched for ten times that much in the Mission District of San Francisco. Yet the IMB missionary who works in Tokyo or London or Moscow does get at least a partial cost of living adjustment.
  
• The current makeup of the SBC's Great Commission Council, a creation of the last major SBC reorganization, is heavily skewed in favor of the interests of theological education at the expense of missions. Six seminary presidents and two mission board presidents all have equal votes. Yet when you consider the SBC budget nearly 75% of Cooperative Program funding goes to IMB and NAMB—not to the seminaries. This lopsided influence of seminary presidents on the council is bad for missions. Combine IMB and NAMB and you go from 6-to-2 to 6-to-1 in favor of seminaries over mission boards. If this body—whose work and very existence is a mystery to most Southern Baptists—is to continue functioning, this imbalance needs to be corrected.
  
• Any merging of mission boards must be done in a way that protects and preserves the priority of reaching the new convention regions of the United States. Winning Albany, New York will never have the same romantic appeal that winning China or India has. Gary, Indiana has little cachet when competing for the imaginations (and mission gifts) of Southern Baptists with places like Nairobi or Rio de Janeiro. I am not suggestion that these various priorities are equally important. But I am saying that we risk hard-won gains in the U.S. outside the South if we suddenly abandon what we have started.
  
• Finally, we need to fundamentally reexamine how we as Southern Baptists do missions education. We are failing at this critical task. I believe that the poor job that we are doing in educating our people about missions, from our youngest children through our senior adults, also underlies the weakness of much of our stewardship education. We need to gather the best and brightest from NAMB, IMB, WMU, LifeWay, state convention leadership, as well as a representative group of pastors and lay leaders to rethink how we teach missions.

God bless the men and women of the Great Commission Resurgence Task Force. They may end up shaping the next chapter of Southern Baptist history. I hope they appreciate the fragile treasure that they hold.

Glen A. Land, State Missions Director

Minnesota-Wisconsin Baptist Convention

Future Convocations on Baptist Associationalism

I was glad to participate in the National Convocation of Baptist Associationalism at Ridgecrest. It was encouraging to see the renewed interest in the work of the local Association by the North American Mission Board. The break out sessions affirmed that I am not alone in many of the things that we have been thinking about and struggling with in our association. The plenary speakers were uplifting and encouraging, especially J.C. Bradley, and I was glad to see the number that came to this meeting. However, I left there with a question that continues to nag me. It concerns the "ownership" of Associationalism. Please let me explain.

This convocation was a North American Mission Board event, held by NAMB for Associational Leaders. I affirm NAMB for doing this for us. The issue I am struggling with is this, if NAMB controls Associational development by holding these events for us, then they have control of the agenda and will "steer" the future of Associational Missions from Alpharetta. The local association will become an extension of NAMB rather than a partner in local missions. We already struggle with this because so much of our funding comes from Alpharetta in the form of NAMB appointed personnel. Please don't hear me saying anything negative about our covenant with NAMB, I am not advocating any kind of revolt! My struggle has to do with perspective of leadership and how our relationship with NAMB tends to lead us away from healthy Baptist polity. I would like to suggest that we as Associational leaders seek a relationship with NAMB that is based on the Empowering Kingdom Growth initiative that was adopted by the SBC a few years ago.

The Empowering Kingdom Growth initiative has worked well in South Carolina because it took us back to our foundational Baptist polity that says the local church is the boss! It restructured our state convention and associations around a pivotal concept that forced us to listen to and respond to the local church rather than create programs and ask the churches to implement them. We moved toward a true "grass roots" leadership rather than the hierarchy that had been developed during the past 100 years and began to streamline our ministries. We became more effective in Kingdom work. Associations in SC were treated as true partners in ministry by the SC Convention and we began to take leadership in Associational Missions that the SC Convention began to follow and support. My point is this: SC Associations "own" associational development in SC.

The formation of the Network of Baptist Associations (NoBA) was a very positive move for associations nationally. It put a structure in place that had the potential to put the ownership of associational development in the hands of the associational leadership. We began to set the agenda and steer the course for the future of Baptist Associational Missions. If our relationship with NAMB is built upon the EKG vision then NoBA would set the agenda and NAMB would come alongside of NoBA to strengthen the work as a partner. I was glad to see that much of the agenda of the Convocation included the NoBA leadership but I fear that NAMB set the agenda. An EKG partner would allow the group that is being served set their own agenda.

Here is my bottom line, If NAMB really wants to partner with Associations, then let them support NoBA and its annual meeting rather than planning a NAMB meeting and inviting NoBA to participate. This is all about "who will steer he associational ship" in the future?

Remember the first NoBA meeting? We had a consultant from Coca-Cola that led us through some initial conversations about our role as associations. Do you remember the point when he stopped us in the middle of our "whining" and said something like, "Do you guys realize that you sound like victims? Do you operate out of a victim mentality? Are you subordinate to NAMB?" That comment galvanized us! It was at that point that we determined to take the lead and develop our own agenda concerning the future of Associationalism.

I can't help but wonder if, after 20 years, NAMBs decision to host a national convocation of associationalism was motivated by our formation of NoBA?

It will be very easy to slide back into our traditional "comfort zone" and let NAMB take control of the future of Baptist Associationalism once again. The only way to avoid it is to insist on setting the agenda ourselves. I truly believe this pivotal change in relationship will strengthen both NAMB an the local association.

Mike O'Dell, Director of Missions
York Baptist Association
Rock Hill, SC

SBC: Organizing for Effectiveness

Our convention is statistically beginning a decline, especially looking at our declining baptisms over the past several years. (See Ed Stetzer’s recent blog article of April 23, 2008 by Clicking HERE or his follow up article HERE). It is time to do something about the condition of our convention. Here is a discussion of a scenario that, I believe, has great potential for turning around a floundering giant and generating massive kingdom building results.

I perceive four levels of dysfunctional activity that must be addressed within the Southern Baptist Convention. I will take each level, one at a time, and attempt to clearly make my case.

I. Relationships Between SBC Entities Must Change

The above diagram greatly simplifies, but generally depicts the current operational strategy of the convention. Strategy development is from a top down strategy, with national leaders attempting to generate “programs” that the state and associations will promote in an attempt to encourage churches to adopt. Resource allocation takes Cooperative Program receipts and distributes them down to the states. Some states may allocate some of those resources into associations and churches, but from my observation, it seems that activity is extremely limited, with support for church planting being the main exception. Almost no funds go to associations and churches for church strengthening.

The diagram below indicates the preferred cooperative workings between SBC entities.

In this model, strategy development starts with the needs of churches and a church strategy to meet those needs. The association takes the collective needs and strategy of its churches and develops a strategy to partner with the churches by bringing value to the churches in the form of needed resources tailor-made to facilitate the local church strategy. In turn, the state develops its strategy based upon the strategy of the associations, and NAMB and other entities, develop a strategy based upon the strategies of the state conventions. It is a “grass roots”, bottom up strategy development process.

Based upon the strategies of the various entities, the available resources are deployed, first to state conventions, then to associations, then finally to churches, where the front line of Kingdom work takes place.

It is my firm belief that if church strengthening and church planting can be developed through this kind of model, the local church will be strengthened and be in a much stronger position to bring about the Kingdom impact within communities. Consequently, I would not be surprised at all to see a resurgence of giving to the Cooperative Program as a result of healthier, vibrant churches if this model were instituted. By the way, I believe that NAMB is in a unique situation to lead in the rebirth of our denomination as we move to greater effectiveness.

II. Dysfunctional Life at the Association Level Must Be Resolved

I am not sure how it all started, but at some point in the past and for various reasons, the role of DOM changed. That change necessitated a different skill set for operating effectively as a DOM. Consequently, some DOM’s found themselves in a situation of confusion and frustration as they dealt with a rapidly changing society. Some found themselves becoming less effective than before. When that realization became apparent at the state convention level, the state conventions began trying to cover responsibilities formerly assigned to associations. Duplication of effort began.

To resolve this situation, this still exists in many parts of the convention, DOM’s need to be taught a new series of skill sets. A massive leadership training effort across the country needs to be deployed toward the development of core competencies for DOM’s. NAMB association staff, in conjunction with a group of DOM’s, has identified four core competencies that are needed for a DOM to be successful in his role today: Entrepreneurial Leadership, Establishing Strategic Direction, Achieving Kingdom Results, and Facilitative Leadership. Each of those categories contains several skill subsets that would be useful to DOM’s.

This training emphasis needs to be on a national level. NoBA (Network of Baptist Associations), in cooperation with NAMB, is in the process of developing a leadership diploma program for all new, in-service and prospective DOM’s.

Apart from the training aspect for DOM’s it appears that many associations are too small to generate enough strength to sustain an aggressive effort to resource their own churches. Regional mergers would be a likely scenario to consider developing larger and stronger associations.

III. State Convention Activities Are Not Producing Desired Results

Despite all the good intentions from state staff everywhere, it is obvious that all the money we are putting into state convention activity is not working. Graph your state’s baptism records, Bible Study attendance, worship attendance, and cooperative program receipts over the last 30 years. Don’t be surprised to find that most everything is plateaued, if not worse.

In the past, I worked as a member of a state staff. I find that my work as a DOM is much more effective than my experience as a state staffer. Why? I think because of the proximity to the churches. State staff can become your friend. Association relationships can foster a family atmosphere. In Illinois, I was assigned to work with 1000 churches in Sunday School growth. It was impossible to have consistent contact with the same churches over time in order to help them to find the path to effectiveness. The work of the state convention is not dependent on the number of people they have on the ground working. The state convention can be most effective in looking at its operational systems and seeking a new strategy that would produce greater effectiveness.

Let me say it plainly. The systems of many state conventions are not working. It is not the fault of the convention staff members; it is the system that is being used to operate the state convention. Simply, if a wagon is broken, it will not work right. Bringing in a new horse to pull the wagon is not going to make much difference. The wagon has to be fixed.

I believe, as indicated above, that the effectiveness of the state convention can be massively improved in participating in a new and different resourcing strategy with associations and churches.

IV. Spiritually Dysfunctional Churches

I have consulted in approximately 100-200 individual churches over the past 25 years. My positions in growing churches insulated me from the reality in many other churches. I finally came to believe that many churches have lost their reason for being. They have misplaced their mission. They have lost God’s vision for their church. Many have become inward focused. According to recent research, about 90% of our churches are somewhere in the dysfunctional camp. I recently had an honest conversation with a pastor. He said, “I don’t know what to do to get my church to become more effective, and if I knew what to do, I wouldn’t know how to do it.” That comment is laced with massive leadership needs.

So, the first line of attack on this dysfunctional situation is to do substantial leadership training for pastors. The training should include, but certainly not be limited to, vision development and vision casting, strategy development, situational self-leadership, lay leader development, mentoring skill development, spiritual formation activity, and to be safe, conflict management. This training should be done best, I would think, through the state conventions that might set up regional training schools for pastors. To be more specific, I would suggest that all pastors be invited to attend, but to make a special effort to reach pastors 45 years old and younger.

There remains, however, a most serious situation. Because of the inward focus of most churches, there are spiritual issues in the life of the church. When you can’t answer the question “Where is God working in your church or community?”, you are in trouble at the heart of what it means to be a Christian. It appears that in some if not many churches we have nice, but carnal Christians in leadership positions. No wonder we are in fighting and have taken our eyes off Jesus. We have lost the concept of surrender to the Lord. We no longer know what it means to sacrifice, and we certainly do not understand what it means to die to self. In short, churches are operating out of their own agenda rather than seeking God and working from His agenda.

Well, how do you deal with spiritual issues? Confession first comes to mind. But in reality, it has to do with a person’s relationship with God. I am sure it must have to do in part with intentional transformational discipleship. I am quite sure that it must involve a much more serious approach to prayer. It is probably dependent upon an outpouring of God’s Spirit; but it must accompany an understanding that as hard as we have tried, we have failed. It is time to move off our own agenda and onto God’s. Somewhere, somehow, we need to focus on being transformed into Kingdom People. The term we use today is “missional”. Again, that requires God’s intimate interaction with each of us, but it seems to me that we need to develop some rationale that would facilitate spiritual renewal. I will leave that strategy to the more spiritually minded. I am doing my best to keep my head above water.

If churches are inward focused and plateaued or dying, asking churches to give more to the cooperative program would be futile and is not the answer to our dilemma. We need to strengthen churches and start as many new ones as possible. That activity will address the Cooperative Program issue. Will every convention, association, and church be improved by the approach I am proposing? Probably not, but many will. I believe it is time to look with new eyes at our situation, stop bickering about inconsequential issues, rally around Jesus, and launch off into a new horizon that will hopefully lead to greater partnership with the Lord in His work.

I am just one person. But, I sense God is trying to get my attention. He keeps bothering me about all this stuff. I obviously do not have all the answers and I probably raise more questions than I answer. But, I think it is time for a serious dialogue. What do you think?

Dr. Larry Richmond, DoM
Gateway Baptist Association
Illinois

Timely or Timeless

Years ago, I remember a “western” that ended with two cowboys lamenting the loss of the old west. One scruffy old chuck wagon cook said, “The times, they are a changin’.” I’ve met more than one scruffy old Baptist that has lamented with the same thoughts. Unfortunately, all that many want to do is LAMENT. I think it’s time for some “sons of Issachar” to arise in our day and give a clarion call to our Southern Baptist Churches about the times we now face and what we need to do! This is a prime time for Associations/DOMs to step up.

As a young pastor (back when I still knew it all), I saw little or no need for the association. That may have been my arrogance or it may have been the expression of associationalism I saw in that day. As I’ve matured and allowed Christ to crucify my pride, I’ve found the great value of my mission partner that the present day association can be.

Being timely is a huge challenge to a tradition driven denomination like ours. We have many fears, not the least of which is theological liberalism. Let me lay that to rest immediately! I believe we must never abandon the timeless truths of God’s infallible word. When we used to believe and practice the great commission, Southern Baptist enjoyed our best days. Well, if we desire to have God’s blessing again, we must reinstate evangelism and missions as our top priorities. Without these, we’ll continue down the same failed path that other denominations have followed to oblivion. Having said that, how we do evangelism and missions is the timely part.

As an associational leader, director or missionary, this is our opportunity to help people understand the times and know what to do. Business as usual will never reignite anyone’s passion but Biblical obedience will. I think we need to realize that the days of automatic participation in associational work is behind us and the future of our work is providing entry points for participation according to Biblical passion. Therefore, the missionary or director needs to embrace the role of strategist. A strategist accesses the situation then presents a process of change. In the business book entitled “Judgment” by Noel M. Tichy and Warren G. Bemis, they identify four areas of critical decision-making.

They are:

• Self Knowledge
• Social Networking
• Contextual Understanding
• Organizational Structure

While nothing but the scriptures carries divine authority, we need to see what Jesus said in Luke 16:8 that sometimes the children of this world are wiser in their generation than the children of light. I think that happens because they are paying attention to the current situation. I love to see what God can do with principles gained from many realms when filtered through Scripture.

When we know who we are in Christ, we know how to use the gifts and experiences God has invested in us. When we see our context, it should become obvious what kind of ministry is needed, and what resources are available to us.

Our social networking is finding the right people to lead in the ministries we identify. Finally, the organizational structure is the process whereby we can move to application.

1 Peter 3:15 instructs us to be ready always to give an answer to every man that asks your reason of the hope that in is you. I believe this presupposes that we are doing something that causes them to ask the question. If we have an effective strategy in place, we should be actively causing some questions. In our setting, disaster relief, mission partnerships and church planting are some of the chosen tools we’ve used. As the churches have embraced a missions and evangelism strategy, I find that my job is a greater joy than ever before!

Steve Patterson. Director of Missions
Spring River Baptist Association
Joplin, MO
http://www.springriverbaptist.com/

Regionalization: Another Perspective

As a new teenage Christian many years ago, one of the first verses I memorized was Isaiah 40:8, “The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever.” Later I learned there is no variableness in God (James 1:17) and that He is the same forever (Heb13:8). Anyway, you get the idea. I think it is safe to say that God is the only constant that we have.

In the Dakotas we are undergoing change. We are one of those areas in which a restructuring/reorganization is going on. The state is moving toward regionalization. As with most changes and new things, when the idea was first brought up (by a pastor), it was shot down. Even now, several months later, there are probably still more questions than answers. But, the one thing I know, change is coming! So the question becomes, how do I, representing the association, employed by the state convention, funded by NAMB, fit into the change?

I anticipate working even more closely with the state convention since there will now be a regional state worker. We will be structured, as in the past. The association will continue to resource (to the best of our ability) the church, and, the state will, in most cases, funnel resources through the association to the church.

Will this ultimately lead to the demise of either the association or the state convention? I don’t know. However, I have another question, how can we best resource the local church in its mission? Let’s keep our eyes on the finish (Hebrews 12:1-2), let’s continue to resource the churches, let’s continue to advance the kingdom, after all, are there not only two teams? (Matt. 12:30) Lets play whatever position we are in!

Jim Pratt, DoM
Siouxland Association of Southern Baptists
Yankton, SD

Associations Will Die ... Or Will They?

If your association ceased to exist how long would it take for area churches and members to notice you were gone?

There is great debate in some circles as to the real value of the local association. Can it survive? Some say “yes” while others have cast doom on the association's future. Are you aware that well known futurist have forecast that a multi-level denominational structure like the Southern Baptist Convention cannot survive in today's post-denominational environment? Most have said that either the association or the state convention must be eliminated from the SBC denominational structure. (For supporting articles, click HERE and HERE and HERE.)

Because of the funding structure in most new work (mission) areas, the state conventions have the ability to "fund" or "not fund" local associational missionaries. Several states are now moving to "phase out" associational directors and are proposing to replace them in some fashion with state convention representatives. Will the churches in those areas notice the difference?

What do churches in your area value about the local association and its ministry?

Will associations be the ones to suffer demise? OR will state conventions fall by the wayside? OR are futurists totally off base ... not seeing the value of the SBC maintaining both levels within its structure.

I CLOSE BY REPEATING: “If your association ceased to exist how long would it take for area churches and members to notice you were gone?”

Bobby Gilstrap, DoM
Huron & Southeastern Associations
Michigan