Among his statements was this:
...there's now an incredible capacity to tap into those who have disengaged. There are thousands of pastors who are ready to re-engage if we provide them a compelling vision and show them how we're going to efficiently and effectively use the money that they encourage their people to give through the Cooperative Program and Annie."It is stating the obvious that this comment by the new NAMB CEO shows that he has clearly, quickly, and totally coverted to a supporter of the Cooperative Program and Annie Armstrong offering. Not that he has a choice. The new leader of NAMB has to find a way to make these two funding streams work, since they provide most of what he has to work with.
"We will do the best for every dollar Baptists send us," he said.Avoiding such disastrous things as trips to London to see movies, ice sculptures, and lavish severance agreements will be a step forward.
Ezell, recognizing his credibility gap in not being much of a NAMB supporter as a pastor said:
"One thing I regret is that years ago, when I examined the system, I got frustrated and I disengaged. Thousands of churches also disengaged because they looked at the system and considered it broken.A regret of his since, say, this past summer? Well, never mind. He's engaged now and hopes to stimulate the engagement of the thousands of churches. I would like to believe him to be accurate in saying that there is an "incredible capacity" waiting to be tapped for NAMB support. Time will tell. I think the climb is rather steep towards significantly increasing church support of NAMB. Retooling NAMB to reallocate present levels of funding is a good way to start.
"It's been a regret of mine that I disengaged..
I hope he succeeds.
6 comments:
I hope the churches who percentage lead CP giving but have staffs loyal to the Resistance movement against fundamentalism in the SBC will use this opportunity to buck up and explain to their congregations the smoke and Mirrors of Ezell's revamped PR job.
David Keys of the Ga Heritage Society in a farewell piece of sort has grand insight he shared this morning at ed.com if anybody cares for a larger perspective on Ezell's lugubrious conversion to the Cooperative Program
It is amazing that now Ezell has seen the light on CP giving. The timing is almost miraculous.
What major corporation or business would consider it a sound practice to tap an unenthusiastic critic of the company with an investment portfolio who puts him in the lower tier of investors as its next president? If you could closely examine the spending of his former church (and that's a big "if") you might find some practices inherent in the megachurch culture that will give you a hint that he's inevitably going to authorize spending on perks which will damage the reputation of NAMB even further.
NAMB does have some incredibly successful ministries which have thrived inside the confines of limited budgets because they are self-supporting. Those are the people who need to be writing the manual for NAMB operations. It might be a good thing for Ezell's tenure at NAMB to find them and turn them loose.
A: $nnnK minus track record plus prestige plus executive perks --> Engaged NAMB.
B: Knowledge of NAMB mis-management and possibly personal declining $nnK in addition to being chief bottle washer and mission leader --> Unengaged NAMB.
C: A --> B --> Support of A’s engagement?
Wanna guess the most likely outcome?
Mission giving down.
What are you going to do?
Hire a leader that doesn’t particularly support what we do.
That will help?
Sure. We’ll give him a bunch of money and perks, and the prestige, oh, goodness; he’ll then be a champion about the need to engage.
I don’t follow.
Likely, neither will anyone else, but it’s complicated.
Really?
No, not really.
And if the money doesn’t come in?
We’ll blame the churches.
Why?
Because that is how things work.
I still don’t follow.
Not really necessary as long as some get to sit in the special seats.
What if we don’t let them sit there anymore?
OK. But others will.
What if we take the special seats away?
What kind of organization do you want?
One that is different.
And what will you do to get it?
Likely nothing.
Why?
It would cost me too much in terms of, well, you name it.
This organization, then, has little value for you, no?
Yes; little value.
Why do you stay?
It’s complicated.
Really?
No, not really.
See. It’s working.
For who?
Now we are getting somewhere.
Ezell now has the best of both worlds. The transparent push for funds outside the old CP funding channel and the continual push for CP funds. His mega friends can be very open and "in your face", in a kind manner of course, that they support SBC missions.
The great divide will come when churches like mine will decide if we want to bypass the state to support the national level completely or seek to designate more of our CP dollars to stay in the state.
The autonomy of the national convention needs to be careful and not tread on the autonomy of the state convention, association or local church. something I see they are walking a very thin line on right now.
Jon Estes
Post a Comment