God has clearly allowed [Kevin] Ezell [new NAMB CEO] the place of authority, and now it is your job (and mine), for your own sanctification in Christ (and mine), to submit to his authority at NAMB so long as he does not violate the Scriptures.
Sorry, not true. He has authority but not over me or any church.
Ezell has authority over Southern Baptist NAMB missions; and we should submit to his authority over this… OR, at the very least, we should submit to the majority of other Southern Baptist churches that have voted in favor of the GCR.
No, un-huh, nope.
There is no principle of submission to the authority of SBC leaders, or to decisions made at any SBC annual meeting, unless you are an employee. There is no principle that requires us to swallow any new policy or strategy. There is no biblical prohibition of criticism of denominational executives or policies.
Whatever level of support we give to Kevin Ezell and NAMB, Tom Elliff and the International Mission Board, or Frank Page, or Al Mohler or any state convention executive, or any associational leader is given voluntarily.
These people have to persuade us of the value of their work and ask for support. If they create new strategies, plans and policies they cannot demand support for them. They must instead explain why is it better and ask for our support.
SBC life may be driven by megachurch people and SBC leaders may all be former megachurch people but, meganoito, God forbid that we should grant to our leaders what some megachurch members grant to their megapastor – unquestioned authority.
Nope. Things don’t work that way.
Now I have yet to hear Ezell or any of the others ask Southern Baptists to submit to their authority, nor should they. Such would be unthinkable. While SBC entity leaders have authority within their own institutions and agencies and trustees have authority over what is given to their trust, none of this extends to the tiniest SBC church or the most plodding of SBC pastors.
No pastor, church, or layperson has to submit to any SBC resolution or motion passed by any SBC body.
No pastor, church, or layperson has to submit to and therefore forego criticism of any new policy, plan, strategy or vision adopted by any of our denominational employees or entities.
Rather, for the sake of the Lord’s work which we share in common among the tens of thousands of SBC churches and millions of SBC members, we absolutely ought to speak courteously but plainly about these things.
Like the new NAMB or dislike the new NAMB. Support the changes or not. We get to choose. Criticize or praise. It’s up to us.
And concerning Kevin Ezell and the new NAMB – trustees acted in accord with their authority and responsibility in making him CEO. One may like, dislike, or be ambivalent about that decision but it is done.
I don’t see the profit in making that decision an issue going forward, just don't tell me that the Bible somehow prohibits me from making that an issue.