There's irony in the air here, brethren...

...and some pretty heavy irony at that.

Here in the Peach State (on that, check the photo on our tags but don't let it out that more peaches are grown in a couple of counties in SC than in all of GA) our state convention leaders have agreed to some self-limitations on publication of nominees for state convention offices.

In 2011 the GBC had a hotly, but congenially contested election for the presidency of the convention. While the GBC has had to deal with declining budgets and  serious money shortfalls, there were no  correspondingly hot or controversial issues to be decided. 

Nonetheless, nominations were made by well known GBC personalities. Websites were put up. Endorsements were made. Online lists of endorsees were public for all to see who liked whom. Camps (Baptist talk for ecclesiastical cliques) were formed and energized. And heavy, heavy campaigning was conducted (I heard one of the two candidates say he had over 40 meet-and-greets scheduled around the state).

Good, old fashioned Baptist politicking. 

Everyone was gracious. The election was held. Someone won. Someone lost. I am informed that feelings were hurt and folks began to question the value and propriety of ten month campaigns.

So what has happened is that the GBC Executive Committee voted to call for a moratorium on endorsement of candidates until early September. Our state paper, The Christian Index, agreed to withhold publication of nominations until that date, eschew political ads completely, and only publish simple formulaic stories about candidates that include name, church name, Cooperative Program percentage, baptisms, along with one endorsement limited to 500 words.

All that is fine. Eight weeks is plenty long enough for me to decide who I will vote for. I suspect that the moratorium will hold until something really important is at stake in the GBC. I have no problem with our leaders attempting to dial down the politics.

Irony?

Have we forgotten? Conservatives wrote the book on denominational campaigning, starting back in 1979. We valued it then and never apologized for it. Now, as long as we are in the same general conservative camp, we're against it? 

Ironic.

The Christian Index, though not in recent years, has been a pretty blunt tool wielded in favor of one issue or one candidate or one camp or another. Editors have been told what to print and when to print it. 

Ironic.


Sometimes the word irony has the descriptive adjective "delicious" prefixed to it. This is a good spot for that.

 

Cutting the Baptist campaigning down in Georgia

My state convention, The Georgia Baptist Convention, is solidly conservative. There has not been a contested election between moderates and conservatives in years and years. But in 2011 there was a white hot political campaign for president, only between two very fine conservative pastors.

I wrote about that here.

When asking around about why the lengthy campaigns, the only answer I got was that there were competing insider groups among GBC conservatives, folks who wanted to be in charge or in a position to influence things in Georgia Baptist life.

The two candidates back in 2011 both had websites and extensive campaign events around the state. I attended one where the candidate said that he had over forty such events, meet and greets, planned beginning in the summer and going all the way to the convention in November.

Fact is, Baptists love to say that they really hate politics but the reality is that they love politics. The proof of that may easily be found in watching them.

Be all that as it may, now the GBC Executive Committee has voted to restrict political campaigning for GBC offices until two months prior to the annual meeting, usually in mid-November. No more of this summer campaign business.

Baptist Press reported the Christian Index story:  Ga. Baptists to limit campaigns to 8 weeks

The Executive Committee's unanimous vote Dec. 10 effectively reduces the campaign window, which had grown to 10 months, to eight weeks. The policy was approved by a unanimous vote of the 125-member group.

The new policy calls for a moratorium on the endorsement of any candidate until after the Sept. 10 GBC Executive Committee meeting. The policy also restricts The Christian Index, the convention's newsjournal, from publishing any article about candidates until that time and limits the amount of follow-up story coverage.

One little problem here...the GBC Executive Committee has absolute no power to prevent anyone from announcing his or her candidacy, to quash any campaign website, or even to prevent the Christian Index from printing such announcements or reporting on campaigns.

They do have a measure of bully pulpit power and they do have some degree of influence over the Christian Index mainly in regard to their budget, but no real power. Does any single Baptist anywhere let any state committee tell them what to do or say and when they can or cannot do it or say it? Nope.

It is a bit ironic, one must conclude, in that many of the heavy campaigners are now voting to restrict campaigns.  Further irony is in the fact that the Christian Index has in the past been the tool of political factions in our state.

I suspect that the Index trustees will go along with the Executive Committee's suggestion. Fact is, the Index and all state papers have been severely diminished in their circulation and thereby in their ability to influence things in the state conventions. Websites and blogs are widely read and may reach more Georgia Baptists who are interested in convention matters than any printed page. Then there are the hallway whisper campaigns, expected to continue unabated.

It is an interesting development. I'm guessing that Baptists are resourceful enough to squeeze a great deal of good, old fashioned Baptist campaigning even into an eight week period. It is one of those things that we just like to do.

We will find out later next year when the office of president in the GBC is up for grabs.

 

Volunteer nursery worker arrested...

...for failing to report an allegation of abuse at church in a timely manner.

It hasn't happened yet but surely will one of these days here in Georgia because our state has expanded the list of mandatory reporters. This article explains the law and says:

Volunteers at churches, colleges, clubs, summer camps or soccer fields or parents who chaperone a field trip could go to jail if they fail to report suspected abuse under the new provision approved by lawmakers last week.

Consider the recent case of a local high school principal, a position that has been a mandatory reporter of abuse for quite some time. After an underage girl told her school counselor of inappropriate behavior by a teacher, the counselor reported to the principal, who promptly called the school system HR director. It took several days of missed phone calls before the principal finally reported the alleged abuse.

The principal was subsequently arrested, charged with a misdemeanor, and retired. Her photograph, a mug shot, found its way to the local newspaper and online side-by-side with the teacher charged with felony child abuse.

If a school principal was not clear on the law consider the knowledge level of our typical church nursery, vacation Bible school, or other volunteer church worker, including the occasional chaperone for a children's day trip. Such folks may find themselves charged with a crime.

School systems have mandatory training for their employees. Hierarchical churches (check this article on the Episcopal church) do the same.

Southern Baptists?

State convention folks talk about it and hope churches and pastors pay attention. Our state paper, The Christian Index, has a brief article about the new law but it is unavailable without a subscription.


Picture one of your children's workers in 'Bad and Busted' for failing to report in a timely manner. Better yet, pastor, picture your face in 'Bad and Busted.'

Better get in gear on this one.

Why SBC churches eschew evangelists: NAMB?

Most SBC pastors and churches do not use vocational evanglelists. Less SBC churches use vocational evangelists than did ten years ago, twenty years ago. It is one of the longrunnng trends in SBC life.

How come? One might ask.

Let's ask Jerry Drace, one of the SBC's most distinguished vocational evangelists. Last month he offered an interesting column in The Christian Index entitled, "The SBC evangelist - an endangered species" in which he listed five reasons that he thinks SBC vocational evangelists are an endangered species. [I'd link it but cannot.]

"First," he wrote, "there is an existing attitude toward evangelists in certain areas of SBC leadership."

Huh?

I'm a pastor. I've had revivals most every year. I've used evangelists rarely but occasionally. I don't recall ever considering what any SBC leader thought about my choice or non-choice of a revival preacher.

Turns out that Drace had in mind for the "certain areas of SBC leadership" one Kevin Ezell and the North American Mission Board whose attitude towards evangelists consisted of their decision to cut funding for certain activities of the Conference of Southern Baptist Evangelists (COSBE).

What did they cut?

They stopped taking Cooperative Program and Annie Armstrong money, over $100,000, and using it to pay for travel, hotel, meal, and conference expenses for evangelists to attend the COSBE retreat held immediately prior to the SBC's annual meeting every June.

NAMB quits cutting hotel, food, and travel costs and that is why SBC evangelists are an endangered species?

I rather think not.

I doubt most Southern Baptists knew that part of their CP and AA gifts went to pay for hotels and meals for Drace and his fellow evangelists.

Ezell responded to Drace's article by stating that "our decision to no longer cover travel, hotel and reception costs for evangelists to meet and greet at the annual Southern Baptist meeting is not intended as a negative toward them – it is a way of keeping as many dollars focused on missionaries and new churches as we can."

Sounds like a better use of the money to me.

But, back to the SBC evangelist being an endangered species. If you ignore Drace's first one he is quite reasonable in his other four reasons:

Second, the current fashion in many churches forsakes sound biblical exposition with an evangelistic fervor.

Third, the lifestyle and requirements of those in full-time evangelism is vastly different from any other Christian calling. Since our calling is referred to as a “Faith Ministry” pastors often make off-handed and ill-advised statements regarding the financial necessities of the evangelist and his family.

Fourth, we as evangelists are often guilty of the demise of evangelistic events in the local church and area wide emphases in the community. Those with unscrupulous methods and deceitful messages hinder not only the advancement of the Kingdom, but encumber evangelists who have ministries of integrity.

Fifth, the challenge for our young men and women to answer the call to itinerant evangelism is almost non-existent in our churches and Southern Baptist institutions of higher learning.

I'll generally agree with Drace on four of five, too bad he expends 40% of his words on the one he lists first.

SBC pastors and evangelists don't eschew evangelists because of Kevin Ezell, NAMB, or any other SBC person or entity. We may be afraid to ask one. We may feel that we cannot afford one. We may have been stung in the past by disreputable ones. But we don't take our cues from SBC leadership.

Vocational evangelists in the SBC have been declining for decades, but not because of NAMB.
____________________________________

The full text of Drace's first reason is below:

"First," he wrote, "there is an existing attitude toward evangelists in certain areas of SBC leadership."


The latest Convention meeting in Phoenix saw the smallest number of evangelists gather in the history of the Conference of Southern Baptist Evangelists (COSBE). This was due in a large measure to the action taken by the current leadership of NAMB.

The traditional financial assistance for the COSBE retreat held the weekend before each Convention was withdrawn. Pastors, staff, and agency personnel have their Convention expenses covered in their budgets, but the evangelist must cover all expenses out of his or her own personal finances.

This action taken at NAMB was a spiritual “slap in the face” to those of us in full-time evangelism. It is a clear declaration of the current trend in the SBC toward the men and women who have given their lives to answering God’s call to full-time evangelism.

Since 1975 I have sat in scores of meetings with denominational leaders listening to how much the evangelist is needed and appreciated. I have heard countless times, “If we can ever help, we are here for you.” When you are young and naïve you believe it, but when you are seasoned you know better.

Lip service without feet service is like church planting without evangelism.

The New NAMB: Plant churches or 'Good bye!'

Like the new North American Mission Board of not, it is substantially different in significant ways.

Last year’s NAMB news was about emptying their Alpharetta, GA headquarters of considerable numbers of personnel to free up money for the job of church planting.

This year’s NAMB news may be in the sharper focus on church planting of personnel outside HQ. Back in June, Baptist Press reported (a reprint of a Christian Index story) on NAMB head Kevin Ezell’s plant to make job assignment changes for the considerable number of associational missionaries that NAMB funds:

About 250 directors of missions fully funded by NAMB will have their ministry assignments changed to "church planter catalyst." Ezell said the areas of the nation where most of them serve -- in heavily unchurched new work areas -- are where new churches are needed the most.

Use for an example of that assignment change what NAMB is doing with the Baptist Convention of New York. The Christian Index reported last week that the BCNY has seven associational missionaries who are fully or partly funded by NAMB. These people have been reassigned as church planting catalysts who have a goal of starting four churches per year in their associations.

In the past six years (2004-2010) the number of churches reported by the BCNY has increased by a total of thirty. If goals are met there will be about that many started in 2012 alone. That’s progress, and pressure.

Two things that might be said here. First, one of the problems identified by Ezell and the new NAMB was described as “soft” numbers in NAMB’s reporting of new congregations. One supposes that these new churches in New York will not be “soft” just to meet the goals. Second, what is to be done if goals are unmet?

Concerning the latter, here is what BP reported in June:

In most cases missionaries serving in director of missions positions will be allowed a year of transition, beginning in January 2012, to see if the new job description is a good fit. If not, they can retire or decide to find other ministry opportunities.

NAMB to AMs: 'You've got one year.'

I wouldn’t want the pressure, unless I was called to the task and confident in the Lord working to get churches started in the BCNY.

Well, a focus on church planting was the intent of the Great Commission Resurgence report. It was what Kevin Ezell said he would do. Here's the reality on the ground in the BCNY. Presumably, NAMB intends to do the same for the other 243 associational missionaries that they fund.

Want a pressure cooker job? There might be some available soon.

Shall SBC churches defund Southern Seminary and Al Mohler?

Shall Southern Baptist churches defund Southern Seminary and Al Mohler?

Well, no, I don't think that is even remotely called for, but here in Georgia one prominent church answers “yes” and has defunded both SBTS and Southeastern Seminary. The Georgia Baptist Convention allows for such and for continuing to label a church’s giving as Cooperative Program even though the church wants to designate around up to two SBC entities.

Abilene Baptist has informed the GBC that they wish for their CP gifts to not go to SBTS and SEBTS. Their pastor, Bill Harrell is a former SBC Executive Committee chairman.

Why?

Reasons were stated: SBTS is a “breeding ground” for Calvinists; the pastor doesn’t want to help start Acts 29 churches, and he objects to the Great Commission Giving category. Another GA pastor says that this may represent a “seismic shift in SBC life.”

My fellow Georgia Baptist, Peter Lumpkins, sees this as a very significant move and as indicative of the disaffection of a large segment in SBC life. (Link here and one might note the lengthy comment stream generated by that blog article).

Plodder thinks not but understands that when some pastors get something in their own mind they might project it onto the rest of us and consider it “seismic.” We will see. I would speculate that some of the more strident anti-Mohler voices will take Mohler's recent commentary on the SBC and homosexuality and start with the same kind of squawking.

We all know that Southern Baptist conservatives are well steeped in is designated giving and not a few have itchy CP trigger fingers. I don't see anything worth pulling the trigger over here.

[The Christian Index first carried this news on June 2nd. I cannot locate the story on their site or I would link it.]

Ezell ambivalent about Acts29 and other pre-convention NAMB news

Update: Baptist Press has picked up this story - EZELL INTERVIEW: Goal is to make NAMB 'first choice of church planters everywhere'

The Christian Index is about a fifteen minute drive from the sparkling North American Mission Board headquarters and the paper usually is pretty close to NAMB happenings. The paper interviewed NAMB leader Kevin Ezell (sorry, unavailable online unless you subscribe). Exerpts and observations:

NAMB’s Priorities
Ezell and NAMB are more focused on church planting rather than a hundred other things, good things, aiming to put 50% of its resources in church planting. Despite the chicken little pronouncements coming from some, the figure is now about 38%. Getting to 50% will “stretch us,” says Ezell.

Honesty in Numbers
How’s the church planting been going? Ezell says that NAMB has been reporting 1,400 to 1,600 plants annually “for years” but that these are “soft” figures. He says that the “numbers we report may be less than previous years but we believe they will be more accurate.”

Give the man a trophy for saying that he believes that the truth is more important than impressing people with “soft” figures. Ask the Baptist General Convention of Texas about “soft” church planting numbers which for them translated into hard dollars, millions of them squandered on phantom church plants.

Legacy staffing
NAMB fully funds about 250 Directors of Missions. These will have a year to transition to “church planter catalyst.” If the new job description is not a good fit they can “retire or decide to find other ministry opportunities.”

“We are looking at newer, more efficient ways of working that do not require additional staff,” says Ezell.

Are we sure this guy is a Southern Baptist agency head and not some alien? A CEO who doesn’t want to grow his staff? Give the man another trophy.

The Acts 29 Network
Critics have dogged Kevin Ezell and the North American Mission Board about the Acts 29 Network, a church planting network that at least one NAMB plant (Grace Baptist Church, Boston) has affiliated with. The complaint is that our Annie Armstrong and Cooperative Program dollars are going to folks involved with this group who are calvinists, or who drink alcohol, or who cuss or some other stuff.

Ezell expresses ambivalence, “[NAMB] missionary participation in the Network does not concern Ezell one way or the other, he neither endorses or criticizes such involvement.” Plodder mades a safe prediction that this stance will be unacceptable to strident Acts 29 opponents.

Ezell: “We plant Southern Baptist churches that adhere to the Baptist Faith and Message and support the Cooperative Program” and “We don’t ask our planters who or what groups they associate with…”

Give the Index and Ezell credit for meeting this head-on.

The rising stock of Kevin Ezell and our North American Mission Board

If you are the president of the North American Mission Board you go to work in a suburb of Atlanta named Alpharetta. Your office is about 20 minutes from the Georgia Baptist Building in another suburb of Atlanta, Duluth. Your employees are members of Georgia Baptist churches around Atlanta and you're smart enough to know that they rub shoulders with GBC employees.

You’re also savvy enough to understand that denominational employees, folks who work for you and whom you pass in the hallways in Alpharetta, aren’t afraid to talk about their work. You probably understand that if they are unhappy they will find an outlet to express it.

Not having been born yesterday and probably being seasoned to such things as a pastor, you are well aware that the Georgia Baptist paper, The Christian Index, has an office in the GBC HQ in Duluth and that the editor, Gerald Harris, has been friends with some of your employees for years. You presume that friends talk. You also know that Harris and The Index has given close scrutiny to goings on at NAMB and hasn’t hesitated to print the results of such scrutiny.

You probably understand the need for some old-fashioned schmoozing with Gerald.

Sorry, Plodder doesn’t have a schmooze report for Kevin Ezell and Gerald Harris but it carries weight with him when Gerald Harris says that

“Ezell’s stock is rising.”

Harris reaches vast numbers of SBCers, thousands, with The Christian Index. I reach, well, dozens and have been quite critical of NAMB over the past few years. They have deserved it. No SBC entity has deserved to be criticized more so than NAMB and they still have some work to do to regain my complete trust.

But from this distance, I join Harris in viewing Kevin Ezell’s stock as rising. HQ personnel have been cut, a good move, though painful. Baby NAMBs have been established, jury is out on those but this is what was expected. NAMB has acutely sharpened their focus on church planting, something that was needed. We will see how it goes.

But what I like best about Harris’ evaluation of Ezell is his description of him as being open and transparent. If we have a leader who is genuinely open and transparent, that will go a long way to restoring trust in our sadly dysfunctional agency.

My church is collecting an Annie Armstrong Easter Offering for North American Missions, the thirtieth consecutive year that a church I pastor has done so. We may not exceed last year’s total – things are extremely tight – but I feel better about NAMB than I did this time last year.

I believe I will hang onto my stock in Kevin Ezell and NAMB and watch it’s value rise.