(Quick info: Tomorrow I am part of an interfaith trialogue (named "Caution Needed: Please Think Responsibly) at the Great Hall at UNC-Chapel Hill. A rabbi, an imam and myself will be answering questions about the role of religion in society, the difference in religions, and how to know truth in a confused world. Open to all… would love to see you there. Doors open at 6:30 in the Great Hall of the Student Union right there on the quad.)
I serve on the Great Commission Resurgence Task Force for the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC). Our responsibility is to offer guidance as to how the cooperative efforts of like-minded churches can thrive in the next generation. People often note (correctly) that "denominations" are not in the Bible. That is true, but cooperation is biblical, and "conventions" are a way like-minded Christians can cooperate together. As Jesus taught, we can do much more when all the parts of the body is working together than we can do alone.
I was recently asked, in a discussion panel, what I hope the SBC looks like in 5 years. It was a good question, and here is what my answer is:
- I want to see a Convention where initiative is restored to the local churches. Good parachurch ministries FACILITATE the ministry of the church.
BAD parachurch takes ministry from a local church and does it for her.
Bad parachurch says, "Give us money and people and we'll do ministry
for you."In my opinion, the SBC has, in many places, descended
into a “bad parachurch” model. The perception is that local churches
should give, send people, and allow the institutions to do the work.Many
pastors, particularly younger ones, are no longer content with that
model. They believe that the Great Commission was given to them, not to
the denomination. They want to use cooperative networks to plant
churches, but they don’t want the networks to do the work for them. - I see a convention that is defined by, and known for, cooperation in international and domestic church planting, not boycotts or politics.
I also want to see us give our time and energies mostly to things inside our 'core competencies.' Our church does not believe that everything we do has to have its genesis in a Southern Baptist church or institution. A lot of the "non-Baptist" body of Christ has produced helpful literature and ministry resource we should use and not attempt to re-invent.
The one thing that we do best with other "Baptist" churches is plant churches.
Whenever a "corporation" gets away from its core competencies, it turns into a hairball of inefficiency. Things that don't propel the mission of the SBC, things that just don't work, or things that are done just as well by other parts of the body of Christ ought to be carefully examined, and be open to re-engineering or elimination.
It's not that any of these things are bad things, it's just that they keep us from doing efficiently the 'one' thing that we come together for.
Obviously, that is not a full and exhaustive description, but these are at the core of what I hope to see in the SBC of the future.
For more on this, see:
- The New Young Southern Baptist: Orthodox, Connected, Unconventional
- Why we desperately need a Great Commission Resurgence 1 2
- The SBC as GM and a Shopping Mall
- A Time to Sacrifice
Yes, conventions and cooperation are both great and biblical. However, as you said, denominations are not. Why can’t we just drop the name “Baptist” out of “SBC” and replace it with something that points to Christ?
Would it be so terrible to just call ourselves what the Apostles called themselves in Scripture, and what the first church called itself? It’s not like the Christians didn’t have disagreements back then in the first church. Sometimes they even parted ways to minister. Regardless, what we call ourselves by to the world should point to Christ first, no matter how great John the Baptist was or how wonderful baptism is. The SBC needs to let its name point to the one it (allegedly) serves.
Then again, maybe dropping the name without changing the underlying reasons why it is there in the first place would be like giving aspirin to a gunshot victim, like treating the symptoms instead of the illness. On second thought… keep the name… a conservative resurgence wouldn’t be the same without one.
Shoot. If we are going to get rid of something lets get rid of the word “Southern.” That word is outdated, inaccurate, and extremely regional for a convention that is trying to make disciples of all nations.
The reality is the majority of our churches are content to just pray and give. The churches that actively want to plant churches are still relatively small in number compared to the average SB church. What % of our SBC churches have planted a church or taken a mission trip in the last 5 years. While I would prefer to see them get on board with missions and church planting personally, at the very least I would like for them to continue to pray and give. My concern is that as you return this responsibility to the local church, many local churches will find reasons why they can’t do it and ultimately the funding we have been receiving for our missionaries and church plants will disappear.