Did that get your attention?

This post is not specifically about the SBC or even the local church trying to hold on to the 1950′s, but it could be. Actually, this post is about… the US Post Office.

The Washington Post has revealed that the Post Office is doing its best, despite laws that prevent it from lobbying, to thwart legislation in several states that would create a “Do Not Mail” list, similar to the “Do Not Call” list(s) that prevent unsolicited sales calls at your home. It’s like a spam filter for your “snail mail” inbox: the mailbox at your house.

What’s the problem? The Post Office has revealed that “standard mail” – or junk mail – has become its life blood. It needs junk mail to survive.

The Post’s story also reveals that environmental groups are not in favor of decreasing junk mail. Why? They are junk mailers.

So let’s review:

1. Culture no longer operates in the same way it used to because technology has changed the way people think and communicate.
2. Institution still wants to exist, and fights to keep doing what it has been doing, despite the fact that those it was created to serve no longer need it or want it to do that anymore.
3. Some people claim to want the betterment of mankind, but stick to an institution that works against their cause because they perceive they need it to exist themselves. Yet if they would progress in their communication style, they could be internally consistent, which would help those they are reaching toward to not think them disconnected and hypocritical.

[edit]

I forgot to add point four: Thrash about for life as it may, the institution will survive for a while, but will ultimately be something else. Either it will adapt itself to its context, or it will diminish.

[/edit]

Thoughts?

After more than two years of what has become frustrating and painful opposition, Wade Burleson has announced that he will willingly do what the powers that be inside the International Mission Board of Trustees have wanted, called for, attempted and thus far failed: the removal of Burleson from the trusteeship of the IMB.

Several observations.

First, Wade is probably past due for this. He kept trying to work with people who didn’t want to work with him. In the end, if people in authority want to shut you out, they can. The IMBOT can and did. It amazes me that he still desires to INCREASE his church’s cooperative efforts and continues to encourage others to do the same. The more they shut him out, the more he wants to cooperate.

Secondly, I would not expect the IMB to be less under the scrutiny of the SBC, but more. Wade offered to shut down his blog. I suppose they stood on principle in asking that he apologize for intentionally breaking the anti-dissent policy passed last year, and in so doing repeatedly rejected his offer, though it was their cheif complaint. Nevertheless, Wade has exposed that he has gone a long way toward them and they seemed unwilling to move toward him at all. Thus, they’ve finally “martyred” him to the ultimate level and now he is free to discuss the IMB without any restrictions.

Thirdly, as a result of Wade’s freedom from restriction, you might expect the infamous notebooks containing evidence of wrongdoing to surface. I know of just a few tidbits of information contained therein, and they are pretty explosive. Wade, treasuring the SBC as he does, may withhold them. I think this is, and always has been, a mistake. However, contrary to the constant assertion that there was a tight coalition of “reformation” minded bloggers that were structured and in lock step, we never were anything but independent thinkers going in a similar direction – which explains why Wade never listened to me or anyone else (Marty) when we encouraged him (and Ben and CB) to let the people know the truth about what is going on and release his (their) evidence.

Fourthly, there will be a slew of people begging Wade to run for President of the SBC. I think this would likely be a mistake as it would create a race between two galvanizing forces: Wade and Al.(1) It would not be helpful to the convention, and I don’t think he can win. Name recognition alone would carry Dr. Mohler. If another, more palatable option arises(2), Wade will be H. Ross Perot and suck away enough votes to guarantee a win for Dr. Mohler.

Fifthly, I think, despite Wade’s encouragement to cooperate MORE with the SBC, many will choose to cooperate less. That is not to say everyone will leave altogether. Those not happy with the status quo will most likely begin to diversify their cooperative dollars among other networks as well as the SBC and will no longer be satisfied with only sending CP dollars and taking up Special Offerings for SBC mission efforts. As a result, CP giving and the Special Offerings will decline, per capita, though they may continue to slowly rise overall, for a time.

I said it many times over the last several years, but it is still unheeded. In this battle, if “they”(3) win, they lose. To quote Bowden McElroy, “The SBC will survive. What it will look like is not yet determined.”

_____________________________________________________

1 – While I think Al Mohler is a scholar of the first rate and is highly qualified to be the President of one of our Seminaries, I object to his becoming the President of the SBC in that there is a conflict of interest in his appointing those who appoint those supposed to provide him oversight: the SBTS BOT; he has repeatedly focused on, and spoken out for, things not central to the mind of the SBC: Public School Exit Strategy (frequently dismissed in the form of a resolution at the annual meeting), the idea that a Christian couple’s decision not to have children is “sin,” and the recently revealed piece of information that, although the Southern Baptist Convention was founded and thrives on missions, Dr. Mohler has never taken the Gospel beyond his local context. No, I don’t count appearances on news shows, even nationally televised ones, as mission work. “Speaking prophetically” to our culture is not missions.

2- I do not consider Bill Wagner a viable alternative. He is a Seminary employee, thus raising the Conflict of Interest objection,[edit: Wagner has moved on, as noted in the comment section. My apologies.] He is not well known and I don’t think he stands a chance against almost anyone else. No one from “the other side” is taking him seriously, or they would be trying to discredit him. That should say something in itself.

3 – The “Powers That Be,” the “Inner Circle,” or those who still seek to narrow the parameters of our cooperation to a standard that is comfortable for them, but intolerable to the rest of us.

My friend and colleague, Joe Ball – Youth guru for the Kentucky Baptist Convention – has posted some more interesting data about church health. This is not necessarily about “leaving the church” so it doesn’t get that designation. In fact, it is moderately upbeat in terms of solutions rather than simply diagnosing the problems.

These are 7 megatrends in church health given by Thom Rainer, President of Lifeway, to the State Executive Directors last month (Dec. ’07).

1. The disappearance of 18-24 year olds in church. Rainer said LifeWay Research has well documented the dropout trends of this age group, and while the church has always seen a drop as young people transition from school to the workforce, “there are solutions emerging.”
2. The growth in the multi-venue and multi-campus church. This trend is accelerating, Rainer noted.
3. The desire for deeper biblical doctrinal studies. “Those in our churches are asking for preaching with biblical depth in addition to life application,” Rainer said. In an attempt to grow their numbers, “churches are trying to get by with shallow teaching,” resulting in “shallow churches with shallow members.”
4. The slowdown in the growth rate of mega churches. “Not a decrease in the number of mega churches,” Rainer clarified, “but a slowing in the rate of growth.”
5. The shortage of pastors. Some seminary graduates “don’t see themselves in rural, white collar, or traditional churches,” Rainer noted. “Some states are already seeing a crisis” among traditional churches.
6. The increasing demand for processes. “Churches are asking for help to put resources together,” Rainer noted. “Churches are saying: ‘Don’t just give us products, show how I disciple this young believer.’”
7. The resurgence of the “open group” in church. “Traditionally we’ve called it Sunday school,” Rainer said, but it may not always be called Sunday school today. Regardless of what you call it, there is a resurgence of the open group in church

I’ve done, now, several posts on young people leaving church (pt. 1, pt. 2, remix, remix redux), but now Lifeway has produced some data revealing that young people are dropping the convention (at least the annual meeting) as well. That is to say, these stats reflect, not that young people are leaving the SBC (that would be the implication of the previous studies referenced), but that young Southern Baptists are absent during the annual meeting.

Scott McConnell said it best in the article when he said, “The general trend is the aging of attendees at the Southern Baptist Convention.” I think I say it better: People aren’t leaving the convention (annual meeting), they just aren’t starting. The surey shows that the same group of people who surged to the meeting back during the CR have remained very faithful to the meeting year after year.

Ed Stetzer, as usual, has a pointed insight:

“Oddly enough, in some quarters there has actually been a debate about whether the SBC attendance is aging and losing its young leaders,” Stetzer said. “Of course, facts don’t convince everyone. My hope is that now, finally, we will stop debating and instead ask the hard question: ‘What is causing so many young leaders to stay away?’

Allow me to speak for myself here, if not for Younger Leaders(1), and answer the question of the day, voiced by Ed.

The SBC I grew up in was a culture and environment that valued the Word of God as Inerrant. The current SBC is a place where the reading of an Inerrant Word is no longer Sufficient, but particular applications(2) of God’s Word have now become divisive – the various resolutions, lawsuits and consistent misrepresentations of others being most openly experienced at the meeting itself.

Moreover, the SBC in which I was raised taught me that the purpose of our organizing as a convention was to better reach the world for Christ. If you have read much of what I have written over the last two years, it comes as no surprise that I perceive the SBC to be regularly marginalizing our missions efforts by prioritizing petty power plays over the smooth implication of our global strategy. Excuse me, our international strategy. We still do not have a unified strategy of reaching the world. Back to the power plays, the censuring of Wade Burleson AFTER he offered to resign and quit blogging right before the Lottie Moon offering is our latest, greatest example.

It does go much deeper than Wade and the IMB, however. The former practice of Inner Circle chosen Presidents running unopposed sends the message loud and clear to young leaders that they are not needed. Now that the practice has been put to an end, is that enough to draw out younger leaders from the next generation?

Unfortunately, it is not the only thing that YSBC (Young SBC) wants or needs from the annual meeting. In terms of missionality, younger leaders want to spend their limited conference time and money on that which will help them accomplish being more missional as well as leading their church to be more missional.(3) At this point, the Pastor’s Conference is anything but useful to that end. Typically, it is the same people encouraging us to do the same things only harder, and I just don’t buy it. I suspect that leaders younger than I buy even less.

All of this begs the question, “Can we fix it?”(4) My answer? I honestly don’t know. At this point, I am rapidly losing my concern with the survival of the SBC and have elevated to top priority the survival of the Gospel in America, western culture and the world.(5) IF the SBC is capable of bringing it’s focus alongside mine and causing the annual meeting to be beneficial to me in pursuing the priorities I have expressed, then it will be worth the time and money to attend. Unless it does, it will not.

I do think I will be at Indy this year, but only because the election of this year’s president will, in my mind, make the difference as to whether or not it is possible to become relevant again. I feel I owe that much. Beyond that, I have no long term plans.

I hope that answers Ed’s question.

*note about comments: At this point, my hosting company seems to be on holiday vacation. The corrupted comment table (thus the ability to comment) may not be up until later in the week.

———–ENDNOTES—————————-

1. It should be noted that I am now 41, and not a Younger Leader by any sense of the word. I am not claiming a voice from their perspective.

2. Please note that I did not use the word “interpretations”. Even now among Southern Baptists, very few interpretations are in dispute. It is the application of the interpretation that now often divides us.

3. They would not mind, I suspect, if people on the podium understood the concept instead of simply parroting it as a new “buzz word” throughout the week.

4. That is to say, if your mind doesn’t jump to the next question, “Should we fix it?”

5. America and western culture because that is where I live and I am called to evangelize wherever I am. The world, because I am also called to evangelize where I am not by going there with the good news.

This is not primarily about the BGCO annual meeting, but I am following up on some stuff from there.

I have been seemingly driven to a point of amazing clarity about the reality of our world and the ability of us – Christians, Baptists, any other number of smaller collectives – to reach that world.

When I went to observe New Bethany Baptist Church in Buford, GA (Pastor, Marty Duren), one of the unique things being done there was that the staff was studying a book together and they discussed it after the calendar portion of staff meeting. The book they were reading was “UnChristian” by David Kinnaman and the Barna Research Group. A couple of weeks ago, Marty called me and told me to drop what I was reading, pick up that book and read chapter 4. That was eye opening.

Some amazing things were revealed to me. Primarily, though, that the things we often do as “evangelism” are actually counter productive. Check this quote from a section of myths and realities (pg. 71).

Myth: Anything that brings people to Christ is worth doing.

Reality: When you are talking dollars, there is no price too high for a soul. But the problem isn’t just cost. In our research with some of the leading “mass evangelism” efforts, we found that often these measures create three to ten times as much negative response as positive. [emphasis Kinnaman] In other words, imagine your church is considering mailing Bibles or videos or other Christian materials to homes in your community. Our research shows that the “collateral damage” of doing so – those whose impressions of your church and of Christianity would be more negative as a result – is significantly greater than the positive impact on those who will respond to these efforts. Moreover, such mass evangelism efforts are most effective with marginally churched adults, while outsiders are usually the ones who respond most negatively.

In other words, our effectiveness is with people who are already church members, but who don’t attend. So we can get them to switch to our church and not attend there. Brilliant. On the other hand, the backlash among lost people means that the things we often do in the name of evangelism actually serves to distance the lost further from the Gospel.

Hmmmm.

Then, I went to the BGCO and heard something about us declining. I have received confirmation from Randy Adams – prompt and very helpful – of the decline of Southern Baptists. Here is a quote from an article that was published in the Baptist Messenger (OK’s Baptist Paper):

In 1980, baptisms recorded by Oklahoma Baptist churches totaled 24,803. In 2005, that total had decreased to 15,916, a decline of 36 percent. When examined in five year increments, one discovers that the decline has been quite consistent over the 25 years, with largest drop occurring between 1980 and 1985. Even more telling is the fact that Oklahoma’s population has increased by 17 percent over the same period, a total of 522,594 people. Thus, the decline in baptisms is approximately 50 percent when population growth is considered. That means that we are baptizing half as many people today, as a percent of the population, than we did twenty-five years ago.

The numbers are even more telling when examined by age-group. The decline is steepest in the 18-29 age grouping, dropping from 6,226 baptisms in 1980 to 2,184 in 2005, a sickening 65 percent decline. Next is the 9-11 age-grouping, where baptisms have dropped from 4,687 to 2,798 for a 40 percent decline. In the 12-17 age-group the decline is 7,014 baptisms to 4,282 for a 39 percent decline. Among the 30-59 age-group the decline begins to flatten out at 12 percent, from 3,792 to 3,322. The only areas of increase in baptisms are those under six years of age, with a seven percent increase to 148 baptisms, and those over age 60, with a 13 percent increase, totaling 676 baptisms.

Upon hearing this, the fire that was being kindled in my mind about our ability (or lack thereof) to reach the lost had begun to be fueled. On top of that, I was directed by some church members to an article in the Tulsa World, Southern Baptists: New Law Won’t Change Ministry, about a resolution I was proud to support. The resolution was basically that we would put the Kingdom first when ministering to the lost – regardless of their situation. This is in response to HB 1804, which is designed to combat those who employ or aid illegal immigrants. The problem is that churches that “minister” to illegals could potentially be prosecuted for doing so – or that is the concern, anyway. The gist of the resolution is that we support the government, but ministry is our command in the Kingdom and the Kingdom (and the people to whom we are sent) are our first priority.

The interesting thing about the story is that it gives a bullet list of other resolutions at the end of a very positive piece and readers who are now allowed to comment take the opportunity to absolutely trash Southern Baptists, until one or two step in and mention the Disaster Relief work that Souther Baptists do. Check ‘em out. It’s eye opening.

As a result, I prepared my Sermon for this week: All Things to All People. Obviously, it is about giving up our rights to spread the message in a way that is comfortable to us. We are, in fact, compelled by Scripture to spread the message in a way that is effective at the sacrifice of our comfort.

At the end of the evening on Saturday, I was finishing up my power point when I went to check on my wife, working on a Grad School project. She was watching a You Tube video and it was, to be blunt, challenging to the core.

I want the video to be the last thing in the post so let me write my conclusion first. The world, our culture, is running away from us at light speed. It isn’t coming back. If we don’t drop every hint of baggage right now and sprint toward the future, we will be irrelevant before we know it. It is hard to recognize this reality, because life is still a lot like it was 50 years ago – lights, indoor plumbing, cars, phones – or even twenty years ago – microwave ovens, home computers, etc.

Anyway, we must recognize that we are rapidly changing. We can’t row a boat in an airplane age. In fact, we need to recognize that water, in this analogy, no longer exists, and boats only cause us to look insane to those around us. Don’t believe me?

Watch this:

As promised, the Frank Page audio is now available here.

I particularly appreciated Dr. Page’s genuine sincerity. He is not a politician, and I mean that in the best way.

Pay close attention to the answers Dr. Page gives in the first grouping of questions. Right out of the box, he says some honest things about the person the SBC chooses to succeed him as president: their motivations and their representation of the SBC to the world.

He does mention “Younger Leaders” who were demanding a “place at the table.” Of course, that was interesting to me, since the old SBC Bloggers (the reformers, anyway) consistently eschewed places of service for the sake of integrity and because, frankly, we realized that we were more divisive than was good for the SBC, were we to be placed in leadership. Well, that was my view, anyway, and I perceived it to be the view of my compatriots.(1)

I was unable to follow up on that statement at the time, but did email Dr. Page and mention this to him, asking him if there were bloggers that were “demanding a seat at the table.” Dr. Page emailed me back with this statement:

“I am happy to say that the young guys I have seen demanding a share of power are not amongst the bloggers I know.”

I am grateful for that clarification, since it was frequently the accusation used against us when we were all still in the SBC Blogging business.

In the middle of the Q&A, there was a question posed about an IMB missionary’s personal situation. Dr. Page was asked to address it, which he did graciously. After he answered the question – off the microphone – he was asked if he could help someone in the association talk to someone at the IMB to make sure the situation was right and he agreed to set up a meeting. I was a bit uncomfortable with that being brought out in this setting, but thought Dr. Page handled it well without committing to one side of the story. On the other hand, the person asking probably didn’t know that the session was being recorded, much less put on the internet.

Anyway, it is what it is, and we thank Dr. Page for his time and candor.

Check for the audio at the bottom of the post.

————————————–

(1) Just so you know, I have served now in the BGCO and am serving the TMABC. Since I no longer blog SBC politics regularly, I also no longer eschew positions offered. Since I am now much lower profile, though, no national level positions are being offered, so that has all worked out well for everyone, I suppose.

Q & A in Frank Page [ 31:46 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

The Q&A with Dr. Page was recorded and I am looking to procure that recording at the end of the week. Since I hosted the Q&A, along with Jim Stratton, I was not able to take notes.

I don’t want Dr. Page held responsible for any misrepresentation, however unintentional, I might make if I blogged it from memory.

In the meantime, enjoy this picture of Dr. Page preaching on Sunday night and a few thoughts of mine.

I am always impressed by Dr. Page’s sincerity and lack of sinful pride. One of the questions was about what he hoped his legacy would be. His answer was something along the lines of, “I don’t want a legacy. I mean that. When my time is done, I hope to slip back into obscurity and go back to pastoring my church. There are things that I hope continue, but I don’t need them to be attributed to me.”

Also, I always appreciate his candor and lack of polish when it comes to convention politics. He’s pretty honest about the way he sees things and doesn’t try to sugar coat them, all the while trying to avoid speaking negatively about anyone. He reaffirmed his commitment to that.

I’ll post the whole audio when I get it.

During a recent conversation, I compared the SBC President’s job after the election to that of someone running for the US Presidency prior to the election. They travel constantly, fit their job in as they are able and deliver a stump speech wherever they stop. I’ve heard a couple of stump speeches from Dr. Page, and, to his great credit, he keeps them as fresh as possible. They are never exactly the same and it is clear that he believes what he is saying. Below are the notes from the sermon delivered at the TMABC’s annual meeting on Sunday, October 7, 2007. I’ll give more detail to the introduction and then outline the sermon.

80% of churches in America, regardless of denomination, are plateaued or in decline.

When I arrived at FBC Taylors, they were among the 80%. They had never split or had any major catastrophe, but they had nto done anything of much note either. They had never started a church, either intentionally or unintentionally. Now they start one new church a year. Now they are 2 1/2 times what they were when I came. Last year was the greatest year in baptizing, ever, and that was with me gone all the time. I think I found the secret, it’s for me to be gone more.

We started a free medical clinic – FREE. Everything that happens there is free. We have a Hispanic work and several of the first families the we reached through that start came from the free clinic.

We have a partnership in Calgary, Canada. We have a partnership with the 18 (?) SBC churches in Maine.

I’m here to tell you, that God can resurrect a church.

I don’t play golf. If you want to waste your time, you are welcome to do it. I did hear a great joke, though, recently. A guy was playing golf and rared back to swing. He swung so hard he missed the ball entirely, but hit the ground – in fact he hit an anthill. Thousands of ants met their doom. The man got frustrated, rared back again and swung even harder. Again he hit the anthill, killing thousands more innocent ants. Before he could swing again, one of the two surviving ants looked at the other and asked, “What are we gonna do?” The other ant replied, “If we don’t get on the ball, we’re gonna die!”

If we don’t get on the ball, we are going to die!

Referenced Luke 13 where Jesus cites two horrific stories and then the question if their suffering was because of their sin? It was common at the time to assume that where there was much suffering, there was much sin. Also referenced Job’s friends, who baited Job, asking for a confession. Referenced his daughter’s cancer last year (doing fine now) and asked, was it because of sin?

No.

Nevertheless, I say to you, repent or you will perish. We must repent or we will perish.

A recent projection shows that 40 -50 percent of our churches could be gone in just 20 years.

We need to get on the ball.

Luke 13:6-8 The Parable of the Barren Fig Tree

6 And He told this parable: ^(F) “A man had a fig tree that was planted in his vineyard. He came looking for fruit on it and found none. ^(G) 7 He told the vineyard worker, ‘Listen, for three years I have come looking for fruit on this fig tree and haven’t found any. Cut it down! ^(H) Why should it even waste the soil? ^(I) ‘

8 “But he replied to him, ‘Sir, ^[b] leave it this year also, until I dig around it and fertilize it. ^(J) 9 Perhaps it will bear fruit next year, but if not, you can cut it down.’ ” -HCSB

The fig tree was planted, not volunteer (in a vineyard, not wild on the property)

• It was there for a purpose
• It was not ornamental
• It was not for shade
• It was there to bear fruit

The result of failure was drastic

• It was to be cut down and cast out
• It was useless
• The greatest condemnation is not for those who do wrong, but for those who do nothing
• It took up resources that others could have used (KJV – It cumbereth the ground)
• It was a hindrance

Though it deserved to be cut down, it receives one more chance

• The vineyard worker intervened
• It was spared not for the value of the tree
• It was spared not for the Master’s inbility to evaluate it’s worth
• It was spared at the intervention of the vineyard worker
• Praise God, we have a vineyard worker, Jesus, who is ready to dig out and fertilize the roots, prune what is dead, and draw fruit from unproductive trees

We are in the midst of God’s resources and, though we don’t often recognize it, He surrounds us with all that we could ever hope for, if we would be obedient and trust in Him.

This past Sunday night, Tulsa Metro Association had its annual meeting at Evergreen Baptist Church – planted here almost 8 years ago – in their new building.

The cool thing about TMABC is their Missional Posture. I’ve blogged about this before, so if you want the full detail, check it out. If you don’t want to read the whole deal, it boils down to downsizing bureaucracy and re-investing our partnership money back into the churches. It’s based on the idea that churches are effective in ministry and bureaucracies aren’t.

We have four priorities around which we are organized: Church Strengthening, Staff Support, Leadership Development and Church Planting. We own no entities and are about to sell our building. We have no line items in our budget – each of the priority teams have lump sums that they distribute throughout the year.

One of the best things that we do is continue to equip our Pastors (and therefore our churches) by bringing in phenomenal missional speakers like Ed Stetzer last year, Reggie McNeal a month ago and Milfred Minatrea at this year’s meeting.

We also had Frank Page in this year. He spoke Sunday night and fielded questions for a lunchtime Q&A on Monday. I am always impressed when I talk to Dr. Page. He is honest, humble and kind. He has great hope for the SBC and for the world.

This afternoon, I will post on both of Dr. Page’s sessions. Tomorrow, I will post on Milfred Minatrea’s sessions with us. In fact, I may turn Thursdays into Missional Minatrea Day for a while and unpack some of the things he gave us during the day long session.

I’m putting off the response to the “Inviting the Lost to Church” post for a little bit. I’ll probably answer later this week, but I definitely have some thoughts – especially to what has already been posted. If you missed it, you might want to check it out or even add to the discussion here.

In the meantime, I am privileged to host a Q&A with our SBC President during the Tulsa Metro Association of Baptist Churches Leadership Dialog in conjunction with our annual meeting. Dr. Page and Dr. Milfred Minatrea will be with us this coming Sunday night for the annual meeting and the following day for the Leadership Dialog.

The Q&A will take place during lunch on Monday. Not wanting dead time with no questions, I have been asked to have several questions prepared to ask Dr. Page to get or keep the ball rolling, so to speak.

So here’s your chance. What would you like to ask Dr. Page?

Pointed and relevant questions are welcome. Agenda driven questions are not. Recognize the difference? I hope so.

Looking forward to hearing from you.

I’ll not be live blogging, obviously, but I will try and post the answers after the meeting.