Executive Committee | Jerry Rankin Blog

Archive for Executive Committee

Did Anything Really Happen?

Posted by: admin | Comments (14)

Monday, June 21st, 2010

What’s wrong with this picture?

All afternoon messengers to the SBC attentively followed the debate, passionately concerned about the outcome of recommendations by the Great Commission Resurgence Task Force. It was the highest attendance in eight years and a clear majority endorsed changes that should enable us to impact lostness across America and around the world.

Yet, that night as the time for the IMB report approached it seemed that half the convention center exited. Did they really not care to hear what was being done to reach unengaged people groups and celebrate the impressive response to the gospel being seen overseas? Are they unconcerned about what their missionaries are doing as they go out on their behalf to labor in threatening and hostile areas to fulfill the Great Commission? The next night’s attendance of those hearing the North American Mission Board report was the sparsest crowd of any session.

Categories : Executive Committee, GCR, IMB, NAMB, SBC, missions

Comments (14)

The Morning After—Reflections on the SBC

Posted by: admin | Comments (9)

Thursday, June 17th, 2010

The last three days have been a blur as a whirlwind of events were interspersed around marathon preaching and SBC business. Late night fellowship and breakfast appointments made for short nights. But who came to Orlando to rest? Being a part of historic convention developments were secondary to the joy of once-a-year uniting with friends, greeting former classmates and meeting multitudes of new acquaintances.

The rumors and intrigue sweeping the corridors stimulated more interest than reports and actions voted by the convention. What was going on for so long behind the closed doors of the Executive Committee in consideration of electing Frank Page as EC president? Would the GCR Task Force recommendations be derailed and divide the convention? Who would prevail among a diverse group of candidates to become the new SBC president? Would adoption of the GCR report really destroy the Cooperative Program?

Being my last convention as IMB president was a humbling experience as the accolades and commendation flowed profusely. While some are probably glad to see my tenure come to an end, most seemed genuinely appreciative of the leadership we have provided for 17 years. It is hard for me to put my finger on anything I have done. God has allowed me to serve at a time when He chose to move in providence and power to advance His mission around the world. I am grateful He has a niche for Southern Baptists, and that I could have the privilege of challenging and serving Southern Baptists during these years.

Categories : Executive Committee, GCR, IMB, NAMB, SBC, missions

Comments (9)

Responding to the Challenges from the GCRTF

Posted by: admin | Comments (11)

Monday, May 10th, 2010

I can’t imagine anyone who cannot embrace and get excited about the final recommendations of the Great Commission Resurgence Task Force. The task force has done a thorough and commendable job in recognizing what needs to happen among Southern Baptists if we are to see a renewed impetus in reaching the lost and a higher priority given to discipling the nations.

The recommended changes are far from radical. The task force was wise in recognizing what is palatable to the Convention and its entities and how far to go in drafting recommendations that were adoptable. They also correctly discerned that a corrective course and refocus on Great Commission priorities would not occur by voting on a few actions and tweaking our structure; it will come about over the course of a new generation continuing to maintain a new direction in cooperation and use of resources.

State conventions should be pleased that the recommended phase-out of cooperative agreements with NAMB has been extended to seven years. However, it is not unlikely, given GCR encouragement, NAMB will move more quickly to reduce these funding partnerships with mainline states, eliminating funding for roles not directly related to evangelism and church planting. Well before seven years, I suspect pioneer states will find themselves much stronger with far more NAMB personnel and resources at their disposal without having to provide a portion of the support.

The effectiveness in which NAMB is able to lead the SBC to engage the lostness of unchurched major urban centers and the least evangelized parts of North America will be dependent on the extent they use their newly empowered strategies to mobilize and facilitate churches, associations and state convention partners, involving them in the task.

Categories : Executive Committee, GCR, IMB, NAMB, SBC, missions

Comments (11)

Alternative Future #3

Posted by: admin | Comments (11)

Thursday, May 6th, 2010

Please read the previous three blogposts (links are provided at the bottom of this post) for context of this post in a series on alternative futures. This final post in this series projects a third “alternative future” should the SBC courageously adopt a vision as a missions people committed to boldly doing whatever it takes to reach a lost world.

Inspired by the report and recommendations of the Great Commission Resurgence Task Force, the Southern Baptist Convention will not only adopt the proposals, but this overwhelming endorsement of missions as the focus and purpose of the convention will initiate an overhaul of entity structures and funding strategies in the years to come. Decisions made in response to the GCRTF will be seen as laying the foundation and incentive for more radical actions in the coming years that literally change nature of the SBC.

Basic programs and budget for the Executive Committee, ERLC and seminaries will be determined and assured. It is possible that SBC seminaries will be both consolidated and dispersed. A common administration will eliminate duplication and competition in theological education and coordinate expansion of programs throughout the country beyond the current high-cost, institutional campus-centered paradigm. Having guaranteed the basic budget needs of these entities, all other funding will go to sending missionaries around the world and supporting church planters throughout North America. Giving to the Cooperative Program will escalate as churches see the increase in funding going directly toward reaching a lost world.

A higher trust will emerge as churches are affirmed in designated giving to cooperative causes beyond their own local programs. In partnership with IMB and NAMB they will be free to join in direct missionary support. This personalized involvement, not only in sending missionaries but in strategic engagement in the task as well, will unleash the resources to send out those being called to missions. The number of international missionaries will grow to 10,000 and within ten years we will be unable to identify a people group that doesn’t have access to the gospel.

Categories : Executive Committee, GCR, IMB, NAMB, SBC, missions

Comments (11)

Alternative Future #2

Posted by: admin | Comments (14)

Monday, May 3rd, 2010

Please read the last two blogposts (links are provided at the bottom of this post) for context of this post in a series on alternative futures. The last post speculated what the future would be for Southern Baptists if the GCR Task Force recommendations were rejected or deferred. This one is projecting an “alternative future” should the recommendations be affirmed and adopted. This series has been written on the basis of the preliminary report prior to the report to be released today (I’ll comment on that later). A third projected “alternative future” will follow.

Let’s suppose the Southern Baptist Convention votes overwhelmingly to affirm the recommendations of the Great Commission Resurgence Task Force. There will then be a sequence of actions to be taken, most of which will be referred to the Executive Committee and various entities. The charters for IMB and NAMB will likely need to be changed by subsequent SBC action. The convention would possibly take immediate action to amend the budget proposal.

Our denominational polity creates a challenging dilemma. Each entity is autonomous, accountable to its board of trustees. They have the freedom to make changes recommended by the SBC, reject them or modify them. But it would be unlikely any board would do anything but seek to fulfill the directives approved by the convention. Even the Executive Committee would feel compelled to formulate changes needed to implement the recommendations concerning structure and processes.

There would be a new impetus in church planting among the plethora of unreached ethnic groups that have flooded our cities and communities as IMB works with NAMB, associations, state conventions and local churches to plant the gospel in indigenous immigrant communities. This initiative would result in the gospel flowing more effectively from the U.S. to families and relatives among these unreached ethnic groups around the world.

Categories : Executive Committee, GCR, IMB, NAMB, SBC, missions

Comments (14)

The Fallacy of Societal Paranoia

Posted by: admin | Comments (11)

Monday, April 19th, 2010

We will never do anything that will result in a Great Commission Resurgence unless we are willing to acknowledge realities and realize that it will take a new paradigm of cooperation. Some have been offended as flaws in our traditional system have been exposed. I have not intended to imply that anyone is doing anything wrong; in fact, state conventions and SBC entities are doing a very effective job in exactly what churches have asked them to do. It comes back to defining the issue and evaluating everything in terms of what it will take to do a more effective job of reaching the lost throughout America and around the world.

I am moving toward a series of posts on “Alternative Futures.” Several future scenarios become evident depending on decisions we make now. Which alternative is chosen will not be determined by recommendations by the GCR task force, but actions taken by every church, association and state convention as well as the SBC. I believe state convention leadership will be the key to whether or not we see a Great Commission resurgence. A lot has been said about the role and responsibility of states in our current system. The leaders of our state conventions are passionately devoted to reaching the lost; they are among the most devoted supporters and partners of our mission boards. Those in mainline states are deeply burdened about the needs and challenges of their colleagues in pioneer states. I believe they will provide the creative leadership needed to create a new paradigm of cooperation and synergy.

No one would deny that spiritual revitalization is needed since the Great Commission is a spiritual task. Simply changing processes and funding formulas will not get it done. But we cannot expect God to bless us with revival if we fail to be obedient to what He has called us as His people to do. We must be committed to the task and have the courage to make the decisions in what we are responsible for in order to be aligned with the mission of God.

Categories : Executive Committee, GCR, IMB, NAMB, SBC, missions

Comments (11)

Integrity, Transparency and Efficiency

Posted by: admin | Comments (11)

Monday, April 12th, 2010

If the problem of fulfilling the Great Commission is the need of greater financial resources then the Cooperative Program must be invigorated to become something that will compel greater giving and church support. Creating flexibility and giving ownership to churches will stimulate a willingness to increase allocations. Churches do want to be a part of doing more together than they can do independently, but they want more involvement in determining what that is.

Another factor that will create greater confidence in the system and encourage an increase in giving is to be more straightforward in what actually happens to an allocation to the CP and to be more efficient in the use of those resources. This is not to say that anyone is being dishonest, but there is suspicion about where all those funds go and what is being done with them.

Such candor could start by not calling something missions that is not. The Cooperative Program is sometimes promoted as “CP Missions” when it is evident that most of the funds don’t have anything to do with winning people to Christ, starting churches and engaging unevangelized areas with the gospel at home or overseas. This will be the topic of the next blogpost.

We must cease putting a spin on promotion in trying to make people believe CP is doing more than it is. Most of the people in the pew believe that half of the CP allocation that leaves their church goes to support international missionaries. Whenever it is said that 86 percent of CP to the SBC goes to missions, it is deceptive as most churches see that reference to CP as what their church designates as CP, not just the portion received at the national level. I have been criticized by Southern Baptist leaders over the years and accused of eroding confidence in CP by pointing out that the IMB only receives 17 percent of Cooperative Program funding from the churches rather than 50 percent.

Categories : Executive Committee, GCR, IMB, SBC, missions

Comments (11)

Giving Churches Ownership

Posted by: admin | Comments (14)

Thursday, April 8th, 2010

We must acknowledge that a spiritual revitalization of born-again church members sharing their faith is the essential foundation for a Great Commission resurgence. Compelled and empowered by the Holy Spirit, Christians whose lives have been truly transformed by God’s grace cannot be restrained from proclaiming the gospel. Such a grassroots movement will permeate our communities, spread across America and do whatever it takes to take the gospel to a lost world.

Making disciples will become an exponential movement when churches are teaching all that Jesus commanded and modeling Christlike character and service. Discipleship will be manifested in a compassion toward others and grace-filled witness that will draw people to Jesus Christ. To the contrary, too often the public profile of Southern Baptists is one of controversy, political action, attacks on culture and mutual alienation rather than one that draws people in the marketplace and neighborhood to our precious Savior.

We long for a fresh move of God among us in which a Spirit-filled lifestyle will infect our society and result in strong and growing churches equipped to fulfill God’s mission. But we cannot wait passively for that to happen, excusing our negligence and lack of devotion to the responsibility to take the gospel to the nations and under-churched areas of our nation. As long as churches are deciding how to use billions of dollars given for “the Lord’s work” and Southern Baptists allocate hundreds of millions of dollars to support various programs cooperatively, we must do what we can to give greater priority to our Great Commission task.

When it comes to applying financial resources to the Great Commission, there is little that can be done to change the current system without someone being impacted negatively. The case is made that we cannot do more until people give more and churches allocate more to the Cooperative Program. Actually, the SBC doesn’t have a good track record of designating more for missions when additional funds are available.

Categories : Executive Committee, GCR, IMB, SBC, missions

Comments (14)

Learning the Landmines of Blogging

Posted by: admin | Comments (14)

Monday, March 15th, 2010

Blogging is a new experience for me. I jumped into this very public medium of communication in response to the urging of friends and colleagues who knew I had a message to share. I have been compelled by my love for the Southern Baptist Convention and passion to see us reach our full potential of reaching a lost world and glorifying our Lord who desires to be exalted among the nations.

I am as vulnerable as anyone, perhaps even more, of expressing an opinion without realizing how it is perceived by others. It is good to be reminded that communication is not what one says, but what the reader or hearer understand you to be saying. I’ve also learned that it is not necessary, and, in fact, is inappropriate to use individuals to make your point.

I made a major mistake in referring to comments made by Morris Chapman to introduce my blog on “Convoluted Priorities.” Inserting that reference as an introduction was an after-thought to my draft on this subject, which had already been written, when I realized Dr. Chapman’s presentation to the State Executives reflected the point I was making regarding different priorities. I was chagrined to find that how this was drafted implied the blog was about Dr. Chapman and insinuated he was not committed to the Great Commission.

Categories : Executive Committee, GCR, IMB, SBC, missions

Comments (14)

Convoluted Priorities

Posted by: admin | Comments (74)

Monday, March 8th, 2010

If there were any question about the need for a Great Commission Resurgence and a study of our structure and programs it has been dispelled in the convictions and positions that have surfaced from many prominent voices. It is evident where resistance will come to recommendations from the GCRTF at the convention in June.

Many will be pointing out how the recommended changes will impact what we are doing as a convention—but isn’t that exactly the point! Watch for those who stand to lose entitlements of a system that hasn’t been moving us toward effective engagement of the lost. Dr. Morris Chapman found a receptive audience in speaking to the winter meeting of State Executives last month in passionately pointing out that the purpose of our denomination is not the Great Commission but cooperation.

Apparently it doesn’t matter whether we impact a lost world or accomplish anything else as long as we cooperate together. In fact, it was said that the formula for Cooperative Program allocations must not change. I now understand why for 17 years I and my staff have been meeting with the budget workgroup of the Executive Committee, presenting our required report on funding needs, but nothing is ever done. It is just a meaningless exercise of denominational bureaucracy.

A mighty move of God could open the world for harvest with thousands of missionaries poised to be deployed to the nations, but we could not do anything about it as Southern Baptists. More important than actually reaching a lost world is every entity getting their share. The priority is reflecting our cooperative commitment to all our programs as if everything we do is of equal value.

Categories : Executive Committee, GCR, IMB, SBC, missions

Comments (74)