I really enjoyed the article. Though I am not from the SBC I can see where similar experiences (innovators leaving) are evident in our denomination. Your words resonate with me, a younger generation pastor of an older denomination.

Thanks for the post.

I'm glad these articles are finally being run and taken seriously, even if they are about 10 years too late.

It's time the convention gets back to its grassroots churches. We sit year after year in our conventions and see pastors from churches that run thousands and are told they are the successful ones. We hear about how we need converts but little about how to make and keep disciples of Christ. Then, as church budgets falter and new churches struggle because of lack of funding, we visit the campuses of our missions organizations and denominational headquarters to see expensive buildings and opluent surroundings. Then some of the establishment leaders get up and run towards the Republican National Convention at the first hint of political question.

We've lost our way and become a prideful lot who are deservedly facing the long end of a journey towards obselescence in an increasingly secular nation. I've had a number of young pastors who have come through my faithful congregation after seminary. They try to get involved in ministries to reach the lost effectively but are thrown out and now so many are leading congregations not associated with the Southern Baptist Convention.

Look at how many of our once future leaders have left and begun churches that are truly reaching the lost. They've written us off.

Perhaps its time to sell of the opulent buildings and campuses of our "established" convention of autonomous churches (while saving the seminaries), move into more suitable environs for missions work, and use the profit to plant 10,000 churches staffed with the best and brightest our seminaries are turning out.

Maybe I'm just too old to see why this isn't the priority. Thank you for adding this and being a voice.

You are the Church!
Robert

It's obvious that Professor Finke has no clue as to how the SBC works. No one "controls" our churches. We can be as innovative or non-innovative as we are led.

Perhaps Dr. Finke should stick to commenting on something with which he is more familiar.

Les

Hey Ed...thanks for continuing to sound the horn about the change that is so desperately needed in our convention. Your comment to Jimmy Draper was right on target. I'm a 32 year old associate pastor and sadly there isn't a pastor that is a part of the "establishment" that really has credibility for being innovative and creative. Granted we have great respect for many of our leaders such as our current SBC President, Johnny Hunt. I pray that the work you are doing will continue to impact our denomination and help us focus on doing what it takes to reach our world.

Right on, Ed. We have confused conservative theology with conformity in methodology. My theology is pretty black and white, but I try to live it in living color! We should encourage creativity rather than stifle it. Our desire to maintain the faith once delivered, which I obviously affirm and have given my life to do, does not mean we zealously defend our preferences (in musical tastes, preaching attire, methods, etc) in the same manner.
And it is not an assault on the conservative resurgence to see the reality of our tragic decline. May we resolve to come together for the gospel.

Les,

While in theory what you says is true there is no "SBC pope" to tell everyone what to do. I speak as a former SBC church planter who has stepped away for the denomination at least for now. I am telling you there are many ways in which young people are not allowed to be innovative in the way we do church.

Sure there is no one person or governing body telling us what to do, but there are lots of groups (NAMB, State Conventions, local associations, supporting churches) that will pull your funding, label you emergent/liberal/unchristian, or just simple write you off for simple questioning certain long held traditions and trying to be innovative.

The great downside to autonomous churches is that the denomination really has no inherent power so they have to use money, resources, and support as their way to keep the autonomous churches in step. I know my experience both as a church planter and as a denominational worker is, that this often looks like dangling a carrot on a string in front of a donkey to get him to go where you want him to go. While sure no one is telling me how innovative I can or can't be they will draw the line that says if you are innovative in that way we are cutting your pay check. That my friend will stifle innovation.

Just my 2 cents.

I told him what we needed most was a nationally-known pastor who had credibility with young pastors and who was also still clearly connected with the denomination. His voice went up with excitement: "Exactly! Who?" With sadness I replied, 'That's my point.'

Ed, the only one I can think of is you.

What about some up and coming guys who bridge that gap? Would a Steve McCoy ever get asked to speak at such a meeting?

Les,

I understand what you are saying. He may very well not understand our congregational autonomy.

But, let me say that "control" does not always have to involve hierarchy. Sometimes it involves exclusion and derision.

For example, I have sat in many a chapel sermon and heard some in the SBC establishment misrepresent and preach against contemporary churches. I believe that can be a form of control-- pushing others out. And, that is exactly what happened. Many of my contemporary church friends just got tired of the misrepresentation and left-- often forming new networks and partnerships.

And, let me add (since it just came to mind!), we must not be surprised that churches like those mentioned in the article are less connected to the SBC. You cannot ask a church to fund and support a system that then tells them that the way they do church is wrong.

Ed

I think the conservative resurgence caused a focus on doctrine and the unchurch don't know enough about churches or doctrine to care.

I was chief among sinners at the largest SBC church and that church is no longer the biggest church in town. Why? Because a young upstart pastor started talking about doing things everyday that make a difference in your faith instead of defining "propitiation" and other words no unchurched person uses.

So in that way, churches within the SBC thought we've got to push the conservative doctrine instead of meeting people where they are. If I don't squeeze everybit of my seminary degree philosphy into my messages then I'm not going to reach people. The unchurched don't want to make that kind of investment. Make it simple instead. Make it about life change.

Since I've left SBC, I look back and thankfully see there is a generation that is litterally dying off that thought hymns and doctrine were the end all.

Even look at the comments above. The article is about a messaging problem (SBC not reaching people) and we are talking about church autonomy (denominational issue / doctrine).

I don't think that preachers pushing too much doctrine is the problem. The young pastors/seminarians that I know of are flocking to doctrine and deep theology in droves--one example of this would obviously be the resurgence in reformed theology.

When the Pharisees first burst onto the scene in the inter-testamental period, they were a force of good. But by the time we see them in the NT, their conservative theology had become a system of idolatry which enslaved men rather then freeing them to properly fulfill the true essence of the law--loving God and loving others. I think something similar is or has occurred within the SBC. The conservative resurgence was a great thing, but the hard lined, uncompromising nature of many who led it has seeped into avenues that it should not have and is strangling the "new blood" of the SBC out. The problem isn't that the SBC leaders were too uncompromising on the right things, such as primary doctrines, it is that they are the same way about issues that aren't first priority, such as alcohol, contemporary music, video projectors, Calvinism, alter calls, etc. I know of plenty of young, reformed, missional, SBC pastors who would rather jump ship and go with church planting networks (such as Acts 29) then trying to remain in the SBC for 30-40 years of ministry and argue with grandma about how electric guitars aren't the mark of the beast.

I would say the situation (edited), but since the powers that be might nix me for that, I'll just say it's "unfortunate."

Ed, could you come up with a post in the near future or even a response to this comment about who some the "sane" voices in the convention still are? Who are the people, like yourself, that are working to get the convention back on track and undo the damaging effects (and just the damaging effects) of the conservative resurgence?

To all,

I think if there is a leader today, that is innovative, and a part of the group that is older and conservative in theology it would be James Merritt. I do not hear much about him any more. Has he been silenced too?

I know that we have had some young people visit, and leave the weekly gathering at the small church I serve due to worship style. I realize that there will always be people that come and go. However if you changed that style of music there would be an incredible uprising, and some would not act with grace I might add. They would tag us as "liberal and worldly" and quote Mohler and McArthur. (I am not saying these men would say this...)

We need some of these older gentlemen to begin to sound the trumpet and deal honestly and openly with the issues at hand. Let's keep plowing, planting, and reaching despite what others say. I will quote one of our former SBC Presidents Bobby Welch, "Let the dogs bark and the gospel train roll on!"

Ed, you wrote: “The first step in organizational decline is that you lose your creative people… In fact, we have actively pushed many of them out by teaching and preaching against them in many SBC contexts and venues. The next step in decline is that the most competent among us begin to leave...”

Jaskyte’s (2004) research on nonprofit organizations asserts successful organizations with deeply embedded values risk losing continued success when the organization stops questioning organizational practices. Organizations with strong directive leaders (sounds like many SBC leaders) are more likely to encourage adherence and commitment to the organizational culture and discourage dissent. I think if leaders were more willing to welcome and manage dissent to the majority perspective (rather than “pushing them out”) it may help prevent the stagnation and decline.

Jaskyte, K. (2004). Transformational leadership, organizational culture, and innovativeness in nonprofit organizations. Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 15(2), 153-168.

Being new to the SBC I am not aware of alot of the past. However I know when one side wins a major battle they seem to wallow in victory and not push on to win the war. It would seem that the SBC conservatives thought the war was against the liberals. Having won the "war" nothing else mattered. The denomination was their's the seminaries and pulpits were once again in the hands of men who would preach the Word as God's (which I that God for!). But it seems that we were never interested in changing the world only making sure we never changed.

I think there are tow factors the supercede all the others: 1.We have lost our first love. 2 We have deminshied the importance of the small group as a mobilizing unit for evangelism and connection.
www.connexionpoint.blogspot.com

As someone who is considering church planting within the SBC, this article is one of the reasons why. Declining numbers and community impact make a new effort needed.

Yet the discussion of the driving out of innovation and the cutting off of funding of non-typical ministry is concerning.

I must say that as I've been conducting a search for a new pastoral position over the last few months, I'm able to find very few true contemporary church opportunities within the SBC.

One of the reasons that church planting is so appealing is that it doesn't have the stifling tendencies of established churches. But this is concerning and can influence our decision.

Pursuing Answers to Questions of Faith & Life...

The loss of innovators is truly tragic because we are a denomination that overflowing with gray-heads. I suppose this is one of the reasons why fewer and fewer younger pastors are involved with convention life. I fear that as a natural result of the loss of young innovators will be the continued decline of baptisms, and the looming loss of a generation.
We must be a convention that is known for our love for Christ, our theological conviction, and also our willingness to think outside the box methodologically.

Blake,

I don't know that I can make a list of who "get's it" because that always leaves out people.

I will say that I think some folks are talking good sense about being part of a Great Commission Resurgence. They are talking about "building upon" the Conservative Resurgence and that is what I believe is needed.

-Ed

Please note (not you, Blake): I have edited some comments. Please do not take swipes at people on my blog. Thanks.

Brother, I completely agree with your assessment of this info -- as a member of an A29/SBC church plant, I can attest to the misunderstanding, mischaracterization, and sometimes ill will that's been directed our way (let me clarify, though: NOT by the KBC folks. They've been nothing but supportive, loving, and helpful the whole journey). And I'm sure I don't have to tell you about the pain we felt with the A29 business in Missouri.

Whew. I'm praying for this situation, and for your unique opportunity to be a prophetic voice in the denomination.

Ed,
Thanks for putting this info out there for us to think about. A friend passed the link over to me and encouraged me to read and 'lament'.

But, rather than 'lament' I, and a courageous/creative/edgy team, have chosen to repent and get on with it by choosing to go upstream and innovate a new church focused on reaching POWs and MIAs (those not connected to church presently and who may not have any connection to Jesus Christ yet) using innovative technology, creative methods and missional engagement.

It's been the craziest, best, hardest, most God-filled thing I've ever been a part of.

To leave an established great SBC church that I had served for 18 years and launch a new endeavor was risky at best but as Jeff Eaton, of Hope Community Church in Lawrenceburg once told a few people interested in church planting, "God is in the risk", and He has been.

We've chosen to launch a church with rock solid theology - but our methods cause the establishment to wonder about what we're up to. We know it'd be safer to play more to the establishment and perhaps grab some much needed funding, but our team has chosen to stay true to our mission of reaching the lost and that means we can't afford to back off of doing whatever it takes to reach those who haven't been reached yet.

I'm grateful for my SBC heritage and the heart for mission that I grew up with as I heard about a grand dream called 'Bold Mission Thrust' back in the day when we believed that we could reach the whole world with the Gospel by 2000. I'm still naive enough to buy the dream (obviously not by 2000, but that it's possible at some point to reach the world....) and still foolish enough to attempt the impossible because I know that with God nothing is impossible....

I'm also grateful for SBC Pastors like Tom Kinman who was the first pastor that I served under in a full time capacity that taught me how to conduct weddings, funerals, and visit hospitals, etc. But, most of all, what I learned from Tom is how to put the mission of reaching people first and all the other 'stuff' second.

I'm grateful for the dream planted in me in an SBC church, but as a Church Planter/Innovator how SBC we can afford to be in the future and still reach people is very much up for grabs. I think it will really depend on whether the SBC moves back toward the Mission of reaching the lost and remember what 'Baptist' really means and whether I can find ways of communicating to and connecting with those in the SBC hierarchy such that they realize that we have the same objectives although our methods are vastly different.

So, for me, and other creative Church Planters we have a part to play -- better, more clear communication of what we're attempting to do and how we're attempting to accomplish our mission.

Many times it's a matter of talking it out and bringing both 'sides' to the table where we can pray and imagine the same future under the same King.

Hopeful!
Jeff Fuson
Phos Hilaron Church
Louisville, Kentucky

There are wolves in the SBC. I've heard pastors address church discipline, but who has ever discussed convention discipline? Ed, you've talked about the importance of ecclesiology in connection to missiology on many occasions. So when and where does keeping leaders accountable for their actions come into play in all of this? Aren't there still unrepentant leaders in the convention? Isn't there something that should be done about them?

Even an incomplete list of those who "get it" is better than nothing. People can respond with more recommendations. I know of very few trustworthy Southern Baptists and want to find more.

As someone outside of the SBC tradition, I see the demographic decline of SBC on a daily basis. At my work place, 100% of the baptist women have married and had one child with no plans for a second child. Two baptists begetting one child is an automatic 50% demographic penalty. If this future generation of single children learn one child as the baptist family norm, then the SBC declines 75% by the end of generation 2.

It's almost impossible to make up for a 4-8 million loss of baptist children by church plants and baptisms yielding 300K yearly.

Then, there's the coming worldwide population decline. Births of children 5 and under have been declining worldwide for over 5 years. The world is no longer making people as it has in the past. By 2100, the world population is likely to be les than today.

Its wonderful that the SBC is anti-abortion, but the waffling on artificial contraception has and is taking its toll on SBC.

BTW, I thought the iMonk and his guests were the more knowledgable group. SBCimpact seemed the more head-in-the-sand bunch. Clear contrast between both audiences.

God bless... +Timothy

To build on what Laura said, the Acts29/MBC fiasco, is in my opinion, the personification of this resistance to the adaptation to innovation in todays SBC. I am a student at MBTS here in Missouri, and while i do feel a calling to work work in church growth/planting, I can say it will not be here in Missouri. Luckily, I have hope for the SBC as a whole, otherwise I would seriously be considering (if the MBC was the norm) leaving the denomination for those who do care for reaching the lost. Calling for a Great Commission Resurgence is great, but if you try to force newcomers to fit your mold instead of finding common ground between you and them, then you will not win that many people over.