Comments on: Article IX and State Relations

By: Brian M.

Brian M. — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 18:56:50 +0000

Until the GCR Task Force sorts this thing out (if in fact they ever do), I think our churches should take advantage of existing offering programs such as the Lottie Moon Christmas Offering and the Annie Armstrong Easter Offering. These offerings bypass state conventions altogether and send 100% of their gatherings to the IMB and NAMB coffers. Not a permanent fix, but a way we can encourage and empower local churches to participate financially right now. .-= Brian M.´s last blog ..GCR, IMB, Lottie Moon, and Article IX =-.

By: Sallie

Sallie — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 00:09:13 +0000

Mark — I met our local DOM when picking kids up from camp tonight. He promised he’d email me back by next week. I’ll share whatever I can.
.-= Sallie´s last blog ..Autistics, Music, and Decorating =-.

By: Matt Svoboda

Matt Svoboda — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 23:27:35 +0000

Alan,

Good words of encouragement and caution. It is much appreciated.

By: Pastor Jim

Pastor Jim — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 23:01:49 +0000

I’m glad you cleared that up–I thought you meant that you couldn’t find him for long periods of time. I quit speaking JJ Walkerese a long time ago but it’s coming back!
.-= Pastor Jim´s last blog ..A Complete Mismatch =-.

By: Alan Cross

Alan Cross — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 22:49:11 +0000

Doug’s concerns in the first comment are right on. We can’t force this thing. It almost seems as though the GCR leaders (I’m a supporter of the GCR, by the way) are like a new pastor straight out of seminary and they want to change their church overnight. We have 150 years of bureacracy and history. I am all for change and I think it needs to happen fast. But, I am concerned that no one has any real idea what the GCR is or what it will be and we are already demonizing people who are asking some real questions about it or are pushing back a little. From what I understand, many of the state convention presidents are VERY concerned about this because they don’t know what will happen and they were not brought in on the ground floor. The GCR Task Force has ZERO guidelines and they can pretty much come up with what they want. Nor, do they have accountability. They are meeting behind closed doors and I suppose (haven’t heard differently) that they will roll out their recommendations around Convention time next year for an up or down vote before an uninformed convention. If what happens next year is like the rhetoric from this past convention, approving the recommendations will be tantamount to approving the Great Commission itself and a vote against the recommendations will be a vote for the death of the SBC and failure of the Great Commission.

That approach IS NOT going to be very fruitful. I hope it doesn’t go that way, but what I’ve seen the past two weeks causes me to believe that GCR proponents sense a mandate and anyone who gets in their way is going to be roadkill. That only means division and interdenominational warfare. The main causualty will be the Great Commission because we’ll be fighting over restructering and not experiencing the heart change that we so desperately need.

I’m all for the GCR. I signed the document. I’m just not for politics and power plays. Everything pre-convention was great. The convention was really positive. Everything post-convention (except for adding some diversity to the task force) has caused me great concern. I hope we keep our eyes on the ball on this one and not get distracted.
.-= Alan Cross´s last blog ..NYC Schools to Celebrate Muslim Holidays =-.

By: Joe Blackmon

Joe Blackmon — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 22:32:38 +0000

I am encouraged to hear that. I had one DOM that was out of sight or as they would have said in the 70's "Dynomite" but he was the exception. Glad that wasn't the case for you. .-= Joe Blackmon´s last blog ..Missing the Point on Missions Part II =-.

By: Matt Svoboda

Matt Svoboda — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 19:14:52 +0000

I wish that were true for all of us.

By: Todd Benkert

Todd Benkert — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 19:13:08 +0000

I have no distrust for my state convention and even have a state exec. who has led the state to adopt measures to reduce bureaucracy and funnel more dollars to church planting as well as to the CP.

The one thing that I don’t understand is why we see the state convention in terms of “them” rather than in terms of “us.” What I mean is that local churches make up the state conventions. We send messengers to the conventions, the various boards are made up of our church members, the decisions made are made by our messengers or by persons elected by our messengers. If we don’t like what’s happening at the state level, it’s up to us to change that. If the GCR task force makes any recommendations that apply to state level issues, it will be up to us as local churches and messengers to decide on those recommendations. The state convention is “us” not “them.”

By: Todd Benkert

Todd Benkert — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 19:05:55 +0000

I’ve experienced the opposite. I’ve been privileged to serve in associations with godly, driven, missions-minded leaders.

By: Mark Lamprecht

Mark Lamprecht — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 18:36:27 +0000

Sallie,

I’d love to hear what the response is to your inquiry.

I agree with you too.
.-= Mark Lamprecht´s last blog ..Happy 500 John Calvin =-.