Did you read the Baptist Press story on the survey of local Baptist associations? Survey Weighs Value of Baptist Associations.
Perhaps the most salient quote coming out of this recent study might be this one,
“When asked to describe the most exciting aspect of their local Baptist association, the most popular answer among church leaders was ‘nothing,'” said Jason Lowe, a Kentucky director of missions who led the study that looked into attitudes about the work of local Baptist associations.
“Nothing.”
How’s that for a succinct evaluation of the work of our most historic cooperative organization?
The specific comments are rather painful,
“My association is mediocre, and thus my church is only minimally invested…they’re 20 years behind on everything. Barely have a website and thinks a fax machine is the latest communication…Nothing, it’s a waste of time and money…Not much. Our association does very, very little…Nothing excites me about it…Nothing really. It’s been a good ole boys association…Really honestly, nothing. It’s living and functioning in the past…Our current local association does very little to serve our Churches.”
My experience is that it’s never hard to get pastors complaining about their local association. Sometimes this is justified. Sometimes not.
What church leaders found frustrating according to comments on the survey:
“Pointless annual meetings…Unnecessary expenses in paid staff and buildings…Total lack of function…Little participation and does nothing but take church dollars. Really a gigantic waste of time…Ineffective…We’re not doing the things that need to be done. We’re functioning as we have, but aren’t relevant to the churches…The complete lack of any gospel work…Associations are so outdated. They cater to large churches and are almost exclusively led by small churches. It is not a network of like-minded churches as much as it is a place for bored people to complain about successful people.”
The Directors of Missions who responded to the survey were, unsurprisingly, most concerned about lack of commitment and participation by churches.
One of the most telling results of the survey was the response to the statement, “Church Would Be Negatively Affected If Local Baptist Association Did Not Exist.” Over four of ten church leaders answered negatively, that is, they did not feel the church would be negatively affected if the local association went kaput. Predictably, DOMs almost all agreed with the statement.
One thing that all senior pastors have is an opinion on their local association and the DOM. I’ve always liked the DOMs but only one was what I would call effective in the role and personally helpful to me and my church.
The Baptist association has been very important in our history in some respects. It has been described as “the oldest cooperative unit in Baptist life tracing its existence back over 300 years.” It should be best in helping churches to cooperate in ministry and fellowship although it looks to me like much of the cooperation has been handed off to state and national entities. Associations should be the place where doctrinal standards are most vigorous and scrutinized. I can identify with the comments by survey respondents that the association lacks relevance while slogging along, apparently impelled by institutional and programmatic inertia.
Some erudite Baptist historian can educate me on why the local association was left out of the Cooperative Program distribution nine decades ago. Was it assumed that the local association could easily prove its value to geographically proximate churches and have little difficult in raising any necessary funding? Were there very few paid associational staff, DOMs or Associational Missionaries and no central offices? I’d speculate that when it became fashionable or there arose perceived value in having a paid associational staff with attendant office and administrative expenses that the focus was subtly shifted from serving churches to maintaining the associational staff and budget. I was regularly told that churches should support their association with 3% of their undesignated giving. It wasn’t explained why although budgets showed the DOM, secretary, and building consumed around 80% of all contributions. One DOM brazenly asked for 4%.
Some larger associations have several staff, operate numerous ministries, plant churches and do work that I would value as a pastor. I cannot think of much the smaller associations have to offer now that just about any church administrative assistance is available online. Most associations near me offer some form of church revitalization services but I’m unaware of any such programs that show measurable positive results. DOMs have personally been helpful in specific services but I’m not sure that is worth a full-time staff position.
I’m curious how pastors view their association and, if present, their DOM or AM these days. There are 1,136 associations in the Southern Baptist Convention. The 116 DOMs that responded to this survey might represent 20% or so of these. That’s a pretty good proportion even though the survey was not randomized. Consider that 2 of 3 DOMs are over 60 years of age and 9 of 10 are over fifty. The route for many to the DOM job has been as an experienced, respected pastor moving to the DOM position as their terminal job. Perhaps the psychology involved in that is not conducive to vision and change.
One thing seems sure about our associations. Either the function changes substantially or we drop a lot of staffing, move to part-time or volunteer staffing. I’d be interested in how my colleagues perceive these things.
_____________
I’m not all that confident in any survey where respondents are self-selected but there is a massive amount of data in this one. Probably the most reliable results are from the DOMs since their sample size was rather large. Reported aggregate results are heavily weighted with the disproportionate number of DOMs, although you can view results by the various categories. The survey’s summary tables may be viewed here.
“My association is mediocre, and thus my church is only minimally invested…”
Uh no, your association is mediocre because your church is nominally invested. You get out what you put in to it.
Except that, having invested a year or two of trying to move the association to be more than a holding pattern for activities that outlived their effectiveness a decade ago, that was when we went to minimal investment.
Because most of the decision-making is locked in to people who have always made those decisions, who originated those programs in the 80s, and who hamstring even the DoM from doing anything different because change is unacceptable.
The nature and structure of associational decision making is even more tradition-locked than the average SB church and the SBC as a whole. The real question in most associations is what will pass away first: the generation in charge or the association? Both are nearing life-support.
William,
Excellent article brother, and thank you for enlightening me to the Baptist Press article. I was unaware one on this topic had been published.
I am fairly new to my association here in Willow Springs, Howell County, MO. Currently we do not have a DOM because the previous one retired and the search committee has yet to find a replacement. Interestingly enough they did due diligence and did an exit interview of the former DOM to see how he thought his tenure went and what could be done better. He(the DOM) said that his work was hindered because churches weren’t very involved and those who were, were just the same old people who’ve always been involved. When pressed for an answer as to what could make churches and younger pastors see the benefits of involvement in the association the DOM could not think of any reasons. You see the former DOM functioned primarily as a pulpit supply preacher, there were rarely any serious missions initiatives undertake by the association under the leadership of the DOM. This meant that churches were paying for a full time pulpit supply preacher who didn’t really do much and rarely ever actually preached in churches. Not a very good use of CP dollars if you ask me. I’ve found out that the search committee has included younger pastors and lay leaders in the process and they’ve revamped the job description and essentially created specific markers and goals that the DOM must reach each year. Our association is not going to hire the next DOM as a full-time staffer until a probationary period of 3 years under a contract that can either be re-upped each year or canceled due to ineffectiveness. I like this approach because this means churches in my association want more from their DOM and more from their association. I think it is a very smart idea to have a probationary period to test the DOM’s effectiveness and to add in goals that need to be met along the way. This approach holds the DOM accountable for his work and efforts in leading churches in missions locally ,nationally and internationally, church planting across the country, evangelistic initiatives in the association, disaster relief training, revitalizing the associational camp ministry, and various county fair ministries that occur. Should our association hire such a man, who can meet these needs and goals, then that’s an association I can get behind.
I’m not sure that you will have a lot of takers when you ask for resumes if they are aware of these strictures. I’m wondering how many pastors would accept a pastorate that had a “probationary period of 3 years under a contract that can either be re-upped each year or canceled due to ineffectiveness”. By the way, many churches see what the association does as a model for their own polity. Therefore, do not be surprised when the next church looking for a pastor in your association adopts these new associational norms for their pastoral candidate.
I’m not suggesting that changes did not and do not need to be made. I am suggesting that you think real hard before making these kinds of changes.
Thomas,
I have no ability or authority to make these changes nor am I apart of this process. Like I said I’m new to the association. This is what the search committee is doing and apparently has been doing for the past year(that’s how long the search committee has been together and working on creating a new job description, working with the state convention, and a consulting firm). I don’t know all the particulars but I do know they were advised to consider this model.
Perhaps at your next church, the Pastor Search team will hire you by contract, for three years, and allow you to be canceled or ‘re-upped’ depending on your ‘effectiveness’.
Jerry,
While I’m certain you’re being sarcastic and coy I’ll engage you anyway. I actually think pastoral ministry must be evaluated yearly by the church, the deacons, and the elders(if the church has elders). My church has yearly performance reviews that the senior pastor, myself, our children’s director, women’s ministry director, and secretary are submitted to. We the pastors are evaluated for effectiveness in ministry, leadership, and our preaching(whether or not it’s biblical & theologically sound and challenging). This is to hold us as pastors accountable for the ministry we lead, but also challenges us to be better and more effective in how we execute the missional-vision statement of our church which is “Reaching South-central Missouri, the U.S., and the World for Christ”.
Excellent post James F. I have been a part of several Assoc and what you wrote pretty much represents all of those
I have doubted the need for a DOM for at least 3 decades. I think that true missions would be better served with 2-3 churches cooperating together to do church plants etc. that way everything would be more streamlined with greater accountability as well as participation in evangelism which would facilitate those involved in a myriad of ways
JMO
I support the local Baptist Associations and have written in favor of them.
David R. Brumbelow
So do I. But support is slipping. Why? What changes need to be made to address this?
I believe there exists the need to connect locally, regionally and nationally. In my other “kingdom,” I vote in municipal, state and national elections, and try to invest the time necessary to participate at each level of engagement. It makes sense to me that our spiritual work, according to the Acts 1:8 model, is active at all three levels as well.
I was intrigued recently when NAMB hired a national employee whose job would be to interpret Southern Baptist life and encourage participation among the 14% of our Pastors who are younger than forty. That’s 7,000 pastors! How can one person do that from a national office? I remember thinking: “If only there were a network of mentors who could be available, all across America, to interpret and promote Southern Baptist work on a more local level among the Pastors in their own region. Oh, wait, there is.”
One other observation is the question about “excitement.” When did “excitement” become the measure of faithful ministry endeavors? If I want “excitement” I will ride a roller coaster or drive through Atlanta, risking my life. Frankly, much of ministry is faithful, godly, peaceable, loving, sacrificial, fulfilling and many other adjectives besides “exciting.” Clearly, I would not describe my attitude toward national SBC life as exciting. I think we are asking a very peculiar question if our measuring stick for associational Baptist life is to require “excitement” out of it.
Frankly, many of my friends have got me wondering about the duplication of the North American Mission Board in relation to our Associations and State Conventions. The Associations and State Conventions, in our case, existed long before NAMB. In a way, NAMB came along and duplicated the work of our state conventions and associations, for if you are going to reach North America, it is going to be through ministries within one of our associations inside one of the states.
And NAMB is certainly not all that exciting these days. Maybe the 22 Send City people are a little bit excited. But many people have expressed concern that we have cut a number of State Evangelism Director positions and Campus Ministries. If NAMB went away tomorrow, divesting its assets and distributing them to the state conventions and associations, I believe we would see a surge in local church involvement and missions activity. Maybe we have identified the wrong organization as irrelevant.
Sense of unreality here..l
When NAMB *was* kicking back millions to the states the state were manipulating the system to fund staff and a world of pet projects. Church planting was not a priority. NAMB once funded one-third of all DOMs (I think but reserve space for faulty memory here) with little to show for it other than “we’ve gotta guy in [wherever]” with no measurable results required. Decades passed in many areas without any net church growth.
If state conventions had any kind of record of achievement maybe NAMB wouldn’t do what you call duplication.
But I commend your state for moving to 50/50 with the recent windfall.
The question is, does NAMB’s mandate need to be changed now that we have state conventions in all fifty states. When it was originally created it was designed to take the Gospel where Southern Baptist were not. Now that we are everywhere maybe its mandate is no longer viable and needs to be reevaluated.
Just a thought.
Excellent article. I had not been aware that the results had been posted. In the Northwest Baptist Convention, though we have 13 or 14 associations, only one currently has a full time DOM. All others were serviced by NAMB personnel until the shift about 7 years ago of NAMB as a church-planting agency. Most of our associations are comprised of just a handful of churches scattered over very wide geographical areas. As a nearly 40 yr veteran of serving churches in the NWBC as an associate pastor and nearly 36 years as a senior pastor (ie single staff pastor for 95% of that time…there were about 2 yrs my current church had an very part-time associate pastor) I can say that at times the association has been a lifeline for me and at other times the association has been unhelpful – even to the point of creating chaos and disunion.
Most of my church members have little or no connection to our local association OR state convention OR the national body. We support Lottie, Annie, and our regional convention’s mission emphasis – but that’s the limit of their exposure – in spite of my efforts over the 26 years I’ve pastored this church.
I have served as a trustee – The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary: 1993 -2003;
President of the NWBC, 2011-2013
Executive Board of the NWBC 2008-2011
and almost every possible office in the associations I have been part of. I have led in associational renewal/vision setting meetings and have seen minimal impact once the funding for leadership was used for church-planting in the urban centers (church planting exists in rural communities – or so I’ve heard…but not much evidence in Southern Oregon unless the community is Hispanic).
Sorry for the long rant…but I am deeply concerned about the future of our local, regional, and national identity now that associations are barely alive.
Thanks. Obviously, associations in the legacy southern states are considerably different than in less established areas.
Is a new paradigm shift needed in Southern Baptist life?
Establishing new models or patterns of ministry are never easy. In Baptist life, things do not change quickly. Whether it be the local church, an association or the state or national conventions, Southern Baptists are not known for their swiftness in expediting change. Change does of course take place, but our basic credo seems to be, “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” The problem is that if it is broke, it takes several committees and a business meeting or two to rectify the problem. I’m not being critical. I’m merely pointing out what most of us are aware of already. The reason that change takes time in Baptist life is not that we are slothful and unconcerned, but because of our polity. It is congregational which means involving as many members as possible in the decision-making process. It can be time-consuming – and sometimes frustrating for A-type personalities – but it’s the Baptist way, and I am glad for it.
So, when I say it’s time for a paradigm shift in Baptist life, I am under no illusions that the shift I am advocating will not take place in my lifetime. It is simply too huge a change.
I contend that it is time for Southern Baptists to seriously reduce one level of denominational bureaucracy and enhance another. I submit that the work of the state convention ought to be seriously reduced, and the work of the Association seriously expanded.
I know this will not endear me to my friends I have working at the Baptist Building in my state. They are hard-working men and women who feel called of God to do what they do. They serve faithfully and loyally and I commend them. In the age of the Internet, electronic messaging, other high-speed communications, and easy travel, however, it’s a level of denominational life we may well be able to do without.
The paradigm shift I contend for is the ‘super’ or ‘mega’ association.’ The idea is not new. In fact it’s a return to the way our Baptist forefathers in America initially organized. For example, in 1791, North Carolina Baptists were organized primarily into three large associations – the Kehukee, Sandy Creek , and Yadkin. There was no state organization until many years later.
Our state convention (Missouri) is currently divided into eight areas from which trustee representation is drawn for the Executive Board, agencies, and institutions. These eight areas could each serve as a mega-association.
In his book A Baptist Association: Churches on Mission Together, J.C. Bradley provides a basic definition of an association. It is, To enable churches to be in fellowship and to be on mission individually and together. Almost everything being done on a state level — I believe — could be done on the associational level, and in many cases could probably be done more effectively. Let me share some of my reasons for such a paradigm shift.
· The state convention cannot be all things to all churches. State conventions, like churches, must prioritize ministries. There is simply not enough personnel, nor is there the financial resources to adequately meet the variety of needs represented by thousands of local churches. No one is better equipped to minister to the needs of its member congregations than the local association. The needs of congregations in or near metropolitan areas are often far different than those of congregations in predominately rural counties. Mega-associations would be able to specifically target the needs of member churches better than the state convention can.
· Significantly reducing an entire level of denominational bureaucracy would free vast sums of money to be used by the mega-association for evangelism, missions, and ministry.
· Mega-associations would be able to call multiple, full-time staffers to administer programs that could be specifically tailored for each association. Instead of a one-size-fits-all approach that a state convention must frequently take, mega-association staff could target specific ministries – such as migrant workers or ethnic ministries — that might exist in their association, but might not have a similar priority in another association.
· Associational camps could become regional conference centers. Camps, often run on a shoestring budget, could be greatly improved and enhanced by the pooled resources of the mega-association.
· Baptist Colleges and Baptist Student Ministries could potentially see increased support. Mega-associations, where such institutions exist, may well decide to make such institutions a major ministry emphasis. Other mega-associations would undoubtedly still contribute.
· As long as the mega-association mission’s center was centrally located, pastors and churches would have access to personnel and resources comparable to what is currently found only at the state offices or in metro-associations.
In his book A Baptist Association: Churches on Mission Together, J.C. Bradley lists ten tasks that the association should accomplish. They are:
1. Nurture harmony in faith and practice.
2. Nurture fellowship among church, church leaders, and members.
3. Call the churches to be on mission.
4. Provide resources and services to churches and leaders.
5. Train, develop, and encourage church and associational workers.
6. Provide opportunities for working together in missions, ministry, growth, and evangelism.
7. Establish and maintain appropriate communication and relationships with the community and the denomination.
8. Govern the association under the lordship of Christ.
9. Plan the association’s program and manage its resources
10. Provide information about the churches to the denomination.
I see every one of these tasks being accomplished ten-fold, with such a paradigm shift.
You’ve given this a lot of thought but I’d rather see you submit an article to the editors here on your ideas than try and cram it all in one long comment. It may be lost here.
Almost all my ministry experience has been in Indiana. My first DOM, Donn Broeker, has become a lifelong friend and mentor. Every DOM I’ve had since has been helpful to my church and to my leadership development. Some of my closest friends are fellow pastors and leaders in my association. Though there’s room for improvement, I’ve had an overall positive experience at the association level.
Over the years I have worked at all levels of Southern Baptist life and even served as the Director of Mission of one of those mega-associations (400+ churches) advocated by David K. There are a number of things I would like to say, but I am not sure there is enough space or time to say them all in this forum. Therefore, I will say a few and then see where the conversation takes us. By the way, as a foundation for my comments let me say, I think that the association (in some form) is essential to the future of the SBC.
1. It is my opinion (based on readings and conversations) that the reason the association was not part of the CP was similar to the discussion here. There was a growing feeling among the leadership, at the time, that it had served its purpose and the state conventions could better do what had been done at the associational level. Anecdotal historical evidence for this opinion is found in two events. (a) When missionaries went overseas in large numbers, after WWII, they did not generally establish associations, they established national conventions. (b) The same phenomenon took place in the US as new territory was opened by the then Home Mission Board. State Conventions were established who in turn set up subsidiary “associations”. The thinking seems to have been, “Why stay with the steam engine (association) when we can move forward faster with the diesel (convention)”. The 1963 forum of associational leaders tried to revitalize this element (associations) of Baptist life, but with mixed results.
2. We do need to rethink the way that we do associations and state conventions. Well, why not, let’s throw the national entities into the mix as well. The system has served us well for a long time, but has some serious cracks which will create problems for the future. Several changes are already in the works which will dramatically change the way we do business in the near future.
(a) Large multi-site churches have become small associations although without the name. In fact, they are much more like a diocese with the lead pastor serving as the Bishop.
(b) Money is being siphoned from the state convention budgets in order to support the national structure. Associations are also being hit financially by this new paradigm. Unfortunately, the national entities, by and large, are continuing to do business as usual instead of rethinking their funding stream. Rather than enlarging the pie we are putting all of our eggs in one basket while in many ways the pipeline is shrinking (how about that for a collection of mixed metaphors).
(c) There is really not entity that can help the smaller membership church leadership like the local association. The vast majority of SBC churches are smaller membership churches. For years a lot of what we have done is play musical churches as people move from one to another, but the larger churches really cannot do what the smaller churches do, even if all of their programming is attractive to those who attend smaller churches.
(d) While interim Exec of a smaller state convention I advocated for smaller associations comprised of churches (3-5) that were geographically close, where the pastor of the largest church (or someone else with this giftedness) served as the moderator/champion responsible for much of what has traditionally been done by the association. His church would pay his salary and the other churches would chip in for expenses and share the cost of any group meeting they needed. A consortium of these smaller associations could form from time to time to plan larger events, camps, or disaster response. Neither of these would be as structured (constitution, bylaws, etc) as association current are, and would be trangegent – springing up as need arose and disappearing when no longer needed. Technology, not organizational structure, would be used as the binding agent. Funding would be carved out much like it is currently done for disaster response – the need would dictate the budget and the churches would respond to the need.
I’ll stop for now see how the thread is going.
I am grateful that we have an excellent association in Birmingham, Alabama. The staff members coordinate numerous ministries between our churches and the local community. I have been personally encouraged by the fellowship with other pastors and the wise counsel of our DOM, Mike McLemore. The association is aggressive in developing partnerships with church planting efforts, especially in minority communities. Currently, they are working on a plan to become more streamlined and efficient in the face of tightening budgets. I don’t doubt the very real problems other associations are experiencing, but there are some that are performing a vital ministry. (And just to be clear, I am a local pastor and not an employee of the association.)
Well stated, Steve.
Your association is one of the best in the SBC.
When I hear or read of DOMs who say their association is not effective because their member churches are “not involved in the work of the association,” I say, “Well there is your problem.”
Too many associations had fallen victim to the “Church Model Paradigm/Structure.”
They call on churches to come “help do the work of the association.” That’s wrong.
The work of a local association in Baptist life was to be a resource to the local affiliated churches to help them fulfill the Great Commission.
Too many associations add to the work of the local church in a burdensome way, rather than to come alongside local churches and be a resource to help them fulfill the Great Commission.
When Baptist associations fulfill their role as a local resource entity rather than an entity that demands to be resourced, the association’s worth to its member churches becomes self evident.
The church I attend is part of a metro Atlanta association that, I am told, planted more churches than the state convention. It seems to be doing well. The connection with my church is not geographical but based on affinity. My last pastorate had an outstanding DOM who was very helpful to me and interested in my church. He’s gone and a series of retirees and others have come and gone. Irrelevance understates the matter. I know of nothing to interest me going on in this association.
DOMs, according to the survey, are frustrated by lack of participation and finances. Pastors are frustrated by lack of participation but finances rank way below vision and relevance. CB rightly assessed the complaint about lack of participation.
I appreciate the insightful comments but am not optimistic about any wholesale or rapid changes. Autonomy means that the association can hang on as long as it can maintain a budget.
About fifteen years ago I was a bi-vocational pastor in Kentucky, while teaching at Southern Seminary. Our DOM retired (at age 85!), and the Executive Committee of our association invited a state convention staff member to help us draw up a job description. We met on a Saturday, and we spent the morning discussing the purpose of a Baptist association. Just before lunch I asked, “If our associational office closed today, how long would it be before someone noticed?” There was a long pause, and then a pastor said, “About two weeks.” Everyone sighed, and then we went to lunch (very Baptistic). After lunch we agreed that the association should develop missions local, state, national, and international missions projects on behalf of the smaller churches. The idea was that the smaller churches could join in missions projects that one small church could not do alone. We also agreed that the larger churches did not really need the association, but it could be a big help to the smaller churches–primarily by providing them with teaching and ministry resources. So, we developed a new DOM job description with those two ministries emphasized. I know of many urban associations that do great work in church planting and ministry.
I am blessed to be a part of what I regard as a very effective association of three counties in south Mississippi. In sponsoring our new Hispanic church start, providing continuing pastoral education, coordinating association-wide mission trips to Indonesia, Mexico, etc., helping churches find pastors and staff, music ministry training, ministry assistant conferences, etc., they more than give back to the churches in our Tri-County Association than what we churches put into it. This was one of my most pleasant surprises when we returned to the States after 36 years with the IMB. It has been really easy to teach our new church about the Baptist principle of cooperation as they can see for themselves with the ministries of Dr. Bill Miller, Rev. Mark McArthur and Lisa Fortner, all of whom have ministered in person in our church.
I assume that this is not the case everywhere from reading the above comments, but my take on our situation here is don’t fix it, it ain’t broke.
I served in an awesome association when I pastored in Johnstown, PA. Doug Pilot the best heart for missions DOM (or whatever name they go by now) was the best.
Roxboro, NC tried to be agreeable to every pastor, even when there were polar problems.
Kannapolis, NC, great guy, but seemed disconnected.
El Paso – good guy, tough ministry – great harvest potential. Migrant ministry absorbed so much energy time and resources.
It seemed where I served, the larger churches who pulled out left the Assoc. struggling financially. This seemed to coincide with churches being hit financially. Made it tough on Associations.
Is there a place for them now? I really do not know. Does it depend upon the heart of the local church and how they want to work together locally? I think that is a major key to the strength.
Other than an annual youth and children’s camp, I have no idea what our association does, although they accept checks from us. We haven’t seen the DOM in probably close to a decade. He did help us make contact with our current pastor.
I serve as a pastor in Wichita, KS. Our church is heavily involved in the association and we consider it a worthy kingdom investment. Our local association has been through some periods of streamlining organizationally and tightening things up in terms of vision and purpose. We have an excellent DOM (Glenn Davis) who has facilitated partnerships for church planting, established pastor clusters for growth and fellowship, and seeks to resource churches in creative ways. We have revised our associational constitution and by-laws to emphasize both church planting and church health. Some of the organizational changes in NAMB and our state convention have forced local associations, including our own, to reconsider their role and their structures.
William,
Thank you for the great post. I have not been associated with Southern Baptists all my Christian life but since I have been I have nothing but good things to say about the Director of Missions that we have had. From my previous exposure to other denominations it seems to me that the DOM is the major factor in cultivating SBC identity at the grassroots. Few pastors/churches communicate regularly with the state entity on the other hand the DOM ( Associational Missionary) does the great work of pulling us together for the sake of Gospel unity.
From where I stand I see our DOM as a man of exceptional maturity and extraordinary drive. We are blessed to have him.
Woody Whitt
I am fortunate to be a part of a good Association with a strong, mission minded, DOM. We are constantly challenged by our DOM, not to support the Association more, but to be a Kingdom focused church. I gladly ask our Church to support the local Association because it helps us be about our task.
Steve Young
Pray for victims of Hurricane Harvey.
Pray for Southern Baptist Disaster Relief, Samaritan’s Purse and others.
This will be a great example of local Baptist Associations being very helpful to those affected by Harvey.
David R. Brumbelow
William,
You might find some of your answers in two writers/researchers/professors who wrote on Baptist associations: Walter (Buddy) Shurden wrote on the development from 1707 to 1814 and Russell Bennett did a great work on the development from 1814 to 1963 in his published dissertation, A Fellowship of Kindred Minds. Ancient history…perhaps…revealing, I think so.