Someone put a link to this interview in the comments on Howell’s post. And I thought it was worth hearing from Dr. Ezell’s own words how things are going at NAMB. I found myself a little more sympathetic to Ezell – he’s had a rough job. I sure wouldn’t want it. It’s an interesting and seemingly forthright discussion.
1) I was surprised at the forceful description of the inadequacy of the way NAMB was functioning prior to his coming. At about 16:30, he says that NAMB was “pathetic.” He describes NAMB as the Montreal Expos (badly managed and facing extinction) and said that NAMB needed “radical change.” That seems to be what he has done in his first 6 months.
At 19:30 he makes the claim that NAMB (and HMB before it) has never had a golden age to look back on. He does not view NAMB’s recent problems as a departure from the past, but as a continuation of it.
I certainly agree with him there.
At about 20 to 20:30, there is a discussion of strategies in different states. Evidently, it is his intent to take over that process of church planting more and develop a national strategy and give states less freedom to do what they think is best. Looks like “big government” days for church planting. Is that good or bad? I’m not sure.
2) He seems to see himself as a victim of others’ meanness and criticism. He jokes about his attacks on bloggers and others, but sees himself as a man under attack. He does not seem to respond well to criticism from others, from what I have been told. This would seem to be evidence of that.
At about minute 6, he describes how little people have trusted him. He does not really deal with the “why.”
At 11:30 minutes, he mentions the “housecoat” controversy, but only in a sense as if he is the victim of unreasonable judgment of others. No mention of the fact that the derisive comments were actually his.
3) At around minute 28, he gives an extended discussion about record-keeping anomalies in the past. Basically, we have not been planting as many churches as our records indicate. I hope this was sloppy record-keeping, not intentional inflation of numbers. But that was a disturbing discussion. Basically, he said that reality is we have NOT been doing what we have been SAYING we are doing. Things are worse than we have been told.
4) I found it interesting how different he and Dr. Mohler view him from the way that we tend to view him. He sees himself as a humble seeker of relationships. That is not the perspective many have formed of him.
5) Around the 42 minute mark, he addresses the key issue – why he, as a pastor, largely ignored denominational missions. He discusses how he did not understand the CP and is getting to know what its all about. It is encouraging to hear this. But on the other hand, one wonders how someone could advance in SBC life as he has without understanding our denominational structure any better than that.
At 44:00, he discusses how he wishes he had done differently as a pastor and regrets being “disengaged” from the denomination.
Great synopsis. You have me wondering about minute #6 though. By “At about minute 6, he describes how little people have trusted him.” are you saying he thinks he’s the Wizard of Oz? Maybe I should just watch the video… 🙂
Oh, boy. It must be Friday.
Anthony & Dave, I borrowed both of your statements for an article I’m posting on my blog in the morning. Just FYI! I think it’s a very funny statement.
Ezell thinks he’s the Wizard of Oz!
Fair enough…just know that I know zero about Ezell, so my comment was more a reference to the “little people” than to him as the Wizard.
Anthony, the article is a spoof. It’ll be on Voices this afternoon.
I’ve read this article once quickly and am more inspired by it and Ezell than any other report. This is the ” meat ” that everybody can use to solve true problems. My only reservation from the article is if Ezell can’t take criticism – if he is thinned skinned – then he needs to choose for himself people that will strongly support him – period .
A ” fresh face ” CEO type , with a proven business record , and with no axes to grind , working under Ezell could be a huge asset . You can never beat a man at his job if he’s good at it.
As one who has been more critical of the changes taking place at the new NAMB, I wanted to watch this video with an open mind. Overall, I must say that Dr. Ezell presented himself well and made a compelling case for why he believes as he does. While I still have concerns about the implementation of the new strategic partnerships with the state conventions and the extremely high emphasis on church planting, there are some positive things that one can take away from the interview.
I do want to share a minor quibble or two before the positive. This was an obviously very friendly environment and a friendly interviewer in Dr. Mohler. If I’m not mistaken, Dr. Mohler not once referred to the SBC as a “Convention.” It was always “denomination.” I know that some use these words interchangeably, but I just found it odd. Perhaps nothing there or perhaps a different mindset.
There’s no question that major changes were needed at NAMB in terms of administration. However, I find it hard to believe that there was nothing worthwhile done at NAMB/HMB since 1845. It would have been nice mention Disaster Relief, for instance. I guess it’s all perspective.
As to building relationships, particularly with those he will be partnering with, it does seem that he recognizes his weakness in that area at the start. I would say that there still may be a disconnect in terms of relationship building with some or at least how one defines relationship building.
Now to the positive. I was encouraged by Dr. Ezell’s heart for wanting NAMB to be as effective as it possibly could be. Bringing the level of accountability within the organization to a high standard was needed. That no one at NAMB knew who the church plants were (because they didn’t ask the states) is mind-boggling. That the record keeping standards and tracking standards are being raised is refreshing.
I was also struck with how Dr. Ezell’s perspective has changed concerning CP since taking over at NAMB. He genuinely regretted having “disengaged” from CP and the Convention. I was pleasantly suprised at both Dr. Ezell’s and Dr. Mohler’s strong support for CP, basically saying that there is no better way to do missions and ministry than through CP.
I still have reservations about some aspects of what the new NAMB is doing, but I came away from watching the interview more open to what Dr. Ezell is trying to do. Time will tell though. Thanks and God bless,
Howell
The SBC is a convention 2 days a year. It is a denomination the other 363. That’s what I glean from our governing documents.
“I was also struck with how Dr. Ezell’s perspective has changed concerning CP since taking over at NAMB. He genuinely regretted having “disengaged” from CP and the Convention.”
Yes, that part also struck me. Frankly, everyone knew that NAMB was a mess. You can’t quarrel with his insight on that one. He says he let his disdain cause him to disengage.
He seemed to be sincere. I’ve been fooled before, but that seemed to be genuine.
“I was also struck with how Dr. Ezell’s perspective has changed concerning CP since taking over at NAMB. He genuinely regretted having “disengaged” from CP and the Convention.”
Perhaps we can hope that his testimony and viewpoint will get other super-mega-grande-mucho-venti-church pastors to re-engage with the CP and help address the issues rather than just cutting off the money until they’re happy with it. This could be good.
And hopefully it will push some folks to do some better CP education, especially for seminary students. There’s pastors in small churches with no SB education that can describe the system quite well to their churches and to others, but it always seems like “I don’t understand the CP” comes from seminary graduates. There should be a “Fundamentals of Southern Baptist Ministry” class that covers that and a few other subjects…
Here’s the thing that makes me think that might be a sincere change of heart.
If the CP is as good a funding system as we think it is, it would be natural that someone like Ezell who had, by his own words, disengaged, would, when he then engaged, begin to see the value and blessing of the CP.
Especially if he now gets a nice paycheck from the contributions. I’m still skeptical. I just have a hard time with turn-coat types. I wait a bit more.
It’s a shock that you take a skeptical view, Frank. Who would’ve guessed that.
I found it interesting how different he and Dr. Mohler view him from the way that we tend to view him. He sees himself as a humble seeker of relationships. That is not the perspective many have formed of him.
Forgive me for being cynical, but that is how PR works. Whatever a person’s weak points are, speak of them as if they’re strengths. If you do that with political figures either in government or religion, you’ll see more of the truth through the rhetoric.
I understand the cynicism, R. However, I would consider the kind of PR you speak of a serious moral failing. We are to be people of the truth, people of integrity.
I have some questions remaining about Ezell. I think it is perfectly fair to disagree with him. But until such is proven, I’m going to continue to believe that he is a man of good-will, integrity and Christian honor. Until such is proven, I will believe that he serves the Lord and is not simply a craven politician.
We will see.
Does anyone else think that maybe our seminary education is lacking if someone could graduate from Southwestern and Southern and still not understand how the CP works?
Tom, at Southern, you have to take a required class that you receive no credit for called the Cooperative program. It’s a free course; and it’s required.
Tom and everyone else,
I looked back at my notes from the Cooperative Program class at Southern. I had to listen to over 3 hours worth of lectures, take 9 quizes without notes. Here were the objectives for the course:
All students are expected to understand the role of the Cooperative Program in the Southern Baptist Convention, especially for the support of the institution’s mission of training ministers.
? To understand why cooperation is essential for fulfilling the Great commission
? To review the New Testament foundations of denominational cooperation
? To reflect upon the governance and finance of cooperative endeavors
? To understand the history and character of the Cooperative Program
? To gain familiarity for the entities of the Southern Baptist Convention
? To examine the challenges to effective cooperation
? To promote commitment for cooperation among SBC churches
This class helped me to better appreciate the Cooperative Program.
I know this is an old complaint but I guess it’s just frustrating that a man who didn’t understand the CP was asked to head up a CP supported ministry and now asks me to do what he barely did when he was pastoring.
I am going to continue to pray for him that he succeeds wildly beyond even what he is thinking and hoping for. But it does make me look several times when he speaks for southern baptists to see if he really does understand the cooperative component of Southern Baptists.
Does anybody think our seminary education is lacking when graduates find that the only jobs as pastors are at family run churches where the pay is $24,000 / yr and they want include a mans wife as part of the bargain – until he gets fed up and moves out to reopen that job again to some other lost soul who values ” working for the Lord ” more important than anything else. Or maybe plant a church with as little income already saddled with debt . Not to worry, folks. The SBC is now going to take charge of things. Wait a minute – who’s been in charge ?
A salary of 24 K, for a man with a family ?
Probably so, Christine. At the first church I served, 1986-1990, my package was $18k, including utilities for the barn of a parsonage we lived in, travel, insurance, and everything except the $33 a month they contributed to my retirement account. They claimed to be a “full-time church.” And they were upset that it was broken down into categories excluding some items from taxation because “they didn’t get their pay like that.” (In fact, for my successor, they insisted the whole package be classified as “salary,” which made them feel better and boosted the church’s numbers in the association and state convention annual, as everybody reading that assumes pastors receive some allowances beyond the “salary”.) We qualified for free lunches at school for our kids, food stamps, and such, but of course the church would not allow us to actually receive such benefits under threat of firing.
John
That actually sounds pretty normal for a lot of churches. Having their pastor called “full time” is like a status symbol for them.
Does Home Schooling look good when your children find out they qualify for Food Stamps and Free Lunches at Public Schools because they’re pastor/father doesn’t make enough money ?
I wouldn’t dream of sticking my kids in public school, despite the fact that my current financial situation qualifies us for food stamps and a few other government programs. My hardest question becomes whether to work part-time and be bi-vocational (I can’t say pastor “part-time” because that simply never happens) or pastor full-time and take the subsidies.
Jeff,
As a taxpayer: use what’s there that frees you to do the work you’re called to do and still have your kids remember your name. Seriously.
Would I prefer that a lot of those programs not even exist? In theory, yes. But in practice, there’s lots of folks that need them, that work hard and still need that little bit of help.
I had to swallow my pride to take those WIC vouchers for that season (well, 5 years is a heck of a season), but it’s there to help. Use it.
And Food Stamps? Those are from the Ag Department that helps sell American farm products, so take them, use them. Buy lots of rice that comes from “Producer’s Rice Mill” in Arkansas. That way you’re helping us out down here 🙂
Doug Hibbard – You bet use all of it and even if someone is laid off – unemployment is not Welfare. Unemployment is paid fro by both the employer and the employee. Food stamps – Well people in our armed service qualify, new hires at most airlines if they have families qualify and stay qualified until the probation period is over. I’ve been there done all that including hanging in there to make a solid 6 figures that takes almost 4 months of the year to pay all the taxes and other deductions and that was 20 years ago. I’ve worked 100 hours for $100.00 ( yes that’s a dollar/hr for Frank) and that was two jobs – one as a Harley mechanic and another in a gas station while living in a Rescue Squad rent free to buy flying lessons. But the payoff , my ” carrot ” was always out in front of me to go after. What burns me the most about this is that pastors & ministers do a great job for all the right reasons but everybody else is gaming the system while you sit back thinking someone else is going to look out for you. One of the biggest hurdles in organising the Air Line Pilots Assn. was in convincing people who belonged to country clubs, drove Mercedes, had boats and big houses was that they were Labor and until they were willing to band together for the benefit of all they would struggle. First things First, but it’s time you faced some facts and started looking out for each other. American Medical Assn. ( AMA – doctors) figured it out a long time ago and copied ALPA’s format. God doesn’t mind if you make a good living in an honest way – nothing to be ashamed of.
Dave,
I think I have become more skeptical over the last few years to be sure. But, in regard to Ezell, it seems he is the one that made skepticism the default setting on his ministry early on. I have not seen enough to prove the setting has been changed.
I went through the Arizona Baptist Foundation bankruptsy and now am dealing with another Baptist Foundation that is in serious financial trouble. Trust is a hard thing to earn, but an easy thing to lose.
I’ve been at my present church less than five years. It is pretty independent. We are seeing record numbers of people being baptized and we gave a record offering to both Lottie and Annie.
We are on the edge of SBC life, and the matters at present have not been conducive to moving us closer to the center. I think Eliff may be a step in the right direction, but I’m not at all sure about Ezell. He seems to generate division simply by waking up in the morning. My theory is that if he really wanted to prove his sincerity in regard to NAMB, he would have declined to appointment. He knew his record (or lack thereof).
Once he jumped into the ring, I have not been predisposed to give his work a pass. I certainly am less predisposed to allegiance than say, Jarod. And, I took my Cooperative Program classes (I took more than one) from pioneers in the cooperative program ministry in the West.
I think it will be a sad day in Baptist life when skepticism is not a default setting in regard to denominational machinations.
Dave, your posts of late (correct me if I am wrong, please) seem to inidicate a growing support from you on behalf of Ezell.
For the life of me, I cannot read the following quote and imagine that this man should be where he is:
“”He discusses how he did not understand the CP and is getting to know what its all about.””
I just can’t seem to get beyond statements like this about him. How did he get elected? It just makes me think of backroom negotiations with friends who are pushing an agenda other than Kingdom missions.
Very little good has ever been achieved with ulterior motives — and I am not saying I know his motives for sure at this time. It’s just there seems like too much smoke for there not to be a fire somewhere.
Well, that is a question. How did a man get to be president of an organization he holds in such disregard?
But, the fact is that he IS the president. We can spend the next 20 years bemoaning his election or we can move on. It does not good to say, “He shouldn’t have been elected.” He was.
I am, in fact, less negative about Ezell.
I believe much as he does, that NAMB was a mess. I thought he might be the kind of person who would remake it.
When he went on the attack against people who criticized him, it left a really bad taste in my mouth. I came to regard him as a typical man who thinks himself above criticism and will treat anyone who criticizes him as the enemy.
This video makes me think this is a real problem – he sees himself as the VICTIM of hostility instead of the PERPETRATOR of it. He created a problem and blames everyone else for it.
But, while I think that demonstrates something unattractive about his demeanor, I think it is also time to move beyond that.
My state is NAMB-funded to a large degree, so people are interested in him doing a good job. And most of the people I have talked to feel like he is growing into the job. He probably couldn’t have done worse in his first few weeks, and has to deal with the negative perceptions he created.
But most of the people I talk to seem to think he is starting to get the hang of it and may actually get things straightened out.
NAMB needed major surgery. He is doing that. Time will tell if he is performing the right surgery.
But I don’t understand how constant harping about the mistakes of his early days will help NAMB succeed.
Should he have been elected? Irrelevant. He WAS elected.
Is he the right man? Irrelevant. He IS the man.
So, I’m going to try to judge the job he is doing and not just focus on the offense he created and the perceptions he left us with.
I think it is time that we extend some grace toward Ezell.
Dave, I really want to believe as you do and give Ezell a “ton of grace.”
I just erased the rest of the post because you have pretty much ended the discussion with: once someone is elected, he’s the man no matter what got him there.
There is no way to argue that logic — only reject it. So, I’ll not argue your point.
What are you going to do? Seek his ouster? He’s the president now.
Yea, little one can do now. We can get the facts, and if they warrant, make sure any back rooms are shut down. I do feel it takes more to gain full support than simply getting elected.
I’d partner with the Devil to win souls-but I’d never trust him.
On the Baptist Press right now dated April 8th, ” Sing ” Oldum (Sp) who is in charge of Communications and Relations at the SBC’s Executive Committee ( whew ), has a long article extolling the virtues of the NAMB . When does everybody at SBC start telling the facts to each other – and then when do we get to be included with info we can rely on as accurate.
Partyism is always a problem as all member are not in full agreement except to maintain power.
Dr. James Willingham, Ezell looks like he’s ready to cross all boundries. I wonder what part of this NAMB developement was in the papers that were ” hidden ” for ten years . They evidently feel no responsibility at all to anybody else to tell the truth – even now with Ezell exposing this tail of woe.
The biggest thing that bothered me in this interview, and I watched it last night and then slept on this, is the somewhat flippant attitude that Ezell projects through parts of it. Whether it is the joke about the housecoat or the offhanded way that he implies that ANY church can send a mission team of 3-5 people to a major city for a weekend to encourage a church planter, those sorts of comments rubbed me the wrong way. Overall, I have a more positive picture of him, but I am still wary because of that attitude. Add to that the crack about NAMB not having a “golden age” as well.
I can’t speak for other “pioneer areas,” but we saw a boom in church planting here in the Dakotas in the 70s that is still bearing fruit today. There were some amazing men who did incredible work for the Kingdom during that time. Now you don’t have to call it a golden age, but would it kill him to acknowledge that some good had been done in the past.
I read a book a year or so ago called How to Change Your Church (Without Killing It). I think it might be a good idea for someone to get a copy of this to Kevin Ezell pronto. He might be able to pick up a few good pointers. It is out of print I think, but I found a copy on Amazon.
“At about minute 6, he describes how little people have trusted him. He does not really deal with the “why.””
Perhaps it is because his approach to “church planting” at Highview was to open other campuses instead of “planting churches”.
I would say that he doesn’t know enough about NAMB if he thinks nothing good has gone on their since it was founded. Saying that makes it sounds like he is trying to excuse the fact that his church was never supportive of it, and covering up for the fact that he got the job because of connections, not because of his ability. He could have skipped that and been fine.