Today’s Five Question interview is with Eddie Funkowitz. Eddie was a career worker for the IMB, but has moved on to different challenges in the US. We caught up with Eddie as he was applying for a Sam’s Club membership while slurping a 64 ounce drink he got for a buck down at the Stop N Go.
As always, names are changed to keep my interviewees from coming to my house and stealing my jalapenos in retaliation. Everything else is absolutely true.
1. Many IMB workers feel cut off from SBC life and trends. Returning to the North American SBC work force often means figuring out the latest events and hot-button problems. What SBC trends and issues caught you off guard the most when you moved to the U.S.?
After coming off the mission field where there is a huge sense of family or team pride within the IMB, I found it extremely disappointing to see the fighting within our own convention. I am not saying everyone within the IMB sees eye-to-eye on all the policies or direction the IMB is taking, but by and large the missionaries take great pride in being part of the IMB team. As a convention founded on the concept of autonomous churches cooperating together in order to accomplish greater things, it is extremely discouraging to see us fight over non-essential matters. I don’t expect every church within the convention to agree on every matter, but it would be great to see the same sense of family or team pride within our convention.
2. As you’ve represented the IMB to pastors and ministers who became, in essence, your co-laborers here in North America, did you find they understood how missions changed you and your view of ministry?
No.
I don’t think it is realistic to expect them to understand. Life and ministry in a different culture is completely different than in North America. I don’t view this as a negative; it is simply reality. It is similar to when missionaries share with churches on their STAS. Some people understand, but most people don’t have the experiences to truly understand what life and ministry in a different culture is really like.
Missions is my passion. It is what excites me. Some pastors will say things like, “we need to focus here first, before going overseas.” That goes against everything I believe. It doesn’t offend me. I just have a completely different view of the world as a result of my missions involvement. I believe if every pastor would leave the comforts of North America and go and serve for a couple of weeks in a different culture it would radically change the church in North America.
3. What part of life in North America appeals to you the most relative to where you were living and working on the field?
Some of the obvious perks are living closer to family, knowing the language, understanding the culture and eating familiar food.
The least?
The speed at which Americans live is absolutely crazy. We are so over-extended and we have no reason to be. We have more money and more conveniences than practically everywhere else in the world. We should be the most care-free, laid back society; but we are probably the most anxious, uptight, stressed society. What’s sad is that it is equally true of believers and non-believers.
4. How did you explain the change in your calling (or however you put it) to people who supported you in missions?
I didn’t feel like there was a change in my calling. Missionaries often change roles or even geographical locations for many different reasons. However, it is never viewed as a change of calling unless they go back to North America.
Many of my friends in the IMB have served in different countries. Much of the leadership within the IMB served in different countries. If they were asked to explain the change in their calling, they would say there wasn’t a change they simply moved to a new role or new country. I view mine as the same. I continue to serve in missions as a missions pastor.
5. There’s talk of the IMB and NAMB combining or joining efforts. Since you left the turf of the former in order to live in the land of the latter, what’s your thinking on this concept?
I think it is an interesting concept. I personally believe that life and ministry is so radically different outside North America that it would be a mistake to combine the two organizations. I understand that some operating budget could be saved or possibly more resources would find its way to the field, but missionaries outside of North America face completely different issues than those living in North America. I believe the two organizations should stay separate.
Bonus question: How many pounds have you gained since being back in the US?
I have gained 3 lbs. over the last 3 1/2 years. Not too bad for a guy who loves to eat. I gained more weight on my past stateside assignments and vacations to the US when I was with the IMB than I have in the past 3 1/2 years.
Only 3 pounds? I wanna be you when I grow up.
How long was he with the IMB?
Long enough to have been changed by the experience and not so long that all his friends in the US died or forgot him.
When did he leave the IMB?
Joe, based on the weight gain question, he left approx. 3 and a half years ago.
Ok. I see that now. I just wasn’t sure if he was one of those missionaries who resigned because they didn’t want to do the right thing and sign off on the BFM 2000.
Gee…..let us know how you REALLY feel for once, eh Joe?
He simply moved on to other challenges and, he explained in the interview, does not feel as though he’s left missions. He’s just tackling it from a different angle.
Yeah, I did get that saw himself doing the same thing just in a different venue. I would concur.
And I’m really trying to be more assertive and say what I really think. It’s a real struggle for me and it’s not something I do very well.
Joe:
You are unbelievable! When you say:”I just wasn’t sure if he was one of those missionaries who resigned because they didn’t want to do the right thing and sign off on the BFM 2000.”
I do not even think you know what you are saying.
Let’s see its 2011 and the BF&M is 2000 not a chance of what you’re saying being the problem.
Let me ask you, Joe, what makes you feel as though signing the BF&M 2000 was so important? I remember there were some resignations, but I was inside the IMB at the time (and still am), so I don’t know what SBCers in the US felt about it.
Jeremy
First of all, employers have the right to set employment conditions for employees. Secondly, while there are probably some of the missionaries that resigned that would affirm inerrancy and were complimentarians, I would be willing to be a good number of them were not complimentarians and did not affirm inerrancy. Therefore, they needed to be shown the door since they didn’t hold to the positions that Southern Baptists expect denominational employees to hold to. Besides, they would have been much more at home in the CBF.
Jeremy: Why in the world are you asking Joe? That is unbelievable to me. Feeling like it’s the twilight zone around here.
Oh Debbie, you may not have seen it in a comment on William’s site, but my family and I have been visiting an SBC church here in town. The Bible church we were going to was too far of a drive. 🙂
Joe,
Welcome back from the far country.
David R. Brumbelow
David,
Thanks.
I don’t like the guy. Anyone who only gains 3 lbs in 3 years cannot be trusted. Wait.. I guess I’m projecting.
The above comment is proof that SBC Voices needs a “Like” button for the comments.
“We can build it. We have the technology….”
Or at least some form of community moderation, plus minuses, etc.
By the way, Jeremy, I appreciate these glimpses into life as a missionary in today’s SBC.
I would have to disagree with Eddie’s answers to question #2. In my experience, pastors and church members who take mission trips are only marginally more understanding of the issues IMBers face on the field; and now that I’m back on stateside assignment, I find most church members to be completely puzzled by differences in our approach to teaching and ministry. Even at churches with rich background in international missions, it seems that most people there just expect that we are simply SBC workers who labor THERE exactly as we would labor HERE.
I am an emeritus missionary with 38 years of mission service behind me. I’m sorry that Eddie felt he had to leave the field when there is such a great need. I still feel the call to foreign missions and have joined a group called “Book-Link.” They collect Bibles, seminary text books and materials to send to third world countries. This ministry has been going on for 23 years. If you have old Bibles, theological reference books, etc. that you would like to donate, call Book-Link at 606) 379-1734 to see how you can support Southern Baptist Missions from your home. They will be glad to hear from you.
Wonderful post.
These are the kind of posts that inspire me about the SBC and the IMB.
Jeremy Parks:
You said to Joe Blackmon:”Let me ask you, Joe, what makes you feel as though signing the BF&M 2000 was so important? I remember there were some resignations, but I was inside the IMB at the time (and still am), so I don’t know what SBCers in the US felt about it.”
Better yet Joe Blackmon Google IMB missionaries and look at the faces of these real people and read about the number of years these people served in the IMB before being terminated for not signing the 2000 BF&M.
Maybe it will change your perspective?
Don’t holding your breath waiting on my perspective to be changed.
Joe:
Could you at least acknowledge these were real people like you that were fired?
Please show me where I’ve said they were not “real people”.
Debbie:
You said to Jeremy:”Jeremy: Why in the world are you asking Joe? That is unbelievable to me. Feeling like it’s the twilight zone around here.”
Joe does not answer questions. He thinks he is the chief Auditor and his only role is to dictate to others or to ask questions and owes no one a response.
Well, I did answer his questions.
To provide a response to Debbie, Joe, and Tom:
I asked Joe for clarity about his statements simply because he’s the one who made them. Seems reasonable to me to ask him for clarifying details instead of asking someone else. Joe, thanks for answering.
As a way of replying to all of this, let me add: the IMB did and does have the right to set the terms of employment, and terms can indeed change over time. As well, I would imagine there were some workers who left the fold due to personal theological iussues with the BF&M 2000. The loss of those workers was felt acutely, and yet I can understand it was a necessary step.
However, some of the missionaries I knew who resigned had different issues that were not theological in nature. For example:
-Many had given years of service to the organization. They felt that the sudden push to sign the BF&M was an insulting indication of disloyalty from the organization. The thinking went, “So no one has objected to my teaching, and no one thinks I am doing anything theologically wrong, but you are asking me to sign this paper affirming that I won’t teach certain theological things? After all we’ve given, this is the response? Distrust?” It was deeply painful for these folks to realize that their own loyalty to the organization was being repaid like this; at least, that was the feeling of things.
-Some who resigned objected to the source. That is, there seemed to be an attitude of distrust for the IMB stemming from certain parties and individuals within the SBC. The process could have been, “Hey, we trust the IMB and its proven workers, but from now on let’s ask new (less well-known) people to sign this document.” Nope. Instead, the sensation was, “We don’t trust the IMB nor its “proven” workers (snicker) and we want to re-evaluate them through this litmus test.” Again, this was the perception of things by some.
-Some missionaries felt that they had already been proven theologically. When we applied to the IMB, I had to write out my beliefs on the trinity, character of God, the Bible, etc in my own words. My candidate consultant and I went over them. I had to defend word choices and explain phrases that might have indicated poor theological foundations. Trustees reviewed my doctrinal opinions and reserved the right to ask me about them in a committee meeting. More than any brief document could have done, the application process thoroughly examined my position on many, many topics. And now…asking me to sign a paper as though I was some unknown stranger, some theological wanderer? Please….
I chose to sign the paper, setting aside some indignation in favor of keeping the peace and keeping my job; it didn’t end up being that bad. I do affirm the BF&M 2000, without doubt, and yet I think it could have been done differently.
Sure, there were theological reasons for resigning, and that’s the nature of things. Even so, there were other reasons that were very difficult and painful for the missionaries involved that had nothing to do with the content of the BF&M. The IMB had no desire to lose a single missionary, nor to get rid of the chaff or anything like that. It was just a difficult process for lots of people, including many leaders and field personnel who had no issue with signing.
Well, like I said, I imagined there are people who resigned who were complimentarians and affirmed in inerrancy. You’ve confirmed that. Now, for those folks I do feel bad that they left.
Jeremy:
I think the whole making people sign off on the 2000 BF&M was just a way to get rid of people who were not beholden to it but the Bible.
Personally I think it was a slap in the face to the senior missionaries. But what is the loss of a few missionaries who just will not follow the rules of employment. I believe I read somewhere there were 153 of them.
And I’m quite certain that a good number of those senior missionaries did not believe the Bible is inerrant and were not complimentarians. I have no problem with those kinds of missionaries leaving, no matter how long they served.
Joe: First, I’m not sure how you know that a good number were not complementarian inerrantists. Second, do you think it is better that the Gospel is not preached at all rather than have it preached by non-complementarian, non-inerrantists? I can see not hiring new missionaries that don’t fit the bill, and I can see removing missionaries that have proved to be teaching unsound doctrine, but the scenario that played out seems to be sending the message that the spread of the Gospel is secondary to issues like gender roles.
Well, I didn’t say “know” I said “quite certain”. I freely admit that I don’t know for an absolute fact. I would, however, bet you a Hardee’s thickburger and some of their beer-battered onion rings that a good number were not complimentarians or inerrantists. However, I could be wrong.
Second, do you think it is better that the Gospel is not preached at all rather than have it preached by non-complementarian, non-inerrantists?
Ah, yes, because those are the only two options. If the gospel is not preached by non-complementarian, non-inerrantists it won’t be preach at all.
Holy excluded middle, Batman.
I take your point, assuming every missionary fired was replaced by someone meeting the new criteria. Do you know if that happened?
I do not.
Thanks for the insights from your interviewee and I am looking forward to the next interview. Blessings
To (those who are exchanging petty bickerings), enough of the back and forth. Let’s address the post or move on.
Sorry, Master Dave. I was seeking understanding, and became distracted.
I’ll go dunk my head in the toilet 10 times as punishment, and will watch an entire Yankees game as discipline.
You’ve done nothing wrong, Jeremy. My comments were directed at those who were exchanging petty insults with one another.
But I might point out, for the record, that watching a Yankees game is a reward, not a punishment.
If he watched on Saturday, it wasn’t a punishment. 🙂
Watching a Yankees game is only punishment if they win.
That’s why Saturday was not punishment. Go whoever-it-was!
As a former IMB missionary (but ALWAYS a missionary) and now North American church planter, I just want to go on record to say that I am proud to have served alongside such wonderful fellow missionaries on the field (many who stayed, some who returned the states), one of them being Jeremy Parks. Love ya brother!
I’d like to say here that I have no idea who this woman is. She apparently has deluded herself into thinking that we have, at some time, interacted on some level. It’s a really sad, sad situation.
Ma’am, get some help, seriously.
P.S.
Tell Brett I said “Hey” and that I’m looking forward to the next hike.
I would have gladly signed my name to the BFM 2000. No problem, at all. Even if I’d been on the mission field for 20 years, I wouldnt have any problem signing it. Even if right now, my church asked me to sign it, I’d gladly attach my John Hancock to that Biblical document.
So, I’m having a little bit of trouble understanding why someone would have a problem with it…any problem with it.
David
007: No surprises there. Some people’s consciences would not allow them to sign this man made document. I know that is hard for you to understand.
What would you have done if they had placed a weight requirement that would have disqualified you after 20 years?
Apples/oranges–being overweight is not a sin. Gluttony is a sin. It’s not like fat preachers are in a constant state of sin until they reach a healthy BMI or weight limit.
Those missionaries were told what they better believe and if they don’t believe it they could leave. I would put real money on the fact that many of them that were fired or quit did so because they were non-inerrantists and they were egalitarians. For those people, they needed to be gone and this was a great way to smoke them out. For those that quit or were fired who were complimentarians and inerrantists, I really do feel bad for them and their families and I totally respect that their consciences wouldn’t let them sign. I have no such sympathy for the egals and non-inerrantists.
Joe Blackmon:
You are not 007. I asked him the question and would like for him to answer as the question applies to him.
Well, you asked an irrelavent question since it would be unbiblical and illegal (per US employment law) for them to make such a requirement. However, expecting Baptist employees paid with Baptist money to be, well, Southern Baptist is not only perfectly legal but also biblical.
You asked a question in a public forum. Don’t get your knickers in twist when you get a public answer. If you want to ask David a question and only him answer it, might I suggest email?
it bothers me that in this discussion, missionaries are being regarded as employees hired to do a job in which the employer has an absiolute right to set criteria for continuing employment instead of regarding missionaries as called of God to do a ministry through the IMB, which is regarded as a facilitator to connect the minister with their God-called ministry.
John
Well, if they didn’t want to be held to the puritanical, chauvanist, fundementalist** beliefs of the BFM 2000, they could always go work for the CBF. God know it doesn’t matter what you believe there.
**Somebody really needs to invent a sarcasm font.
There is always a certain tension between individual calling and organizational limits. It simply cannot be helped.
The dust-up over the BF&M was just one example. Another, older example was when the IMB shifted to a church planting focus; many missionaries were required to change their strategies in order to line up with the new philosophy. Some missionaries chose to leave the organization in order to be true to His calling. I personally think that is the most ethical way of handling it. If He calls you to a specific task and the IMB no longer allows that, then leave the company and pursue that task in faith that He will provide. However, if He calls you to work with the IMB, then obey the standards they have with the knowledge that the Lord has placed you here for a purpose.
While there are times that I wish the IMB would handle certain things differently, I will affirm that the organization has the right to establish basic expectations for its workers. Sometimes those expectations are from the IMB itself, while at other times the SBC as a whole places those standards on its agencies.
Since the IMB is an SBC agency, the IMB should respect the basic standards that the SBC establishes. And since IMB workers submit themselves to the authority of the IMB (while receiving paychecks and benefits along the way), then workers are obligated to conform to the basic standards established by the IMB.
It isn’t pleasant, and it might clash with calling, but God knew you (generically speaking) would be in that position when He called and yet He still called you. It will be alright.
Mr. Blackmon:
You are being very rude by answering for 007. My question applied to him and not you. My thanks in advance for your cooperation.
My question is a legitimate one.
Well, you asked an irrelavent question since it would be unbiblical and illegal (per US employment law) for them to make such a requirement. However, expecting Baptist employees paid with Baptist money to be, well, Southern Baptist is not only perfectly legal but also biblical.
You asked a question in a public forum. Don’t get your knickers in twist when you get a public answer. If you want to ask David a question and only him answer it, might I suggest email?
Since apparently you missed this above.
Have yall seen this?
http://pastortimrogers.com/?p=2170#comment-3712
Go and check this out at Tim Rogers blog. I’d like for some of yall to explain this to me.
Yeah, so what exactly does this have to do with this thread? Seems like if you want to discuss it, there are plenty of other places where that discussion is taking place.
I for one am not a cessationist, so I don’t have much problem with it. But if you want to press Scripture to say something it doesn’t in order to downplay the role of the Holy Spirit in people’s lives you don’t like, then go for it. But I’d be very careful in characterizing something that the Holy Spirit may very well be doing (see Mark 3:20-30).
DR,
I didnt want to get into a discussion on this….in this thread. I was inviting you and others to go to Tim Rogers to view this. And really? You think what he said was ok? wow.
David
David,
You seem to ignore what I actually said here. I said I didn’t have “much problem with it”. I didn’t say I thought everything was o.k. I am just not willing to jump to conclusions like many of you are. I think more questions need to be asked and more explanation given. I think we need to be careful about what we say given Mark 3 and the Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit.
The following is from an October 18, 2002 Baptist Press article:
“Almost 99 percent of Southern Baptists’ overseas missionaries have affirmed the 2000 Baptist Faith and Message, and International Mission Board leaders are asking the remaining few to decide soon whether they are going to affirm it as well.
Avery Willis, IMB senior vice president for overseas operations, is talking personally with those missionaries about their reasons for delaying.
‘For 157 years, Southern Baptist missionaries have been expected to affirm that their beliefs are consistent with the beliefs of the churches that support them,’ IMB President Jerry Rankin said. ‘It is a reasonable expectation.’”
David R. Brumbelow
David Brumbelow:
I have lots of respect for the 1% who would not sign this man made document. There is a whole lot more to the story than what you have posted.
I also have lots of respect for the 1% who were complimentarians and inerrantists who would not sign the BFM 2K. I hope they’re doing well.
Now, for the non-inerrantists and non-complimentarians….. :-p
Joe Blackmon:
So you answer for 007 and know for David Brumbelow. Wow! How many people are you?
Who said anything about knowing for David Brumbelow??
And I didn’t answer “for” anyone. I answered. If you want to have a private conversation, go someplace private.
Dave Miller:
I give up. I’m not trying to make any of these blog items about me and Joe.
So I shall refrain from posting to SBC Voices for a while to let this situation hopefully cure itself.
This creeps me out a little. I am highly skeptical. However, I cannot say that such a thing is impossible. I think it is extremely poor logic to say that God cannot (or will not) give people such discernment just because we have scripture. But I take these things with a huge grain of salt.
He is correct in saying this has nothing to do with Calvinism.
And from a September 5, 2003 BP article:
BF&M FACTS
— Following the resignation of 54 missionaries and termination of 13 others who refused to affirm the BF&M, the International Mission Board reached its highest total of missionaries under active appointment in its 158-year history, a total of 5,607.
— During the past two years, since adoption of the revised BF&M, more former missionaries were reappointed and returned to service with the IMB than any comparable time frame in the past.
— More than 3,000 missionary candidates for long-term service continue to express interest and availability for overseas assignments, fully cognizant of the doctrinal accountability expected of Southern Baptists.
— Since the 2000 Baptist Faith and Message was adopted by the Southern Baptist Convention, more than 6,000 current and former IMB missionary personnel have affirmed that they will work in accord with and not contrary to the current BF&M.
David R. Brumbelow
I made sure Eddie Funkowitz saw the blog and the subsequent discussion. I pointed out that the discussion has deviated slightly from the original topic and that there was at time an attitude of snippiness. His response:
“And I said the fighting within our convention surprised me in question #1. What was I thinking?”