Undecided.
That is as much as I can say about the GCR.
I’ve read the blogs, heard the podcasts, and asked around – but I still don’t really get it. Let’s just say I’m coming to Louisville with a lot of questions marks.
At face value, the GCR statement says some good things. About 90% of it would get a nod from any Southern Baptist. No SBCers are going to argue against the Bible, Jesus, and the Great Commandments.
It’s like preaching a hard point in your sermon. You get the people moving in your direction. You get the AMEN corner warmed up. Then at the decisive moment, you throw in all your weight. It’s old fashioned preacher-spin.
Not that all spin is bad. But this tactic can confuse the issues. It gives the impression that the hard part of the message is just as obvious as the easy parts. The listeners are assume that a 90% right message is automatically 100% right.
That’s what I see in the GCR. The real objective is to radically restructure the SBC. That is the battle line and the rest is just repeating what the convention has already accepted. The final goal may be spreading the Gospel, but the GCR is committed to doing that through reorganizing institutions. That is the point of action.
At least that’s my feeling, especially after reading this post on Baptist 21 titled “A Call to Young Southern Baptists.” What issue seems front and center?
It does little good for us to criticize state conventions for keeping too many CP dollars in state if we will not show up and vote.
. . . but we believe that the Great Commission Resurgence is trying to answer some of these frustrations. It is true that many younger SBC’ers are frustrated with the bureaucracies and with what they perceive is ineffective use of resources. In addition, they are frustrated with many of our church planting mechanisms.
What kind of things come up for a vote?
This was my first concern when I read the GCR statement. There was only a few ideas that could actually be implemented at the national, state and associational levels.
It just looks like a Trojan Horse to me.
So What Does This Matter?
That’s the funny part – it may not matter. From what I know, the SBC has many structural flaws and needs to reorganize in some painful ways. Especially with the money drying up over the next 10 years. The SBC cistern has some leaks and the missions spicket is running dry.
At the same time, I feel manipulated. If we need to radically restructure – just lay out the case. I don’t need the omnibus approach. I don’t need the preacher-spin. Just give us straight talk and real evidence.
If half of our CP funded jobs don’t actually advance the denomination’s mission, then just say so. If most of our State conventions are money pits, then say so.
The “more effective convention structure” is going to mean cutting back jobs – lots of denominations careers will be gone. State conventions and local associations will have rapidly shrinking budgets. Fewer people will make more decisions.
Maybe that’s why they don’t want to talk about committment #9
Anyway . . . That’s why I’m undecided.
{please grill me in the comments}
