I began attending the annual meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention in 1999 in Atlanta. That first year, I was a newly appointed church planter with virtually no money. My wife graciously said I could attend…if I could do it for $100. So, between the free luncheons, gracious older pastors who chose to feed me, and three nights in the International Youth Hostel, I made my way to Atlanta to my first Convention. Since that time, I have missed only two meetings due to a seminary deadline and the birth of my third child. I have found attendance at the annual meeting to be an important part of my year and a valuable investment of my time and resources.
This year was low in attendance, but just as valuable to me as years past. My experience is perhaps not much different from the average small church messenger. I make a point to attend for basically three reasons: Relationships, Representation and Recommitment.
Relationships
Many have described the SBC annual meeting as a kind of “family reunion” and rightly so. Each year, I am able to rekindle old friendships and make new ones. That first year in Atlanta, I was able to reconnect with an old pastor and former seminary friends. I hung out at the NAMB booth and made many new friendships that remain until today. I got to meet Adrian Rogers who graciously encouraged me (and light-heartedly made fun of my friend’s pink shirt – “Ask your wife to use a little bleach and she’ll get that out for you”). I shared a cab with Jimmy Draper, who took great interest in my ministry and encouraged me while his wife shared Christ with the cab driver. A later Convention connection resulted in a friendship and mission partnership with an Oklahoma pastor that remains to this day. Shane and I get together every Convention to reconnect, tell our “miracle” missions story, and enjoy each other’s fellowship. This year was no exception and over breakfast we shared and discussed future missions partnerships. I could share many other stories, but you get the idea – and if you have been a messenger, you no doubt have many such stories of your own.
Representation
Of course, the “official” purpose of my participation is to be a messenger for my church so that they are represented in the business of the Convention. My second Convention was perhaps the most historic. I made it a point to be in Orlando in 2000 because I wanted my new church to understand that the doctrine that we affirmed was not merely handed down, but was one that I supported and for which I cast my vote. I was on the Convention floor to hear the room gasp when a moderate pastor stated that “the Bible is still just a book.” I was there to hear Dr. Mohler clarify “Ladies and Gentlemen, this is what it all comes down to,” and a few minutes later cast my ballot for the 2000 BFM. Since that time, over the years, I have represented my church in many decisions both big and small.
This year, there was a lack of foreseen “my vote really matters” decisions. Yet, whether foreseen or not, every Convention has some decisions that come to a close ballot vote – this year was no exception. Also, despite our annual collective groan at those “crazy uncles” – we were reminded that any messenger can be a representative and go to the mic to ask a question, make a motion, or nominate someone (even themselves) for office. Further, one messenger can lead the Convention to overrule the chair and have the Convention consider and even pass any motions and resolutions that the messengers choose.
I was encouraged by some of the decisions of which I was able to vote as a representative of my church. Perhaps the most significant thing we did this year was to affirm the Executive Committee recommendation to “give special attention to appointing individuals who represent the diversity within the Convention, and particularly ethnic diversity.” After numerous resolutions on the issue over the past several years, this vote takes a proactive step to broaden the ethnic diversity of our leadership and be more representative or both our constituency and our heart. I enthusiastically voted yes. Among other votes, we passed an important resolution on illegal immigration as it relates to gospel ministry, changed the mission statements of NAMB and the IMB, and elected Fred Luter as first VP. I go to the Convention as a representative and this year was no exception — whether or not there was anything “BIG” on the agenda. I count it a privilege to be a part of the decision making process of our denomination.
Recommitment
The third reason I attend the annual meeting is recommitment. I attend the Convention to remind myself why I am Southern Baptist – to be challenged to greater commitment to the Great Commission and to cooperative work. I love to hear conversion testimonies, rejoice in what God is doing, and be challenged to aspire to join God in His kingdom work. Whether any great decision is made or not, and regardless of statistics, I believe it is important for us to challenge one another to unity and even greater Great Commission focus and true sacrifice for kingdom work.
Unity and cooperation were certainly a theme of this year’s Convention. One important moment took place during the Executive Committee report. Last year, as part of the GCR report, we agreed to a new set of core values including Christ-likeness, truth, unity, relationships, and trust. This year, in a significant if symbolic affirmation of those values, the presidents of our SBC agencies, seminaries, ethnic fellowships, and State Conventions took the stage together having signed an “Affirmation of Unity and Cooperation” pledge. We were collectively challenged by EC President Frank Page to recommit ourselves to “Christ-like selflessness.”
I was encouraged also by the inclusion in both the NAMB and IMB reports of a commissioning service as numerous missionaries were sent out to North America and the uttermost to take the gospel to the unreached. I found myself committing myself anew to support these missionaries through prayer and giving, and to continue seek out how God wants to use me in His kingdom work to reach my community as well as the unreached and unengaged peoples of the world.
Over and over during the meetings, I was encouraged to renew my commitment to partner together with fellow Baptists and Great Commission Christians to take the gospel to the lost. The pastor’s conference, entity reports (especially the big three — EC, IMB, and NAMB), the NAMB and B21 Luncheons, as well as the president’s address and Convention sermon all served to issue such a challenge. Throughout the Convention, we were reminded that the needed Great Commission Resurgence will not take place by votes on the Convention floor but in the hearts of pastors and churches as we renew our commitment to the gospel and taking it to our neighbors and the nations. This kind of spurring toward love and good works is what brings me back to the annual meeting each year whether or not there is anything “BIG” on the agenda.
So my take on SBC2011? I am glad I went and look forward to next year’s meeting. The meeting was gospel-focused, church-centered, and God-exalting. I am thankful for my Southern Baptist family. I am excited about what God is doing in and through Southern Baptists. I returned home renewed, refreshed, revived, and spurred on to be part of God’s kingdom work!
Blessings,
Todd
Anyone care to chime in with your impressions of SBC2011?
I disagree! Let’s argue about this!
Thanks, Andrew — maybe we can over coffee 🙂
Everyone should read Bart Barber’s blog post on the low attendance….
http://praisegodbarebones.blogspot.com/
Todd, what’s your take on Bart’s post?
David
As to your question, David, I think there are four key things that contributed to this.
1) There was neither a presidential election nor any key business (such as the GCR).
2) The location was far from the SBC stronghold of the Deep South.
3) A lot of churches are in financial trouble right now and people decided, in light of the lack of issues, not to come to the convention. I probably shouldn’t have gone, based on this reason, but my church wants me to go and I want it too.
4) There is no doubt that there is a downward trend in attendance at the SBC.
I wonder what the SBC attendance figures were before 1979 and the CR? I attended some conventions with 30,000 people, but that was in the height of the battle, and that was about 16-17K on the conservative side and 13-14 on the moderate side. Once the moderates stopped coming, there was a large drop in attendance figures.
I’d love to see what things were like in the 60s and 70s, before the CR kicked in.
Next year, I suspect we will be back to the 8 to 10K range in attendance, but I doubt we are going to see the kind of attendance we used to.
Dave:
Your reason #3 surely is one of the major reasons people did not go.
Yeah, if your church is not in at least a little financial trouble, it is a unique blessing.
Well, not sure there’s anything to disagree about .. but he really doesn’t say why he didn’t come.
Everyone I have talked to about their reasons for not coming this year had to do with money and time. I know my cost was significantly increased over last year. But I admittedly have a limited frame of reference. On the other hand, I had friends (over 50) who came to the annual meeting for the first time and were blessed. Also, I thought my state and association (NW Indiana) were pretty well represented.
On the why question, everything is speculation at this point, but I’m not sure you can track the attendance to any one thing in particular.
It would be crazy not to think the economy had some impact.
Distance also played a factor, given that attendance dipped the last time we were in Phoenix as well.
After two Conventions where important and highly publicized/promoted decisions were made, this year might be seen as anti-climactic and a good year to take off.
And of course, there may well be people that did not return because of dissatisfaction with the GCR vote, though I suspect that number is minimal.
Bart included a couple other factors that I’m sure played a roll as well.
The truth is a mix of all of these, I’m sure. Or maybe some other factors we haven’t even considered.
All in all, I’m not all that interested in hand-wringing over the issue. And one year does not make a trend.
All I can do is lead my church and share my thoughts with the small number of people who care what I have to say. 🙂
Todd, you may not have gotten a lot of comments, but this thing got shared on Facebook quite a bit.
Dave,
If I heard right…the 4,800 was the lowest attendance since 1960. Also, we’ve had SBC’s in Phoenix before…we’ve been to Los Angeles, Salt Lake City, and Pittsburgh…and the attendance was a lot better.
I believe the low attendance shows the attitude of many people, who arent pleased with how things are going.
David:
You said:”I believe the low attendance shows the attitude of many people, who arent pleased with how things are going.”
That is such a Hugh jump of a conclusion.
Do you have facts to support this or is this just the conclusion you have come to?
I, for one, have not heard one person indicate their dissatisfaction as a reason for non-attendance. Of course, I would not rule that out, but if that’s the reason, it’s a lousy reason. The leadership of the Convention are only in place because we messengers elect them — the decisions that have been made on the Convention floor are only made because we messengers voted for them. In a democratic body, how does non-attendance help anything???
BTW, for full disclosure, I am among those that are happy with the general direction of the SBC.
There are probably many factors for the low attendance. Apathy certainly would be at the top of my list.
But, I have heard from friends that they have just been frustrated with constantly having to defend the conservative perspective (their words) of the Convention.
Many conservatives, or at least more than a few I have talked with, have simply given up on trying to preserve the gains of the last 20 plus years.
This is just my small random sampling. I have no idea why it was the lowest attendance in decades. I don’t think it was because so many people are thrilled to come and support the current president and everything that the new leadership stands for.
My feeling, and it is just my feeling, one of two things will happen next year: 1) one of the largest attendances in the last several years; or, 2) another small attendance which may signify a paradigm shift in Southern Baptist life.
Please feel free to disagree, but these are just my random feelings drawn from a very small sampling of people I talk with regularly across the country.
I think it is incorrect and offensive to label the opposition group as “conservatives.” Every one of the leaders of the convention that I heard reaffirmed their commitment to inerrancy and to the CR.
That is a pejorative and unfair description.
This is not a battle between conservatives and moderates, and you lose credibility when you try to paint it as such.
David,
Perhaps in your corridors there is complete harmony and unity and little differences with the leaders and celebrities of the Convention.
But, people I know who helped do much of the heavy lifting in the CR feel things have slided much further than you feel that have from what I gather in the post above.
I also would like a little credit for pointing out twice in that post that this is my very limited personal view from a very limited sampling of pastors I deal with on a regular basis.
I don’t know yet whether I agree fully or disagree with self-described conservatives who feel the conservative direction of the Convention has shifted. But to say these people do not exist and this is not a possibility seems to lack some credibility.
I don’t think I used the word “moderate” in my post so I’m not sure why you characterized my post in that way. I’m not sure what the factions are really, but I’m pretty sure they are there and I’m pretty sure each side has their celebrities.
Also, my point was that the persons who helped turn our Convention back home, some of them at least, feel it has begun to turn in a different direction. I’m not saying I know that to be true or that I agree, but that I’m aware that some leaders in the CR feel that way.
I thought this was “reflections on the Convention.” That’s all I’m offering is my “reflections.” What you consider to be a “conservative” and what I think of as a “conservative” may not be the same thing.
But, please do not feel the need to intimidate me by questioning my credibility — which you have done at other times to me and to others.
I did not mention “moderates” and I was not suggesting that any of the current leaders are “moderates.” My point was: simply being “conservative” may not be enough to keep power struggles from taking place. I wished it were not that way, but it appears it might, possibly, perhaps be that way.
The difference I was trying to point out is that at least a couple of pastors who voiced this view to me have said they are not Tareton Smokers: they will quit rather than fight.
I was simply offering a reflection on why the crowd was not just small — but noticeably and critically small.
I’m not sure I completely buy that, David. When people aren’t pleased, they tend to show up and try to change things, don’t they?
The huge SBCs of the 80s were because people were not pleased and wanted to make a difference. When one side realized that they could not win, they retired from the conflict and that is when attendance dwindled.
It is all speculation anyway, I guess.
Didn’t Bart Barber speculate that the ones avoiding the SBC this year were the ones who were post-denominational, anti-congregational, and who were ashamed of being Southern and/or Baptist. That doesn’t square with the idea that the people who stayed away were non-emergents and non-extreme-calvinists.
If that is true then we truly are in trouble. Since when have Southern Baptists had a “I’ll take my ball and go home (or stay home) attitude?” Apathy is a quicker killer than anything.
I watched as much as I could via computer stream. Two of my pastors and an intern did attend. As far as I know, they were encouraged and had positive things to say about the meeting.
Mark, if you haven’t already, go listen to Afshin Ziafat’s sermon at the pastor’s conference website.
I really believe that one day we’re going to have to look at moving towards regional satellite locations at megachurches or introducing technology which would allow for online voting as well as online messengers being able to interact with the main convention.
I also believe that many trustee meetings can already be handled via online capabilities only which would save hundreds of thousands of dollars per year in expenditures. I know it’s not relevant to this thread, but I wanted to share that I think we can use the internet in areas outside the annual convention as well.
As for the convention itself, you didn’t have anything controversial or game changing going on this year. I would suggest that maybe after last year’s emotionally charged convention combined with several other minor, contributing factors all created a perfect storm for a low turnout this year. You have parts of the south absolutely devasted either through calamity or economy. You didn’t have something controversial being voted on this year. You had a line up that was largely uninteresting (do I want to fly out there and listen or just listen online). Phoenix is largely not convenient for many who drive to the convention. It’s literally a combination of things, not just any one thing.
To suggest that there’s any one reason for a low turnout is simply too big of a brush to paint with here.
A pastor friend of mine stated he just wasn’t interested this year while my pastor decided to send a group to Joplin with the money he normally sets aside for the convention. That right there are two different reasons right there with two different people.
And for the record, I enjoyed much of what I got to see via online. I’m very hopeful for our future and I’m hopeful that I’m wrong about my prediction concerning NAMB. I’ll eat crow in nine years and I’m sure many here would love to be present when I do.