A major issue in the SBC 2021 presidential election is the relationship between NAMB and state conventions, especially state conventions outside the south. One candidate, Randy Adams, has made NAMB his main platform as he campaigns for the highest elected SBC office.
Charges of mismanagement, secrecy, top-down authority, rejection of historic patterns, partnerships, and principles, heavy handedness, and a lot of other things have been aimed at NAMB. The phrase “forensic audit” is being brayed incessantly.
The whole business of relationships, cooperation, partnerships, agreements, church planting policy, statistics is complicated and confusing.
Joe Westbury does an excellent job in an article of almost 10k words on Baptist News Global. I doubt Baptist Press would carry the article. I don’t know if anyone other than a couple of my colleagues could even write ten thousand words on any subject. Try putting a think piece analysis of a complicated issue in a Twitter Thread. Read the thing and get educated:
State conventions beyond the South question SBC North American Mission Board’s spending and accountability for church planting
I read it and am inclined to say it leans a bit against NAMB but I’m very much appreciative of Joe Westbury for the work. It features all the grand characters of the SBC reality show: Floyd, Ezell, Akin, Mohler, Hunt, and others. Many mid-level SBC folks like Adams, and a number of front line pastors. Read it.
The whole business may have a lot of personality conflicts, questionable decisions, and such but:
THIS. IS. A. CLASSIC. SBC. POLICY. DISAGREEMENT.
We should be able to discuss such things… but not out of ignorance, so read it. The SBC is far too important to be left to entity heads and major players.
______________
Virtual Chick-fil-A gift card to all who read the whole 10k word thing. Then we can discuss it.
Yes, I know Baptist News Global is the old moderates news site with a lot of liberal views, articles and such. If you think you’re going to get everything you need to know on Baptist Press, think again, even though it is much improved.
I read about 90% of the article….
Is it too simplistic to suggest that it seems a large part of the controversy is over states wanting money from NAMB to use as they desire and wish, and not wanting the “rules” that come with the accepting of those funds?
I am not completely unsympathetic to that argument/issue….but at the same time…if you accept money with strings attached – you are stuck with the strings….or you can return and reject the money and not be so constrained (but of course will not have the money, LOL)
Yes, too simplistic. The “Cooperative Program” money starts in the states. NAMB wants more of that, too — and gets to plant churches, that go to state conventions and represent NAMB’s interests.
The McRaney suit is happening because a state tried to say “no” — and NAMB (allegedly) got the state to fire that person.
So it’s not the “strings.” It’s that NAMB is making offers you can’t refuse. If you suggest you might do better than NAMB with CP dollars, you may need a new career soon.
This is no longer a case of money with strings attached. Smaller state conventions are not getting the money nor the strings.
I agree with William that Joe Westbury has done Southern Baptists a tremendous service in writing this article. Unlike William, I believe NAMB’s centralized approach to missions has been a dismal failure.
Never before in Christian history has a missions strategy been less organic. Placing pins on the map almost exclusively upon urban sites and investing millions in real estate has not worked.
There is a reason NAMB avoided giving Westbury their numbers. Also, NAMB should never count megachurch campuses as plants. If a Body claims to be “one church in five locations,” let’s take them at their word.
Partnerships sour when you make people sign non-disclosure agreements, threaten to withhold Southern Baptist gifts to enforce ultimatums, and dictate the strategy of autonomous conventions.
Rick, I do agree that campuses are not church plants….chuurch plants are autonomous bodies not a wing-man for the mother ship.
“Never before in Christian history has a missions strategy been less organic.”
Nothing like hyperbole put forward as fact. This is why southern baptists can’t have serious discussions of policies.
Until you dismissed my observation as hyperbole, I thought we were having a serious discussion. My understanding is that for hundreds of years, new churches would start when the Christians in an area saw the need for one and prayerfully began the work. I am honestly unaware of any large scale church planting effort that has ever proceeded like ours. But I am willing to learn if there are fact checkers.
You lost me at “never before in Christian history.” Didn’t know you had exhaustive knowledge in that area. You didn’t act as if you read the article.
The fact record on church plants in AK and NWBC isn’t impressive. We know it’s possible to create denominational jobs but that’s not the goal.
I’ve read it twice now. I like the part where he linked to the petition for a forensic study and to the reform NAMB now website. Too few news stories present both sides of these arguments. I’m glad Westbury does.
And on that personal thing, I’m not claiming “exhaustive” knowledge. I could modify it a bit for you. How about, “I don’t believe that in the history of Christendom there has ever been such a wide scale church planting effort utilizing a strategy so distant from the location of the plant rather than letting matters unfold more naturally and locally.” Such wording clarifies that I am simply offering an opinion.
Oh yeah, the anonymous anti namb site calling for transparency. Rich. Only southern Baptists would think of that.
Start out by putting your credibility in the toilet and then aim to be the beacon of transparency in our Grand Convention. Priceless.
Yeah, I just don’t see it that way. I think whistleblowers in all walks of life—business, politics, media, you name it—prefer to remain anonymous while they expose the corruption. They are driven to this tactic by watching their friends lose their jobs, see their funding cut, and be eliminated from the organization as retribution for their remarks. It explains why the powers that be have non-disclosure agreements. They are telling you up front that if you talk, there will be consequences. Southern Baptists are not the only ones who would think of that. It’s the way it works pretty much everywhere.
Profiles in courage? If it is that important, put your name on it. You put your name on unpopular opinions. Your former org was generally open about who was behind it, who wrote articles and such. Not the new one.
If you argue for transparency and openness then be transparent and open, even if it has a cost.
Generally, I agree with you when it comes to anonymous criticism. I believe in owning one’s opinions. But at a certain level of whistleblowing, I begin to feel sorry for the informant, like Mark Felt, who kept his identity as Watergate’s Deep Throat secret for almost four decades. If they can identify you, then you are attacked, doxed, fired, lose your funding, lose your position, and probably get canceled in this culture. Since the bad guys are operating in secret, I don’t come down too hard on the good guys for wanting to expose it secretly. After all, we don’t exactly have a Southern Baptist Witness Protection Program!
Still hyperbolic. Keep trying.
Did you see that Randy Adams published the church counts and explanation of how and what they count for the NWBC?
https://www.randyadams.org/2021/02/03/church-planting-in-the-northwest
Looks different than NAMB’s but he goes into the difference and exactly how they count them using consistent metrics.
Yes. I read it.
The ACP reported 415 churches in the NWBC in 2019. The number of churches in 2014 (year I have at hand) was 424. Adams gives a long explanation about counting, multicampuses, church type missions, etc, that he sees mitigating NAMB’s published numbers about the lack of new churches in NWBC. Both have points to make but churches in his area reported to the ACP in both these years and the results showed little or no growth. Membership showed a decline during that period.
I make this reply candidly, but I’d rather have Randy Adams in every state convention reporting numbers. At least he makes an attempt at explaining things and giving reasons why the numbers can be confusing.
I read it can I get some virtual fries. Lots to digest
William, I read the article, so please send my Chik-fil-A voucher asap. It is a long article, but Joe Westbury did a good job summarizing the history of this controversy. As I see it, the question is: Who knows better how to spend missions money and do church planting. The non-South state conventions believe they do, while the NAMB trustees and executives believe they do. The NAMB trustees believe the SBC gave them a mandate to prioritize and centralize church planting in its 2010 vote. The non-South state convention executives disagree vociferously. The NAMB trustees believe Kevin Ezell is doing what they and the SBC want. So, they support and protect him. Joe W did get one thing wrong. It is true that NAMB reported 1,508 new church plants in 2008; however, the real number was about 500.
Why the discrepancy between 1,500 and 500? In 2008 NAMB typically provided three years of financial support for a church plant. They counted that same church plant for all three years. So, the actual number was about 500. Kevin Ezell said he was shocked to learn this when he became president of NAMB.
The statement that stood out to me was this:
“A number of churches have left our convention in the last few years because of the problems they are hearing in the denomination,”
Planting in one area only to lose in others is not an effective or efficient plan.
But, I’m very negative on NAMB for multiple reasons. I think the same negativity we’re hearing in non-Southern states is evident in many small Southern churches as well. At least many in my circle feel that way.
Personally, I think the emphasis on church planting and church planters is fallacy, or maybe better seen as fantasy if it’s intended purpose is to curb the decline in numbers and baptisms. All these new church plants aren’t producing converts. They only serve the purpose of consolidation, not increased souls saved.
An emphasis on church revitalization handled at the state and association level makes more sense than church planting initiated at the national level.
BTW, our church has decided not to contribute to Annie Armstrong this year. We’ll be focusing on the Golden Offering for state missions instead.
Good report in Baptist Global. Main problem in SBC in most areas, Lack of Transparency. Fact gleamed from BG article, 109 pieces of real estate owned by NAMB, soon to expand to 200, NAMB spokesman declined to id where properties are owned or the number in any given state? Why? Ezell cancelled a live telephone interview with BG author day before interview, issued written statement. Why? Letter did not address number of church planners in each state, no report of this in ten years. Why? So much to be followed up on in this BG article. NAMN typical of SBC leadership, lack of transparency. Loyal to SBC hierarchy not membership who only pay the bill and are rubes.
Transparency is the underlying issue.
No. It’s an underlying issue and it didn’t start with post-GCR namb. I asked for years to see any cooperative agreement between namb and a state. Always denied. They were secret.
I don’t know if you will allow this link but here goes.
Tear Down this Wall! – randyadamsdotorg
Already read that. I said last year that I agree with some of his stuff. The GCR minutes should have been made public immediately. Mohler was the main opponent of that.
My state convention, had a 20 year record of spending outside any approved budget. Let’s not be limited in our rants.
Am I reading the article correctly that NAMB kind of stockpiles some of it’s funding so they can act as a lending institution? It sounds that way.
Would it not free up more funds if NAMB set aside a fund to act as collateral and co-signed for church loans instead of acting as the whole bank?
And when NAMB does lend money does it charge interest on the loan or do they just get the original loan amount?
I don’t think an SBC entity should act as a bank.
Perfectly sensible and routine. I doubt that’s a point of much contention with critics.
Do you know if the loans are interest free? I would think they should be.
The only loans I know of from them to churches have interest. Specifically one I know is just under 5%. They may be interest free for others, but I am not aware of it.
Then it would seem at least some portion of NAMB funding would be self-perpetuating. Do they disclose how much capital they have tied up in loans?
Of course I’m sure loans to church plants is risky. I’m wonder what the default rate is?
Again, I’m not much in favor of supporting a church sponsored lending institution.
Proverbs 22:7
Romans 13:8
Exodus 22:25-27
The former Home Mission Board provided loans for property, buildings, even renovations. The rates were low but not interest free. HMB helped many churches through the years, especially those that would have difficulty getting a loan through a bank. I was uncertain if NAMB still had this service.
I read the whole thing yesterday. The article was extremely well researched. I hate the lack of transparency. How can a state not know where NAMB is planting churches? What sense does that make? Why are the GCRTF documents still sealed? Why were they sealed in the first place? Do they contain info on the Kennedy assasination? We’re told the trustees monitor everything, but we’re told nothing. This is an obvious issue in other places than NAMB as well. This top down structure is not Baptist.
Let us hope the NAMB trustees do a better job than the IMB trustees did when it when belly up. Top down structure and lack of transparency may be not Baptist but is how the SBC operates. NAMB is planting churches where SBC churches exist but they are in the wrong neighborhood. Who knows what is going on? Make up your own theory but heaven forbid that a forensic audit and open books be done. Cancel your local church business meetings and see what happens. Would you give money to a local church that would not account for their operating expenses and where your tithes are going? Paige Patterson lived like a king from what was revealed but who knew? It is all tied together.
Imb pre platt was ill managed. The basic financial information was public, though, and the org didn’t go belly up.
The EC trustees aren’t exactly popular at the moment either, or the ERLC. You mentioned the fiasco at SWBTS. SBTS has had it’s issues as well. NDA’s are common practice. It appears there is an all out effort to protect the system. That is never, ever a good model. If I read the article correctly, under the old system HMB would examine every state convention as to how the $$$ given was used and account for them. A reciprocal agreement now that NAMB controls much more is apparently to much to ask. Our entities are apparently beyond questioning.
Some years ago my church decided to find out where our CP giving went after we sent it to the state convention. We asked for a report and they sent us pictures of starving children in India. They were arrogant and showed an utter lack of transparency. It took a lot of private back and forth of escalating intensity before we were allowed to come to the “ministry center” and learn the truth. Almost two thirds of our CP giving stayed right here in Georgia.
We were shocked and discouraged. The system was arcane and secret. It seemed intentionally opaque.
That was a long time ago and the percentages of how our CR money is disbursed are now public. Unfortunately the percentage still here in the peach state is discouragingly high.
Every “controversy” you guys decide to “discuss” anew, serves to confirm and reinforce my decision to stay as far away from the SBC as is humanly possible. Whatever the topic, sooner or later the real argument is revealed to be about who controls the money. Don’t you see that the issue can never be resolved? By dressing it up in new clothes and going to war over it (again) you become trapped in this endless circle of bitterness. You can actually see the rancor and bitterness in many of the comments, and if you can’t then you are simply blinded by that of your own. The only thing that unites the sides is a collective bloodlust, each for that of the other. Who needs that?
A little stridently presented, but we have a history of this.
About the only reason I come to this site is to gain information to help our church leave the SBC.
SBC Voices is the best site for displaying the reasons to leave. One controversy after another… Argument after argument.
Sometimes I think I know how Moses felt.
“Let my people go.”
I don’t think SBC Voices understands they are the moderates, not BNG (flaming liberals over there). The CBN is nothing but political mire. Where do the true Baptist conservatives hang out? I’m beginning to believe they stay off the internet. Time to go back in my shell.
This a legitimate request and should be provided yearly.
NAMB declined a BNG request for the state-by-state breakdown of church planters, a policy which its predecessor Home Mission Board published yearly along with all information about missions personnel. The number never has been released since the Task Force restructuring a decade ago.
Second paragraph is pulled from the article. I read the entire thing. Looking forward to some CFA courtesy of Pastor Thornton.
Take a virtual bite right now. Enjoy.
Very healthy discussion here about critical issues that need to be addressed in a civil, critical-thinking environment.
Very thoughtful and well researched, Joe!
Thanks Bobby, I remember your DOM ministry well there in GA and enjoyed serving alongside you until I was retired. I apologize for the length but I kept falling down one rabbit hole after another. I prefer more simple 1,500 word news stories.
Joe Westbury, your article was right on target. I wish the secular press as well as many faith based reporting was as good. I really tire of “sound bite” and simple reporting of complex issues and policy matters. The time spent on your article was time well spent. Lack of concern, lack of knowledge and non involvement of members has got the SBC where it is today. So thank you there were no “rabbit” holes in your reporting. Lack of transparency and accountability is the major problem in the SBC. Most members will not take the time to read your excellent article and that is on them , not you. Do not apologize for trying to educate people with more that a few sentences.
Thank you very much. I took no pleasure in having to write that exhaustive piece. It was three long months of research and interviews and struggling with what to leave out. If Baptist Press were doing its job this would never have been necessary. The state conventions were being treated more like enemies than members of the family.