Is Peace What We Want?

One of the titles for Jesus we have taken from the Old Testament is “Prince of Peace” (Isaiah 9:6). Jesus describes his work among men as bringing peace in a way that is radically different than anything the world can offer (John 14:27). In Matthew 10:34, however, Jesus describes his ministry as one that will bring, not peace, but a sword. To identify with him is to bring division in family and social relationships where some accept him and others reject him. There can be no peace where there is a division over the calling of Christ.

This matter of peace for Jesus that we see in his teachings and his example can give one serious discomfort. In the Beatitudes (Matthew 5:9) Jesus said that peacemakers were to receive the blessing of being called the children of God. Yet one has to wonder if Jesus hesitated long outside the Temple of Jerusalem before he went in with whip in hand to do some serious housecleaning (John 2:13-17). Jesus guided his actions with a wisdom springing from his sinless walk with his Father that we sinful humanity lack.

In my years of ministry I have come to see two types of peace in congregations. The first is the peace that comes from a strong unity among the members. They are not without stress because they are in the midst of action and change. There is, nonetheless, a peace that comes from the certainty that they are involved in the right actions. They as a church have focused on the right priorities.

The other kind of peace is what I sense as I move through the stones of a cemetery. Many congregations have that kind of peace as well. The membership is united as it travels a path to certain death. There is no conflict because nothing is moving. There is no unrest because every member is content with the status quo. There is no disagreement because all have decided no decisions are necessary except to do nothing. All is peaceful and quiet much like a cemetery.

I don’t believe this is the kind of peace Jesus had in mind for his disciples and his Church. I don’t believe that Jesus ever saw his Church at peace while it bore witness to him in this world. I don’t believe he ever thought it would be free from conflict in its efforts to make disciples of all peoples. I don’t believe he saw his Church resting comfortably upon any kind of past accomplishments. Yet he believed that all of his followers could experience peace as they focused upon him.

A recent article in our state Baptist paper (Biblical Recorder quoting Baptist Press, Nov. 7, 2012, “Calvinism team meets for second time”) offers a brief insight into the current efforts to reach some “peaceful” conclusion regarding Calvinistic doctrine and the Southern Baptist Convention. An informal discussion group is meeting to determine “a strategy whereby people of various theological persuasions can purposely work together in missions and evangelism.”

This group represents an effort by the Southern Baptist Convention Executive Committee President Frank Page to address the increasing number of questions raised about Calvinism and its place in Southern Baptist doctrinal life. Perhaps some state conventions have felt the need to address this issue, but the primary conversation is taking place on the national level.

I raise these issues of peace and Calvinism in the same article because of their example of dynamics within Southern Baptist life. The recently concluded North Carolina Baptist State Convention recorded 1604 messengers and 281 guests (Biblical Recorder, Nov. 14, 2012). This rates as one of the smallest number in my memory. Recent Southern Baptist Convention annual meetings have been able to meet in smaller venues because of decreased attendance. Perhaps these numbers reflect a kind of peace.

We declared all the extreme liberals to be outside cooperating fellowship and told them they were no longer welcome. Then the moderate Baptist churches discovered their voices were no longer required at the annual meetings on the state or national level, so they stopped coming. Now we are being led to believe that a doctrinal issue based upon some form of Calvinism may lead others to see that their chair at the table of denominational fellowship might be removed. Compromise leading to unity has been a difficult goal to reach when it comes to doctrinal issues in Baptist life.

Do we really have to condemn someone and clean house to feel like we are on God’s side and on our way to peace? It just might be that God left the discussion table some time ago.

Making the Most of These Annual Meetings

The associational annual meeting is over, and the state annual convention is next month. They involve months of planning. They involve taking time away from home and local church field. The agenda is packed to the extent there is little time to evaluate or consider all the dynamics. There are a lot of reports and a few business sessions. Why go?

Out of the distant past these annual gatherings of Baptist church members brought fellow believers together who were otherwise separated by long distances  and poor travel conditions. They discussed the needs of sister churches and the need of distant mission fields. They also discussed the boundaries of Christian doctrine and how diverse an interpretation could be accepted. They provided the opportunity for new relationships to be developed and old relationships to be strengthened. Fellowship was a key purpose behind these annual meetings.

Now in the 21^st century a few of these purposes remain. General business for the large group is conducted and the general affairs of the churches are evaluated.   Some associations and conventions use these occasions to overview the doctrinal stance of the convention and determine if any corrections are needed. Individual church needs are rarely brought to the attention of a convention, perhaps more so on the local associational level. Improved travel time has allowed the meetings to be shortened in duration and agendas have been tightened accordingly.

An underlying need, however, has not been diminished. That is the need to establish or reestablish relationships with people from other churches. Fellowship, socializing, catching up on the local news from other areas of the state or nation is still critical for the strength and health of the Church. Christians need each other. The more turbulent the times, the more Christians must depend upon ongoing contact with other believers.

On the national level this can be extremely difficult, but the benefits of being in face-to-face contact with others are still evident. Emotional support, sharing and mixing of ideas, and seeking the common ground may be possible in our digital age, but a small screen cannot replace the communication conveyed through body language and voice tone.

State convention annual meetings offer a bit more opportunity as contacts between meetings is easier and therefore serve to reinforce the impact of the business session gatherings. Ideas shared may be more applicable in the common state arena. Other avenues of contact are more available on the state level. The possibility of stronger relationships is enhanced by participating in state level annual conventions.

Within the area of the local association, however, we see the benefits of involvement at its highest. Local church representatives who gather at associational meetings find they are sitting next to neighbors. They are talking to people they see at the supermarket and the restaurant. They are discussing issues with those with whom they do regular business, whom they saw the previous week, and may see again the following week. Discussions and decisions at associational meetings are made in the context of ongoing and close relationships. It is hard to walk away from strong disagreements in this context.

The local association of churches offers a richness of ideas and planning development. Churches in different contexts offer a variety of perspectives that is essential to healthy Kingdom work. Churches are strengthened by listening to and learning from the stories of their sister churches. Churches are encouraged by hearing of the victories of others in their region. Shared resources make the big projects for the local community possible when otherwise such ministries might be nothing more than frustrated dreams.

Relationships are critical for the work of the Kingdom of God. Strengthening those relationships must be a high priority. Associational cooperation and the annual meetings representing that cooperation are worthy of our time and efforts.

You Got Two Options. Choose Wisely.

At a recent conference I attended, that was the extent of the choices given to today's local churches. The local church was faced with the need for dramatic and deep change or it would die. I have to elaborate and say that goes for the individual Christian, the local association of churches, and the conventions on the state and national level. Of course we hear that a lot from a variety of directions. The problem arises when we are forced to decide what to change and to what extent both in our personal lives and in the arena of these larger collections of relationships.

Relevancy is a key concept in this, and it can and should be separated in content and methodology. While content can remain relevant for eternity, methodology may need to change on a regular basis. Relevancy reveals importance, value, and applicability. Relevancy is often lost when the communication methodology is muddled, and only reappears when the methodology is changed.

The human body must change if it is to remain healthy. It will grow. It will change form as well as size. Changes will take place that are both apparent and hidden. The process of maturing will bring about loss in some areas and gains in others, some of course we would like to avoid. Change is inevitable in living things. The only option is the radical change caused by death itself.

So what's new about this revelation? People have been writing on the subject for years. Change or die. We live with it. We recognize its own relevancy as a concept for our lives. So what's new?

Perhaps it is the idea that even though it is being repeated over and over, no one is listening. In far too many cases either no change is being considered or the change is cosmetic. Deep change is being avoided. Substance remains the same. Change that would guarantee a healthy future is not happening.

On the personal level people must eat right and get enough exercise and rest. People must stretch their minds through activities that involve something besides television and video games in ways that will develop abilities in analysis, evaluation, and application. People must seek to grow in ways other than girth. We find it easy to see what needs to be done in our personal lives. The public media is telling us that all the time!

State and national conventions must look not only at what will be new in how they do their ministries, but also what will renew the foundations that provide the resources for those ministries. Who is providing the material resources for advances in missions? Who is training the leadership for these advances? From where will the next generation of leaders come?

The local church must step forward to answer these questions. State and national conventions look to the local church to provide the funds and the leaders for our mission and ministry efforts. The health of the local church will determine the health of all those institutions that depend upon it. Right now the 20th century church is having a hard time keeping its head above the water in the 21st century. It must change or it will die, and if it does, it will take a significant portion of those institutions that depend upon it with it.

Church, and association, renewal must move beyond repeating the old methods at a faster and more desperate clip. Relevancy in renewal must focus on how effectively we are communicating the unchanging content. Relevancy in renewal must focus upon finding and using the languages of our cultures. Relevancy in renewal must focus upon understanding those we are trying to reach and do so in a way that insures what we are saying is understood by those we are urging to listen.

Change or die. We can change. We don't have to die - as churches, associations, or conventions. If we don't change in a healthy and intentional way, however, death remains our only option.

Bigger Than You and Me

Every Christian, not just your church pastor and other leaders, needs to ask this question of themselves on a regular basis, How big is the Kingdom I'm serving. The answer will say something about a person's ministry vision, perspective on resources, ultimate goals, and the level of dependency upon God. We sometimes say that a person's world extends no further than their personal needs. I dream of a Christian's arena of service being a lot bigger than that.

As individuals, as churches, and as associations and conventions we are often tempted by the desire to be in control of our world. Such control brings safety, security, and an enhanced sense of personal worth. There is nothing wrong with such qualities in our lives or institutions. The problem is what we determine will be the source of those qualities.

Way back when, a couple of people stood in front of a tree and decided that the world would be no bigger than what they could control. God said if that's your choice, so be it. Your world is out there. Go make the best of it if you are determined to go it alone. We've been paying the price ever since.

God calls us to see our world as being a lot bigger than ourselves. Then he calls us to see that we still can find safety, security, and personal value even if we are not in charge. We find it not in ourselves but in him. Failing to do that causes us to wander in the world trying to provide all this for ourselves and failing every time.

How big is the world of a Christian? It must be as big as the Kingdom of God. Who's in charge of that Kingdom? It is not we, folks. Our struggle lies in the fact that we must find what we want while acknowledging that it is God who is in control. When we maintain a perspective that gives the Kingdom of God the priority in all things, then we put God and his priorities where they are supposed to be, front and center, the focus of everything.

Keeping the Kingdom of God in its proper priority position forces the individual to see himself/herself as a servant, a citizen, a child before God the Creator. As such the dominant qualities in the individual become love for God and others, humility, a willingness to sacrifice self, a willingness to show honor to others above self, a desire to exalt others, a desire to serve others and see them reach their full potential, and a life-controlling desire to give all glory and praise to God.

A church that maintains a Kingdom of God perspective will see itself as a community nurturing its members to become salt, light, and leaven in the world for the glory of God. Such a church will encourage its members to discover, develop, and use their spiritual gifts to grow more Christlike and impact their world for the glory of God. This Kingdom-focused community seeks to multiply itself beyond its fields by sending forth its members not as members of its own family but as members of the Kingdom of God. Such a local family of God will never hold for itself what it knows will serve the greater needs of the Kingdom of which it is only a part.

Associations and conventions are not mandated by scripture. They exist out of the recognized need to accomplish more than what one congregation can accomplish alone. As such they exist first for the Kingdom of God and then to assist their members in carrying out their calling as members of the Kingdom of God. Resources should be used to help their members be the greatest possible members and contributors of the Kingdom. Vision should be maintained as a focus upon the Kingdom of God. Growth must be focused upon the Kingdom and not upon the organization. Sacrifice is just as much a part of the life of an association and a convention as it is for the local church and the individual Christian.

The Kingdom of God is bigger than any convention, association, local church, pastor, or individual Christian. Each of these must order their existence with that in mind. God is in control and must be the focus of all actions and the recipient of all glory. Anything less puts us all back in front of that tree and making the wrong decision.

Even the New Has Some Old

Jesus uses a parable in which he tells of a householder who takes the old and the new out of his treasure chest. He shares this brief story in the context of teaching his disciples the importance of being trained for service in the Kingdom of God. Such wisdom as shown by the householder is not for religious leaders only, but for all who would serve the Kingdom in a God-honoring way, individuals, churches, and larger organizations alike.

We all have a past. Describe it in any way you wish, you still have a past. Some or most you may have forgotten or tried to forget, but you still have a past. Parts of your past may be remembered better by others than your self, but you still have a past. Your past may be dominated by your own initiated actions, or it may be the result of your response to the actions of others toward you. Either way you have a past.

The same can be said of a local church. As soon as someone has a dream of starting a local body of believers, a past has been formed. It will only grow with time, being filled with a wide variety of events and experiences. Conventions both large and small pass through the same dynamic. A past is created that cannot be altered or removed. It is locked in the pages of history.

The past or history of an individual or church cannot be ignored. Denying it will not change its truth. The past of an individual or church is always there lingering just at the edge of the present exerting its influence, whispering in a small voice about what has been and what might have been. It contains both jewels and cinders, both gold and pot metal. They all reside in our past influencing how our decisions in the present will determine our future.

Jesus pointed out that a wise servant of the Kingdom will look at everything in the past and decide what is valuable for the present and what is not. The wise servant will see how the old and valuable compliments or merges with the new and valuable to create something more valuable yet. That which is of little or no value will be placed aside for its value may not be in the present but may well reveal itself in the future.

Our Creator-God did not stop his process of creation in the first couple of chapters of Genesis. Through his prophets he spoke often of doing something new, something the people would not expect. In Jesus something occurred that was so new that few people recognized what had happened. In the birth of the Church (Acts 2), a living creation came into existence that could not have been anticipated except through the deepest insights of faith.

In all these there had been earlier signs that something wonderful was to happen. God was working with what was, introducing something new, and bringing forth a radical creation that revealed his glory and power in a way as never before. Something old combined with something new brings forth the awesome moment.

A new vision of the future can never be separated from the past out of which it springs. It is grounded in a response to what has been and an initiation of action toward what could be. God calls the individual to learn the agony and the glory of the cross. God calls the church to testify to the faith of its founders and then speak in a new language that its contemporary world will understand. That church will bring the old out of its past and meld it into the glory of the present and offer a testimony that will speak clearly of the timeless glory and love of God.

Is your church using both the treasures of the past and creations of the present? Can our conventions be said to be bringing the best out of the past, combining it with the best of the present, and through that produce a witness in our world that offers hope to all regardless of whether it is received or rejected?

The Kingdom scribe understands how God has spoken in the past, hears how he is speaking in the present, and is at work to make sure that the word of God is heard and understood now and into the future. God calls all of us to be careful but also to be bold as we search through the treasures of our past to develop the witness that is needed for the future.

Purity Is Not an Option

Most of us prefer to drink water that has been found pure. The same can be said about most of our food. Purity is something we consider a serious matter especially when it relates to what we see as most important in life. Perhaps we should be reminded that God takes purity rather seriously as well.

The creation came into existence free from the impurity of sin. Old Testament sacrifices were to be pure, without blemish or scar. The prophets called the people of Israel to practice a pure faith free from the corrupting influence of pagan religions. The God of Israel demanded a pure and holy people that would be his royal priesthood among the nations.

The perfect sacrifice that was pure in every way came in the person of Jesus Christ. He preached purity. He lived in purity. He died in purity. He was raised from the dead in purity to ascend to sit by the throne of glory. Purity is no laughing matter or subject of coarse jokes in the eyes of the Creator of the universe.

Some of my favorite verses for memorization (and thus reminders of how I ought to be living) include the concept of purity. In the New Testament we find in the Beatitudes, Matthew 5:8, "Blessed are the pure in heart"; in Paul's counsel to Timothy (I Tim. 4:12) he says to set an example for others that includes purity, and in his letter to the Philippian believers he encourages them to keep their thoughts focused on what is pure (4:8); and James says that wisdom from above is known first and foremost by its purity (3:17).

This concept is not just some commercial for getting the stains and residue out of your life. The two more common words used for purity in the New Testament bring together concepts of morality and freedom from corruption, such as an innocent life, clean water, and gold without contamination. There is even the root reference that purity has its foundation in the divine. Being and staying pure is serious stuff.

An individual that responds to the call of Christ is called to be pure, as well as holy, perfect, etc! To be consistent this must be reflected not only in deeds and words but also thoughts. Jesus made it clear that just as sin is a matter of the heart so is purity. Words and actions only follow what has already set up housekeeping in the mind.

Churches are made up of individual believers. Associations and conventions are made of churches that are made up of individual believers. The motives and the actions they prompt in our churches and more extended organizations cannot but help reflect the nature of the individual believers. God calls for us to make sure that nature is pure.

Individual Christians should be motivated out of pure minds. Their words and deeds should reflect that aspect of their transformed nature. Believers should relate to others out of the pure, divine love of their Savior. Believers should see others through purified eyes. They should speak with purified words. They should act in ways that reveal they have been purified by surrender to the Lordship of the Holy Spirit.

Churches should respond to their communities out of a purity of purpose and motivation. The self-sacrificing agape love of our Savior can be the only guide we have. The Church must be pure if it is to be the salt and light its Lord intended. The sins of self-preservation and need for domination have no place in the Church, the Bride of Christ.

Purity in the same way must mark the motivation and actions of the Church in its expanded image of associations and conventions. Self is always subordinated to the divinely recognized needs of humanity. These larger entities must look deep within themselves and find the truth of who they are and why they exist. If purity does not mark what they find, then change is demanded.

Purity demands constant self-evaluation, confession, and repentance. This is no less true of the Church, the association, and conventions than it is of the individual believer.

Practicing Our Religious Freedom

Yes, we Americans do have religious freedom, more than we practice in fact. Last Monday, January 16, carried the designation of "Religious Freedom Day". A little recognized occasion it is often lost in the commemoration of MLK Jr Day. It does exist, however, and began under the presidency of Bill Clinton. It deserves greater recognition and dissemination through a broad based educational effort. A description of the day and suggestions for how to observe it may be found at www.religiousfreedomday.com.

I had not heard of the day before this year. I have never heard it announced in one of my churches. I never heard of it while volunteering in a public school over a period of four years. I have never heard my Baptist state convention promote it. A quick search of Baptist Press articles showed the last one on the subject was an opinion piece written in 2007 indicating to me the subject is not a huge, newsworthy topic even in the conservative press.

Why is it not a major topic? One of the universal complaints I find in the churches I serve is the terrible thing our government did by taking Bible reading and prayer out of our public schools. The government has taken steps to remove state and school administration mandated Bible reading as a devotional exercise and prayer out of the daily routine. I for one have no problem denying our public school children the necessity of having to hear devotional readings from the Quran, the Teachings of the Compassionate Buddha, the Book of Mormon, the Book of the Dead, or the Bhagavad-Gita. If we insist in our free country that our children hear the Bible read each day, those same children will also be required to hear readings from other works considered sacred by their adherents. You cannot have it both ways in a free country!

My suggestion is to make the most of the freedom we have. As the old saying goes, "As long as there are tests in school, there will be prayer in school." I can vouch for that. There is no law anywhere that says a student cannot bring a Bible to school and read it for personal benefit when it does not distract from the classroom efforts of the teacher. A student can read the Bible during lunch, in a study period, or standing in an open hallway. Anyone who tries to interfere can be accused of harassment.

Far more important than having prayer and Bible reading in our schools is having prayer and Bible reading in our homes and in our churches, yes in our churches! Before we condemn the government for taking state-mandated prayer and Bible reading out of the public arena, we need to see how much we do in our private settings. Religious Freedom Day should judge how much time we spend in our homes with the Bible open. The Day should judge how much time we spend in prayer (beyond the cursory "Thanks for the grub, God."). The Day should judge how important it is to us that our children see that prayer and Bible reading are important to their parents. We can do this without fear that someone will break into our homes and arrest us for practicing our faith or be waiting outside our church doors with guns and hand grenades to kill us all.

Think for a moment about the last time you were in a Christian worship service. How much time was spent reading the Bible? How much time was spent in prayer? What was the subject of the prayer? Where are our people when it comes time for small group Bible study? Are all the ones who want our public schools to read the Bible taking advantage of the freedom to study it themselves at home and other places?

Worship for the Christian is a process of personal acknowledgment of who God is and the individual's place before God. That process can take the form of silent waiting, singing, listening to both the reading of the Bible and its explanation/application. It will include prayer that is both personal and guided. Yet with all this, how much comes through our traditional worship services that says the Bible should be the handbook on life for every believer and that prayer is the method of communicating with the most important Person in your life. Better use it!

Religious Freedom Day for the American Christian should be a day on which we celebrate our freedom to read the Bible and not be forced to read someone else's holy book. We should celebrate that we can pray and not worry about someone spying on us to see what we are doing. We should celebrate that we have the freedom to try to convince all those other people who read something else that they are missing out on the Truth, and we don't have to worry about being locked up in jail or beheaded for doing it. We must educate our membership at all levels of our religious organizations about the freedoms and responsibility we have as free American Christians. We just need to be compassionate and live out our freedom the way our Lord taught and practiced it.

Christmas Was Risky

God became a human being. That human being gave up being equal with God the Father and took on all the weaknesses of a typical mortal including the ability to be tempted by the wiles and ways of this world. God did this to show us how much he loved us. Jesus, the Son of God, became Emmanuel. I call that risky.

Apparently God did not have a Plan B. If Jesus failed to meet the requirements for the job while existing in full human nature, there was no back up plan, at least none that scripture seems to imply. Jesus had to be sinless to finish the plan. I call that risky.

To add to the high stakes that God was seeing, when the job that Jesus had come to accomplish was finished, God created the Church out of a bunch of weak, sinful, and rebellious human beings that said they would follow Jesus anywhere. He put the entire task of spreading the news about what Jesus had done in their hands. He made no provision for any back up plan if they failed or just lost interest. Again there was no Plan B. I call that risky.

Another year is about to begin. The Church has had the same marching orders for 2000 years. Holy Spirit continues to be our one source for strength, wisdom, and boldness essential to carrying out the task received so many years ago. God took a big chance subjecting his Son to the temptations that surround every mortal. He took a big chance giving a world mission responsibility to those first disciples. He continues to take a big chance on the Church's willingness to take a risk as well.

In 2012 the Church must take some big risks. We must do ministry with less money than we will think we need. We must do ministry in a culture that is less interested in what we have to say. We must make sacrifices in ways that we cannot imagine at this time. We must make decisions about what we must maintain and what we will allow to disappear before 2013 arrives. We must start living in a much riskier fashion.

Christians must decide if they will be safe or faithful in 2012. It is terribly difficult to do both in this world. Associations must decide whom they can help, how they can help, and what they must let die in the process. State and national conventions must decide why they exist, eliminate what does not support that purpose, and be honest in their reasoning. In 2012 taking the necessary risks will mean some things must die or disappear. Taking the necessary risks will mean division and realignment of priorities and support.

Taking the necessary risks always follows determining God's will. Simply taking risks does not make a fool any less a fool. The Church God established at Pentecost takes risk because faithfulness to his Plan demands taking risks in this world. You count the cost. You weigh the sacrifice. In the end it is faithfulness to God's Plan that must come out on top.

Christmas was risky, but then God being God, he knew what was involved from the beginning. The Plan it initiated concerned the spiritual eternity of mankind. As we enter 2012, we will find ourselves having to decide if we are willing to take the risks. There will be sacrifices that bring discomfort and loss, but faithfulness demands risk, and we do still believe that the God who started this Plan is still in control. The Church, to be the Church that cost the life of the Son of God, has no other choice but to take the risks. I hope we all enjoy stepping into the dark!

They May Not Tell You Beforehand

A few weeks ago I had the unexpected experience of a brief stay in the hospital due to a blocked artery in my heart. At 95% blockage the doctors told me I was lucky to have gotten through the situation without a heart attack. With no damage having been done, I could go back to my regular schedule with a new awareness of how things can happen with no warning.

I had felt a strange pressure in the middle of my chest and a burning in my throat. Those were the warnings my body gave me that my heart's arterial system was about to shut down. For years I had focused on a heart healthy diet. I had exercised every day. I had kept my blood pressure under control and cholesterol levels in the healthy range. I took comprehensive vitamins to supplement the already controlled diet. I still developed a blocked artery.

We all know that these things can happen. Cancer is well known for being discovered in stages too advanced to make treatment successful. Other diseases can give us the same problems. We find out too late a problem exists. Our options become limited. In the end we sometimes have only one option. Accept the end as it comes.

This same scenario is too often visible in our relationships among family members and between friends. It also occurs in churches, associations, and conventions. We are not sure what is going on, but something feels unusual. Something is wrong. We sense a deep and serious problem exists, but we cannot define it. The end result could be fatal if preventive action is not soon taken. Yet we have little warning of the coming crisis.

The medical personnel found nothing on ECGs or blood tests that would show anything was wrong around my heart. Only when they went into the arteries with a camera did they find the obvious cause of the unwanted pain. Once discovered the problem was evident and the cure obvious. A procedure to insert a stint took less than a hour and a day later I was home. Sometimes we must look deeper into our relationships to make sure that possible trouble is not hiding and building into something deadly.

I told my doctor that I felt I had a problem and did not know what to do about it. That started the process of treatment. We must do the same with family members and friends. We must communicate! My health was valuable. I wanted to do something about keeping it in the best condition possible. Our relationships are likewise valuable. We must do whatever is necessary to keep those relationships healthy. We must communicate!

I didn't blame the doctor for my condition. I went to the doctor because I knew that any help I needed must begin there. Don't blame a family member or friend when you sense trouble in the relationship. Express your concern and ask for help from the only one who can work with you to solve the problem, the other member in the relationship.

Within the church we too often push felt problems under the proverbial rug. We don't want to hurt someone's feelings. We don't want to make something big out of something that appears small. We operate as if we can ignore a problem and it will go away. It almost never does.

We must communicate! Redemption is a foundational aspect of good communication. You want to restore what may appear to be damaged or broken. In redemption you think of the needs of others. In redemption you express value. In redemption you take action to restore that which you had before. Few church, association, or convention conflicts would exist for long if redemption was the goal in every discussion.

Only through an emphasis upon redemptive and open communication can reconciliation be reached and healthy relationships restored. Only as we seek the divinely defined health of God's people through reaching out to others, by considering others better than ourselves, and by honoring others (Romans 12:3-16) will we be able to maintain the family relationships within the family of God that he intended.

Trust is the key to reconciliation and spiritual health. I trusted my doctors. I will again. When others know they can trust me, they will be open with me in their communication. They will reveal their fears and their pains. They will explore with me how I can help. Sometimes I will have to ask and hope that enough trusts exists that they will share what they had planned on keeping hidden. That is when the blocked arteries are discovered and healing/restoration can begin.

Autonomous: To Be or Not To Be

I wish I were a brilliant historian. I would have a big title, a big salary, and a big list of books carrying my name as author. Alas, I am no such creature. So I must gather a foundation for my thoughts in other ways or simply give my opinion.

Federalism versus States' Rights. Autonomous local church versus autonomous association versus autonomous state convention versus autonomous national convention. By the way probably Southern Baptists are the only ones who understand the implications of this previous sentence. We have ongoing crises among Southern Baptists because of misunderstandings and an outright wrong approach to the concept of autonomy and its sister concept of connectionalism. We have ongoing discussions about the cause of the Civil War. Was its cause grounded in slavery or was slavery simply the chosen issue over which the battle for a strong central government versus strong states' rights was finally fought rather that tariff questions or rules governing international trade agreements or the right to print your own money (or maybe even how many wives you could have)?

Alas, I am not that brilliant scholar in American history. So, as to the other issue, why is there so much emotional upheaval among Baptists over autonomy and a proper understanding of connectionalism? It has everything to do with priesthood of the believer and organizational freedom. At this fall's annual meeting for the NC Baptist State Convention, messengers will hear a report concerning the 2000 Baptist Faith and Message. Should the state convention accept it as our confessional document or stick with the 1963 BF&M?

This question has arisen because one messenger said we have a "mess" if we don't address it. Where's the mess? The national convention with less than 10,000 messengers supposedly representing sixteen million members adopted the 2000 as drawn up by a presidentially hand picked committee. The 1963 version was drawn up and presented by a committee composed of the executinve directors of the various state conventions, people chosen by the states from which they came!

If NC Baptists have a mess, it is because someone has forgotten that great Baptist element called connectionalism and its relationship to autonomy. In the Encyclopedia of Southern Baptists (c. 1958, vol. I, p. 99), the article author quotes the SBC constitution and then adds his own comments. "'While independent and sovereign in its own sphere, the Convention does not claim and will never attempt to exercise any authority over any other Baptist body, whether church, auxiliary organizations, association, or convention.' This limitation is prompted by the theological proposition that each church is independent and autonomous. No other body may usurp the authority of the church."

We are "connected" as NC Baptists to the SBC by choice, choosing to cooperate as we mutually desire. We do not have to follow the SBC in each step it takes, nor does it create a mess when we choose not to do so.

We do not have a mess except when someone decides to turn our convention into a strong federalist organization instead of the local church rights, associational rights, state convention rights organization it was designed to be. We are connected as a community, not as a family bowing before the ruling patriarch who dictates how the entire family will live.

If we are blessed as a state convention, the committee that has been appointed by the president of the convention will remember that we are autonomous and serve together through a clearly defined connectionalism. They will recommend that we maintain our freedom by continuing to function under the 1963 BF&M, a document that was prepared in part by our own elected personnel. When we forget our foundations of autonomy and connectionalism, then we will have a mess! And I really don't want to have to lead my association to assert its autonomous rights.

Who's Afraid of Change!

I am getting older. Can't stop it. Not sure I would want to if I could. Staying young, or at least locked into one age or another, would just make you weird and out of place. People would look at you as if you were some kind of freak, that you needed to be in a laboratory somewhere or at least in a museum. After all, everything around you is changing. Why aren't you?

We have met the enemy of change and it is us! (Sorry, Pogo) There is a church sign in my area that says something like "When change stops, death starts." Not bad for a church. In fact most churches I know would consider that heresy. Change comes hard, so hard that for some death is preferrable.

People don't change much, at least not their basic needs and their basic patterns of life. Society does change and with it comes the way we as Christians must relate to it. The questions arise as we look at how much our methods and our images must change to keep us communicating with a society in constant change.

Baptists don't like change. After all if God doesn't change, why should we? Therefore churches shouldn't change. Associations shouldn't change. State conventions shouldn't change. National conventions shouldn't change.

Of course we know all the responses to this. Change the methods without changing the message. Be relevant in a changing society. Meet the never changing basic needs by using ever changing different methods. God's love never changes. Man's sinful nature never changes. Only the methods of communication change.

The conflict arises when the new method reflects a desire to change rather than a more effective method. Churches can change and die in the process. Associations can change and lose all reason to exist. Same can be said for state and national comventions.

Change can be initiated because the old has become ineffective. It can also be initiated because someone felt they weren't receiving the attention they deserved. Change can also come about because someone felt that a little revolution is always healthy regardless of the methods or outcome.

Churches and their cooperative structures have to change. Are we changing for the right reasons? Do we have any reasonable assurance that what will result after the change will be an improvement? I can say change is essential. I cannot say yes to either of the two remaining questions. Baptists need to be very aware of the consequences of change for the wrong reasons and in the wrong direction.

Finding a Balance in Cooperative Ministries

Current trends at every level of cooperative giving should be a concern for everyone. This includes the support provided by individual church members to their church, the level of support provided by a church to its partner organizations, and the division made by state conventions in conjunction with the national bodies. What standards are we willing to support, condone, or simply ignore in our current system?

The level of a spring-fed pond on the farm rose or fell based on numerous factors. The spring's rate of flow and rainfall were the only sources of water. Ground seepage and evaporation accounted for primary losses. As long as the water entering the pond was equal to or greater than the amount leaving the pond, everyone was happy. When the loss exceeded the input, the pond started going dry. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see the application to the funding programs of our churches, associations, and conventions.

Church members who designate their financial gifts away from the unified budget may still get a tax deduction, but in the long run it hurts the ministry capability of the church. Churches that designate their gifts to the state and national conventions instead of supporting the Cooperative Program may feel good about their mission support, but they hurt the ability of the conventions to do their work. When national conventions demand greater slices of the financial pie and state conventions don't have a larger pie from which to draw, then the pond starts to go dry and eventually everyone suffers.

Some future courses of action might include:
1. Individuals find in their local church's unified budget the best way to support the work of the Kingdom of God from Jerusalem to the ends of the earth by contributing 5-10% of their income. This puts more money into the network even if organizational percentages don't change.

2. ALL churches get behind the Cooperative Program and support it at a percentage level that reveals their commitment to the unified budgets of the conventions as the priority mission support channel. This allows for a healthy flow of adequate funds into the state convention and then on to the national level. If the current SBC church average approximates 6%, then 7% would be a healthy initial goal.

3. Sufficient churches continue to demand the right to send their money anywhere and still make decisions about the unified budget system of the state and national conventions. Less money goes into the Cooperative Program pool and supplies less for all channels going out. Additional cuts have to be made to unified budget priorities.

4. Sufficient churches demand that more money go out of the unified budgets of state conventions to national and international causes while giving minimal percentages to the state unified budget themselves. The state resources continue to shrink forcing more cuts to be made, further limiting the state's ability to meet ministry and mission needs within its field. Ultimately the state has to decide what it can and cannot support among former priorities. The two sides of the Great Commission coin, evangelism and discipleship, appear to come into conflict. Because this will result in less impact on the local church, the process will contribute to the increased dollar shortfall felt by national organizations that depend upon the states' providing supportive funding even though percentages sent are increasing.

I wonder:
Will the North American Mission Board decide to depend upon retail sales, designated gifts, and the Annie Armstrong offering for funding and focus on its own church planting program divorcing itself from all state covention involvement?

Will the International Mission Board begin to partner as a priority with missionaries already supported by individual churches jointly commissioning them to maintain a higher missionary force?

Will Southern Baptists decide that six convention seminaries are unnecessary, closing at least one of the "Bible Belt" schools to save money while depending more upon independent seminaries that are quasi-Southern Baptist to provide ministerial training?

Will associations become more creative and effective in providing local church support for missions, ministry, and training through cooperative efforts among churches and with other associations on a regular basis? Will they develop their own mission partnerships focusing on areas where their churches have a specific interest?

Based upon the changes in the last thirty years, the next thirty may well end with nothing that looks like the organizational structure we know today much less with what we were familiar in 1980. Since associations are outside the Cooperative Program channel, their efforts to increase ministry funding may have a significant impact on the efforts by other organizations to increase financial loyalty.

Initial Reflections on the 2010 NC Baptist State Convention Annual Meeting

Attendance continues to drop at the annual meeting which is sad. A lot of tremendous information was shared that would make for a much more highly educated membership in our churches. Hearing both what has happened and what is planned would help our churches decide more effectively their own type and level of involvement. But if you don't show up, it is hard to get the news!

How much should what we have been shape who we should be? Change in the church is necessary when we live in a world that will change whether we want it to or not. Why we should change in a particular area of life and ministry and what should change always become the points of discussion and division. The study committee that was approved by this year's convention will have to answer those questions. Do we throw out the 1963 Baptist Faith and Message Statement as our doctinal document and replace it with the 2000 version or do we leave it as is?

1. Have we changed what we believe as Baptists? Then change the documents.
2. Are we doing it because the SBC did it? Not good enough, leave it alone.
3. If we have not changed what we believe, then don't change the documents.
4. If we are still an autonomous Baptist body, then any reference to the SBC should become irrelevant in the decision making process.

I don't think we have changed our fundamental beliefs about the Bible, its final authority in all matters of faith and practice, or our calling fron God to live God-glorifying lives before the world. Few associations and conventions on the state and local level across our country have felt a need to change. We don't need to do so either.