Dr. J.D. Greear
If 36 still counts as young, then I am a young Southern Baptist pastor. (I’m not sure it does, but whenever I’m at Southern Baptist events, people are always calling me “son” and “boy”—grin.)
I have been given the great honor of serving on the SBC’s Great Commission Resurgence Task Force. I have a great deal of hope serving on this team, as I know that the God who purchased the church with His own blood will supply all that we need to thrive and prosper in the days to come.
One of the keys for a Great Commission Resurgence, I believe, is for the Southern Baptist Convention to restore the initiative in ministry to the local church. The local church is the primary institution of the New Testament. Jesus established it right after giving the great commission (Acts 2:42–47), intending for it to be His vehicle in accomplishing that commission.
Parachurch ministries (and, denominations and networks) exist to facilitate the ministry of the local church. Denominations are not biblical institutions. That is not to say they are unbiblical institutions… denominational networks are simply functional tools that churches can use to accomplish the mission given to them (as, after all, Christians have historically found they can accomplish more cooperating together than they can acting independently).
Good parachurch ministries FACILITATE the ministry of the church. BAD parachurch takes ministry from a local church and does it for her. Bad parachurch says, “Give us money and people and we’ll do ministry for you.”
In my opinion, the SBC has, in many places, descended into a “bad parachurch” model. The perception is that local churches should give, send people, and allow the institutions to do the work.
Many pastors, particularly younger ones, are no longer content with that model. They believe that the Great Commission was given to them, not to the denomination. They want to use cooperative networks to plant churches, but they don’t want the networks to do the work for them.
Furthermore, they question whether or not giving money to the Convention is the best use of their resources. They see what they believe to be a great deal of bureaucracy, inefficiency, and activity in the Convention not related to church planting.
Whether right or wrong, most younger pastors will not give to the SBC solely out of a sense of loyalty. They want to know if the Convention will assist them in the fulfillment of the commission God has given to them as church pastors. While some of us are young, arrogant, and naïve, we also have the understanding that we must be more committed to the Great Commission than we are the Convention. If the SBC is an efficient tool in fulfilling that commission, we will use it. If it is not, most younger pastors will discard it.
Many younger pastors are not actively participating in the Convention because they don’t see the SBC helping them (that is, the local church) fulfill the call God has given to them to plant churches. They are not interested in funding an institution or bureaucracy. Many gladly would give to support seminaries and other strategic initiatives that help train and produce church planters, but they want to see these institutions as partners in the work, not as those who will take over the work.
Part of the Great Commission Resurgence Task Force’s assignment is to address the issue of how younger pastors can be brought back in. How can we align the Convention so that local Baptist churches see the SBC as an effective partner for accomplishing their commission?
