Jimmy Draper - Frog in the Kettle

Kiffin,

I disagree. Young pastors need to have a grasp of their heritage, but if they fail to know how to relate what they believe to their current culture, their knowledge is irrelevant.

The SBC has dropped the ball on relevant ministry. Regardless of size, a church can be relevant. Regardless of size, a church can be focused on purpose. Regardless of size, a church can be focused on reaching and discipling. I would say that a large part of what Lifeway puts out is outdated and irrelevant. They have attempted to do some things recently with Ed Young Jr and some others, but for the most part, we are decades behind.

Young pastors need to be learning how to engage their culture with the changeless truth. I know as a young pastor, I get extremely frustrated dealing with the non-essentials that traditionalism and denominationalism have created and turned into essentials.

Again why droves of young pastors are walking away from the SBC has far more to do with methodology than theology.

 

SBC,

To be honest with you I think the new methology is being pushed (especially in my State Convention) down our throats (to the point I need to throw up!). Maybe in other states it is not. I also do not see young pastors walking away from the SBC. Where are the stats on this? From what I see the SBC is promoting the methodology of Young Jr. and Warren. There are Churches being built that look more like Disney land and Theatres rather than a sanctuary all over and trying to appear Hip and Cool yet the same time the problem with baptisms exists. Is there any proof that Warren and Young Jr. have had any more success that traditional churches in keeping their converts?

 

I'll be posting up on my blog later today about this current issue, and that post will be more substantive than what I say here. First of all I would like to say that I believe Dr. Draper is dead on with his comments.

I'm a final semester seminary student at SWBTS in Ft Worth, Texas. I have thoroughly enjoyed my time at seminary and have grown greatly during my time here. I am a Southern Baptist and believe in the Baptist distinctives and theology. I can say that most all my fellow seminary students just roll their eyes and groan when politics enters the equation on anything (well except a couple of the guys dealing with short man's complex.) The controversies that have embroiled both the SBC and SWBTS lately have been untimely and unneeded distractions from our time at seminary. The simple fact is that most of our graduates are going into either missions or church planting, few wish to go into traditional church work due to the politics and perceived foolishness which occupies so many of our churches.

The trend with many of my fellow seminarians is they wish nothing to do with convention issues because they have never been taught what it is to be a Baptist, they have no denominational loyalty, and they simply can get the work of the Kingdom done more effectively without the problems they see in the convention. Some of these reasons are ill-founded, but they are their reasons for disassociation with the convention. We are loosing many of the young pastors and seminarians we have in our convention.

Personally I look forward to being involved in certain aspects of denominational work as I get out seminary and am ministry. The simple facts are that we can do more cooperatively than apart.

One other note about the "rising Calvinism" in the SBC contributing to the lack of baptisms. I completely diagree that Calvinism leads to less impact on soul-winning. In fact it is apathy and a lack of passion for winning souls that has corrupted the evangelistic efforts of our churches. We are fat, happy Americans who could care less about other people.

I still am optimistic about the convention and its future. Thanks for reading.

 

Hey, I'm younger than you...39, turning 40 next January!

I have a perspective here, too. I think many younger pastors who have been exposed to new ways to engage the culture are somewhat disenchanted with churches due to worthless traditionalism and "sacred cows."

For instance, our Sunday School program could use a little help, but I dare not revamp the "Opening Session, complete with slow hymn and recognition of birthdays with "Happy Birthday to You." (We even have the original can for birthday offerings dating back to the 1960's!)

And don't forget "Sister So-and-So," who donated the obsolete Commodore64 computer (circa 1980) that doesn't work - we can't throw it away for fear of hurting her feelings, even though she rarely (if ever) attends.

Those problems are small though. Some of the "sacred cows" in churches today rise to the level of idolatrous. These are the things that pastors have a hard time fighting. That's why so many decide that it would be easier to do a "church plant" outside the SBC.

 

I wouldn't call it laziness - I'd call it disobedience.

 

We are a very small church - less than 100 in Sunday Attendance. We just launched a new Outreach Ministry in April of this year and have baptized three since then with one more scheduled in two weeks.

I am currently serving on the Historical Commission of my State's Convention and I served as a State Convention President for two terms back in the 90's.

I am supportive of the SBC and my church participates in the Cooperative Program plan of giving.

I am also an outspoken Calvinist.

 

If you attend a conference focused upon young leaders (such as the Catalyst or C3 Conference), you will find dozens of disenfranchised young SBCers who are walking away from the denominational politics.

The declining baptism rate does not reflect the ministries of Saddleback or Fellowship (I believe Fellowship had the highest baptism rate of the SBC last year). And Warren and Ed both have a great retention rate. If you think these guys and their methods are being promoted, when is the last time either one of them spoke at the national level of the SBC? Warren spoke a few years ago and Ed spoke in Atlanta several years ago, but for the most part, they are kept at arm's length from the establishment.

The SBC has begun to embrace the 40 Days at a certain level just b/c it has done so great across the board. The PDC model has existed long before the 40 Days, yet the average SBC pastor is unaware or ignores it. Being promoted? Hardly.

Some would even argue that the Warren model and/or seeker-sensitive model are outdated (The Emerging Church / post-mod generation). Yet the average SBC church is so far removed from even being seeker-sensitive. I would contend the SBC is decades behind as far as relevant ministry goes.

Your words reflect the very problem I am addressing -- a failure to separate properly theology and methodology.

PreachinJesus & USN -- I would agree with most of what you guys wrote. As Warren says, it is easier to jump in the canoe and paddle than it is to turn the Titanic. I plan to join the church planting movement myself in the near future (which is very unusual for someone who has given much of his life to academics and local church ministry).

 

USN2Pulpit and SBCbyGrace,
I believe you have hit the nail on the head in most of your statements. I feel a kindred spirit with you. I am almost 30 years older and just to be able to express these thoughts today is a hard-fought accomplishment. We must be flexible in our methodology, albeit, without theological compromise, to be on the cutting edge and not 20-30 years behind it. There exists a fine line between blind demoninational participation and chucking it all for some new perceived freedom in methodology. That line is starting to blur rapidly. I must confess that I can't see it to follow it. I have great hope that young men like you can, with the Lord's guidance, can sort it out.

 

Wally Gator hit the nail on the head. What we are witnessing is a new brand of postmodern, fragmented spiritualism that does not have a doctrinal base. I teach at a public university and the "Christianity" that is espoused by Generation Y is almost unrecognizeable to me.

 

To paraphase: Do not be too quick to climb the ladder of success; you may find upon reaching the top, that your ladder is on the wrong wall!

 

I don't think the "old guard" of the SBC is concerned about the coming generations being as devoted to certain doctrines as they are. What they are concerned about is whether the SBC will stay as conservative as it is now. Its not that we upcoming pastors are not trustworthy, for several of the leaders have made public statements about passing the mantle to us. Its that we next generation pastors have a different view of ministry which is not as traditional as the older crowd that bothers some.

 

The table at which we sit has the same legs as the older generations (the legs are non-negotiables), but the tabletops we eat upon and the trays and plates we bring to the table are different.

The difficulty for those passing the torch is realizing that one can have a different tabletop and tray w/o compromising the table itself. For that reason, some refuse to give others a seat at the table. They must realize the table still stands on the same legs.

 

I think there are a few things to blame. One is that those going to church are on the average are older than they once were making it more difficult to reach younger people. People today are not as receptive to the gospel as they once were. We have to work harder and pray for people to reach them.

In our wealth and comfort I do not see so many people with passion and an understanding of hell. There is a lot more passivity and less boldness among believers.