;)
Real Cooperation
Posted by Bowden McElroy in Uncategorized
A couple of years ago the Tulsa Metro Baptist Association was a fairly traditional SBC association. Large, but traditional. (I think we’re still the sixth largest association in the convention.) Our size allowed us to have several ministries: a camp, a home for battered women, and a food pantry/clothes closet (the Allen Davis Ministry Center). The churches gave money and a large staff administered programs.
A new vision led to a name change: the Tulsa Metro Association of Baptist Churches. A small change but a significant one. The new direction is simple: churches do ministry; associations should be in the networking business.
We gave away our large ministries. We gave up control. The camp and women’s shelter are completely independent with their own boards. The Allen Davis Ministry Center was given to a church. One church has direction and control of the Center.
Dire predictions were made: one church can’t pull it off by themselves, no other churches will want to cooperate. Years of work will go down the tube. Ministry opportunities to the neighborhood will disappear. Yada, yada, yada. Blah, blah, blah.
None of it came to pass.
Volunteer hours are up. More churches are cooperating with the Center than before. More people are being reached. New means of reaching out to the surrounding community have begun. You can read about it in the Tulsa World:
Five hundred teens from 17 area Baptist churches will help needy families put food on the table for Christmas this year.
The teens collected 6,000 cans of food through the annual Care Xplosion event held at South Tulsa Baptist Church.
It’s a simple concept. Churches do ministry. Associations network resources. The end result is a smaller staff, lower overhead, more money funneled to people, and churches taking ownership of ministry. We haven’t worked out all the kinks yet but we may have stumbled upon a model that will actually work in the 21st century.
What’s working in your association?
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;){kind=logo}
;)
;)
;)
Bowden
Please sit down before you read this next statement. I AGREE WITH YOU!
Associational DOMs or offices should be the conduit in networking churches to accomplish Kingdom building that can’t be done alone.
Where we might disagree is that I still believe the association can serve in an accountability and mentoring function when it comes to doctrinal matters. While you and I both could come up with some horror stories where this has not always worked well, I believe that for the most part, and historically I might add, associations have served this role well.
Bowden,
I agree with the direction that the association is going and agree that associations should be in the networking business.
My question to add to the discussion is this. DOM stands for direction of missions, not director of ministries. Leading out in ministry is great and we have a biblical mandate to do this. But when does the “DOM” also lead out in church planting, encouraging churches to reproduce themselves while participating in ministry?
Robin,
Dr. Jordan at the Baptist General Convention of Oklahoma (BGCO) agrees with you. Did you know the BGCO doesn’t have a doctrinal statement in our constitution/bylaws? Oklahoma baptists have historically left issues of doctrine to the associations.
I see the rise of multiple associations within geographic regions as well as non-geographic associations for that very reason.
Ken,
Our philosophy is churches birth churches. We have an Executive Director, not a DOM. Again, the association networks churches in their church planting… as a work of the association we’re out of the church planting business. The Association is divided into four teams (a team is an open committee that anyone from a member church can join); the church planting team is the largest team with the most resources. We’ve streamlined the process of getting money to church planters and have a mentoring group of church planters and wanna-be’s.
Bowden-
A most excellent post! I believe that your association is, indeed, “on to something.” Furthermore, I am convinced that associations which do not shift toward this model of facilitation and networking are in danger of entering the realm of irrelevance in our world of 21st-century technology.
Robin-
Seriously … the problem with the notion of doctrinal accountability and mentoring within an association is the issue of church autonomy. And, honestly, I haven’t seen much attention paid to issues of doctrine … instead the focus becomes mostly about issues of practice (i.e. how other churches, especially new churches, are “doing church”). It’s at that point that accountability and mentoring devolve into meddling.
“While you and I both could come up with some horror stories where this has not always worked well…” Man, don’t even get me started.
Ken,
Good point. I agree that associations should focus upon church planting and reproduction (even more so than planning “mission trips,” when churches should be doing that themselves) Unfortunately, the church planting emphasis is missing from many of our associations.
I agree with you all that the association is the churches, and should focus on church-led ministry and missions. I also agree that sometimes an association, particularly a DOM, AM or ED is there to hold churches accountable for what they are not doing (church planting, reaching out to the poor, pregnant or forgotten) and training them in doing what God has called them to do missionally.
By the way, our DOM here is big on church planting and so was our old DOM in Maine, Mike Hoffmann. Both of these guys were former church planters before becoming DOMs. I do think church planting is a necessary competency and passion for leaders of associations.
Geoff
Didn’t mean to get you started bro. I agree, there is a fine line between meddling and accountability. From the beginning of associations, though, accountability has been a function. I pray that all our associations know the difference between the two.
God Bless
I really hope that what you describe could become a model for many associations. I believe there’s way too much duplication in the SBC “system” between local and State associations.
I’ve heard many pastors describe associations as “dinosaurs.” There are some great associations out there, but I believe most of them could disappear without the local church even noticing.
Just my two cents.
“I really hope that what you describe could become a model for many associations. I believe there’s way too much duplication in the SBC “system” between local and State associations.”
kevin, i say, “amen” to this statement. a lot of overhead costs at the state level could be cut down and more go to actual mission work. more should be done at the associational level than rely on a top heavy state convention.
david