It actually might be a good thing for Southern Baptists that two titans of denominational life — the IMB’s Jerry Rankin and the SBC Executive Committee’s Morris Chapman — aired their differences publicly. Surprisingly, the immediate cause for their disagreement was Chapman’s emphasis on cooperation among Southern Baptists, a reflective-type speech (he is nearing retirement) that he offered to state convention executive directors meeting during February in Idaho.
Don KirklandThe gist of the controversy is this: Rankin felt that by emphasizing the importance of cooperation, which he believed could be too much “about us” rather than the world’s lost, Chapman demonstrated a lack of commitment to the Great Commission in which our Lord told his disciples to “go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them — and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.”
This edition of the Courier contains an article revealing that Rankin has since apologized to Chapman, and appropriately so. The IMB leader admitted that his passion for the lost clouded his objectivity and caused him to “personalize” the issue in such a way that it was “perceived as an attack on a friend and colleague.”
Have these two men settled their differences? That is doubtful, because both see the mission of Southern Baptists from different — though what are actually complementing — perspectives. They have, in fact, discussed their “different perspectives,” so at least each has a better understanding of the other.
There should be no question in the mind of either that the other is committed to obeying the directives of the Great Commission. To think otherwise is simply ludicrous.
What remains after the controversy and resulting apology are the two perspectives on the mission of the Southern Baptist Convention. Rankin heads up an entity whose single goal is carrying the gospel to foreign shores and winning the lost to Christ. Chapman’s assignment is to give guidance to a conglomerate whose work is close-up and broad as well as far-reaching.
In a sense, this controversy between Chapman and Rankin is no small matter to be quickly forgotten as new issues arise to claim our attention — and our passion, as well — as Southern Baptists. Their differences — admittedly differences of perspectives — are multiplied by the thousands among denominational pastors and other leaders as well as among rank-and-file Southern Baptists nationwide.
In May, the Great Commission Resurgence Task Force will release its report in what should be a final version of its recommendations to be presented to messengers attending the yearly meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention in June. It will be adopted, of course, and then put into practice at the SBC level and by state conventions to varying degrees.
Priorities will have to be established at all levels of denominational life. This is why the Chapman-Rankin episode — and what it reveals about them and us — is crucial to any success the GCR might have, and to the future of the Southern Baptist Convention itself.
The proposed new giving plan, called Great Commission Giving, is an obvious indication of how different perspectives are coming more prominently into play within our denomination, and it will have far-reaching effects on the vitality of the Cooperative Program. By giving heightened praise to designated giving, the new plan represents a boon to megachurches that for years have designated their money to favored causes, and it will be a temptation perhaps for even smaller churches to pick and choose among the various Baptist causes.
It is necessary to note that there are no good guys and bad guys in all of this — and we must refrain from personalizing any upcoming issues to the point that we see fellow Southern Baptists in terms of “them and us” and we know for sure who is right and who is wrong. This will serve no useful purpose and will bring dishonor to the name of the One whom we serve.
The Southern Baptist Convention is changing — has changed. The South Carolina Baptist Convention is changing — has changed. There is more to come, though we cannot know in detail just what all the changes will be. Shrinkage in dollars and membership is likely the fate of both conventions, and we must deal with it effectively, keeping nostalgia for the “old days” to a minimum. Perhaps we will discover new “sacred hows” for doing our work cooperatively, but only if we also recognize that there are no “sacred cows” of methodology.
But we must not forget to keep the “main thing the main thing,” as many of my generation and earlier have been prone to say. And the main thing is our ministry together to fulfill the Great Commission. It has broad implications. To make disciples, which is called for in Matthew 28:19-20, literally means to “make learners.” Southern Baptist Greek scholar A.T. Robertson says, “This means evangelism in the fullest sense and not merely revival meetings.” He calls the teaching portion of the Great Commission a “weighty part of the work of Christians,” adding this: “Though not replacing conversion or regeneration, Christian education belongs in manifold places — in the home, in church and in school.”
In addition to the commission given in Matthew 28:19-20, Jesus also promises power and a presence. We work with his power and in his presence — always. Like the early followers of Jesus — especially those 11 Galileans — we are sent out on the greatest task in the world, but also with the greatest presence in the world.
We must embrace the Great Commission in its totality, and then we will see more clearly how to set our denominational priorities to enhance our mission and please our Lord.