If there’s one word that can send any Baptist group into tumult, it’s the word change. Any pastor or church leader with more than two weeks’ experience knows what it is like to try to lead a church through needed change. It doesn’t matter how valuable the change may be – there is still a challenge in leading the congregation through the process of doing something differently.
Michael DuduitWhat’s true in a church is also true of networks of churches, like our own South Carolina Baptist Convention. When we’ve been doing some things the same way for a long time, it creates controversy to suggest that there might be a better way. That has certainly been the case with the recent proposals presented by the GCR Task Force, which will be presented to the annual meeting of the state convention in November.
Recognizing the need to shift more resources to the mission field, members of the GCR Task Force went through a process that produced a proposal which includes several trade-offs in order to free up more dollars for missions and evangelism. Among those trade-offs are a reduction in funding for our three Baptist universities, coupled with a provision to allow those schools to have up to five trustees (or 20 percent of the board) who are active Southern Baptists who live outside South Carolina.
Some South Carolina Baptists have objected to this move, believing that it will reduce the convention’s control over the institutions – though even if a school uses all five slots, every trustee still must be elected by the convention and 80 percent of the board will still be residents of South Carolina. However, I think many observers have missed how valuable such a provision will be to the schools we love.
I am particularly attuned to this issue since I served as executive vice president at Union University at the time that Tennessee Baptists faced the same question, heard the same objections, and ultimately decided to give their schools that tool. Today, Union is allowed to have up to 20 percent of their trustees from out-of-state, just like the South Carolina proposal. Right now they are using just two of their available six slots for out-of-state board members; in fact, one of their trustees is a South Carolina Baptist!
Over recent years, the ability to have out-of-state trustees has been a valuable resource for Union, according to president David Dockery. When I asked him how this provision has helped Union, he listed at least four ways:
1) “It has provided a broader perspective for board conversations and discussions.
2) “It has allowed us to pursue people who might have means to help the university in particular ways.
3) “It has connected us with people and churches in other sectors or regions who can introduce us to new student population groups or to other potential donors.
4) “This one has helped as much as any: It has allowed us the opportunity to keep trustees who move from Tennessee to other states.”
Right now, if any of our South Carolina trustees accepts a church or position in another state, they must resign. That happened when Dr. Frank Page – an Anderson University trustee – left the state to move to NAMB, and then on to lead the SBC Executive Committee. (Ironically, Dr. Page is now on the Union board, rather than continuing to be able to serve with Anderson’s board.) The ability to keep such leaders would strengthen continuity on our boards and allow us to keep those vital ties with leaders who love and help our universities.
The best boards of trustees are built to cover many needs and to bring to the table a variety of expertise. Certainly there is a need for some to bring business knowledge and financial means, but there is also a need for theological insight, for educational knowledge, for political understanding and much more. And even as a board is assembled to bring those varying talents and resources to the task, the board has an ongoing responsibility to keep the institution accountable to its mission and to the convention. Nothing about the GCR proposal will change that; instead, it will give our universities an additional tool to make sure the best possible people are on those boards ? even if a couple of them might now live in Georgia or Tennessee!
Ultimately, as we vote on the GCR Task Force proposals, let’s do so on the basis of what will best honor the kingdom of God and advance the work of South Carolina Baptists in reaching our state, our nation and the world for Christ.
– Duduit is dean of the College of Christian Studies at Anderson University, and executive editor of Preaching magazine.