More dismissing fiduciary obligation of IMB administration and trustees

I recently expressed my lament over the recent announcement of the International Mission Board of the Southern Baptist Convention (IMB). Not only is it hard to accept that at least since 2010, our missions-sending agency has outspent its predictable income by close to a quarter of a billion dollars, it also remains gut-wrenching to know IMB both sold off tens of millions of dollars of real estate and properties and depleted its cash reserves just to keep the doors open. Adding insult to injury, IMB officials announced it expects seasoned missionaries, most of whom are undoubtedly poised for the greatest effectiveness on their respective people-groups in their entire tenure, to voluntarily retire so IMB can appoint newly appointed but inexperienced missionaries to replace them.

And, as I mentioned in my lament, it remains organizationally unforgivable for an agency's trustees and administration to allow itself to get into the dismal fiscal condition it has. "Nonetheless, it seems to me there remains a very simple principle which predictably keeps one out of this type of fiduciary fiasco regardless of the size of the organization; namely, no matter the budgeted amounts, we spend within our means and not beyond our means."

What remains just as concerning to me is the public response of many high profile Southern Baptists to IMB's discouraging announcement. I mentioned two in my earlier piece. Below are a few more (embolden added for emphasis):

• "We all should shoulder the blame for what has happened. This is unacceptable! We need to lead our churches to sacrifice and give more so we can send more. As a pastor, I understand financial realities and the challenges churches face when making a budget. However, it is possible – no matter what your church’s situation – to lead your church to sacrifice and give more for missions" -- Jon Akin, son of Danny Akin and Senior Pastor at Fairview Church in Lebanon, TN.
• "One is that, as with any large organization, it is easy for expenses and personnel to slowly grow beyond a sustainable level,” Kidd says. “The second, more concerning level,” Kidd notes, “is that Southern Baptists’ giving to missions has simply not kept up with the aspirations of the IMB” --Thomas Kidd, Professor at History, Baylor University.
• '"I don’t think it [the IMB staff reduction] signals decline. I think it signals a different approach for positioning Southern Baptists for long term effectiveness,” Coppenger says.'-- Jeb Coppenger, son of Mark Coppenger and Pastor at Redemption City Church in Franklin, Tennessee.

As before, these statements duplicate almost in toto what appears to be the absence of fiduciary obligation at IMB. Apparently for Akin, IMB's reckless spending patterns are no big deal. Rather, all Southern Baptists share blame in this. What's unacceptable for Akin is, we don't sacrifice and give more. Give and sacrifice more to an agency that grossly overspends its clearly predictable income, and has done so for at least five years totaling close to a quarter billion dollars? Give and sacrifice more to an agency which, against its own policies, depleted its cash reserves and sold off SBC property to keep the operation afloat? Not to mention Akin apparently didn't get the memo--For years both the annual missions offering and CP giving to IMB has increased. Also forget mentioning the approval of the GCRTF proactive to raise IMB's cut of the CP pie exceeding 50% of total CP gifts.

Baylor's history professor seems no more sober in his estimation than Akin. On a more concerning level, Kidd indicates, Southern Baptists just simply failed to keep up with the "aspirations of the IMB." Failed to keep up with IMB's aspirations? Excuse me? Is that not like the old worn proverb about the tail wagging the dog? Who owns whom here? Who represents the interests and convictions of whom here? Southern Baptists do not answer to the IMB. IMB dictates to Southern Baptists neither its mission nor its aspirations. Rather, the IMB is charged as a missions-sending agency to send to the uttermost parts of the earth missionaries that Southern Baptists support and fund, not missionaries and strategies to send missionaries that Southern Baptists cannot support and cannot fund. And given the deplorable deficit spending IMB recklessly observed, IMB sent missionaries Southern Baptists did not and predictably could not support at the level of giving we are and were. I wonder if Kidd would argue that his university president should spend according to his aspirations for Baylor regardless of the projected budgetary income to Baylor. Should Baylor's history department of which Kidd is a member spend according to its aspirations or according to the projected income and allotment the history department receives?

What is more, what pastor would long survive in any church if he, year after year, overspent receipts according to his aspirations, dipping into and depleting cash reserves until the bank was broke and then suggesting they sell off property in order to keep going? On top of this, the Chairman of the Deacons stands and says, "This is all our fault. We need to be giving more and sacrificing more!" This is prima facie nonsensical. 

Finally, Coppenger sees no decline signaled by IMB's staff reduction. Instead he sees a "different approach" to poise Southern Baptists for long term effectiveness. Like both Akin and Kidd and along with many other high profile Southern Baptists, Coppenger dismisses carte blanche the fiduciary obligation of IMB administration and trustees to over 40,000 Southern Baptist churches for the hundreds of millions of dollars given to it every year and instead conveniently focuses on long-term strategies for effective global missions, an indisputable assumption of which most all Southern Baptists presume. Is it not obvious and even expected that IMB leaders would routinely, day-in-day-out, focus and poise themselves for long-term effectiveness? Coppenger ignores the problem at the IMB by citing the obvious.

If this recent announcement coming from the IMB is not a wake-up call to grassroots Southern Baptists that hands-off, top-down, elite-driven leadership models cannot work in a convention of free churches hopelessly wed to the time-tested, time-honored Baptist principle of ecclesial voluntarism, the 170 year old Southern Baptist Convention is, for all practical purposes, finished. We're done.   

 

Comments

[Mary]

So the Akin's are going after churches for not giving enough but somehow the IMB now has a leader who comes from a church who didn't give enough. How is Platt qualified to lead the IMB with his history of not supporting the IMB?

[peter lumpkins]

Hi Mary,

Many predicted that choosing a person who possessed no real conviction of either cooperate missions or the missions board itself would backfire. In the most desperate time in the life of the IMB, a time when it is flat broke, and its survival is surely at stake, the leader calls for reduction in missionaries rather than appealing for funds. I find this sad irony breath-taking. Leaving aside for the moment whether churches ought to have given more through the years, imagine the president attempting to raise funds for an organization he and churches like his assisted in creating the very lack of funds it now has. Unfortunately, Dr. Platt lacks any moral authority whatsoever to appeal to Southern Baptists for more money. It would be like a thrice-divorced man standing before a group of newly-weds teaching them how to have a successful marriage.

[Scott Shaver]

Kudos Peter:

IMO,

Lilly-livered pastors more loyal to the persona than the practicality and history of the CP/IMB along with arrogant seminary presidents stand more complicit/responsible than any collective of churches or current voices of dissent for slitting the throat of the golden-egg goose.

Began with "conservative resurgence" and was codified in the 2000BFM

[Scott Shaver]

Rick Patrick is deftly holding off an onslaught of critics at MillerVoices for questioning the wisdom and obviously revamped trustee process of the IMB.

Sounds like trustees are now willing to forego votes of the board for "directives" from the President. Everybody comfortable with that?

[peter lumpkins]

Just more reason to lament, Scott. As for "MillerVoices," I'm afraid the only variety of genuine voices from all over the SBC left there are the chosen few...

[Mary]

MillerVoices hee! I always thought of it as SBC Pravda. If there is a place on the internet for SBC Propaganda from on high it's at Voices where "all voices are equal; some voices are more equal than others." I don't see how Rick Patrick stands all the abuse they hurl at him. Miller throws pure vitriol at him every time he dares to raise a question. See how Miller allows Tarheel to twist his words and then call Rick - Rick "Rivera" Real nice.

[Scott Shaver]

I've read and re-read Kidd's comments:

Somewhere along the way the thought must have been conceded in SBC academia and denominational process that the role of the "visionary" supersedes the role of the accounting department.

Can't tell whether Kidd is skeptical or supportive of the "aspirations" not met.

[Scott Shaver]

These reviews of former IMB employees are interesting.

http://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/International-Mission-Board-Reviews-E258783.htm

[Lydia]

Everything is based upon personalities and entitlements these days. One cannot discuss facts, observations, patterns of behavior in an effort to seek truth. That is verboten because it might make the leading personalities look bad and lacking accountability. And saving image is more important than taking the fact they have taken advantage of hundreds of thousands of pew sitters and their money.

This is a character and integrity issue. Not to mention a trust issue.

[Mary]

Peter, we're on the same page here re Platt. Everybody keeps saying "this isn't David Platt's fault. These problems predate him." Which is true to a degree. But are we to believe that Platt did not know how bad this situation was when he accepted this position. Platt is the poster boy for the so-called "young leaders" who have given very little and mostly only designated gifts for these so many years. Now he wants to sound the rallying cry that it's time to support that which he himself didn't think worth supporting. Who exactly is Akin calling on to "repent" Has David Platt repented of being part of the culture that brings us to this place?

And then we have to question what exactly is being proposed here. Because reading between the lines this isn't just about budget shortfalls = but Platt seems to be moving the IMB in an entirely new direction but he just doesn't want to show all his cards right now. "Never let a crisis go to waste." Is this crisis being seen as an opportunity to move the IMB in a completely different direction in the years to come? Is this being done in such a way that five years from now we look back and think - "I didn't agree to this" how did that happen.

One thing is certain - nobody is holding anybody accountable. The SBC trustees system is meaningless. Trustees seem to be appointed based on their level of sycophancy. The SBC is now being ruled by a handful of men.

[Lydia]

"Who exactly is Akin calling on to "repent" Has David Platt repented of being part of the culture that brings us to this place?"

But Platt is the "Radical" guy. Sell everything, move among the poor, etc. That was his churches focus and over the last 5 years or so I have read of some brave souls very involved for a long time who got totally burned out with it. At some point, you should focus on making sure your own family has a future. It was collectivism at its worst because it was in the name of Jesus and a sort of competition of who could out do radical over who.

My guess is Platt is used to people simply giving it up after he speaks with his passion. But then he left "Radical" church for a big salary and fancy office. Maybe he was burned out, too? But then if you look at the trajectory of what he taught from so young...his shitck, so to speak, it makes sense how he would think now...you mean people are not willing to send us more money? But aren't they excited about my new missions plans? With his congregation being so radical you would think more had found its way to the CP.

That whole world is personality over substance.

I also think people have been fooled so many times by this crowd they are silly if they don't question that there is another plan altogether. What better way to keep the admin salaries high than persuade a whole bunch of YRR people to find their own support and go as SBC missionaries. That lot tend to prefer kool aid over meat. And the older missionaries are most likely not as gullible nor Calvinist. I agree about not allowing a crisis to go to waste. But they certainly hid the crisis well.

"The SBC is now being ruled by a handful of men."

That has been the goal. Explain to me how this is not similar to how Obama operates.

[Mary]

"...Explain to me how this is not similar to how Obama operates."

I wrote in another thread that the Calvinists in the SBC operate just like the radical progressives or the Republican elites for that matter. The country is starting to wake up to the fact that a handful of people really believe that the majority of people are too dumb to know what's best and so all power should be consolidated within the hands of a few.

[Max]

Mary writes ""Never let a crisis go to waste." Is this crisis being seen as an opportunity to move the IMB in a completely different direction in the years to come?"

Certainly! New Calvinism is already moving in a completely different direction than mainstream SBC belief and practice! IMB will phase out the old and bring in the new within 5-10 years, with the first wave of veteran missionaries coming home by year's end.

Lydia writes "I also think people have been fooled so many times by this crowd they are silly if they don't question that there is another plan altogether."

There are three types of people on planet earth: (1) those who plan to make things happen, (2) those who make things happen, and (3) those who wonder "What happened?!" SBC's New Calvinist elite (Type 1) are masters at strategic planning - you have to give them that. It's not the Quiet Revolution of SBC's reformed old guard ... it's been an in-your-face and well-orchestrated takeover of most SBC entities. The YRR (Type 2) are executing the plan across SBC life - you better get out of the way of this bunch of radicals! SBC's non-Calvinist majority (Type 3) have yet to stir from their deep slumber - when they do, they will surely proclaim "What happened?!" But, their weeping and gnashing of teeth will be too little too late.