Is the International Mission Board a Potemkin Village or a Lean, Efficient Missionary Sending Organization?

After my post this week questioning the wisdom of the IMB in not reimbursing ISC'ers, Journeymen and Masters missionaries for utilities like dryers, air conditioning and phones, I received a flood of emails and phone calls from missionaries on the field who agreed with my assessment. All of the field missionaries expressed loyalty to the IMB, but to a person, there was the belief that morale among missionaries on the front lines is the lowest it has been in decades. One of the missionaries, an intelligent and articulate team leader who has been employed by the IMB for nearly two decades, asked me if I had ever heard of a Potemkin Village. A Potemkin Village, he said, represents an organization with a hollow or false construct, physical or figurative, hiding an undesirable or potentially damaging reality. Potemkin Villages are built to look impressive to friends and strangers from a distance, but the buildings' shells and facades hide the fact there is little or no work actually being done within the village. This field missionary on the front lines, and others, suggested to me that the IMB has much in common with a Potemkin Village. The following represents their reasoning:

(1). Missionaries who are actually on the field planting churches and sharing Christ have little or no resources to do ministry.

According to several field missionaries who emailed me or phoned me, money for Bibles, special mission projects, and materials needed to help witness and evangelize has not been received from the IMB for months. Churches that make their way overseas to participate in prayer walks, street evangelism, or church planting efforts must bring their own money for materials like Bibles, books and other resources for native converts and pastors. IMB field missionaries are often asked by Southern Baptists from the States, "You mean we have to buy the Bibles we use in evangelism? What about Lottie Moon funds going for special projects?"

What's worse, say these field missionaries, is that those on the front lines of the mission field have now been told that money normally given for expense reimbursement is being withheld. This support money, used to reimburse missionaries for gas in making trips to new church plants or Bible studies, or other expenses associated with the ongoing mission of establishing new churches, is being withheld due to the budgetary crises. One field missionary with a wife and kids has over $2,500 in unreimbursed ministry expenses. The question before IMB field missionaries at this time is simply, "Do we continue funding our ministry ourselves, or do we buy our kids Christmas presents?"

Field office budgets are being slashed by 50% for 2010. Field missionaries are discouraged because there is a feeling among many that Lottie Moon funds are being used to support an ever-increasing overhead budget and an ill-timed reorganization causing little or no money to reach the front lines for ministry projects and field missionary support. In short, the IMB presents itself as a large, beautiful, and impressive missions sending agency--but there are no funds to actually work the mission of the organization.

(2). The current reorganization of the International Mission Board, intended to make the organization flat and lean, has in reality made the IMB fat and deep.

Rather than IMB having "regional offices," the IMB is restucturing the organization to have eight Affinity Offices among eight affinity people groups, nine if you include the deaf people of the world. Each people group has an identifiable office in Richmond and an overseas office that works closely with the staff at the Office of Global Strategy, all headed by Dr. Gordon Fort, VP of the IMB in Richmond, Virginia. There are an additional four IMB Support Offices overseas, offices that "support" the eight Affinity Offices. These four overseas Support Offices work closely with the home offices in Richmond that carry the same names. The offices in Richmond and those overseas include the aforementioned Office of Global Strategy, the Office(s) of Global Personnel, the Office(s) of Financial Services, the Office(s) of Global Logistics, and the Office(s) of Personnel Support and Mobilization Support. For example, the "Support Office" for the European Peoples Affinity Group is located in London. Twenty missionary personnel work in that particular office of Financial Services. That's just one of four offices in the London Support Office (one of four "Support Offices" worldwide) that report to both their respective "Affinity Offices" (one of eight worldwide) and then to corresponding offices in Richmond. You will have a hard time finding any of these offices on the official IMB website

Let me simplify it.

A field missionary (either career, ISC, Masters or Journeymen) is one who is on the front lines sharing the gospel and planting churches. These field missionaries report to a team leader who is also a field missionary. Again, all these field missionaries are what we would call the front lines. They are the ones who need the money, the supplies, the support of the Southern Baptist Convention. But these are the missionaries who seem to be receiving the financial cuts. Ironically, if the average Southern Baptist were to call the International Mission Board and ask " Can you tell me the number of SBC field missionaries on the field who are actually responsible for sharing Christ and planting churches?" you would not be given a direct answer. Why? The standard response is "All our personnel are missionaries!" That's true, but when we give to Lottie Moon, we are thinking about the person on the field sharing Christ and planting churches. Sure, we need the support personnel. Nobody is suggesting any differently. But the question is: Does this current reorganization of the IMB make it leaner and more efficient so that more funds, not less, reach the front lines of the mission field?
The field missionaries are telling me "no" in response to this question. They say that their team leaders must now report to supervisory "Cluster Leaders" who are in charge of missionary teams in a handful of countries. These "Cluster Leaders" then report to their respective Affinity Leaders, who then report to the Office of Global Strategy. All the other IMB personnel in the overseas Affinity Offices, overseas Support Offices, Richmond home offices, etc are technically there for the "support" of the field missionaries. Yet, the field missionaries feel like nobody is listening to them for the following reasons:

(1). When "tours" are made of regions, it is the upper echelon IMB management and IMB supervisors who lead the SBC dignitaries (i.e. SBC President, trustees, etc...) on those tours.
(2). When the last two reorganizations occured at the IMB (i.e. New Directions and Affinity People Groups), the instructions for reorganization came from the top down. Field missionaries were not asked for their input. (Edit: David Rogers, former IMB field missionary to Spain points out in the comment section that he received an email about possible impending changes in 2008, asking for input. The field missionaries who have contacted me did not mention the email, just their belief that the changes were being implemented with or without direction from the field missionaries. I do not believe it is accurate to represent that all field missionaries were not asked for their input. Some, including David Rogers, obviously were).
(3). The cuts to ministry, expense accounts, and salaries are being felt by the field missionaries--frustrating them in their efforts to share Christ and plant churches.
(4). There is a feeling that any complaining about the situation will cause someone to be labeled a "malcontent." Rather than feeling empowered to speak up and to offer helpful suggestions, many field missionaries are either quitting, retiring, or contemplating getting out.

If top level management of the IMB wants to prevent a wholesale collapse of missions as Southern Baptists know it, then there should be a long-term hiring freeze and reserves should be tapped to get MORE MONEY ON THE FRONT lines--not less. It would be better for Southern Baptists to do the work we are now doing well, than to continue to build a huge organization to try to reach every people group in the world and do it all very poorly.

(3). The statistics on the Annual Statistical Report cause IMB missionaries on the field to question the wisdom of their superiors.

There has been a healthy amount of skepticism related to the numbers of baptisms and church plants reported by the International Mission Board in 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008. Field missionaries report constant pressure to "get the numbers up." The International Mission Board's Office of Global Strategy reports that field missionaries in the IMB had a direct hand in starting over 50,000 Baptist churches in 2007 and 2008. If you counted every single missionary that is employed by the IMB, including support personnel, every IMB employee would have had to singlehandedly begun 10 churches in the past 24 monhts.

The IMB has reported over 1.1 million baptisms through the work of our missionaries these past two years. The field missionaries believe that organizational management has succombed to the temptation of inflating or fudging numbers to justify the extraordinary expansion and expense of reaching more and more people groups. Unfortunately, when money is spent on public relations and slick presentations--in order to raise more money--all the while using numbers that the field missionaries raise their eyebrows over, we have constructed a Potemkin Village. We build to impress, but we neglect the actual things required to do the real work.

It's time we stopped trying to impress everybody and simply gave our missionaries in the deserts of the Middle East, the islands of the Pacific, the far reaches of China and other remote areas around the world those things they actually need to do the work.

It's not too late for the IMB to respond. Word has it that a secular company has been hired to implement the new reorganziation of the IMB around the world. I have been unable to confirm whether or not this is true, but I've confirmed enough to make a prophetic statement.

If we Southern Baptists don't stop trying to impress people as to how big we are, and if we don't start taking care of our missionaries on the front lines by meeting their requests for ministry funds, reimbursing their expense needs, and helping them accomplish the tasks to which they were called, we will find our beloved missions organization eventually collapsing like a house of cards.

Our missionaries are great people--both those on the front lines and those in the offices of support. It's not their fault there is no money reaching the front. It's the fault of leadership--both trustees and upper management. We've been so focused on silly tertiery things, so enraptured by telling people "We are the largest missions sending agency in the world!" and so consumed with personal agendas that we have lost sight of our mission to care for those who have gone to the front lines.

It's time to buckle up and get them money. I suggest the IMB tap into the millions of dollars in reserves and pay our missionaries what we promised them. And I would also put a clamp on any consideration of future appointments until the morale of those missionaries already on the field is what it should be.

In His Grace,


Wade Burleson

A Recommendation to IMB Administrators and Trustees in the Midst of a Financial Shortfall

I have long been a supporter of the International Mission Board and her paid administrative leadership. We hire the best missiologists to do our work, and there has been no greater defender of our paid staff in Richmond, particularly when it comes to keeping trustees from exerting control in areas that are the sole responsibility of professional staff. Recently my fellow Oklahoman and friend, David Severson, CFO for the International Mission Board reported that there could be a reduction of 600 missionaries from the SBC missionary force in 2010 if the current 8% to 10% decline in revenues through the Lottie Moon Offering and Cooperative Program gifts continue. That's the bad news.

Here's even worse news.

The IMB administration in Richmond has informed all International Service Corp, Journeymen, and Masters missionaries that they will no longer be reimbursed by the IMB for dryers, cell phones, or air conditioning while on the field. These missionaries will be allowed to have heat in the winter, but the IMB will no longer be able to pay for air conditioning. Phones for communication (an essential in foreign countries) will now be paid for by the aforementioned missionaries themselves. Clothes will need to be dried by air or the missionaries will pay the cost for drying their own clothes. This information has not been publicized except through emails sent to the supervisors of the ISC'ers, Journeymen, and Masters affected. It is hoped by Richmond that these cost saving measures among the front-line staff will allow for more missionaries to be appointed in the short term.

As Lee Corso might say, "Not so fast, my friend!"

I and the people of Emmanuel are not unfamiliar with budgetary shortfalls during this time of year. We, too, are 8% behind budget in giving. I wrote the following article (edited for the blog) to our church family two weeks ago:

"We are rapidly coming to a close to the 2009 calendar year. As has been our custom for the past several years at this time of year, we are behind in our year-to-date budget giving. However, every December for the past eighteen years we have always financially caught up and wound up surpassing our budget needs by 1% to 5% per year. As we all know, the economy is different this year. We knew it would be and so the Finance Committee held the line on the budget during the budget planning process for this year. There was no overall budget increase, including no salary increases for the 2009 budget. However, due to rising costs , attendance and increases in the 2009 budgeted ministries of Emmanuel (Refuge, Abounding Grace, Celebrate Recovery, Missions, etc.) there is very, very little cushion (if any) in this year’s budget. For this reason, I am asking for your help. We will not promise you God’s blessings if you give to Emmanuel – you already have them in Christ. We will not try to guilt you into giving to your church – that’s between you and God. We will simply tell you of our need, and ask you to help us these last eight Sundays of the year to catch up financially. If you have been blessed by Christ and the ministries of Emmanuel, then we ask you to give. If God sees fit for us not to meet our budget this year, then we as a church will be making some very tough decisions regarding ministry, personnel and missions. Those tough meetings will begin in January if we have not met our budget, but I am hopeful that this will not have to happen ..."

I anticipate our church will again surpass our budget in terms of our giving, but if we do not because of the current economy, then the person who should receive the largest pay cut (in both percentage and dollars) for our new fiscal year (April 2010 ) is me. That's the way it should be. There is nothing worse in ministry than for the lowest paid personnel to be given cuts when the highest paid personnel go unaffected. Frankly, I believe it should be the reverse.

Likewise, in my opinion, there is nothing worse for missionary morale than for those missionaries on the front lines--the very ones getting paid the least to be there--to have their expense reimbursement or salaries cut. Those sitting around in stifling heat, having their clothes permanently saturated by sweat, and then having to carefully count their meager dollars to have enough money to pay for their ministry cell phones are not the ones who should be the first in line when it comes to financial cuts. The "cost cutting" efforts being implemented by the IMB in terms of ISC'ers, Journeymen, and Masters actually save the IMB very little money, but they do negatively affect missionary morale. I know my friends in leadership at Richmond are doing everything within their power to get more missionaries on the field, and I commend them for this, but I've got a few suggestions that might actually save them some real money for future appointments.

(1). Stop having multiple meetngs in Richmond and other parts of the US, flying all the missionary supervisors home from overseas, spending tens of thousands of dollars on travel expenses in the process. The missionaries on the field pay close attention to the fact that these meetings for supervisors often conveniently fall close to United States holidays, and with technology the way it is today, there's no reason to pay such enormous travel costs for meetings in the US. This will save real money.

(2). If there is a consensus that shutting off air conditioning payments will save funds for future appointments, then well and fine. But the air conditioning should also be shut off in Richmond as well. I imagine having no air conditioning in the former capital of the Confederacy during July will convince a few strategic people that such "cost saving" efforts are not very effective in sustaining missionary morale.

(3). From this point forward stop having trustee meetings in exotic places and luxurious hotels. Make every trustee who come to Richmond pay for his own car (if he must have one), and put him up in the cabins at the ILC (or let him pay himself for his hotel if he must have one). It should also be a requirement that every trustee attend those trustee meetings without the benefit of air conditioning. A little sauna wouldn't hurt the long term health of many anyway.

(4). Let the missionaries ON THE FIELD determine the kind of ministry that is needed. Allow for the creation and adoption of reports that count "conversions" and "church planting" in the various countries by reflecting the different cultural and demographic make-ups of those respective countries. We must resist the cookie cutter approach that forces every missionary in every country to do the same thing the same way. Resisting perpetual world-wide reorganization of the IMB (every five years) will save huge amounts of money in the long term.

(5). Any reduction in work force "on the field" should be met with a corresponding reduction of the work force in Richmond. Further, if there are to be cuts in benefits, salaries, or expense reimbursement, the people who should take those cuts FIRST should be the career missionaries and administrators--the highest paid personnel. Taking cost cutting measures amongst the lowest paid, semi/volunteer ISC, Masters and Journeymen at the IMB without first cutting either the expense reimbursement or salaries of the highest paid missionaries is unwise.

Again, I commend the IMB for their pro-active approach to these matters and urge churches to send their missionary offerings to Richomond as soon as possible. But I think the above suggestions, combined with increased missions giving by our churches, will provide the best solution for the appointment of more missionaries.

In His Grace,

Wade

The Hammer Has Fallen

Rodney Hammer is one of the finest missiologists ever employed by the International Mission Board of the Southern Baptist Convention. He has served for the last ten years in various leadership positions, including Regional Leader for Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) the last eight years.

Yesterday, May 5, Rodney Hammer resigned as Regional Leader, effective immediately.

He resigned his position as Regional Leader because he was not free to further share his convictions about the new IMB missionary candidate policies. It seems Rodney and the missionaries in his region were visited by a group of trustees from the International Mission Board, and Rodney dared expess, again, his contrary views to the new policies. It would be interesting for you to know the trustees who serve that region, particularly the regional trustee chairman, but in essence, Rodney was given an order - be silent, accept trustee decrees or resign.

Rodney sent a letter to the missionaries in CEE explaining that the Lord had clearly led him for two and half years to speak further about the policies to both Trustees and Southern Baptists. Some IMB trustees have sought his termination due to his conscientious dissent on these issues, and senior leadership at IMB instructed Rodney that he cannot appeal further from his position as a Regional Leader. He is expected to accept, own, and support the policies of the IMB trustees. He reached the conclusion that he would rather obey the Lord than man.

I was informed by an IMB trustee this afternoon that Dr. Rankin sent all trustees a letter explaining that Rodney had sent a letter requesting that it be forwarded to each of the trustees. But in the good wisdom of those who make the decisions of what information is (or is not) acceptable at the IMB, Rodney's letter is not being forwarded to the trustees, as he requested. This type of heavy handed, hardball religion is one of the reasons every Southern Baptist ought to show up in Indianapolis. I do not know what Rodney's letter to the trustees contained, but here's hoping that the information I present below might shed a little light on why the Southern Baptist Convention is losing her luminaries.

Several IMB missionaries on the field forwarded to me a personal letter Rodney wrote to them expressing the reasons for his departure and his love and appreciation for them as missionaries. I have chosen to publish just the last portion of the letter to show you the kind of Southern Baptists we are losing from the mission field. Read carefully the following, unedited explanation that Rodney gives for why he had to resign. Pay close attention to the last section of Rodney's letter which describes those who are being disqualified from Southern Baptist missionary service. For those who think these issues are not important, a reality check is needed. Rodney writes:

"I am in fundamental disagreement with the current IMB missionary candidate policies concerning baptism and private prayer language, and the unnecessary, extra-biblical narrowing of parameters for Southern Baptist cooperation in the Great Commission they represent. While I have other serious concerns, I believe the missionary candidate policies are most in need of redress and illustrate most significantly why change is needed.

The IMB is its people. The missionaries and Board personnel ARE THE IMB and what makes it great in so many ways. Southern Baptists and IMB personnel deserve not only continued prayer and financial support, but also a Kingdom-oriented, transparent, accountable, BF&M-aligned trustee board and missionary candidate policies and guidelines that do not exceed the only consensus doctrinal parameters of the SBC nor move us from sounder biblical foundations. Even more importantly, the unreached people groups, the unevangelized of the world's cities, and the lost without Christ everywhere compel us to biblically maximize our efforts and missionary force, not restrict it unnecessarily.

WHAT'S WRONG WITH THE POLICIES?

The current "guideline" (a de facto policy) for IMB missionary candidates regarding baptism puts the emphasis on the faith/beliefs of the baptizer, rather than the one being baptized. This seems to be a shift away from biblical teaching and Baptist tradition.

The BF&M 2000 Article on Baptism states: "Christian baptism is the immersion of a believer in water in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. It is an act of obedience symbolizing the believer's faith in a crucified, buried, and risen Saviour, the believer's death to sin, the burial of the old life, and the resurrection to walk in newness of life in Christ Jesus. It is a testimony to his faith in the final resurrection of the dead. Being a church ordinance, it is prerequisite to the privileges of church membership and to the Lord's Supper."

Romans 6:3-5 states "Or don't you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life."

The Baptist Faith and Message 2000 and the Holy Scriptures put the emphasis on the work of Christ, and the faith and testimony of the believer being baptized into Christ, not the particularities of the beliefs of the Christian administrator of the baptism.

The new missionary candidate policy regarding baptism goes beyond the above consensus doctrinal parameters of the SBC, and Scripture, adding extra-biblical stipulations concerning the church and administrator of the baptism. It also puts the IMB in the place of the autonomous, local Southern Baptist church in determining the validity of a candidate's baptism…and worse than that insists to some that they re-baptize the missionary candidate. Organizational compliance is not a biblical reason for baptism or re-baptism. A Southern Baptist church member whose baptism was by immersion, after regeneration, in obedience to Christ and as a testimony to their faith in Christ, should be accepted for service in a Southern Baptist entity or agency.

PRIVATE PRAYER LANGUAGE

In regards to the "guideline" (another de facto policy) about private prayer language, three things should be noted.

1.Much of the discussion and rationale given for needing such a policy forbidding missionary candidates from having a private prayer language was that there were widespread problems regarding this among our missionaries on the field. Regional leaders demonstrated that was not and is not the case.


2.Many biblically conservative Baptist scholars disagree on the hermeneutic that was used to support disqualifying candidates who pray privately in a prayer language.


3.Trustees were assured that the vast overwhelming majority of Southern Baptists could not and did not support the concept of private prayer language. This contention was proven false in a survey by LifeWay research last year.

I will forgo revisiting the ample cessationist and continualist viewpoints on spiritual gifts. I will simply say this…in our IMB Manual for Field Personnel we have a robust, sufficient policy against the advocating of any particular spiritual gift as normative for all believers, or the public use and causing of division by such advocacy or practice. This policy is enforced whenever necessary, although that is rare. It has been an adequate protection against inappropriate behavior or teaching.

What we are talking about now is the forbidding of a private prayer language. Private. Prayer. We have no business going into anyone's private prayer closet who calls Jesus their Lord and Savior, nor forbidding otherwise qualified Southern Baptists from service through the IMB because they may pray differently in private than you or I may, nor judging any current or potential IMB policy-abiding missionary to privately utilize under the Lordship of Christ a gift they believe is bestowed upon them by the Holy Spirit. There was and are no field realities requiring or necessitating such a move.

Upon the outcry in opposition to these policies from many Southern Baptists, IMB Trustees made minor, cosmetic semantic changes and made both "guidelines." They are de facto policies and applied comprehensively.

We've been led down a Landmarkist ecclesiological path by some influential IMB Trustees. They used unfounded rationales to justify missionary candidate de facto policies that overly restrict and disqualify many good, conservative, God-called and otherwise qualified Southern Baptists from missionary service through the IMB.

WHO IS BEING DISQUALIFIED?

Dozens and even hundreds of Southern Baptists for short and long-term service through the IMB, INCLUDING SOME CURRENT STUDENTS OF OUR SBC SEMINARIES, who…

... are God-called to cross-cultural missionary service.

... are members of an SBC church for at least 3 years.

... are conservative Christians baptized by immersion after conversion as a testimony to their faith in Jesus Christ.

... affirm the BF&M.

... meet the qualifications for service OTHER than the new, overly narrow restrictions.

... are willing to abide by IMB policy and parameters.

... are willing to sacrificially go to the ends of the earth.

HOW DO I KNOW THESE THINGS TO BE TRUE?

I have attended multiple IMB Board of Trustee (BOT) meetings per year now for the last 8 years. I am personally well acquainted with the methods, policies, and practices of our collective Board of Trustees, its leadership, and their impact on our work on the field, our support within the Convention, and upon candidates for missionary service. It brings me no joy, and no personal gain, to express these concerns and appeal for change. I have no illusions of any real or perceived personal influence within the SBC. However, I firmly believe that God would have me express these concerns further, and to advocate for those who can no longer serve through the IMB due to these policies. I will trust God to do with it what He desires.

Regarding the policies, I sought to dialogue and express my concerns along the way. I waited, prayed, sought counsel, and asked for wisdom and peace from the Lord to move on when they were enacted two and a half years ago. While I sought to address the overseas committee and entire trustee board unsuccessfully, I did internally discuss with staff, my regional committee and some trustees for almost one year. After those efforts I made one public appeal for reconsideration of the rationale given and the policies that were enacted. I was formally reprimanded. I accepted that and submitted myself again to Senior Leadership and to the policies and direction of the Board.

The IMB BOT received much concerned feedback and decided to review the policies on baptism and private prayer language. Again I waited, prayed, sought counsel from Scripture and others, dialogued with some Trustees and asked for wisdom and peace from the Lord to move on. I repeatedly requested the opportunity for myself and other regional leaders to give our perspective and field input into the review process. It was finally granted after many months. But then our field leadership input that the policies hurt our legitimate candidate pool, the work and morale of many missionaries on the field, and the lack of any field realities requiring such policies was summarily dismissed.

I have sought to pray, understand, yield, reconsider, search the Scriptures, and dialogue with Senior IMB leadership and Trustees about these concerns and policies over the last two and a half years now. I have submitted to them. I have watched as the supposedly softened "guidelines" are implemented as de facto, hard policy and many a good missionary candidate is turned away. I know of some personally, I hear of many others. I am expected as a regional leader to accept, own, and support the policies of the IMB Trustees. I can do so no longer.

I am now forced to resign my position as regional leader because of my biblical convictions and leadership from the Lord to dissent further and to advocate for those Southern Baptists who cannot serve through the IMB now, and have no voice. I would like to think that Southern Baptist agencies can tolerate conscientious dissent based on biblical convictions. However, Senior IMB leadership have instructed me that further dissent and appeal of said policies voted by our Trustees would result in my removal as regional leader.

I believe part of the reason for the decline in the SBC (as reported by LifeWay's Annual Church Profile and LifeWay Research/Ed Stetzer's blog) is unnecessary narrowing of parameters for Great Commission cooperation. I know for sure it is keeping us from getting many additional Southern Baptist missionaries, turning off a younger generation of future missionaries and leaders, and harming the confidence of some IMB missionaries in their stateside supporters and Trustees.

I simply want to appeal to our IMB Trustees and Southern Baptists to return to a sufficiently conservative, yet broader consensus and parameters reflected in the BF&M 2000 for missionary service through the IMB. I am asking that all born again, bible-believing, BF&M affirming, otherwise qualified Southern Baptists who are called to overseas missions and desire to serve through the IMB be allowed to do so…for the glory of God, the betterment of the SBC, and the sake of making disciples among all nations.

Respectfully submitted,



Rodney L. Hammer, Regional Leader


P.S. Let me state unequivocally that I love our IMB Trustees in the Lord. I appreciate their voluntary service. I recognize that they love the Lord Jesus Christ and wish to see Him glorified among the nations as well. I appreciate that they have put up with my own faults as well. There are many who serve with no agenda other than faithfully supporting Southern Baptists' obedience to the Great Commission, and to send and support God-called Southern Baptist missionaries. Some have worked behind the scenes to resist the implementation of these policies and opposed these practices. A few have dared to publicly dissent until such was also voted out of order. I appreciate them greatly. I also love and appreciate those with whom I disagree."

It is because of people like Rodney that I remain a Southern Baptist. It is because of people like Rodney that I will be in Indianapolis. It is because of people like Rodney that I will continue to resist the narrowing of the doctrinal parameters of gospel cooperation and the Baptist Identity initiative within the Southern Baptist Convention. When God called, Bible-believing, Christ-honoring, Southern Baptists are being forced out, then it's time for the silent majority to make their voices heard.

In His Grace,


Wade Burleson

Help Needed for a Tornado Ravaged SBC Church

The following letter is from Dwight McKissic, Pastor of Cornerstone Baptist Church, Arlington, Texas. In response to his request to help some fellow Southern Baptists, I will be requesting our church to financially assist the Cowboy Way Church this Sunday night. Let's join together to help one of our own. Dwight writes:

"Bro. Dan Haby is pastor of Cowboy Way Church here in North Texas. Melanie, Dan's wife, serves alongside him as Church Administrator and Minister to Women. They are both graduates of Southwestern Seminary and planted this church several years ago to reach out to the cowboy community. Until recently Cowboy Way Church has been meeting in a tent. Earlier this week a tornado touched down in Alvarado, Texas and the tent where they were meeting was destroyed. Not only did they lose the tent but they lost the sound system and the sound board was destroyed. The only things that survived was the chairs and the microphones that were enclosed in cases. I talked with them earlier today and they are frantically searching for a place to lease for the future and they are planning worship services in the open air at the former tent sight this Sunday. Insurance companies do not insure church sights that meet in tents.

Obviously, the Haby's are experiencing somewhat of a crisis time in their ministry. I am writing you to make two requests;

(a.) please pray for Dan and Melanie Haby and Cowboy Way Church in your Sunday morning services this Sunday

(b.) would you consider giving a missions gift, benevolent offering, discretionary fund gift or whatever means you choose and mail that gift to the Cowboy Way Church to help them recover their losses? You could either send your gift directly to the church at PO Box 1196, Alvarado, TX 76009 or you could send it to the ANC and we can forward one check to Cowboy Way Church.

Of course if this email reaches you too late for you to respond by this coming Sunday, April 13 you have the rest of April and May to respond, if you so choose.

Thanks for your consideration in this matter and I'm sure at the very least the Haby's would appreciate a word of encouragement by sending an email cowboydan@juno.com or to Cowboy Way Church, PO Box 1196, Alvarado, TX 76009."

Sincerely in Christ,


Dwight McKissic

Commission Stories: A Site That Will Excite You

Commission Stories is a new site dedicated to telling compelling stories of how God is working in other parts of the world through Southern Baptist missions. One of our IMB employees recently travelled to Rio De Janeiro and documented, then produced, a video about an extraordinary individual named Eric Reese. God is using Eric to transform hostile communities through the power of the gospel both in life and word.

If you have any involvement in SBC missions I would encourage you to watch the six minute video of Eric Reses's ministry in Rio. Eric is one of those Southern Baptist missionaries that, after viewing his story, makes you thank the Father for how He is continuing to expand His kingdom around the world through the cooperative efforts of Southern Baptist churches and people.

Commission Stories puts flesh and blood to the black and white print of mission reports. I would encourage every pastor, lay leader, or other church member who reads this blog to direct other people in your church to Commission Stories. It will help bring the Cooperative Program, Lottie Moon, and other mission efforts of the SBC to life. To me - and to the young Brazilian girl who gives her testimony in the comment section - reaching people for Christ is the reason why we identify ourselves as Southern Baptist.

It is all about missions.

In His Grace,


Wade

Several Observations from Our Mission Trip

Rachelle and I have returned from overseas after spending a great deal of time with many of our Southern Baptist missionaries. I have been able to visit five of our eleven overseas IMB regional headquarters in the past two years, and have spoken personally to several hundred of our Southern Baptist missionaries during that same time. There is so much to be excited about and thankful for when it comes to Southern Baptist cooperative mission work. This most recent mission trip reinforced several things I already knew about our work and taught me several other things. In no particular order, the following are several observations from our most recent mission trip. The comment section is now open and unmoderated.

(1). Just as the sun never used to set on the British Empire, the sun never sets on the work of Southern Baptists. There is no region of the world where you will not find Southern Baptists, called by God and appointed by the IMB, reaching people with gospel of Jesus Christ.

(2). Though there over 5,000 Southern Baptist missionaries appointed by the IMB, there are tens of thousands of other gospel missionaries serving on mission fields who have been appointed by various other sending agencies representing various evangelical churches and denominations.

(3). It is not always easy - nor necessary - to distinguish between those new church plants and conversions on the mission field that are the direct result of Southern Baptist mission work as compared to the work of other evangelical missionaries or indigenous believers. All evangelicals have a tendency to cooperate on the mission field for the cause of Christ and do not pay near as much attention to separation as people in the States do.

(4). One of the missionaries with whom we were most impressed in terms of her language abilities, vision to reach her city and hard work sincerely thanked me for representing her back in the States. She was appointed in 2004 after answering 'yes' when asked if she possessed a private prayer language. The new policies which forbid such appointments went into effect in 2005.

(5). Some of the best International Mission Board work in difficult places of the world occurs through doors opened via medical missions.

(6). The baptism and new church start statistics - reported by Southern Baptist Strategy Coordinators on the mission field and compiled in the annual ASR - are difficult to grasp. Over 25,000 new church starts on the mission field in 2006 represents five new church starts for every one Southern Baptist missionary. Even accounting for the fact that many new churches are often begun though indigenous believers planting those new churches, it is difficult to comprehend the magnitude of 25,000 new church plants on the mission field associted with Southern Baptists. On the ground observation reveals the difficulty of even beginning one new church in dangerous parts of the world - the very frontier where Southern Baptists are putting most the emphasis.

(7). When Southern Baptist leaders spend more time on the mission field with our missionaries, I believe the emphasis on 'numbers' will diminish and our appreciation for steadfast faithfulness in terms of ministry will increase. William Carey spent nearly two decades on the mission field before he had ONE convert. I sometimes wonder if we Southern Baptists have lost perspective on what it takes to be a patient in building faithful ministries.

(8). If I were a Southern Baptist missionary on the field, supported by Southern Baptist Cooperative Program funds, and I lived in a city where there were Baptist churches started by Southern Baptists, I would attend that church instead of a larger non-denominational church.

(9). The one thing that keeps me a Southern Baptist pastor and my church a Southern Baptist congregation is the cooperative work we Southern Baptists do together in the area of missions; work that when closely observed is even better than imagined.

(10). The world is a lot smaller than it was even a decade ago. Through the internet, skype, emails and other forms of communication, it is possible to be overseas and keep up in real time with things going on back home - even if it is watching the disappointing loss of the Cowboys on a laptop.

In His Grace,



Wade

The Difference Between Foundations and Corners

-- Pastor Wade is currently overseas with his wife Rachelle. He was able send the following few thoughts about some of the things he has seen and learned. You may leave a comment if you wish. We will moderate their publication until Pastor Wade returns to the states next week --- (Blog Administrator)

"In the southern states of America there are some Baptist pastors and theologians who feel they have the corner of theological truth. Notice, I did not say the foundation of truth, but the corner of truth. Firm, solid foundations are absolutely necessary for a stable structure, but how an architect finishes out the corners is a measure of style, function and creativity. Any southern architect worth his salt will finish corners differently overseas than he would in the United States; or, if he flat out refuses to be flexible on corners in various cultures, then that architect will put himself in danger of having no working relationship with anyone but those in his neck of the woods who love the way he finishes his corners.

Some Baptist pastors believe that the only true ecclesiology (doctrine of the church) is the way their local ecclessia operates. Deacons? Why of course, but all male. One pastor? Absolutely, with ultimate authority over the congregation. Baptize converts? Certainly, but not for identification with Christ; only as the door of entrance into our ecclesia. Ordinances? Without a doubt, but only with those in our local ecclesia, and administered by those duly qualified as pastors and deacons of our ecclesia. "Why, for heaven's sake," say some of my southern Baptist pastor friends, "This is the only way a true ecclesia should look."

Tight, clean corners that all look the same is the desire of these southern pastors.

But a few of my pastor friends need to spend time on the mission field overseas. They need to go to the provinces where all hotel rooms for foreigners are bugged. They need to walk down the street where the police, both uniformed and undercover, keep a close eye on you. They need to sit with our missionaries as they have their emails for the past year laid in front of them by government officials. They need to help one of our missionary couples pack as they leave quickly from the place they have called home for the past few years under threat of arrest. They need to observe the locals in their small house churches as they sing quietly, pray quietly, worship quietly, and welcome any believer into their presence - regardless of denominational affiliation. They need to allow a tear or two flow as they watch a female leader of a baptistic house church baptize a couple of new converts in a bathtub, only to have watchers outside prepared to warn the half dozen people within about approaching military police. They need to breathe a prayer of thanks for God raising up a man of influence in the community after years of only females being willing to risk their lives, jobs, families, and future for the cause of Christ. They need to realize that their demand for neat little corners at overseas ecclessias - in order to make them like like some southern churches in Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Texas and Florida - will only cause southern missionaries to be frustrated, overseas believers to be perplexed, and the kingdom of Christ to be minimized.

May God keep us southern Baptists concerned about the foundation overseas but allow each culture to finish out the corners of their local 'ecclesia' as best suits the culture in which they find their ministry."

In His Grace,


Wade

Giving to Support Those Who Share the Gospel

--- Pastor Wade was able to send another email from overseas, one that encourages us to remember why we give through the Cooperative Program and Lottie Moon Christmas Offering. We do not anticipate being able to hear from our pastor again until the middle of next week due to the areas where he and Rachelle will be travelling in the next few days. You may wish to leave Pastor Wade a comment, but as stated earlier, we will wait for his return from overseas and allow him to moderate the comments that you leave. May each of you have a blessed weekend and a wonderful Lord's Day Sunday. ----

"Never pity missionaries; envy them. They are where the real action is --- where life and death, sin and grace, Heaven and Hell converge. " Robert C. Shannon

The above quote was given to me yesterday and is epitomized in the story of a missionary that Rachelle and I shared lunch with on Friday, June 11, overseas. This young man and his family were forced out of the country where they served for several years.The government officials initially gave him forty-eight hours to leave, but after an appeal, he and his family were given a few more days. They left everything behind because they were unable take anything that couldn't fit in a suitcase. To watch their small son's reaction when told that his 'Big Wheel' had to be given away because their wasn't room is something they will not forget. But, more importantly, to be forced from the place to which they were called by God because they faithfully shared Christ was even more difficult. To hear their story, and the enthusiasm of going to a new region, and a new people, to continue fulfilling their call, illustrated to us both the quote by Robert Shannon. No pity for these heroes of the faith; only more opportunities for future excitement of being where the real action is.

Having now travelled to five of the eleven regional headquarters of our convention over the past year, I can say without hesitation that the regional offices that have been established for the support of field personnel are incredibly effecient. The men and women that serve to support the missionaries are are all very gifted and just as called as those who spend their time planting churches in the villages and cities. The pay scale for our missionaries is not high, but each works hard to turn the mission dollars of Southern Baptists into actual ministry by doing quite well at balancing frugality in living expenses, effeciency in ministry expenses, and actually concentrating on how to reach the most people possible with the money available. I have often heard it said that missonaries from other conventions would desire to be appointed by the IMB because of the guaranteed salary and benefits, but for those of us who have seen the missions and ministry side of the Southern Baptist Convention, we know that getting to the place where Southern Baptist missionaries do not have to worry about raising financial support takes many years of laying the foundation for an organization that models effeciency. Southern Baptists began laying that foundation for our mission work over 150 years ago, and the results are being seen today on the mission fields of the world. The Cooperative Program and Lottie Moon Christmas Offering are the two financing mechanisms that makes our international missions ministry tick. Trips like the one Rachelle and I are taking make us realize all the more the need for MORE Southern Baptist pastors - not less, MORE Southern Baptist people - not less, MORE Southern Baptist churches - not less to all feel ownership for what is taking place in and through SBC missions.

In His Grace,

Wade

The Sacrifices Being Made by Missionaries

Pastor Wade is in overseas visiting and encouraging missionaries who are giving of themselves for the expansion of the gospel of Jesus Christ. He has sent us an email to update his trip.

"Rachelle and I remarked upon landing at the International Airport that the average Southern Baptists has absolutely no idea how difficult it is for a missionary to bring his family halfway across the world to share the gospel of Jesus Christ. From the simplest things like being greeted at the airport, hustling family through immigration, conversing with government officials as to the reasons for your entry into their country, finding transportation to your new home, enrolling kids into school or homeschooling, getting acquainted with fellow evangelicals in your area --- and of course, fulfilling the purpose of coming by leading others to an understanding of the person of Jesus Christ --- it is utterly amazing the trials and difficulties faced by each of our missionary units. It is absolutely incomprensible to most Southern Baptists the sacrifices made by our missionaries. I am intentionally being vague of where we are because of security issues, but I can assure you there is no fear in the eyes of those who serve our King. We Southern Baptists have reasons to be proud of our missionary workforce, and we should do everything within in our power to INCREASE cooperation - not minimize it."

In His Grace,

Wade

Off to Far East Places for a SBC Mission Trip

As you read this Rachelle and I are making our way to the Far East for a mission trip. Rather than attempting to blog during the two week journey, my computer has been left at home. I will be speaking to several groups in several places during the trip, and my goal is to be an encouragement to those who follow Christ on the other side of the world.

My next post will be a synopsis of the trip and my thoughts in preparation for the impending International Mission Board meeting in Gainesville, Florida on January 28-30, 2008. I will be present at the IMB meeting and I will participate as I always have - faithfully attending every session, quietly listening, and writing about those issues that are discussed in the public plenary sessions so that Southern Baptists can be kept informed about the work of our cooperative mission efforts. The IMB meeting is in Gainesville, Florida and I will be paying for my own way to attend. I am also paying for the air fare, hotel and meals of a fellow church member to attend the IMB meeting with me. His name is John Pardon and he is a colorful and interesting Christian that I had the privilege of leading to Christ a few years ago. John was a member of the original SEAL TEAM ONE (Navy Special Forces) sent to Vietnam in the early 1970's and some of his stories will make your hair curl. I am looking forward to introducing him to how SBC missions operate, as well as continuing my discipleship of him as he advances in his walk with Christ.

I will post again on Monday, January 21st, 2008. In my absence let me encourage you to venture over to the blog one Mary Burleson, my mother, entitled Reality Check. But be forewarned. If you have a problem with a woman teaching men truth (in Hebrew or English), then stay away, because you will definitely be taught.

Until then, grace and peace to each of you.


Wade Burleson

The Path to Keep a Focus on Missions Was Clear

The November 5-7, 2007 Springfield, Illinois International Mission Board trustee meeting could have gone down as one of the greatest trustee meetings in the history of the IMB. We heard some wonderful field reports from our Regional Leaders, we received some amazing statistical information about the number of churches planted and baptisms performed in our overseas missions work, and we passed the largest missions budget ($305 million dollars) in the history of the IMB.

Unfortunately, the Springfield, Illinois trustee meeting may be remembered as the time when a rare, possibily unique, censure was issued against a sitting trustee. The very sad and unfortunate truth is that this censure, and the resulting distraction from our mission work, was absolutely avoidable. I feel it is necessary to show that if there is a loss of Southern Baptist focus on missions during this very important Lottie Moon season, it is because a few leaders chose not to follow the very clear path laid out for them that ensured missions, and not conflict, stayed in the forefront of the IMB. I will avoid using names to keep anyone from feeling my words reflect poorly on them. However, Southern Baptists should ask the question 'Why?' Why did this censure have to happen? Why now? For what purpose? The fact that it did occur, in light of what I am about to tell you, is a sign that some Southern Baptist leaders have either lost perspective about what is really important in SBC life, or are so obsessed with the stifling of any dissent, or are so consumed with keeping power and control that comes with absolute authority, or (and I pray this is not true) they have been so blinded by either vendetta or personal ego that they can't see any higher calling.

Even though the censure was a majority vote, I am absolutely certain that the majority of International Mission Board trustees did not know the information this post contains when they voted to censure. However, a few trustees in leadership were told, in detail, what I am about to tell you. It is not confidential information. though it should have been shared with the entire board, it was not. It was not shared with the trustees in the Monday night trustee Forum because my censure was not even discussed. It was not shared with the full trustee board during Executive Session Tuesday night when my censure was voted on. I probably would have shared the information with all the trustees had I been asked to address the board before the vote, but I was not afforded the opportunity to address the trustees before they voted on my censure.

No Executive Session rules of confidentiality are being broken in this post. The information that I am about to share with you was given to two IMB trustees who serve on the Executive Committee as well as an administrator of the IMB. These three men were sent to meet with me by the Executive Committee late Monday afternoon (5:30 p.m. to 6:30 p.m.) to seek out a resolution that would stop short of a public censure.

I am free to give the details of what I said to these men in that meeting - a meeting which occurred at the end of a hotel hallway as the four of us sat on a couch and two chairs - because the Executive Committee themselves reported in the Censure Recommendation, what I said. The Censure Recommendation states the following about this four man meeting:

Trustee members of the Executive Committee and a senior staff IMB staff member met with Burleson on the evening of November 5, 2007 for further discussion. Burleson was asked to apologize for the following violations:

(a) Making public private communications with fellow trustees;
(b) Speaking in a way that reflected poorly on fellow trustees; and
(c) Publicly criticizing board approved actions instead of speaking in positive and supportive terms as he interpreted and reported on actions of the Board of Trustees, regardless of whether he personally supported those actions.

Burleson stated that the violations regarding speaking in a way that reflected poorly on his fellow trustees were unintentional offenses for which he would gladly apologize. However, he stated that he intentionally chose to make public private communications with the trustees and that he intentionally chose to publicly criticize board approved actions instead of speaking in positive and supportive terms as he interpreted and reported on board actions.

That 'official account' of the meeting is correct - as far as it goes. It does not say enough. Not near enough. But before I tell you the critical information that is left out of the Censure Recommendation, let me tell you what the Executive Committee did get right about what I said to those three men sent by the Executive Committee to meet with me.

The Details of What Was Said Are Accurate

I did tell the men that I would personally and publicly apologize to Winston Curtis, Jerry Corbaley, and John Floyd for posts on my blog, posts that I was told 'reflected poorly' on these men. I stated that though none of these men had ever approached me personally with his offense, and though I had never intentionally sought to disparage these trustees, I would accept the word of the Executive Committee that the men had been offended, and would issue an apology to them publicly - without reservation - immediately.

I also said to them, and it is reported correctly by the Executive Committee, that I could not apologize for making public so called 'private communications' with fellow trustees. But the rationale for not apologizing is not given. Why would I not apologize? Because the alleged 'private communications,' were conversations that occurred about International Mission Board business, and were questions being asked of me by Southern Baptists. I asked these questions to keep Southern Baptists informed about their missions agency (see my explanation here). In no form or fashion did I violate Executive Session rules of confidentiality in any of my blog posts. Also, if someone I visited with at the trustee meetings, either missionaries or trustees, stated that our conversation should be 'private,' I always abided by their request.

Finally, the Executive Committee accurately reports in the Censure Recommendation that I said I could not apologize for my public dissent of board approved action. However, again, the explanation was not fully given. I do appreciate the Executive Committee reporting that I said the following:

"Burleson further stated that he would not apologize for these intentional violations of the Trustee Standards of Conduct and Trustee Responsibilities. Burleson stated that he had voted against these standards of conduct when they were adopted because he believed in the principle of dissent."

The Executive Committee left out the word 'Baptist' before the word 'dissent.' I'm sure this omission was unintentional. I told the three men that I was a Baptist first, and the principle of courteous dissent was a cherished one. I could not apologize for publicly opposing the private prayer language and baptism guidelines, nor could I refrain from opposing the 'New Trustee Standards of Conduct' because those 'new' standards contained a very un-Baptistic policy. The 'new' trustee standards, adopted March 22, 2006 in Tampa, Florida, say this:

Individual IMB trustees must refrain from public criticism of Board approved actions . . . trustees are to speak in positive and supportive terms as they interpret and report on actions by the Board, regardless of whether they personally support the action.

I told them that I could NOT, in good conscience, abide by that policy. When they told me that I was bound by the 'New Trustee Standards of Conduct,' I reminded them that I voted against the 'New Trustee Standards of Conduct' on March 22, 2006. They said it made no difference, and they could not understand why I would 'intentionally' violate the public dissent rule and then refuse to apologize. I told them that my Bapist principles were higher than 'new' trustee guidelines, and I could neither violate my conscience nor my convictions by abiding by the 'new' trustee standards of conduct that prohibited public dissent of board approved policies.

Why Were New Standards of Conduct Needed in 2006?

March 22, 2006 was the day the International Mission Board voted to adopt 'The New Trustee Standards of Conduct' in Tampa, Florida. It also happens to be the very trustee meeting where trustees voted to rescind the recommendation for my removal from the board - a recommendation that would have had to be offered, debated, and voted on by the messengers at the Southern Baptist Convention in Greensboro, North Carolina three months later - June 2006. But before the IMB trustees went into closed door session to rescind the recommendation for my removal, and eventually expunge it from the record, the 'new' Trustee Standards of Conduct, which stifled dissent, were passed. At the time, and during the debate, I said to anyone who listened that 'the new guideline prohibiting dissent is the worst policy passed in the history of any agency of the Southern Baptist Convention.'

For years the International Mission Board trustees were guided by the conduct guidelines contained in what is known as the 'The Blue Book.' There was no prohibition against public dissent in 'The Blue Book.' Why, all of the sudden, were 'new guidelines' needed to stifle dissent in March of 2006? Well, I think it was because my blog was causing a stir in the SBC. I always spoke courteously and graciously in my dissent, but I tried to explain why the new private prayer language and baptism guidelines were ultimately harmful for the SBC - an agency was narrowing the doctrinal requirements for missionary cooperation beyond the convention wide accepted Baptist Faith and Message 2000.

Simply put, rather than having the Southern Baptist Convention deal with the recommendation for my removal for dissenting against the guidelines passed by the IMB that went beyond the BFM 2000, trustee leadership tried to deal with me by passing 'new' guidelines that stifled dissent and threatened 'censure' or 'discipline' if the 'new' guidelines were not followed.

Initially, I really thought it best to attempt to follow the guidelines prohibiting dissent, and I did my best to 'support that which I didn't support,' but I saw very quickly that when Baptists, or any Christian group for that matter, take away the cherished principle of free and courteous dissent, the group can quickly deteriorate under the whims of autocratic leadership. Exerting absolute authority over missionaries, fellow trustees, or IMB administrators, to the point that everyone fears to speak out lest they lose their job, their position, or their reputation is highly unhealthy and dysfunctional for any organization, but particularly any Christian organization. Further, when you publicly state you support what you don't actually support, you are at best pretending, and at worst lying. Transparency is the opposite of such pretension.

So, for the past several months my writings have always been supportive of the mission and work of the IMB, respectful of my fellow trustees (even those with whom I disagree), and always for the purpose of bettering the IMB and the SBC - but I have publicly dissented when I felt it necessary and I have always sought full transparency in our work. It seems that many people have been encouraged by my blog to become more involved in mission work, particularly SBC mission work, through what I have written, including this missionary appointee who note sent me the following comment this week while I was in Springfield:

Wade, my wife and I saw you this afternoon when you came into the hotel in Springfield. I wanted to come up to tell you hello and that you are one of the reasons that we decided to proceed with an appointment with the board and soon we will be moving our family to a restricted access area and it really helps us to know that men like you are standing up for what is right.

New IMB M

Even if some of my fellow trustees cannot see the positive in my blog, it is certain that others do. My goal has been to increase missionary participation, increase giving to missions, and to increase the number of missionaries appointed to serve the SBC.

Displeasure Expressed for Using the IMB as 'A Platform.'

However, the trustee spokesman for the three men who met with me that early Monday evening, November 5, said he was upset that I (and I quote), "used my position as a trustee on the IMB as a platform to raise concerns in other Southern Baptists over what I was calliing 'the narrowing of the doctrinal parameters for missionary cooperation and participation in the Southern Baptist Conventon.'"

They felt my bog was a detriment to missions. These men said the Executive Committee desired an apology for all three things on the list given to me - and my willingness to only apologize for the personal offenses, but not apologize for intentional violations of the 'new' trustee guidelines put us in a quandry. There was a stalemate.

What the Executive Committee DID NOT Report

Toward the end of the meeting I was finally asked the million dollar question:

"Wade, what solution would you propose?"

I told the three men, two Executive Committee trustees and the IMB administrator, my proposed solution to the stalemate. Again, my proposed solution was NOT reported in the Executive Committee's Censure Recommendation description of my meeting with these three men. Again, the full board of trustees was NOT told what I had offered in the Executive Session.

Here is what I said.

I did not desire Wade Burleson to be an issue at this meeting. I wanted people to focus on Lottie Moon, missions, and the great things that were happening around the world. I did not wish to be the focus of this meeting. I did not intend to say anything about Jerry Corbaley's 153 page email and believed that since Southern Baptists could read for themselves what he wrote (which, by the way, was all about me), there was no need to discuss it any further. It had nothing to do with our missions purpose.

Further, I said that I was feeling it was time to move forward in my own ministry, and that I was feeling led to do four things, and would do all four if the Executive Committee would simply ignore any attempts to censure me, and move forward in the IMB's work.

(1). I would, without hesitancy, apologize both publicly and privately to the three men who felt certain of my posts placed them in a poor light, and,
(2). I would, from this date forward (November 5, 2007) abide by the 'new' trustee guidelines prohibiting dissent, because . . .
(3). I was closing my blog on December 6, 2007, as it related to the IMB and the SBC, choosing to concentrate on personal ministry, and
(3). I would step down as a trustee of the International Mission Board before the end of the year, but . . .
(4). I would not apologize for any violation of the 'new' trustee guidelines regarding public dissent of board approved guidelines and would leave my posts up as a testimony that I stand by the veracity of all I have written.

I further told them that I believed the majority of Southern Baptists agreed with me that Baptists should have the right to graciuosly and courteously dissent from the majority, and that the Garner Motion, adopted at the 2007 Southern Baptist Convention, indicated that the majority of Southern Baptists agreed that the IMB had gone too far in passing doctrinal guidelines that exceeded the BFM 2000.

I could not apologize for saying that there was the 'narrowing of the doctrinal parameters of missionary cooperation' because I could never apologize for telling the truth, even if it was not what trustee leadership, or other leaders in the SBC wanted to hear. However, for the sake of avoiding further controversy, and for the purpose of keeping the International Mission Board focused on missions, and not 'the Wade Burleson issue,' I would do the four things above.

I told them that if the Executive Committe would wait until the NEXT IMB Board meeting that Wade Burleson would be no longer an issue. I would be gone. But if they pressed for an apology, they would not get it.

The Decision To Censure Shows a Lack of Southern Baptist Statesmanship

I honestly thought that the issue was resolved. We closed that little four man meeting in prayer and the next day, I was absolutely convinced that I would not be censured. I called my wife and told her nothing was forthcoming. I told my Dad the same thing. I told Ben Cole everything was off. They all knew of my impending resignation.

In my mind, I was attending my last IMB trustee plenary session Tuesday night, when, out of the blue, we were called into Executive Session. I was, just like two years ago, completely blindsided. I had not been told the censure was coming. I had not been given the three page Censure Recommendation. I was not asked to speak to the motion. I have no clue how many trustees knew what I offered to do, but I am honestly clueless as to why my offer was not accepted. Maybe stunned is a better description than clueless.

The Lord Is In Charge

I am grateful that I learned from a young age to trust in God's providence. There is no human, logical explanation as to why I was censured. I realize that some might say, 'Well, if you had just apologized, it wouldn't have happened.' I don't know how to respond to that kind of thinking except to say that an apology for publicly dissenting, or an apology for keeping Southern Baptists informed in as transparent of a manner as possible would be a violation of my principles and my conscience - as a Baptist Christian and as a trustee elected by the SBC to serve Southern Baptists - not my fellow trustees.

So . . . because a majority of fellow trustees voted to censure me . . .

(1). I will NOT resign from the International Mission Board and will faithfully serve out the tenure assigned me by the Southern Baptist Convention, and
(2). My wife and I will gladly pay our own way to International Mission Board meetings and rejoice that the money saved for our expenses can be used in overseas missions work, and
(3). I will continue blogging about IMB trustee meetings, including all the information needed for Southern Baptists to understand what is taking place in the largest missionary sending agency in the world.
(4). I will continue to be gracious and kind to all my trustees, and will be supportive of the mission of the International Mission Board, but will continue to publicly dissent, when appropriate, if there are IMB policies implemented, guidelines approved, or actions taken that either violate Scripture, Baptist principles, or Christian charity, and finally,
(5). I will humbly accept any future censures from my fellow trustees, for my conscience is bound to a higher principle than that guideline which stifles dissent.

Let me encourage you to give to Lottie Moon this Christmas season. Let me also encourage you to increase your Cooperative Program giving. This week the Lord has shown me that I couldn't get out of the IMB and the SBC even if I wanted, and I definitely desire the IMB to be strong as ever.

The Lord must have a plan for this current controversy. Heaven knows I offered the olive branch.


In His Grace,


Wade Burleson

John Paton: A Stirring Missionary Story for Us All

In 1606 Spanish explorer Fernandez de Quiros discovered a chain of eighty islands in the South Pacific previously unknown to Western Civilization. In 1773, those same islands were explored by Captain James Cook and this English explorer gave the islands the name New Hebrides because of the similarities they had with the Hebrides Islands off the Northwest coast of Scotland. Today, the New Hebrides Islands form one nation called Vanuatu. Vanuatu is the nation formed by this chain of islands that stretches over 450 miles long in the South Pacific. If you were to draw a straight line from Honolulu, Hawaii to Sydney, Australia you will cut through Port Vila, the capital of Vanuatu, two thirds of the way from Hawaii to Australia. The population of Vanuatu today is about 190,000.

Eighty five percent of the population of Vanuatu considers themselves Christian. The transformation of the pagan, cannibalistic people of the New Hebrides Islands into the Christian people of Vanuatu is a fascinating story of missionary perseverance and trust in God’s divine call. The New Hebrides Islands had no Christian influence until missionaries John Williams and James Harris from the London Missionary Society landed there in 1839. Both of these missionaries were killed and eaten by cannibals on the island of Erromanga on November 20, 1839, only minutes after going ashore.

A young Christian man from Scotland, a man named John G. Paton, was deeply affected by the news of the deaths of John Williams and James Harris. He himself began to feel a divine call to go to New Hebrides. John Paton’s entire missionary story can be found in John G. Paton: Missionary to the New Hebredes, An Autobiography Edited by His Brother (Edinburgh: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1965, orig. 1889, 1891). All quotations from the journal below are taken from this book with appropriate page numbers.

John Paton describes an exchange he had with a Mr. Dickson when John expressed his desire to take his wife and son to New Hebrides to minister among aborigine cannibals. Mr. Dickson exploded,

"The cannibals! You will be eaten by cannibals!"

John Paton responded:

“Mr. Dickson, you are advanced in years now, and your own prospect is soon to be laid in the grave, there to be eaten by worms; I confess to you, that if I can but live and die serving and honoring the Lord Jesus, it will make no difference to me whether I am eaten by Cannibals or by worms; and in the Great Day my Resurrection body will rise as fair as yours in the likeness of our risen Redeemer” (p. 56)

John Paton sailed for the New Hebrides (via Australia) with his wife Mary on April 16, 1858, at the age of 33. The first four years of work on the island of Tanna were full of severe hardships. Both Paton’s wife and son died of fever. Except for the joy of a few conversions, including an old cannibal chief, the work on Tanna was difficult and dangerous. Eventually Paton was driven off the island by the cannibals in February 1862, a mere four years after leaving England. For the next two years Paton traveled around Australia and Great Britain, encouraging the Christians there to support his work in the New Hebrides. John Paton eventually remarried and took his new wife, Margaret, back to the smaller island of Aniwa (two miles wide and seven miles long). They labored together on Aniwa for forty one years until Margaret’s death in 1905. When John and Margaret arrived at the island of Aniwa in 1862, John discovered the natives to be of the same character of those on the island of Tanna, of whom he had written:

Their worship was entirely a service of fear, its aim being to propitiate this or that Evil spirit, to prevent calamity or to secure revenge. They deified their Chiefs . . . so that almost every village or tribe had its own Sacred Man. . . . They exercised an extraordinary influence for evil, these village or tribal priests, and were believed to have the disposal of life and death through their sacred ceremonies. . . . They also worshipped the spirits of departed ancestors and heroes, through their material idols of wood and stone. . . . They feared the spirits and sought their aid; especially seeking to propitiate those who presided over war and peace, famine and plenty, health and sickness, destruction and prosperity, life and death. Their whole worship was one of slavish fear; and, so far as ever I could learn, they had no idea of a God of mercy or grace.

Paton admitted that he wavered as he wondered whether there would be any gospel success. He poured himself into learning the language of the Aniwa people and reduced it to writing. He built orphanages where he and Margaret trained young people for Jesus. Margaret taught a class of about fifty women and girls and they became experts at sewing, singing and plaiting hats, and reading. . They "trained the Teachers . . . translated and printed and expounded the Scriptures . . . ministered to the sick and dying . . . dispensed medicines every day . . . taught them the use of tools . . ." (p. 378). They held worship services every Lord's Day and sent native teachers to all the villages to preach the gospel.

Within fifteen years, John and Margaret Paton saw the entire island of Aniwa turn to Christ. He would continue to minister to the people of Aniwa for another twenty-five years and would write in his journal toward the end of his life, "I claimed Aniwa for Jesus, and by the grace of God Aniwa now worships at the Savior's feet" (p. 312). Even in his old age, when John would leave New Hebrides and travel around the world championing the cause of missions in the South Pacific, he continued to minister to his beloved Aniwan people and "published the New Testament in the Aniwan Language" in 1897. Paton outlived his second wife by two years and died in Australia on January 28, 1907. Until the day of his death he was translating hymns and catechisms and creating a dictionary for the Aniwa, even though his health prevented him from being on the island.

There are three things that strike me about the character of John Patton and seem to me to be the mark of all great missionaries.

His courage

John Patton often spoke directly and forcefully to his cannibal assailants, trusting in God’s divine Providence that whether he lived, or died, it was all in God’s hands.

One morning at daybreak I found my house surrounded by armed men, and a chief intimated that they had assembled to take my life. Seeing that I was entirely in their hands, I knelt down and gave myself away body and soul to the Lord Jesus, for what seemed the last time on earth. Rising, I went out to them, and began calmly talking about their unkind treatment of me and contrasting it with all my conduct towards them. . . . At last some of the Chiefs, who had attended the Worship, rose and said, "Our conduct has been bad; but now we will fight for you, and kill all those who hate you" (p. 115).

[Once] when natives in large numbers were assembled at my house, a man furiously rushed on me with his axe but a Kaserumini Chief snatched a spade with which I had been working, and dexterously defended me from instant death. Life in such circumstances led me to cling very near to the Lord Jesus; I knew not, for one brief hour, when or how attack might be made; and yet, with my trembling hand clasped in the hand once nailed on Calvary, and now swaying the scepter of the universe, calmness and peace and resignation abode in my soul (p. 117).

His joy

Shortly before his death, John Patton wrote to his family the following words regarding his joy in serving Christ on the mission field and his desire that his children and their children follow him.

Let me record my immovable conviction that this is the noblest service in which any human being, can spend or be spent; and that, if God gave me back my life to be lived over again, I would without one quiver of hesitation lay it on the altar to Christ, that He might use it as before in similar ministries of love, especially amongst those who have never yet heard the Name of Jesus. Nothing that has been endured, and nothing that can now befall me, makes me tremble - on the contrary, I deeply rejoice – when I breathe the prayer that it may please the blessed Lord to turn the hearts of all my children to the Mission Field and that He may open up their way and make it their pride and joy to live and die in carrying Jesus and His Gospel into the heart of the Heathen World! (p. 444)

His perseverance

The island of Tanna, during Patton’s first four years of missionary work, saw little fruit. Following those initial four years of missionary service on Tanna, the entire island population rose against Paton, blaming him for an epidemic, and came against him and his little band of Christians. There were some spectacular life and death close calls and one remarkable, even miraculous deliverance from fire by wind and rain and finally a wonderful answer to prayer as a ship arrived just in time to take him off the island. (page 215).

In response to this, after four years of risking his life hundreds of times and losing his wife and child, he recounts this incident:

Conscious that I had, to the last inch of life, tried to do my duty, I left all results in the hands of my only Lord, and all criticisms to His unerring judgment. Hard things also were occasionally spoken to my face. One dear friend, for instance, said, "You should not have left. You should have stood at the post of duty till you fell. It would have been to your honor, and better for the cause of the Mission, had you been killed at the post of duty like the others." (p. 223)

Most Christians would quit under the withering criticism of Christian friends. Paton not only did not quit, he returned to the same island chain two years later to continue his missionary effort for another four decades.

Listen to Paton’s own explanation for the four years of hardships on the island of Tanna and the unprecedented missionary success on the island of Aniwa afterwards:

Oftentimes, while passing through the perils and defeats of my first four years in the Mission-field on Tanna, I wondered . . . why God permitted such things. But on looking back now, I already clearly perceive . . . that the Lord was thereby preparing me for doing, and providing me materials wherewith to accomplish, the best work of all my life (page 222).

May God raise among Southern Baptists more missionaries like John Paton.

In His Grace,

Wade Burleson

Pornography And A Private Prayer Language

A pastor sent me an email yesterday that contained a question he asked if I would answer. Since I serve the SBC at large as a trustee of the IMB, I feel it is appropriate for me to answer any and all questions that come my way. This pastor, who prefers to remain unidentified, wrote to me the following:

Dear Wade,

I just returned from a Regional Summit of the IMB at FBC Arlington. The closing panel asked for prayer that more men would become Journeymen, as presently women outnumber men 2 to 1. The startling fact was revealed that about 50% of male applicants are turned down . The primary reason is the use of internet porn. In fact, the problem is so pervasive that the application question has changed from "Have you ever used internet porn?" to "When was the last time you used internet porn?" A repentent attitude demonstrated by a significant time of "abstinence" would allow candidates to still be considered. I think this is a wise stance.

However, all this got me to thinking: You mean past use of internet porn won't bar you from the mission field, but a private prayer language will?

Baffled,

An Unnamed Pastor

Let me be the first to say that I am in complete agreement with the work of our candidate consultants of the IMB and the modification of the questionnaire regarding the past viewing of internet pornography. I have learned in over a quarter century of pastoring that some of the most valuable servants in the kingdom are those who have been truly broken of their private sins of the past.

However, the pastor's specific question to me was "You mean past use of internet porn won't bar you from the mission field, but a private prayer language will?"

I think it would be good to understand the new policy, adopted by a majority of the IMB trustees, but opposed by the IMB President, on November 15, 2005 regarding a 'private prayer language.' Point four of the new policy prohibiting a private prayer language states (emphasis mine):

In terms of general practice, the majority of Southern Baptists do not accept what is referred to as “private prayer language.” Therefore, if “private prayer language” is an ongoing part of his or her conviction and practice, the candidate has eliminated himself or herself from being a representative of the IMB of the SBC.

The pastor's question seems to indicate he thought that somebody could serve as an IMB missionary having viewed pornography on the internet in years past, but a missionary candidate would be rejected if he had used a private prayer language in the past. In other words, he seemed to think viewing pornography was treated differently than using a private prayer language.

That's not so.

Viewing pornography and using a private prayer languages are treated the same. You may have viewed pornography on the internet in the past, and you may have prayed in a private prayer language in the past, but you must renounce both, in terms of 'conviction' (i.e. 'it is wrong') and in terms of practice (i.e. 'I will not do it again).

So, under the new policies both pornography and a private prayer language are seen as similar activities from which a candidate can be forgiven, redeemed, and ultimately restored. I am making no comment or statement in this post on whether or not these two activities should be treated the same, just an observation that they are treated the same as far as the screening process goes. Both pornography and a private prayer language are treated as activities from which a person must repent in order to serve as a Southern Baptist missionary.

I trust that answers the pastor's question.

In His Grace,


Wade Burleson

E-Mail, Missionaries and Mid-America

Today was a very busy day for Rachelle and me in Memphis, Tennessee. During the morning Rachelle continued her studies for her approaching NCLEX, the national nursing boards. I used the time to correspond with a number of people via email, and one particular exchange is pertinent to this blog.

Dr. Hershael York, a man that I respect and mentioned in my post yesterday as having a sympathy for Landmark tenets emailed me and graciously requested that his views not be labeled ‘Landmark.’ I really appreciated Dr. York’s dialogue today and do desire to represent his views accurately, so the following is a sample of the brief email exchange between Dr. York and myself to insure his views are portrayed by me accurately.

Dr. York wrote:

I don't question either your intent or your understanding of my position, but I really do hate that Landmark label because it allows people to fill in the blank and assume things about me that are untrue. I find the whole thing ironic because I was so ostracized by the Landmarkers when I pastored in Lexington. They even voted to not recognize my church's baptism, so you can see why I cringe a little bit when the same label that they wear is applied to me. So I don't mind being identified as completely supportive of the IMB policy, nor a restrictive view of the ordinances (which I defend exegetically more than historically), but I just don't think the label is fair.

I responded to Dr. York:

Thank you very much for your humble email allowing me to see into your heart. Now I realize you understand the depths of my feelings to have my own convention agency, no less than the very mission arm of the SBC -- the IMB -- reject my member’s baptism and his service on the mission field. I will be more careful with the label Landmark in the future and thank you for calling me out on it.

Is there a word that would describe your position? You would be hard pressed to say "Baptist" because Gill represents the traditional Baptist view. Maybe 'American Baptist' view? I'm just asking. Obviously, I would reject calling your position the "Biblical view" of baptism label as well.

Dr. York then emailed back:

I don't mind my view being called a restrictive view of baptism or the authoritative baptism view. I do believe that the authority of the administrator is as important as the intent of the subject. I would not object to anything along those lines.

I will close the review of the email exchange with my edited response to Dr. York:

I do appreciate the dialogue -- I find your spirit refreshing.

When Baptist Elias Keach baptized people in colonial America, and then was later converted while preaching a message he had taken from his father's notes (Benjamin Keach), were the earlier baptisms performed by Elias 'unacceptable' because the administrator was a 'lost man?' If you say, 'no' - the authority for the baptism was found in the commission of Christ to the 'church' not the 'person' doing the baptism -- then I think you will find we are saying the exact same thing.

The 'church' has the privilege and, yes, authority of baptizing converts to faith in Christ. But the definition of the church is the key when it comes to baptism. I would define the church as the universal body of the elect -- those whom the Father has redeemed -- therefore, any professing disciple of Christ has the privilege of baptizing his convert -- this was Dr. Gill's view. We Southern Baptists use pastors to baptize often out of convenience, but it is not necessary. The authority is given to all Christians by Christ. It is an ordinance (command) of Christ, not 'the church.' It is possible that some 'professors' of faith in Christ who baptize others are not actually converted, but that does not negate the validity of the baptism of the person who was baptized at the hands of a lost man, because baptism identifies a person with Christ, not a 'doctrine' or a 'local' church, and the 'authority' of the administrator does not make or break a 'Christian' baptism. The authority for baptism comes from Christ -- it is His ordinance.

The 'local' church is important for discipline reasons, accountability, etc . . . But admittance into my 'local' church is through examination of one's faith and baptism --- faith must be faith in Christ alone and the baptism must be by immersion, after having come to faith in Christ, identifying the believer with 'the universal body' of the Lord Jesus.

These are our differences. I would hold to the old English Baptist (and dare I say 'biblical' view) of baptism. You would hold to a modern, Americanized view that the 'authority' of the baptizer is important, but you believe that authority is NOT given to the baptizer by Christ, but by the ‘local’ church. Therefore, it is hard for you to see how Gill says 'baptism takes place outside the church (i.e. 'local' church) but is a prerequisite to membership. I believe, though, we both would agree baptism is not a prerequisite to becoming part of the 'universal body of Christ.' I would just simply say baptism identifies a person with Christ and His universal body --- you would say it should identify him with the ‘local’ church.

Where have I misrepresented your views?

Dr. York graciously responded that ‘I think you represent my view correctly.’

Missionaries

Rachelle and I had the privilege today of visiting with some absolutely wonderful missionary candidates for the International Mission Board. We were standing outside the Hilton, Memphis and ran into Jon and Reagan G______ from Oklahoma. They reside about thirty miles from where Rachelle and I live, and though I had met Jon before, it was the first time for me to meet Reagan and for Rachelle to meet them both. I cannot begin to share with you how much knowing missionaries like Jon and Reagan inspires me to lead our church and others to strengthen Cooperative Program giving. This good looking husband and wife are bright, articulate, and passionate about their call to missions. We enjoyed our brief but delightful fellowship with this wonderful couple.

We also were able to visit with Ryan and Laura W____ another young, very bright Southern Baptist couple who represent the future of Southern Baptist missions. Laura was raised Methodist and was baptized as an infant, but at the age of eighteen came to the conviction that believer’s baptism by immersion was biblical baptism and she was baptized in her church accordingly. However, in order to be appointed a missionary with the IMB, she was told she needed to be ‘rebaptized’ in a ‘Southern Baptist Church’ though her Southern Baptist Church had years earlier received her baptism as ‘biblical’ and she was a leader, mentor and teacher in her local Southern Baptist Church. Frankly, it was embarrassing to do what she was forced to do (be rebaptized) and she really struggled with the demand it be done, but her love for the mission field is too great, and so she consented. We had an interesting discussion over her acquiescing to the demand that she be ‘rebaptized’ in order to be appointed on the mission field, and without going into details, let me just say I am very, very proud of Laura and her husband and their ability to search the Scriptures for themselves and hold to their own convictions in a gracious, but firm manner. I will be praying for them in their IMB assignment which will begin in mid-July 2007.

We met several other missionaries during the day, and had a great time of fellowship with many of them, including Brian and Becky H_____ and Sarah and Bill M_______. It’s best not to use their last names or places of assignment even though not all are in security three zones.

Every time I come to one of these IMB meetings, I am reminded about the purpose of the Southern Baptist Convention – cooperation in missions around the world.

Mid-America Seminary

Tonight our trustee, staff and missionary dinner was hosted by Mid-America Baptist Theological Seminary. Mid-America was founded by Dr. Gray Allison in the early 70’s as an alternative to the traditional six SBC seminaries. It is located across the street from Bellevue Baptist Church and sits on 35 acres donated by Bellevue. The $15.5 million dollar complex is stunning. Dr. Mike Spradlin is the current President and the current trustee chairman of the IMB, Dr. John Floyd, is Vice-President of Mid-America.

Dr. Floyd gave Rachelle and me and Dr. Allen McWhite of North Greenville University a personal tour of the facilities. Dr. Floyd was project manager on the construction of the facility and I must say, he did a superb job. The classrooms, preaching labs, auditorium are not only fitted with the most modern technology, they are all spacious, efficient and pleasing to the eye without being too luxurious. Frankly, Mid-America will draw even more than their current 542 students because of the superb facilities. Rachelle and I thoroughly enjoyed Dr. Floyd’s hospitality and tour. A week before Dr. Adrian Rogers died he drove around the facility with Dr. Spradlin and was asked, “Does it meet your expectations” to which Dr. Rogers responded, “Oh, it far exceeds them.” Mid-America will produce some top quality Southern Baptist scholars and preachers in the years to come.

Rachelle and I ate dinner with Dr. Matt Acres, Professor of New Testament Greek at Mid-America. He is trained in Hebrew and Old Testament, but is teaching Greek, telling me he enjoys Greek as much as he does Hebrew. I was very impressed with Dr. Acres. We discussed the history of Baptists and views regarding ‘The Trail of Blood,’ the Baptist Missionary Association (whose members make up the second largest group of students behind Southern Baptists at Mid-America) and various and sundry other issues. Dr. Acres is dead on theologically and because of faculty like him, I have absolutely no hesitation at all recommending Mid-America to any Southern Baptist interested in serious theological study.

The Forum

Tonight all trustees met behind closed doors for what is called the forum. Again, the meeting was filled with prayer, praise, and encouragement to all.

The very kind of thing that should always happen behind closed doors in the SBC.

In His Grace,


Wade