With the announced retirement not only of Executive
Coordinator Daniel Vestal but also long-time leader Terry Hamrick (who has at
least three different titles on the website) and the upcoming report of the
Hull Committee, the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship is entering a significant time
of transition. Plagued with financial
shortfalls in the past year like so many judicatories, some hard decisions will
have to be made about future mission, organization, and services.
Although I no longer hold a leadership position within
CBF life, I am a supporter and feel that I have a stake in the future of the
organization. As I think about the
future of CBF, I suggest that we need to consider two major areas—competition and
opportunities.
Who are the competitors of CBF? The “knee jerk” response would be the
Southern Baptist Convention, but this is yesterday’s competitor. Those related to the SBC have made their
choice about the path they will follow and that path has its own opportunities
and challenges. Individuals may still
choose to leave an SBC church and join a CBF church, but churches will not make
that choice. Certainly, many churches
will continue to support both SBC and CBF and the strength of that support may
ebb and flow, but those same churches are also looking toward other partners
beyond these two entities.
The real competitors for CBF will be determined by the
path that the organization chooses to follow in the future. If it continues to be a global
missions-oriented entity (not necessarily a missionary-sending entity), the
competition may be groups like Wycliffe Bible Translators, Buckner
Benevolences, World Vision, and Habitat for Humanity. The good news is that these can also be
partners if clear relationships can be developed. If CBF continues to provide congregational
development resources and services, the potential competitors (and at the same
time partners) are groups like the Center for Congregational Health, The
Columbia Partnership, The Upper Room, Smyth and Helwys, Pinnacle Leadership
Associates and so many others.
The key will be the answer to this question: “What does CBF bring to the table that makes
it a desirable and viable partner?” Many
of the organizations mentioned above have ready access to churches already and
do not need or desire CBF as a gatekeeper.
What is the value that CBF can add to the partnership?
The opportunities ahead for CBF are both internal and
external. Externally, CBF needs to
relate constructively to organizations like ethicsdaily.com (the Baptist Center
for Ethics), the Baptist Joint Committee, Baptist Women in Ministry, Passport,
and the fifteen theological institutions because they are providing some things
that CBF either cannot or has chosen not to provide to the churches. They
will provide a “Baptist voice” in politics and culture, innovative ministries for
specific groups, and theological education for clergy and lay leaders.
Internal opportunities are numerous. One would be an increased use of the Internet
and web-based platforms to unite, equip, and educate CBF constituents. Great strides have been made in this area,
but more needs to be done. Another
opportunity would be to look for staff with non-traditional experience and training. Although CBF will probably continue to see
the local churches as the organization’s primary constituency, this does not
mean that the entrepreneurial leadership needed for the future will necessarily
be found in the churches. A third
opportunity would be to disperse CBF staff across the nation and the
world. Leaders with various
responsibilities could enrich the life of CBF if they were scattered around,
serving not only as resource people but relationship builders. What would CBF look like if the majority of
its staff became “field personnel”?
Some say that crisis brings creativity. I would not want to characterize the present
situation in CBF life as a crisis, but it is certainly a time that calls for
creativity.
Comments