Kevin Ezell | NAMB Competing With Networks

Is this what we want to hear from the head of the North American Mission Board of the Southern Baptist Convention, Kevin Ezell? Do we really want to compete with other groups (Acts 29 specifically was mentioned)? 

As a denomination we have admitted that church planting has not been a priority and we are now changing that, but that's why so many have looked for that help elsewhere.

We are in the early stages of building a network, a support group, that will be the first choice of church planters everywhere, not just Southern Baptist. We will and can compete with other groups. (via)

My take: Partnerships, not competition. Playing a role. Being a part. Locking arms. I don't like this quote. It seems to me to be the same old SBC approach where we are the one-stop shop. 

Are you reading this the same way as me? Seriously, would love your thoughts.

Comments

[Joe Thorn]

Yeah, man, I'm with you on this. The SBC (which we as a church are happy to be a part of!) does not need to compete with networks like A29 (which we are also very happy to be a part of!). We need cooperation, not competition. The NAMB would, in my opinion, do well to do a better job at assessment, and fund fewer planters while giving them more money. I say this as a man who was assessed and sent via the NAMB. I like what the BGC (now Converge) does, and think it would be a good way the NAMB to move forward. Give good money to qualified men who will then put back into the program.

[Ryan K.]

As a young SBC pastor, who also loves what Acts29 does, I am really perplexed by this statement.

Competition usually ensues, or is the term used, when you think there is a limited market share. Part of me just wants to send a memo to the NAMB that there is beyond enough places in North America that need good churches.

In all seriousness I wish he would elaborate on what he thought the competition was for...

[John Mark Harris]

Competition can only make us both better, I think... We are in competition, if we know it or not. It's not an adversarial competition, or shouldn't be...

[Matt Steen]

I don't know Kevin Ezell from Adam. I planted a church with NAMB's help before Ezell came aboard, but trust me, believe me, I am not a NAMB cheerleader.

That said, my hope in this is that he was not talking about competition in the adversarial mindset. If the conversations that I have been following in the NAMB world are accurate, my hunch is that he is talking about seeing planters who leave the SBC for other organizations due to internal frustrations will start looking at NAMB as a serious possibility when it comes to planting in the future.

I doubt that this is as controversial as people will want it to be in the days to come.

[John Leek]

Competition is good as long as it doesn't mean cutting off resources one way or another. As long as folks are willing to help across affiliation and even across denominations (I'm United Methodist) we'll do even better. I say this as someone who would love MORE competition when it comes to church planting and evangelism especially when it come to my tradition.

[Brian Mayfield]

l don't want to speak for anyone, but I think I know Ezell's heart didn't mean that like it sounded. That said, I'm with you in that I do NOT like the words chosen here. And I think at this stage the SBC needs to choose every word carefully.

[Ryan K.]

@ John Mark

Competition for what though? That is what I am not understanding. Are there just a few communities left in North America that need churches? I am open to understanding the competition angle but first it would be nice to know in regards to what?

[Will Adair]

The question is about identity. Acts 29 is cultural engagement model (a Christ of culture model) whereas the SBC is a cultural isolationist model (Christ against culture model). A29 is more urban, whereas a whole the SBC is more suburban and rural in mindset. It is very much a competition. It will likely grow less cordial as time goes on until one side ends up swaying the younger generation that its methodology (model) is the right model.

[Jody Sneed]

Local churches are giving less to the cooperative program and directing their mission gifts directly to ministry PARTNERS...

So, at the convention level, leadership seeks to preserve their domain rather than follow the trend of their funding source and be more effective/productive...

Makes sense if you are trying to preserve an institution rather than build a Kingdom...

[Nick Rynerson]

I'm with you on this Steve. This leaves a really bad taste in my mouth. Church Planting isn't a "competition", at least I'm pretty sure it shouldn't be. That makes it seem like we really don't love non-Christians or each other, we just want to pad our stats and "do better" than the other guy. That's a pretty poor way to show those inside and outside the church grace, love and compassion.

The quote came off somewhat panicked, like Microsoft when Apple announced the iPod, not like a unified front participating in a resurgence of the gospel. I hope the NAMB doesn't just "up their game" to compete with A29, that could hurt both of us.

I just wish we could all just get along...

[Patrick Goodman]

This makes me sad but doesn't surprise. i'm a former IMBer who lived through the frustrating years of appointing only Ms who are baptized in a certain church and hold to a certain view of tongues.

I'm now part of an Acts 29 church in Louisville (Sojourn) and have found that the network is VERY serious about church planting, mentoring, verifying the called, etc.

When Ezell addresses the issue of why men and women want to partner with Acts 29 he cites the '"It's a sense of brotherhood, of training and top-notch resources that they can't find anywhere else," he said. Especially among Southern Baptists.'"

Exactly.

Lastly, I'm curious how Ed Stetzer felt about this piece. Last time I checked, he was pretty tight with the Acts 29 crew.

[Chris Blackstone]

Strikes me as odd that Ezell wants church planters everywhere to think of the NAMB first, even ones that aren't Southern Baptist. Does this imply that he wants to pull people from other denominations? That's definitely a bad idea. Maybe he's thinking of people who are planting non-affiliated churches and he wants to convince them of the benefits of SBC/NAMB? Good thought, but it's not a competition. I wish partnership was the focus. Competition implies that there's a loser. I'm sure we all would love to see more winners.

[Jonathon]

I seriously doubt that Dr. Ezell meant it the way it sounds.

Unless you script out every word, when you are engaged in an interview, dialouge, etc., you will probably say something that will be taken wrongly, or articulate something in a way that, when you look back, you wish you had said it differently.

With where Ezell is pointed the NAMB in recent months, his focus on planting churches, and working hard to be a good steward of resources, I am inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt. I do not think he meant "competition" in the way some of us are reading into it (but I do not know his heart/mind, either).

And, just as a note, I am not saying that our words do not matter. We need to be careful with what we say...especially when we are in a position such as the one Dr. Ezell holds. However, our words in such situations (a one time interview), usually don't tell the whole story.

Good conversation it has started though. I am glad to see both those within and without the SBC talking about cooperation and not competition.

Jonathon

[CW]

I didn't take what he said in the spirit you indicated (and I read the interview with Ezell before I came across your post). But I'm not an A29 member, so maybe my radar wasn't up about it.

Here's my take: NAMB has been second class (at best) in their church planting efforts, and groups like A29 have definitely raised the bar (set the standard?) for church planting networks. I think Kevin Ezell was acknowledging that fact and committing to lead NAMB to that same level.

Poor word choice? Cut the guy some slack...

[Stan Britton]

The SBC genuinely feels threatened by organizations like A29. Just listen to their rhetoric toward those associated with it. I'm glad for the renewed effort in church planting. However, we are renewing because we failed to focus on it for so long NOT because it's all-of-a-sudden important to the SBC. The SBC has been too busy fighting a battle it already won in Biblical inerrancy. That fight is over and won. It's been time to focus on planting churches for at least the last decade. Church planting should have been at the forefront of our focus long ago. Now, once again, the SBC is behind and trying to play catch up.

Here's hoping that Ezell's quote is from a position of quality (in competition) rather than quantity.

[Jonathon]

Stan,

The SBC feels threatened by Acts 29...

Remember that the SBC is made up of over 45,000 churches and thousands of leaders. Just b/c some within the convention "feel threatened" (if that is the case) or are less than cordial to those who are associated with Acts 29, does not = THE SBC.

I think we are seeing a growing movement of leadership within the SBC that wants to link arms across denominational and organizational boundaries. Praise the Lord!

So, please be careful in making sweeping generalizations.

[Steve McCoy]

Brian, agreed. Word choice is very important. My concern is that he meant what he said. I can't see from the article how to take it any other way.

[Mark]

Steve,

I'm not sure exactly how to take Ezell's words on this subject. It does sound like he wants NAMB to be a one-stop shop.

Another SBC pastor-blogger is questioning the statement that Ezell wants NAMB to be the "first choice of church planters everywhere, not just Southern Baptist."

[Steve McCoy]

Patrick, I believe Ed has said quite a bit on denominations and networks and the need for partnership and cooperation.

[Steve McCoy]

Mark, I'm not even sure what Ezell means by that. Who is blogging on that?

[Mark]

Les Puryear on his new(?) blog. http://sbcview.blogspot.com/2011/06/did-dr-ezell-really-say-that.html

He's afraid Ezell's statements may mean that SBC dollars could go to fund non-SBC churches.

[Steve McCoy]

Jonathon, I hear you. I really do. But what else can we take from interviews and articles, especially as put out by agencies that are FOR the one being interviewed, but that they mean what they said in the way they said it?

[Jonathon]

Steve,

I simply know, from experience, as I am sure you do as well, that at times our words in one isolated situation do not always paint the most accurate picture. So, what can we do? We can look at what has marked Ezell up to this point, add in this statement, and see that it could possibly be something we are taking in a way he didn't intend...but, I'm not in his mind, so he could very well have meant it in the way it sounds!

With that being said, I agree that our words matter. I hope that competition was not meant in the way it seems many are taking it.

Since Dr. Ezell has made some great strides within the NAMB, I am hesitant to get too worked up about something that has simply been misunderstood.

Thanks for interacting...

[Jonathon]

"something that has simply been misunderstood...

Should have read, "may have been simply misunderstood.."

Just so I'm clear... ;)

[Mike Ebert]

Steven

Nothing could have been further from Kevin's intent. He's focused on re-tooling SBC church planting methods, approaches and outcomes so ours can be the best out there. Not so we can "compete" in the sense of beating other like-minded planting networks and denominations, but so we can have effective outcomes and support our planters better.

However, I might add that Kevin has admitted he used to beat his Grandmother in checkers and brag about it.

Mike Ebert
VP, NAMB Communications

[Aaron Harvie]

Steve,
I have known Kevin for over 11 years. He was the pastor at Highview and Highview was our main supporting church when we planted. I have known Kevin as a friend and mentor for a long time. You may not like the wording of the quote but it is not intended to be about competition. It is about raising the bar at NAMB. I actually spoke to him prior to the release of the story. Kevin in no way sees Acts 29 as competition. He is striving for partnerships. Look at the partnership with Upward he just formed. You are making a big deal out of nothing.
The simple fact is NAMB has not been focused or sharp in church planting. We have boasted in false numbers for years. He is raising the bar and sees some great things in many networks. Acts 29 is a familiar one in the SBC world, and Acts 29 does some fantastic things. Again it is about raising the bar at NAMB.
Aaron

[Joe Thorn]

Well, I certainly like the emphasis on planting! And I have been praying for NAMB to improve in the areas of assessment, training, and support. But I would say that Steve isn't making a big deal out of nothing. He is responding to something Kevin said; to his words.

And you have to understand that some of us see the negative example of "competition" in the SBC frequently. Even up here in Illinois. We've heard leadership talk about other churches and networks as "competition" in unhealthy ways. So Steve's questions and concerns here are not baseless.

[Steve McCoy]

Hey Aaron. How are you, bro? Good to hear from you.

I'm responding to what he said. A lot of other people seem to see what I see too. I hope he isn't doing what the article seemed to say, but it does say what it says. If he wants to clarify I'm all for it. I'll let him put up a guest post here if he wants.

[Keith Walters]

I would love to hear him clarify what he means here. I hope his reference to those outside the SBC points toward a spirit of humility of humility and cooperation rather than competition. If it does not then I am profoundly disappointed.

At the same time we must move beyond the mindsets of “looking elsewhere,” of “first choice,” of “other groups” and embrace the fact that to be effective our networks must network with other networks. This us versus them mentality must be put to death. The mission of God is not about whose network plants the most churches but the glory of God. I do not care what seminary you attend or who you network with or what kind of church you plant. I do care whether your seminary equips you to preach the gospel, whether your network equips you to plant Christ-centered churches, and whether or not your sheep are well fed.

In short stop reading “The Wealth of Nations” and start reading scripture we are not here to sell competing products or corporate identities. We are here to freely proclaim the gospel.

[Aaron Harvie]

Steve,
I am doing well! We are launching a third church in October called Trinity. I love investing in planters! We need to connect! I want to talk with you about partnerships. I will pass your invite along and I hope he gets the chance to do it. I know all our hearts are for the Kingdom of God. Let's join together and see God do great things!
Aaron

[John]

Being in the NAMB loop currently, I can tell you from the inside that the organization is sadly not in good shape. Specifically, it does a poor job in church planting. In that sense, there is no competition--that is, no reason for young SBC church-planters to use them as their planting network. So, we have guys growing up in the SBC, being trained in an SBC seminary, then leaving the SBC because NAMB doesn't work well.

This is the context of the quote, in my opinion. It's not that we are competing against other groups (e.g. Acts 29) as much as making NAMB an excellent church-planting network is well-spends the millions given to it by SBC churches.

This is picture I've seen from other "in-house" conversations with Ezell and NAMB employees.