Author: Brandon Porter

Sexual Abuse Task Force modifies recommendations in advance of the annual meeting

NASHVILLE (BP)—Changes to the recommendations that Sexual Abuse Task Force members will present to messengers at next week’s SBC annual meeting will address the nature of third-party investigations at the church level, including funding and action toward churches that refuse to respond to an accusation.

The changes came after hearing from Southern Baptists in the days following the initial presentation of the recommendations, said SATF Chair Bruce Frank in a video on June 8.

“We are super grateful to receive valuable feedback from pastors to entity heads to lay leaders,” he said. “Your task force has been hard at work to take that feedback and use it to strengthen our recommendations.”

The changes were made to clarify questions and concerns around funding and polity, Frank said. “The goal of all the recommendations is to help churches and entities make wise decisions for the glory of God and the good of people.”

A $4 million gift through Send Relief – rather than Cooperative Program dollars – will fund the reforms in the first year. In addition to the development, three key changes address future third-party investigations.

One clarification is that those investigations will be launched by the local church or other Baptist body, rather than giving the impression of a top-down approach. Churches or groups requiring financial assistance to hire an outside firm will be able to apply for grants that will be limited to funding.

The changes also note the potential situation where an abuse survivor requests a third-party investigation but a church or Baptist body refuses to cooperate. That can result in the church being submitted to the Credentials Committee for consideration of disfellowshipping.

Marshall Blalock, SATF vice-chair and pastor of First Baptist Church in Charleston, S.C., and SATF member Andrew Hebert, pastor of Paramount Baptist Church in Amarillo, Texas, went into more explanation on the changes with TAB media.

At one point in the interview with Jennifer Rash, editor of The Alabama Baptist, the group discussed the term “credibly accused” and how a third-party investigation would arrive at that determination of an individual.

“That ‘credibly accused’ standard is the one that’s used in our civil courts,” said Hebert. “That is a higher standard, by the way, than what Guidepost recommended. Our task force listened to Guidepost but then made our own recommendation that increased the standard to what is called the ‘preponderance of evidence,’ which is a civil court standard.”

“Multiple levels” of assessment and review on the Ministry Check website as well as through the Credentials Committee, not to mention an appeals process, would make it extremely difficult for a false accusation to get through, he said.

With the Send Relief funding set through the first year, the Executive Committee will gather this fall to assess future funding, said Blalock. “We’ll know a little bit more then about the actual cost and these kind of things.”

Blalock also spoke to the controversy of Guidepost’s tweet in support of gay pride, how it could impact its report and the way it can shape a future working relationship with the SBC.

He was complimentary of Guidepost’s work and the individuals assigned to the SATF.

“They understood what we were about as Southern Baptists,” he said, adding that those individuals were Christians and Baptists. A sub-contracted group, he shared, was made up of members of a Southern Baptist church in Chattanooga.

“They were invested in our goal. They don’t hold to our worldview as a company, but the people they assigned to us were folks who we believed would do a good job.”

Expressing disappointment at the tweet, Blalock stood by Guidepost’s work and the responsibility of Southern Baptists to respond to it.

“The report they gave us is credible. We don’t think that tweet does harm to what they gave us. At the same time, we don’t have confidence to recommend them in the future at this point.”

This article originally appeared on Baptist Press.

Violence against pregnancy support centers on the rise

NASHVILLE (BP)—An increase in attacks on pro-life centers has led those groups to call for prayer and protection.

On the morning of June 7, Mountain Area Pregnancy Services in Asheville, N.C., shared pictures of vandalism that had occurred at its offices overnight, including threatening messages spray-painted in red and shattered and broken windows around the building.

“If abortions aren’t safe, neither are you!” and “No forced birth” accompanied an anarchist symbol, the Asheville Police Department said.

That act followed at least three others. One occurred over Memorial Day weekend when a pregnancy care center in Hollywood, Fla., was also defaced with similar threats. On June 3 red paint was splashed on the front door of the Capitol Hill Pregnancy Center in Washington, D.C., with the words “Jane says revenge” spray-painted on the building’s side, an apparent reference to Jane Roe, pseudonym of the plaintiff in the landmark Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision, which appears likely to be overturned this month. On the same day of the Asheville attack, a Buffalo, N.Y., pro-life center was firebombed and graffiti scrawled on its exterior.

North Carolina Baptists stepped in on the same day of the Asheville attack to offer help, Executive Director Todd Unzicker said.

“We abhor this vile attempt to terrorize a center that cares for women in crisis and works to save pre-born lives,” he told Baptist Press. “Mountain Area Pregnancy Services is a beloved partner to many of our churches in the Asheville area.

“Because of our commitment to stand for life and the generosity of N.C. Baptists, we immediately offered financial assistance to help them recover from this attack. I pray this ministry’s bold Gospel witness shines brighter than ever before in their community.”

Vandalism toward pro-life centers increased sharply after a leaked memo last month pointed to an upcoming Supreme Court ruling that would, in effect, reverse Roe v. Wade, the decision that ensconced abortion into federal law.

With that ruling still not public, pro-abortion activists have maintained pressure and threats against pro-life groups. A 26-year-old California man was apprehended outside the home of Justice Brett Kavanaugh on June 8.

The man admitted he had traveled there to kill Kavanaugh, who was at home with his family, before killing himself. He told authorities he was upset over the leaked memo and how he expected Kavanaugh to vote in future cases regarding gun rights. Police recovered a Glock pistol, tactical knife, screwdriver, nail punch, pepper spray, zip ties, pistol light, duct tape, hammer and a crowbar from the man’s pack.

Attorney General Merrick Garland ordered just last month to increase 24/7 protection at the homes of all Supreme Court justices. A June 7 memo issued by the Department of Homeland Security cited the upcoming SCOTUS decision as the impetus for individuals “both for and against abortion” calling for violence on public forums. That violence includes coming against “government, religious and reproductive healthcare personnel and facilities, as well as those with opposing ideologies.”

A bipartisan bill that would expand security protection for immediate family members of Supreme Court justices has stalled in the House of Representatives.

Meanwhile, hours after the arrest thwarting an apparent assassination attempt, pro-abortion protestors gathered outside of Kavanaugh’s home to carry signs and chant pro-abortion slogans.

Americans open to most churches, regardless of denomination

NASHVILLE—Most Americans, including many people of non-Christian faiths or no faith at all, are open to a variety of denominations of Christian churches.

Americans have a wide range of opinions and impressions about Christian denominations, but most won’t rule out a church based on its denomination, according to a new study from Lifeway Research. From a list of nine denominational terms – Assemblies of God, Baptist, Catholic, Lutheran, Methodist, Pentecostal, Presbyterian, Southern Baptist and non-denominational – more Americans rule out Pentecostal than any other denomination. Just over half of Americans (51 percent) say a church with Pentecostal in the name is not for them.

But for each of the other denominations in the study, most Americans say a specific religious label in the name of a church is not an automatic deterrent for them. Americans are most open to non-denominational and Baptist churches. One in 3 (33 percent) say a church described as non-denominational is not for them, while 43 percent say the same about a church with Baptist in the name. A 2014 phone survey from Lifeway Research also found Baptist and non-denominational churches among those Americans were most open to and Pentecostal the denominational group they were least open to.

“Church names vary greatly,” said Scott McConnell, executive director of Lifeway Research. “Names including St. Peter, Trinity, Crossroads and Presbyterian reflect biblical people, theology, modern imagery or references to the branch of Christianity the church is tied to. Most people have preexisting impressions of denominational groups when they see them in a church name or description.”

Americans have more favorable than unfavorable impressions of most denominations, whether they would personally attend a church of that denomination or not. More Americans have favorable impressions of Baptist churches (61 percent) than any other Christian denomination. But Baptist churches are not alone in giving generally favorable impressions. Most Americans think favorably of every denomination in this study except for Pentecostal (47 percent) and Assemblies of God (43 percent) churches. Still, more people have favorable than unfavorable impressions of Pentecostal and Assemblies of God churches.

Understanding different denominations

For each denominational group studied, 11 percent to 32 percent of Americans say they are not familiar enough with that denomination to form an opinion. This response is often more common than unfavorable responses and may indicate many don’t understand denominational differences.

Fewer people have favorable impressions of Assemblies of God churches than any other denomination, but more Americans are unfamiliar with this denomination than any other. Whereas 1 in 10 (11 percent) Americans say they’re not familiar with Catholic churches, nearly 1 in 3 (32 percent) are not familiar with Assemblies of God churches, the smallest denomination directly asked about in the study.

“The reputation of denominational groups may be tied to what someone knows about that group’s doctrine, but it also can be the sum of people’s impressions of local churches in those groups,” McConnell said. “Personal experiences with local churches, word of mouth and whether they see them serving in their communities can lead people to have positive or negative impressions of those groups.”

Protestants tend toward Baptist, non-denominational churches

Most Protestants are open to attending a non-denominational church. Protestants are least likely to assume a church is not for them if the description non-denominational is used for the church (21 percent). And Protestants are most likely to have favorable impressions of Baptist (76 percent) and non-denominational (69 percent) churches.

Infrequent churchgoers are also generally open to non-denominational churches, as well as Presbyterian and Lutheran churches. Christians who attend a worship service less than once a month are least likely to say they assume a church is not for them when they see Presbyterian (36 percent), Lutheran (37 percent) or non-denominational (22 percent) in the name of a church.

Similarly, Christians who attend church infrequently are less familiar with the Protestant religious groups. Almost 4 in 10 Christians who attend less than once a month are not familiar with Assemblies of God (38 percent), more than a quarter are not sure about Lutheran and non-denominational churches (27 percent) and a quarter are unfamiliar with Pentecostal (25 percent), Presbyterian (25 percent) and Southern Baptist (25 percent). Christians who attend worship services less than once a month are least likely to say they have unfavorable impressions of Lutheran (15 percent) and non-denominational (10 percent) churches.

“Just because someone is a Christian doesn’t mean they’re familiar with the many types of Christian churches,” McConnell said. “If a person who identifies as a Christian is not interested enough to practice the faith by attending church, they likely aren’t interested enough to learn about historical or doctrinal differences between Christian groups.”

What’s in a name?

Denomination identifiers in the names of churches spark different responses among Americans. For non-Christians, three denomination names stand above the rest as deterrents for attending that church: Baptist, Lutheran and Southern Baptist. People of other religions are most likely to say they assume a church is not for them when the name Baptist (63 percent), Lutheran (65 percent) or Southern Baptist (66 percent) is in the name of a church.

The majority of Catholics indicate most of the Protestant groups are not for them. Only Baptist (49 percent) and non-denominational churches (44 percent) are ruled out by less than half of Catholics. Similarly, 58 percent of Protestants assume a Catholic church is not for them.

Those who are religiously unaffiliated are most likely to have unfavorable impressions of Catholic (47 percent), Pentecostal (41 percent) and Southern Baptist (40 percent) churches. Although the religiously unaffiliated think most favorably about Baptist (36 percent) and non-denominational (36 percent) churches, the majority don’t think favorably of any denomination.

“The one group of Americans that consistently has more people with unfavorable than favorable views of different religious groups are those who are religiously unaffiliated,” McConnell said. “More of them have negative impressions of every group except for non-denominational churches.”

But faith isn’t the only factor in people’s impressions of churches. In some cases, ethnic, educational and geographical factors play a role as well. People who live in the South are among those most open to Southern Baptist churches, as they are least likely to say they assume a church is not for them if the name Southern Baptist is in the name of the church (40 percent). Those in the South are also most likely to have favorable views of Baptist churches (70 percent).

Young people also often have strong impressions of denominations, most of them negative. Young people (age 18-34) are most likely to have unfavorable impressions of Catholic (39 percent), Methodist (33 percent), Presbyterian (33 percent) and Lutheran (35 percent) churches. They are also least likely to say they have favorable impressions of Southern Baptist churches (39 percent).

Hispanics are most likely to have unfavorable impressions of Methodist (38 percent), Southern Baptist (44 percent), Lutheran (37 percent) and Assemblies of God (35 percent) churches, while African Americans are most likely to have favorable views of Baptist churches (82 percent).

For more information, view the complete report and visit LifewayResearch.com.

Use tragedy for God’s purpose, relatives of slain grandfather, grandsons tell SBTC church

HOUSTON—Three days after a grandfather and four of his grandsons were found murdered at the family ranch, family members stood before Houston Northwest Church and encouraged others not to lose hope or forget that God is gracious.

“I lost my best friend. He kept me sharp,” said Glen Collins of his brother, Mark.

Mark Collins, 66, was found dead at the property west of Centerville alongside his grandsons Waylon, 18, Carson, 16, Hudson, 11, and Bryson, 11. The group had gone there Thursday, June 2, to do some fishing at the conclusion of the school year. Investigators believe they were killed by a prison escapee who then stole their truck and was killed later that evening by police in a shootout.

Hundreds of mourners gathered the next day at a baseball field in Tomball, northwest of Houston, to commemorate the victims. Waylon Collins was a recent graduate of Tomball High School and an umpire for Little League baseball.

Speaking June 5 at Houston Northwest Church, Glen Collins urged attendees and viewers to find comfort in the Lord, as he has.

“My message is encouragement,” he said. “This is my home and you are my people, and this is where I find solace and comfort. God is still God, and we’re not.

“There was a purpose when His son suffered so much more than my family [has]. … That purpose is why I know I will see my loved ones again.”

Keith Mitcham, Mark Collins’ brother-in-law, also addressed the congregation.

“Evil did visit our doorsteps,” he said. In those times, he added, it is important to remember where to gather strength in tragic situations.

“Jesus said, ‘Abide in me.’ And by abiding in Him, we’re letting Christ abide in us. We’re connected to the vine. You realize that serving God is easier, then, because you’re no longer the one producing the fruit. You’re just connected to the vine.

“Yes, we live in an evil world, but God is sovereign. For Him to have allowed this to happen, there’s a greater good that He will accomplish through all of this.”

A cross, flowers and a box to hold letters of encouragement for the family sit at the start of the driveway to the property, Mitcham said. A sign will soon be added to the fence announcing Romans 5:20 – “But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more.”

Houston Northwest pastor Steve Bezner told Baptist Press that the comments mirrored the faithful disposition of the Collins family.

“They are just heartbroken,” he said. “But they are hopeful, because they believe in a God larger than any tragedy.”

Glen Collins’ words reflected that assessment.

“Let me tell you how we make it through this – because we have a hope grounded in the cross. That is our saving grace.

“… Let’s use this for God’s purpose, to bring others to His Son.”

This article originally appeared on Baptist Press.

CP giving above budget by $11.2 million through May

NASHVILLE (BP)—Giving through the National Cooperative Program Allocation Budget was once again above budget in May bringing the fiscal year total to nearly $139 million – more than $11.2 million over year-to-date projected giving.

The budget surplus is important to note as the SBC Executive Committee approved a recommendation Thursday (June 2) calling for the first $5 million of the overage to fund recommendations brought forth earlier in the week by the SBC Sexual Abuse Task Force. With just four months left in the budget year, the funding appears to be well in hand, but messengers must still approve the plans from the EC and the SATF at the 2022 SBC Annual Meeting later this month in Anaheim.

“The continued faithfulness of local churches giving through the Cooperative Program is a reminder that our God is faithful to provide,” SBC Executive Committee interim president Willie McLaurin said in a statement. “As a network of Great Commission churches, we have faced one of the most challenging years in the history of the SBC, yet, our giving remains strong. On behalf of all our national Southern Baptist entities, I say ‘thank you’ to every pastor and church for your generosity.”

The amount given through the Cooperative Program in May 2022 totaled $16,518,236.03, which was $462,862.15 (2.15 percent) less than the $16,981,098.18 received in May 2021 but $684,902.69 (4.33 percent) more than the monthly budgeted amount of $15,833,333.34.

As of May 31, gifts received by the EC for distribution through the CP Allocation Budget total $137,929,818.58. This is $9,059,336.70, or 7.03, percent more than last year’s budget contribution of $128,870,481.88. The amount given is ahead of the $126,666,666.72 year-to-date budgeted projection to support Southern Baptist ministries globally and across North America by $11,263,151.86, or 8.89 percent.

Designated gifts received in May amounted to $16,767,406.99. This total was $5,224,989.82, or 23.76 percent, less than gifts of $21,992,396.81 received last May. This year’s designated gifts through the first eight months of the fiscal year amount to $157,443,290.90, which is $7,797,291.08, or 5.21 percent, more than the $149,646,019.82 given through same period in the previous fiscal year.

The Cooperative Program is the financial fuel to fund the SBC mission and vision of reaching every person for Jesus Christ in every town, every city, every state and every nation. Begun in 1925, local churches contribute to the ministries of its state convention and the missions and ministries of the SBC through a unified giving plan to support both sets of ministries. Monies include receipts from individuals, churches and state conventions for distribution according to the 2021-2022 Cooperative Program Allocation Budget.

State and regional conventions retain a portion of church contributions to Southern Baptists’ Cooperative Program to support work in their respective areas and forward a percentage to SBC national and international causes. The percentage of distribution is at the discretion of each state or regional convention.

The convention-adopted budget for 2021-2022 is $190 million and includes an initial $200,000 special priority allocation for the SBC Vision 2025 initiative. Cooperative Program funds are then disbursed as follows: 50.41 percent to international missions through the International Mission Board, 22.79 percent to North American missions through the North American Mission Board, 22.16 percent to theological education through the six SBC seminaries and the Southern Baptist Historical Library and Archives, 2.99 percent to the SBC operating budget and 1.65 percent to the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission. If national CP gifts exceed the $186.875 million budget projection at the end of the fiscal year, 10 percent of the overage is to be used to support the SBC Vision 2025 initiative with the balance of the overage distributed according to the percentages approved for budgetary distribution. The SBC Executive Committee distributes all CP and designated gifts it receives on a weekly basis to the SBC ministry entities.

Month-to-month swings reflect a number of factors, including the timing of when the cooperating state Baptist conventions forward the national portion of Cooperative Program contributions to the Executive Committee, the day of the month churches forward their CP contributions to their state conventions, the number of Sundays in a given month and the percentage of CP contributions forwarded to the SBC by the state conventions after shared ministry expenses are deducted.

Designated contributions include the Lottie Moon Christmas Offering for International Missions, the Annie Armstrong Easter Offering for North American Missions, Southern Baptist Global Hunger Relief, Disaster Relief and other special gifts. This total includes only those gifts received and distributed by the Executive Committee and does not reflect designated gifts contributed directly to SBC entities.

CP allocation budget gifts received by the Executive Committee are reported monthly to the executives of the entities of the convention, to the state convention offices, to the state Baptist papers and are posted online at sbc.net/cp.

This article originally appeared on Baptist Press.

Iowa church holds prayer meeting, seeks to recover after shooting

AMES, Iowa (BP)—Members and friends of Cornerstone Baptist Church are recovering after a shooting in its parking lot June 2 left three dead, including the shooter by his own hand.

“… We are more than saddened by the events that transpired,” said a statement on the church’s website. “Our hearts break for all involved, and we are praying for everyone affected, especially the [families] of the victims.”

The first summer gathering of the church’s collegiate ministry, The Salt Company, was about to begin when local authorities received 911 calls at 6:51 p.m. Ames is home to Iowa State University.

“I was horrified and concerned for those involved when I heard the news,” said Tim Lubinus, executive director for the Baptist Convention of Iowa. “I’m praying for the leadership at Cornerstone and all those families affected.”

Lubinus spoke with Baptist Press from Istanbul, Turkey, where he is visiting friends. Word of the shooting reached him this morning when he woke up to a series of texts and voice messages from friends including SBC President Ed Litton. Lubinus served as missions director at Cornerstone for eight years before serving in his current position.

Cornerstone held a prayer service earlier today (June 3). The church’s lead pastor, Mark Vance, referred to the passage shared in the church’s statement, Psalm 34:18, and how the Lord draws near to the brokenhearted.

“Together, we’re here to grieve and to cry and to pray [and] to do that in a way that brings some form of help and comfort,” he said. “We’re asking God to comfort and help us.”

Troy Nesbitt, founding pastor and Salt Network director, and Sol Rexius, Salt Company director, also spoke between times of worship and prayer.

Jerry Montag, father of one of the victims, 22-year-old Eden Montag, addressed the crowd.

“She walked the walk. She died for her faith. I’m proud to have been her father,” he said. “She’s with the Lord. She did her best to walk the walk.”

Officials said today that Vivian Flores, 21, also died at the scene. Both were students at Iowa State and part of the collegiate ministry at Cornerstone. A third female who was with them escaped unharmed.

The day before the shooting at Cornerstone, a gunman killed four people in a Tulsa, Okla., hospital before taking his own life.

In this morning’s press conference, officials stated that the gunman had been charged May 31 with harassment third degree and impersonating a public official in connection with Montag. He posted bond and was scheduled for his first court appearance on June 10. A restraining order had also been issued against him.

A search of the shooter’s residence produced an AR-15 rifle. A 9mm handgun was used in the crime, with ammunition found in the gunman’s truck purchased an hour prior.

Cornerstone was planted in 1994 out of The Salt Company, which had become the name for the ISU Baptist Student Union in 1987. Grand Avenue Baptist Church in Ames, home of an active collegiate ministry, was Cornerstone’s sending church.

“It has a huge impact among college students,” said Lubinus, who was part of ISU’s BSU in the early 1980s and a member at Grand Avenue. “They’ve created a network of churches that also plant churches on college campuses throughout the Midwest and beyond. Around 20 churches have been started through The Salt Network.”

Known for its church-based collegiate ministry and emphasis on developing leaders, Thursday nights are the central gathering point for Salt. Officials stated today that more than 80 students were in the worship center during the shooting.

The North American Mission Board has held a long-standing partnership with Cornerstone to plant churches on college campuses throughout North America. Through its collegiate ministry, the church has sent thousands of students toward national and international mission service, said a statement from NAMB.

“My heart aches for our friends at Cornerstone today,” said NAMB President Kevin Ezell. “They are an incredible church and I’m praying for Mark Vance and Troy Nesbitt and everyone there. I know they are already ministering to the hurting in their community and will walk closely alongside those who have been impacted by this tragedy.”

The shooting was the latest in a series that has rocked the country. On May 14 10 people died in a racially motivated attack at a predominately Black market in Buffalo, N.Y. Twenty-one died May 24 in Uvalde, Texas, when a shooter entered Robb Elementary School and barricaded himself in a classroom. The husband of one of the victims died days later from a heart attack.

This article originally appeared in Baptist Press.

Two ways the local church may prevent attrition in global missions

Life on the mission field is commendable work and, for many, a calling worth giving their lives to. The life and work of a missionary, though, is challenging for untold reasons, a fact the apostle Paul knew all too well.

In describing his work, he wrote, “For we do not want you to be ignorant, brothers, of the affliction we experienced in Asia. For we were so utterly burdened beyond our strength that we despaired of life itself” (2 Cor. 1:8). From families whose missionary zeal wanes because of sickness to marital difficulties brought on by a seemingly unending workload to the discouragement experienced after years of no visible gospel fruit, not to mention exposure to deep depression, anxiety, and persecution, the challenges and potential afflictions for missionaries are many. And, too often, the result is a mission field vacated, left to lie fallow.

These are some of the real examples being highlighted by studies indicating an alarming pattern of attrition in global missions. For example, a recent three-year study conducted by Missio Nexus showed that upward of two-thirds of missionaries left the field for potentially preventable reasons, equating financially to around 40 million dollars lost every three years. From a stewardship perspective, this is problematic. But, equally important, the stories behind these numbers are tragic. Years of potential gospel ministry are being squandered, oftentimes for reasons which better pre-field assessment, equipping, and care may have prevented.

So, how can our churches better prepare their missionaries to avoid these pitfalls, so many of which could be preventable? Below I discuss two biblical principles for minimizing missionary attrition.

Two missionary principles

After Jesus commissioned his followers to “go and make disciples of all nations” (Matt. 28:18), a pattern began to develop as the message of the gospel advanced, a pattern that continues to this day. The Lord saves people from their sin and, upon being baptized into the Triune name of God, these new believers are joined to a local assembly—a church. It’s at the emergence of this pattern, after the establishment of the local church first encountered in the book of Acts, that we see in the church at Antioch the first Christian missionaries identified and sent:

“While they were worshiping the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, ‘Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them.’ Then after fasting and praying they laid their hands on them and sent them off” (Acts 13:2).

We may ask: was this a random, purely reactive response by the church to send out missionaries simply because Barnabas and Saul felt “called” to go? Furthermore, beyond being prompted by the Holy Spirit, how did they know Barnabas and Saul were qualified and ready for this difficult work? These questions lead to the first principle.

Take the time to have missionary candidates tested within the church

In Acts 11:26, we read that Barnabas, who had been sent by the church in Jerusalem to Antioch, sought out Saul, bringing him to Antioch where they labored together among the churches for at least a year before being sent out. If we fast-forward to Acts 16, where Scripture details Paul’s recruitment of Timothy, describing him as a man spoken highly of by “the brothers and sisters at Lystra and Iconium” (v. 2), we encounter a similar idea. In both stories, we are introduced to characters who had been vetted by the churches where they belonged and identified as men qualified for the work of missions.

In other words, these were not quick assessments by the churches in Antioch, Lystra, or Iconium. These men were not qualified based on some sort of subjective whim, but were men from among the church who had proven themselves as qualified because of their time-tested faithfulness to the gospel. Thus, it is here, where we learn our most foundational missionary principle: the local church is the proving ground by which potential missionaries are assessed and equipped over time for the work of ministry abroad. Therefore, churches should take ample time to know their missionary candidates.

Take the time and resources to care for those you send and partner with in missions

As Paul labored in his mission of proclaiming the gospel, establishing churches and elders, and encouraging the churches he helped plant, he himself was cared for by the church. In Philippians 4, Paul seems to view the financial partnership of the church as more than simply bankrolling the mission, but as a kindness to share (to have fellowship) in his trouble (Phil. 4:14). He highlights his need for the local church’s prayers, and he outlines the encouragement he draws from them (Phil. 1:19; Col. 4:3; 1 Thess. 5:25; 2 Thess. 3:1). And he writes of the importance of the church to remember his difficulties (Col. 4:18).

Furthermore, we see the encouragement he receives in Timothy’s report that the church in Thessalonica remembers and longs for them, causing them to be comforted even in the difficulties of field life (1 Thess. 3:6-9). And after being stoned in Lystra, where does Paul go for a time of reprieve and encouragement, but to the church in Antioch (Acts 14:24-28)?

In reading the book of Acts and Paul’s letters in the New Testament, the principle of resourcing, caring for, and partnering with missionaries on the field is undeniable. And it is a principle rooted in the supernatural love found only in the people united to Christ in a local church, a love which transcends surface-level pleasantries and affects the soul. The local church, therefore, is the primary means by which biblical soul care and tangible care are given to its missionaries.

How we can get better at sending

So, how are we doing at sending? In our heart for missions, are we so eager to flood the fields with workers that we neglect our responsibility to prepare those we’re sending? Are we unknowingly sacrificing the sustainability of brothers and sisters in the field at the altar of convenience and speed?

There are untold churches laboring well to assess, equip, and care for those in their congregations who desire to go to difficult places for the gospel. Yet there are many churches who desire this but who may not be well-equipped to provide adequate attention, time, and resources to faithfully steward this responsibility. Either way, our ultimate hope and assurance is founded in the fact that God will be glorified whether we do it well or not; it is his mission to complete.

Yet, this is exactly the reason and fuel for why we must continue to press in and wisely steward the roles he has given us as members and participants within his flock. Our love and desire for God’s glory among the nations must not drive us to neglect the means by which he accomplishes this, which is the local church. The clear pattern in Scripture is that the local church assesses, equips, and cares for his flock, even as it sends its members to ends of the Earth.

So, what are some practical ways the church can more fully embrace this responsibility of assessment, equipping, and care of those desiring to go and those sent?

Slow down the assessment process to ensure that missionary candidates are qualified to go. Prayerfully consider ways you can encourage and care for those that you send. Some ideas include pastoral trips, offering biblical soul care, sending teams to serve the staff in tangible ways, and equipping members of your church to care for those you send.Grow a zeal for missions as you teach your congregation about missions and their role in caring for missionaries as it comes up in Scripture, and by praying corporately for brothers and sisters around the world.

Though we do have an enemy, and much opposition and difficulty in this world (Acts 14:22), let us not grow weary in our pursuit of sending spiritually mature missionaries and caring biblically for them on and off the field. And let us do this so that these precious missionaries and the nations whom they serve might more clearly see the glory of the one true and living God.

The post Two ways the local church may prevent attrition in global missions appeared first on ERLC.

SATF recommends ‘Ministry Check’ database, Abuse Reform Implementation Task Force

NASHVILLE (BP)—A report issued Wednesday from the Sexual Abuse Task Force (SATF) includes “challenges” for Southern Baptist groups toward better abuse prevention policies as well as two recommendations, including the formation of a website to maintain a record of those credibly accused or convicted of sexual abuse.

Those challenges included the request for a $3 million allocation to fund the implementation of sexual abuse reforms over the next year. That allocation will come from Cooperative Program overages as well as a portion of the Vision 2025 budget and through an Executive Committee recommendation to messengers in Anaheim.

The SATF is scheduled to deliver its report at 1:45 during the Tuesday (June 14) afternoon session of the SBC annual meeting in Anaheim.

A recommendation requiring approval by messengers concerns the creation of a “Ministry Check” website for the purpose of “maintaining a record of pastors, denominational workers, ministry employees, and volunteers who have at any time been credibly accused of sexual abuse.”

Inquiries into the database would focus on individuals, not a church.

“Statistics show that sexual offenders have an 80 percent recidivism rate,” the report said. “One of the problems in our churches is the ability of abusers to move from one church to another to perpetuate their abuse. This often happens because churches don’t have the means to communicate with one another.”

Names in the database would consist of those with a conviction or civil judgment against them for sexual abuse as well as those that an independent firm determines have been credibly accused of abuse. The sexual abuse allocation is available to cover the cost of an independent firm if a church or other Baptist group is unable or unwilling to do so.

Another recommendation proposes the creation of an Abuse Reform Implementation Task Force (ARITF), which would operate on a three-year term and provide reports at the 2023, 2024 and 2025 annual meetings. ARITF members and leadership would be appointed by the SBC president and, though funded by the aforementioned allocation, “shall operate with full independence.”

The ARITF would study the feasibility of Guidepost’s recommendations, including establishing a survivor care fund and memorial, and report on those findings at next year’s annual meeting in New Orleans. The group would also study the possible creation of a permanent committee and assist SBC entities in implementing the recommendations within the context of their ministry assignment. State conventions and other “Baptist bodies” could request the ARITF provide the names of independent firms for training.

An independent firm selected by the Credentials Committee and ARITF would establish and maintain the database website, which will be funded by the sexual abuse allocation requested by the Executive Committee.

The SATF’s recommendations further addressed the development of the Credentials Committee, which was repurposed in 2019 to address claims of churches being out of fellowship with the SBC due to areas such as sexual abuse but has struggled to find its footing in that role.

A request came from the SATF for the Executive Committee to assist and “evaluate staffing needs” for the Credentials Committee in addition to hiring staff or an independent contractor “to receive reports of abuse for the purpose of determining the appropriate church, entity, or association to respond to those allegations.”

The ARITF would work alongside the Credentials Committee in revising the evaluation and submission process for churches appearing to be out of friendly cooperation with the SBC. It would further assist the EC and Credentials Committee to select an independent firm or firms in those investigations.

The series of challenges for entities and other Baptist bodies also recommended training in sexual abuse prevention and survivor care for entity boards and standing committees, denominational workers, volunteers and students.

In addition, the SATF requested that the Committee on Nominations complete background checks for trustees appointed to entity boards and standing committees. Churches and other groups are encouraged to participate in the SBC sexual abuse assessment.

Wednesday’s (June 1) report requested state conventions consider designating a trained staff person or independent contractor to address sexual abuse allegations. A series of abuse-related questions to the Annual Church Profile may also be added through consultation with Lifeway Christian Resources and the Executive Committee.

Other best practices for state conventions include maintaining a list of trauma-informed Christian counselors, establishing a self-certification program for churches in abuse prevention and survivor care as well as adjusting staff orientation to include abuse prevention training and background checks.

Baptist Press reached out to SATF Chairman Bruce Frank and Executive Committee Chairman Rolland Slade for comment, with both declining to do so at this time. The SATF’s full list of recommendations can be found here.

Religious faith, church attendance aligns with more pro-life views

NASHVILLE—Not all pro-life Americans are religious, but religious Americans are more likely to be pro-life.

Americans’ views on the morality of abortion remain mixed in the days leading up to a Supreme Court decision that could overturn Roe v. Wade, but a majority favor restrictions that go beyond those currently allowed, according to a new study from the Land Center for Cultural Engagement at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary conducted by Lifeway Research. In addition, those who self-identify with a religion, engage in religious practices like church attendance and hold evangelical beliefs are more likely to favor restrictions on abortion.

“This survey clearly demonstrates evangelical beliefs and practices, especially church attendance, translate into pro-life views,” said Adam W. Greenway, president of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary. “This underscores the truth that the ultimate solution to this moral problem, like all moral problems, is spiritual transformation of the Gospel of Jesus Christ among individuals that will eventually translate into societal changes.”

“Critical research is one part of the Land Center mission, and because of the long-standing commitment of Southern Baptists to the sanctity of human life, we focused on Americans’ abortion views as our first in-depth research project,” said Dan Darling, director of the Land Center. “This research provides information vital to equipping pastors and church leaders to understand this cultural moment and to shaping the moral consciences of God’s people. We expect to provide additional serious research on a variety of topics to help Christians engage our culture with Gospel truth.”

Conducted days prior to the leak of a draft opinion by Justice Samuel Alito that indicated the Supreme Court planned to overturn the landmark decision that essentially legalized abortion throughout the United States, the study records Americans’ views on abortion, the beginning of life and what people want to happen in a potential post-Roe environment.

While increased church attendance correlates with pro-life perspectives, those who attend church say they don’t often hear about abortion on Sunday mornings. Two in 3 Americans who say they attend religious worship services a few times a year or more (66 percent) say they hear a teacher or clergy person mention the topic of abortion no more than once or twice a year, including 36 percent who say they never hear it spoken about. Few churchgoers, regardless of their perspective on abortion, want the church to talk about the issue less often. Overall, 46 percent say the topic is addressed the right amount, 38 percent want to hear about it more and 16 percent want less.

Americans’ abortion views

Around 3 in 10 Americans hold generally pro-life views on abortion: 12 percent say abortion shouldn’t be legal in any situation, and 17 percent say it shouldn’t be legal in most situations. Another 21 percent say there are a variety of situations where it should be legal and illegal. More than 2 in 5 are generally pro-abortion rights, with 22 percent saying abortion should be legal in most situations and 24 percent saying it should be legal in any situation.

Pro-life views are more common than pro-abortion rights views among Protestants (41 percent vs. 31 percent). Catholics (32 percent vs. 43 percent) and people from other faiths (31 percent to 47 percent) lean pro-abortion rights. The non-religious are overwhelmingly pro-abortion rights (11 percent pro-life vs. 70 percent pro-abortion rights).

Those with evangelical beliefs are more pro-life than pro-abortion rights (64 percent vs. 15 percent), while those without evangelical beliefs are the opposite (22 percent vs. 53 percent).

American Christians who attend church weekly are more than twice as likely to be generally pro-life (53 percent vs. 19 percent). Those who attend two to four times a month (28 percent vs. 36 percent) and those who attend less frequently (30 percent vs. 46 percent) are more likely to be pro-abortion rights.

For half of Americans (51 percent), one of the strongest factors in the development of their views on abortion is their views on women’s rights and freedoms. For more than 2 in 5 (43 percent), their views on morality and right and wrong play a strong role. More than a third point to views on health and medical issues (37 percent) or views on children’s rights and quality of life (34 percent). Three in 10 say their religious faith is a leading factor in the development of their abortion views (29 percent). Fewer point to their views on social issues (25 percent), views on economic issues or poverty (23 percent), views and experiences as a parent (20 percent), personal experience with the issue (18 percent) or the views of political leaders and party they support (5 percent).

Specifically among the generally pro-life, personal religious faith (58 percent), views on morality (56 percent) and views on children’s rights and quality of life (46 percent) are dominant factors contributing to their perspectives on abortion. Around 1 in 6 pro-life Americans say their views on women’s rights (16 percent) is one of the strongest factors in how their views on abortion were developed.

For those who are pro-abortion rights, views on women’s rights and freedoms (74 percent) dominate the other factors, which include views on health and medical issues (46 percent), views on social issues (36 percent), views on morality (35 percent) and views on economic issues (32 percent). Close to 1 in 10 (9 percent) point to their religious faith.

Among those who have a more mixed perspective or who are unsure about the issue, half point to women’s rights (51 percent) and a third (32 percent) mention their religious faith.

“Americans’ own descriptions of how their views on abortion developed have strikingly different origins,” said Scott McConnell, executive director of Lifeway Research. “While the issue has been heavily politicized, almost all Americans claim they had these views without the influence of political leaders. One group says they’re heavily influenced by their views on women’s freedoms and the other by their views on religious faith and morality.”

While abortion generates much debate and discussion, other issues are personally important to more people. Americans are more likely to say inflation (85 percent), voting rights and security (76 percent), national debt (71 percent), foreign policy (67 percent), climate change (66 percent), immigration (66 percent) and race relations (65 percent) are important or extremely important to them than abortion (64 percent). Fewer Americans say the same about prison reform (49 percent).

Those who are either generally pro-life and pro-abortion rights are more likely than those who have a mixed opinion to see abortion as extremely important and view it as a key when determining their vote. Among the two opposing perspectives, pro-life individuals place more political importance on the issue. Pro-life Americans are more likely to say abortion is extremely important (52 percent) than those who are pro-abortion rights (40 percent). When choosing a candidate, 40 percent of pro-life Americans say the candidate’s view on this issue has an extremely strong impact on their willingness to vote for that person, compared to 34 percent of pro-abortion rights Americans and 14 percent of those who are in the middle or unsure.

Mixed opinions on life and specifics

Americans have varying opinions on when human life actually begins and have complicated views on specific cases of abortion. Most say life begins at least by the first heartbeat detected, however, most also believe abortion should be legal if the child would be born with severe disabilities.

More than a third of Americans (35 percent) say life begins at conception, while 28 percent say at the first detected heartbeat. Almost 1 in 8 say life begins when the fetus is viable outside the womb (13 percent) or upon birth (13 percent). Few (2 percent) say at another point, and 10 percent say they honestly don’t know.

Protestants are most likely to say life begins at conception (49 percent), as are Americans of other faiths (39 percent). Catholics are most likely to say at the first detected heartbeat (40 percent). Religiously unaffiliated Americans are the most likely to say at birth (28 percent) and viability (20 percent). Americans with evangelical beliefs (66 percent) are more than twice as likely as non-evangelicals (29 percent) to say life begins at conception.

Most Christians who attend church weekly (56 percent) say life begins at conception, while those who attend less frequently are more evenly split between conception and the first heartbeat.

“Since the Roe v. Wade decision, it has been legal to end what the majority of Americans consider a human life,” McConnell said. “People’s perspectives on the start of life varies greatly by religious faith. Those with no religious affiliation are less likely than any other demographic group to say life begins by the time of the first heartbeat. This contrasts sharply with the almost 9 in 10 with evangelical beliefs who say it does.”

When asked specifically what time period they believe abortion should be a legal option assuming there are no health issues for the woman or the fetus, half of Americans say no later than 12 weeks (about 3 months), including 26 percent who say it shouldn’t be legal at any point, 15 percent who say up to six weeks and 11 percent who say up to 12 weeks. Fewer set the time frame at later dates, such as 15 weeks (7 percent), 20 weeks (6 percent), 24 weeks (4 percent), 28 weeks (4 percent) or up to birth (10 percent). Almost 1 in 6 (17 percent) say they aren’t sure.

Even among those who are not generally pro-life, there is broad consensus for abortion restrictions. Almost 3 in 5 Americans (59 percent) who are unsure or somewhere between pro-life and pro-abortion rights, favor limiting legal abortion to no later than 12 weeks. Among the pro-abortion rights, 50 percent place the limit somewhere prior to 20 weeks (about four and a half months).

Protestants (40 percent) are the most likely to never allow abortion assuming there are no health issues related to the pregnancy, followed by Catholics (26 percent), those of other faiths (25 percent) and the religiously unaffiliated (10 percent). Few Protestants (4 percent) or Catholics (3 percent) say they would allow abortion up to birth compared to 9 percent of those of other faiths and 22 percent of those with no religious affiliation.

Weekly churchgoers (52 percent) are more likely than those who attend less frequently (31 percent) or not at all (23 percent) to say abortion should not be legal at any point assuming there are no health issues.

When asked about specific circumstances related to the pregnancy, most Americans say abortion should be legal when the mother’s life is in danger (78 percent), the pregnancy involves the rape of someone under 18 years of age (75 percent), the pregnancy involves rape of someone over 18 (73 percent), the pregnancy is the result of incest (72 percent), the child will not survive long after birth (64 percent) or the child would be born with severe mental or physical defects (58 percent).

Americans are less supportive of abortions when a mother younger than 18 decides they just don’t want the child (46 percent), the mother or parents believe they aren’t capable of giving the child a good life (38 percent), raising the child would be a financial hardship to the mother or parents (37 percent), when a mother 18 or older decides they just don’t want the child (37 percent) or the mother wants a different gender (15 percent).

In each circumstance, those with a religious faith and those with evangelical beliefs are more likely than their counterparts to oppose abortion being legal. Those who attend church weekly are more likely than those who attend less frequently to oppose legal abortions in all but one situation.

Regardless of their personal opinions on abortion laws, 7 in 10 Americans (69 percent) say it is at least somewhat important to reduce the number of abortions in the U.S. in ways other than through the courts and legal system. Even among pro-abortion rights Americans, 54 percent believe reducing abortions is at least somewhat important.

“There are a lot of gradations in what abortion scenarios people think should be legal, but America is far from a majority supporting a legal right for an adult woman to have an abortion who just doesn’t want to have the child,” said McConnell. “The truth is Americans want fewer abortions taking place.”

When asked about potentially effective ways to reduce abortions, Americans are most likely to point to sex education, birth control and adoption. More than 2 in 5 say more birth control for minors (46 percent) and more and better sex education (44 percent) would be effective ways to reduce the number of abortions performed. Slightly fewer say promoting birth control to men (40 percent) or birth control for lower income individuals (39 percent). Close to a third point to promoting adoption as an option (36 percent), making adoption easier (36 percent), local organizations assisting mothers and children (34 percent) or more pregnancy counseling (33 percent).

Other ways Americans say are effective means to reduce the number of abortions include encouraging abstinence (27 percent), childcare for lower income families (27 percent), government help for low-income parents (22 percent), stronger legal limits on abortion (18 percent) and making it harder to find abortion providers (12 percent).

Opinions on Roe v. Wade

As Americans await a Supreme Court decision that could overturn Roe v. Wade, most say they’d prefer to keep the decision in place.

Two in 5 Americans (40 percent) say they completely support the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision. Another 1 in 5 (19 percent) mostly support it. One in 5 Americans (19 percent) completely oppose it, and 11 percent mostly oppose it. More than 1 in 10 (12 percent) say they aren’t sure or have no opinion.

Americans with no religious preference (76 percent), those without evangelical beliefs (66 percent), and Christians who don’t attend church (62 percent) or attend less regularly (60 percent) are all more likely to support Roe vs. Wade than not.

For those who oppose the Supreme Court decision, a quarter (26 percent) say a main reason is because children have rights, and 22 percent mention abortion is immoral. Around 1 in 5 (21 percent) say they oppose Roe vs. Wade because they believe abortion should be legal only in specific situations. Americans who support the decision overwhelmingly explain their reasoning goes back to a woman’s right to choose (71 percent).

Most Americans prefer a federal law on abortion for all states as opposed to leaving the issue up to the states. Those in the middle or unsure are more divided. Among the pro-life, 54 percent prefer a national law and 33 percent would rather leave it to each state. For the pro-abortion rights, 66 percent prefer a federal law for all states and 22 percent want each state to determine their own laws. Less than half of other Americans (48 percent) want a federal law, while 32 percent prefer individual state laws.

“Despite the many differences in Americans’ beliefs on abortion, there appears to be an innate desire for an unchanging legal standard,” McConnell said. “As the Supreme Court deliberates yet another change to the legal standard, evangelicals are among those who most want Roe v. Wade overturned. They are guided by a more static standard: the belief that the Bible is the highest authority for what they believe.”

A potential post-Roe future

When asked what they want to happen to Roe v. Wade, 40 percent completely support the decision and want it to remain, and 12 percent say it’s now the law of the land and should not be overturned. One in 5 Americans (20 percent) want it overturned and abortion made illegal nationwide, while 12 percent want it overturned and the laws left up to the states. Another 17 percent say they’re unsure or don’t have an opinion.

If Roe v. Wade is overturned, Americans are split on what should happen in individual states. More than a third (36 percent) want more restrictions on abortion, while the same percentage (36 percent) want to keep things like current federal law. More than 1 in 4 (28 percent) prefer easier access to abortion than currently exists.

In a post-Roe nation, 8 in 10 Americans (81 percent) say if a state government restricts abortion, it has a responsibility to increase support and options for women who have unwanted pregnancies. Almost 2 in 3 pro-life individuals (62 percent) agree.

Similarly, 3 in 4 Americans (74 percent), including 63 percent of pro-life Americans, say churches and religious organizations in states where abortion access is restricted after Roe v. Wade is overturned also have a responsibility to do more for women with unwanted pregnancies.

“The majority of Americans did not ask for Roe v. Wade to be overturned, but if it is, there is no national majority for any legislative path whether more or less restrictions or something similar to what has been in place,” McConnell said. “However, if more restrictions are put in place a large majority agrees the church and the state have a moral responsibility to help women with unwanted pregnancies.”

For more information, view the complete report and visit LifewayResearch.com.

 

SBC Hispanic relations director ministers to Uvalde community in wake of school shooting

ULVADE, Texas (BP) – As the local community in Uvalde, Texas, continues to grieve last week’s tragic school shooting, Luis Lopez, the Southern Baptist Convention Executive Committee’s executive director for Hispanic relations and mobilization, has been ministering to the community by listening and reminding of God’s love.

Lopez, who arrived in Texas May 26, described emotions in the community as “broken, angry, grieving and heartbroken.”

“I have seen a lot of the pain this community is going through because of this tragedy,” he told Baptist Press.

“It is one thing to see the news on TV, but it is another thing when you actually talk with the people who are there and see their hurt and anguish. This is a community that is hurting very much at this moment, and they are beginning to see the depth of the impact of what has happened.

“I’ve simply tried to minister by listening to people and their stories, pray for them, and ask questions about how we can best help them.”

The shooting took place Tuesday morning at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde when an 18-year-old opened fire on a classroom of students after locking the door. Police eventually shot and killed the gunman, but not before he killed 19 elementary students and two of the school’s teachers.

Lopez said he witnessed many effects of the violence, including children afraid to go back to school and parents deciding whether to have an open or closed casket for their child.

Southern Baptist churches in the area have not been immune from the devastation.

A particularly anguished Southern Baptist church is Primera Iglesia Bautista (First Baptist Church) in Austin. Two of the young girls killed in the shooting were the great-granddaughters of the church’s pastor emeritus and frequently attended the church.

Lopez said the great-grandfather even spoke at a prayer vigil held at the church Thursday night, saying he does not want to have hate in his heart for the attacker.

“Many of the attenders at the prayer vigil are finding comfort and hope in their faith,” Lopez said. “It is what they are holding onto even if they don’t understand why all of this has happened.”

Lopez said he is thankful for the faithful work of Southern Baptists amid tragedy.

“I’m very grateful that [Southern Baptist] Disaster Relief and the two Southern Baptist [state] conventions have been present since the incident happened,” Lopez said. “I wanted to show appreciation for what they do and remind them how important what they do is.

“They are some of the most important people ministering here at this time in the community. There are even some bi-vocational pastors from the local community who have taken time off to come minister by the school every day this week. That shows the strength of the faith family and how important it is to connect with each other during these times.”

Lopez said the tragedy has reminded him of the brevity of life.

“It makes you think about how fragile life is and how important it is to make the best of every moment we have with family,” he said.

“I think the gift of presence is one of the best things that we can give to people when they’re going through pain. Just to let them know that you are there, and being right next to them and remind them of the love of God is one of those gifts we can give to people.”