Discovering a Missional Mental Model for a Mid-Level Judicatory more

Northern Baptist Theological Seminary Discovering a Missional Mental Model for a Mid-Level Judicatory Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Course DM 7609 Leading Congregational Change Dr. Osvaldo L. Mottesi, Professor By Ircel Harrison March 31, 2005 “I am not sure that congregationally oriented Baptists have any uniform theology of church order beyond the local church, certainly not beyond the idea of the association. . . . We have no single Baptist ‘model’ of church order beyond the local church; we have ‘models’.”1 Introduction: Description of the Chosen Reality. The Cooperative Baptist Fellowship (CBF) was organized in 1991 as a response to a conservative movement within the Southern Baptist Convention. The Tennessee Cooperative Baptist Fellowship (TCBF), an autonomous body related to the national CBF organization, was incorporated in the state of Tennessee in 1992. Although a separate corporate entity, TCBF has adopted the mission statement of CBF and coordinates its work with the national body through the state coordinator’s participation in the CBF movement leadership team composed of all state and regional coordinators as well as national program leaders. CBF has chosen to consider itself a fellowship rather than a denomination, but it has many of the characteristics of a denomination. The fellowship is made up of churches and individuals who choose to provide it with financial support and participate in its ministry projects. Most of the churches related to TCBF still have some relationship to the Southern Baptist Convention. The Tennessee Cooperative Baptist Fellowship may be described as a middlelevel judicatory. The mission statement of CBF and TCBF is “serving churches and individuals as they discover and fulfill their God-given mission.” One of the ways we attempt to do this is by assisting churches in their transformation to a missional perspective. For us to be effective in this task, we need a new mental model for a middle-level judicatory that is missional. 1 Walter B. Shurden, “A Solicited Letter to the Study Commission,” in Findings (Atlanta: Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, 1996). 2 Historical-contextual Critical Analysis of the Chosen Reality. The Cooperative Baptist Fellowship has adopted a networking or “web” approach that emphasizes resourcing churches rather than developing institutions. This model seems particularly appropriate in a post-modern context. Writing in 1993, Nancy Ammerman suggested that CBF had “the possibility of becoming a model for new forms of denominational structure” involving flexible services, information technology, participatory democracy, and networking.2 At the same time, in order to properly assist churches in the 21st century, the organization must continually evaluate its basic assumptions and strategies in light of the postmodern context. In doing so, we would be wise to consider the stand taken by a number of contemporary Baptist theologians in writing “Re-Envisioning Baptist Identity: A Manifesto for Baptist Communities in North America.” In this statement, the authors clearly state “ideologies and theologies of the right and the left, as different as they may appear, are really siblings under the skin by virtue of their accommodation to modernity and its Enlightenment assumptions. . . . . We embrace neither modern alternative.”3 This writer’s desire is that our organization actively pursue a “third way” that moves beyond the limitations of the modern project and takes seriously the postmodern transition in which we find ourselves. This requires developing a new mental model that takes seriously the context in which we minister. Peter Senge defines mental models in this way: “Mental models” are deeply ingrained assumptions, generalizations, or even pictures or images that influence how we understand the world and how we take 2 Nancy T. Ammerman, “SBC Moderates and the Making of a Postmodern Denomination,” The Christian Century 110 (September 22-29, 1993), 899. 3 Curtis Freeman, “Can Baptist Theology Be Revisioned?” Perspective in Religious Studies 24 (Fall 1997): 309-310. 3 action. Very often, we are not consciously aware of our mental models or the effects they have on our behavior.4 Our mental models or metaphors shape the way that we act. Paul Borden has observed, “Often the mental maps we have as individuals are shaped by the metaphors we assign to such designs. . . . If I can shape the metaphors of a culture, I can then change the culture.”5 Mental models are useful in helping us to function on a daily basis, but they can also become constraints. They are no longer valuable “when the assumptions or generalizations on which they are based are inadequate or no longer correct.”6 When the situation changes, we may still be tied to our old mental models. For example, when Copernicus proposed that the sun, not the earth, was the center of our solar system, he encountered significant resistance. He was not simply suggesting a new approach to astronomy, but he was also challenging the idea that the earth—and humankind—is at the center of all things created by God. In The Emerging Church, Dan Kimball cites Albert Einstein as saying, “It’s impossible to get out of a problem by using the same kind of thinking that it took to get into the problem.”7 Our mental models tend to determine our conception of reality. In like manner, each of us has certain mental models of the church and certain metaphors we use to describe it. Those images determine how we understand our ecclesiology and its structures. In Leading Congregational Change, the authors 4 Peter M. Senge, The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization (New York: Doubleday Currency, 1990), 8. 5 Paul D. Borden, Hit the Bullseye: How Denominations Can Aim the Congregation at the Mission Field (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2003), 20. 6 Jim Herrington, Mike Bonem and James Furr, Leading Congregational Change: A Practical Guide for the Transformational Journey (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2000), 114. 7 Dan Kimball, The Emerging Church: Vintage Christianity for New Generations (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2003, 112. 4 describe two mental models for the church or local congregation in the American culture. One is to see the church as a relatively stable organization that shares the values of the predominant culture and changes incrementally. In contrast to this model is that of the church as an outpost on a rapidly changing mission field where change is rapid and discontinuous.8 In this missional church concept, the “church cannot help but participate in God’s mission in the world. This is what it means to be the church. To do less would be contrary to its nature.”9 What is the appropriate mental model for TCBF in this missional context? In many ways, TCBF is more of a “society” or “parachurch” organization or even a consulting firm than a traditional denominational entity. We perform many of the functions of a middle-level judicatory without authority or enforcement powers. We seek to assist churches as they pursue the mission that God has given to them. Individual churches decide when and in what ways they will affiliate with us. We also understand that an individual church may relate to us but also be in relationship to another Baptist body such as the Tennessee Baptist Convention, the Southern Baptist Convention, the Alliance of Baptists, American Baptist Churches of the South, or one of the historically African-American Baptist conventions. Biblical-theological Reflection on the Chosen Reality. What are the biblical and historical models of how churches have been assisted by entities beyond the local congregation? When we examine the various ways that 8 9 Herrington, 115. Craig Van Gelder, “From Corporate Church to Missional Church: The Challenge Facing Congregations Today,” Review and Expositor 101 (2004): 445. 5 churches have been assisted in fulfilling their mission, we discover a diversity of models and approaches with varied goals. The Apostolic Paradigm. The earliest paradigm or model of the church’s encounter with a new, challenging culture was what Loren Mead calls “the apostolic paradigm.” This early church was centered in a local community of faith, a congregation “called out” (ekklesia) of the world. They were a faithful people encountering a hostile environment with a witness of Christ. The culture was not neutral toward this community but was often openly antagonistic to it.10 As the movement spread, the need for regional apostolic leaders emerged. Itinerant teachers and “troubleshooters” like Paul and Barnabas were appointed or emerged to connect the churches and further the mission of the church.11 Robert Banks considers the apostolic model of Paul and his team in detail in Reenvisioning Theological Education. Although the writer’s purpose is to explore missional alternatives to ministry formation, his observations about the way in which this team functioned are informative for us as we consider new ways to assist churches in a missional context. Paul and his group worked alongside and for local churches to encourage evangelism, church planting, congregational nurture, and networking (2 Timothy 4:1-5).12 In many ways, this was a parachurch enterprise. They sometimes operated as a large group and at other times in a small group or even as individuals, but they always represented the apostle Paul and his apostolic mission. Banks observes, While they may have been younger and less experienced in ministry, they were still his colleagues rather than apprentices. They represented him fully when he 10 11 Loren Mead, The Once and Future Church (Washington, DC: The Alban Institute, 1991), 10-11. Ibid., 12. 12 Robert Banks, Reenvisioning Theological Education: Exploring a Missional Alternative to Current Models (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1999), 116-117. 6 could not visit a particular church, and they shared in writing the letters he sent to various congregations.13 A key comment by Banks is that the purpose of this group was not just spiritual or skill development, but “active service or mission in furthering the kingdom, as initially defined by a key figure, but progressively clarified by the whole group.”14 Spiritual formation and practical leadership development did take place, but these were byproducts of the ministry of helping churches. In discussing this type of apostolic leadership, Eddie Gibbs writes Apostolic leaders must have a profound understanding of the nature of their mission and be concerned to pursue that mission using all their God-given faculties. Yet at the same time they must remain open to the leading of the Holy Spirit, responding to course corrections and to unexpected, seemingly insurmountable obstacles—which are not always sent by Satan to frustrate progress but may be part of God’s overall scheme, the complexity of which we humans cannot hope to fully understand, much less resolve.15 The apostolic leadership exhibited by the Pauline team was Spirit-led, service-oriented, and committed to the building up of the church through its various local expressions. The Monastic Paradigm. Although the earliest manifestation of monasticism was one individual withdrawing from society to become closer to God, monastic communities soon developed around these solitary teachers. Throughout the fourth and fifth centuries the monastic movement gained such influence that it became a religious structure with great influence parallel to that of the church. In its radical form, monasticism called both individual believers and the church to a transformed lifestyle and a closer commitment to God.16 The monastic tradition at its best provided a new 13 14 Ibid., 116. Ibid., 123. 15 Eddie Gibbs, ChurchNext: Quantum Changes in How We Do Ministry (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2000), 111. 16 John McGuckin, “The Early Church Fathers,” in The Story of Christian Spirituality, ed. Gordon Mursell (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2001), 57-60. 7 vitality to the church through its emphasis on spiritual formation and a total commitment of one’s life to God. Historic Baptist Approaches. Since their origin in the seventeenth century, Baptists in England and America have developed a number of structures to encourage churches and enable them to work cooperatively. Bill Leonard observed, While congregationalism is at the center of their ecclesial order, diverse Baptist groups demonstrate varying degrees of connectionalism in their denominational alliances. National, regional, and local relationships are evident throughout the worldwide Baptist community, yet no genuine uniformity prevails.17 Associations. Although Baptists began with a “radical congregationalism,” the churches soon “reached out to other like-minded churches” in fellowship, encouragement, and other associational expressions.”18 The first association may have come into existence in 1644 when seven Particular Baptist churches in London approved a common confession of faith. Other groups soon developed.19 These gatherings beyond the local congregation provided “fellowship, mutual encouragement, doctrinal stability, and often disciplinary authority.”20 E. Jeffrey Mask notes, however, that in the modern context, associations may coordinate mission or ministry activities that involve the churches or channel funds to and from the denomination, but “the association is not generally a vital factor in the life of the congregation.”21 In both the Southern Baptist Convention and the American Baptist Churches, state and national organizations have become the dominant structures. Associations do, however, continue to fulfill fellowship and networking roles especially for clergy. 17 18 Bill J. Leonard, Baptist Ways: A History (Valley Forge, PA: Judson Press, 2003), 9. Ibid., 6. 19 Ibid., 52. 20 Ibid., 53. 21 E. Jeffrey Mask, At Liberty Under God: Toward a Baptist Ecclesiology (Lanham, MD: University Press of America, Inc., 1997), 172. 8 Societies. The British Missionary Society was formed in 1792 for the purpose of “propagating the gospel among the heathen.” 22 This society provided churches with the opportunity to work together to accomplish their mission. Individuals as well as local churches supported the society. This model was brought to the United States in 1810 when American Congregationalists formed the first national missionary society.23 Societies allowed local churches and individuals to choose the activities they wished to support—missions, literature, education, evangelism. Each society was responsible for raising its own funds. Leonard commented, “Societies were a compromise measure that permitted Baptists to form loosely knit agencies for pursuing specific ministries while avoiding elaborate bureaucracies.”24 In 1814, the “General Missionary Convention of the Baptist Denomination in the United States for Foreign Missions” was formed. It became known as the Triennial Convention because it met every three years. Although its primary purpose was support for foreign missions, its focus was expanded in 1817 to include home missions and education. 25 The Triennial Convention was something of a compromise between two different approaches to Baptist cooperation. Robert Baker observed, “The associational method of organization stressed denominationalism, while the society type magnified church independency and benevolence.”26 In 1826 the Triennial Convention reverted to an emphasis on foreign missions and other concerns birthed separate societies. Conventions. South Carolina Baptists organized the first state Baptist 22 23 Leonard, Baptist Ways, 105. Ibid., 164. 24 Ibid., 166. 25 W. M. Patterson, “Triennial Convention,” in Dictionary of Baptists in America, ed. Bill J. Leonard (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1994), 269. 26 Robert A. Baker, The Southern Baptist Convention and Its People (Nashville: Broadman, 1972), 108. 9 convention in the United States in 1821. In the next several years, state conventions were formed in Virginia (1823), Alabama (1823), New York (1826), Georgia (1827), and North Carolina (1830). These state conventions “fostered unity, identified Baptist principles, stressed the centrality of Scripture as the rule of faith, promoted cooperation among churches, and encouraged missionary endeavors.”27 The Southern Baptist Convention was organized in 1845 when the Triennial Convention and the Home Mission Society denied Southern slave owners appointment as missionaries.28 The stated purpose of the new convention was to organize “a plan for eliciting, combining and directing the energies of the whole denomination in one sacred effort, for the propagation of the Gospel.”29 The Southern Baptist Convention consciously chose a more connectional system that linked boards and agencies through a centralized system. Although Richard Fuller’s initial call was for “a society for the propagation of the gospel” the term “society” was quickly changed to “convention.”30 Funding continued on the society approach, however, until the adoption of the Cooperative Program in 1925.31 In the original plan, membership and representation in the SBC could come from individuals, churches, associations, and state conventions.32 Eventually this was changed to representation by “messengers” elected by the churches to attend the annual meeting. Over the years, the convention became a vertically integrated corporation with a strong 27 28 Leonard, Baptist Ways, 171. Jesse C. Fletcher, The Southern Baptist Convention: A Sesquicentennial History (Nashville: Broadman and Holman, 1994), 39-40. 29 Robert A. Baker, A Baptist Source Book with Particular Reference to Southern Baptists (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1996), 116. 30 Fletcher, 47-48. 31 Bill J. Leonard, “Baptists in the South: A New Connectionalism.” Review and Expositor 95 (Winter 1998): 77. 32 Leonard, Baptist Ways, 189. 10 programmatic emphasis. As one writer noted, “As the denomination grew larger and more diverse, it developed an increasingly uniform organizational structure.”33 Cooperative Baptist Fellowship. CBF identifies itself as “a fellowship of Baptist Christians and churches who share a passion for the Great Commission of Jesus Christ and a commitment to Baptist principles and practice.”34 Baptist principles are defined as “soul freedom, Bible freedom, church freedom, and religious freedom.”35 Bill Leonard observed that the annual meeting of the CBF represents a connectionalism reminiscent of the Triennial Convention: “While the business meetings focus on the ‘mission-sending society’ that is the CBF, auxiliary gatherings of multiple societies and subgroups abound.”36 Parachurch and Paradenominational Organizations. Another model is provided by the parachurch agencies and paradenominational organizations that have developed to work with the churches. These include what Karl Barth referred to as “special working fellowships of the church.” Such organizations carry out the Christian mission but in a distinctive style or approach.37 Robert Wuthnow pointed out that these groups do not “produce new or distinct denominations” but stand “alongside churches and denominations, as ways of advancing and renewing Western religion.”38 Wuthnow described such groups in this way: Some of their memberships overlap with the memberships of denominations, some have memberships that cut across denominations, and some operate more 33 Arthur Emery Farnsley, II. Southern Baptist Politics: Authority and Power in the Restructuring of an American Denomination (Pennsylvania State University Press: University Park, PA: 1994), 51. 34 “Who We Are: What Fellowship People Do.” (Atlanta, GA: Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, n.d.), 2. 35 Ibid., 3. 36 Leonard, “Baptists in the South,” 81-82. 37 Karl Barth cited in Darrell L. Guder, Continuing Conversion of the Church, 183-184. 38 Robert Wuthnow, The Restructuring of American Religion (Princeton, NJ: The Princeton Univesity Press, 101. 11 as clearing houses or depend on the work of a few professional staff persons rather than cultivating membership at all.39 Such organizations can include missionary societies within a denomination (such as the Woman’s Missionary Union of the Southern Baptist Convention), special purpose groups focused on a particular ministry that work with churches of various denominations or those with no denominational tie (Habitat for Humanity, Fellowship of Christian Athletes, InterVarsity Christian Fellowship), an association of churches across denominational or non-denominational lines (Willow Creek Association), or a loose association of individuals (Emergent Village, the Ooze). Although such groups usually have a statement of beliefs, their primary commitment is to “a rather focused objective” and they “run the danger of appealing to quite homogeneous groups.”40 Like the Baptist societies, some of these organizations include in their membership both churches and individuals. Theological Principles. What theological principles of these various models provide guidance for us as we work on a mental model? The key principle is that the church is an autonomous body responsible to God for accomplishing its mission. Most of the structures considered above were initially formed for one particular purpose: to assist churches to carry out their mission. They were designed to assist churches to do the work to which God had called them. This is still true today. From his perspective as a judicatory leader, Paul Borden commented, “We do not transform congregations; only congregations transform themselves.”41 Churches are ultimately responsible for carrying out the mission to which God has called them. All structures external to the 39 40 Ibid., 108. Ibid., 130. 41 Borden, 104. 12 church will ultimately be judged on how they helped the churches accomplish their mission. What then is the mission of the local church? In the missional context, “the church’s self-understanding is that it is created by the Spirit as a called and sent community to participate fully in God’s mission in the world.”42 The missional church affirms that the God of the Bible is a missionary God and He has called us to join Him on mission. God created the church primarily as a missionary entity. In order to carry out its purpose, the church must be open to new ways to impact its culture.43 A second principle would be the identity of the local expression of the church with the larger community of faith. The believers present in each church also compose the larger Body of Christ, the Universal church. Darrel Guder explained it in this way: Evangelical unity reflects the idea that any particular community is independent of all other communities. Dependence, connectedness, mutual love, shared responsibility, as well as submission to one another are marks of the structures of connectedness that practice unity as apostolic witness.44 This connectedness attests to the “one Lord, one faith, one baptism” of the church. Although the types of structures that link churches together may vary, they must keep in mind this principle of Christian connectedness. Ministerial Conclusions. In the new missional paradigm, churches no longer look to the denomination for standardized programs developed by national entities. Instead, each church is 42 Craig Van Gelder, “From Corporate Church to Missional Church: The Challenge Facing Congregations Today.” Review and Expositor 101 (2004): 42 43 This concept of the missional church or missiological ecclesiology is discussed at length in Craig Van Gelder, The Essence of the Church: A Community Created by the Spirit (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2000). See also Darrell L. Guder (ed.), Missional Church: A Vision for the Sending of the Church in North America (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1998). 44 Guder, Missional Church, 264. 13 continually adjusting its strategy to reach its mission field—its community—and chooses its resources from a variety of organizations—denominational, parachurch, or even secular sources.45 How are denominational structures responding to this change? Loren Mead suggests three kinds of responses from denominational systems. First, there are efforts to develop a new program or restructure in an effort to assure the constituency that the denomination is ready to serve their needs. Second, another approach is “holding steady and hoping for the best.” A third approach, and certainly the most appropriate, is embracing a new paradigm of mission.46 He further observed, The denominational families with which most of us have had a love-hate relationship for years may have already become antiquarian relics. God may have a more challenging future in store of us, calling us out of these structures altogether.47 Mead also stated, “The local congregation is critical. The congregation is where people touch the church and are touched by it. It is there that literally millions of people are struggling to understand their own personal sense of mission and to get the strength to pursue it.”48 Although it may be a bit presumptive, the writer suggests that the appropriate mental model for the Tennessee Cooperative Baptist Fellowship should be an apostolic team model based on the role played by Paul, Barnabas, and their colleagues in relating to first century churches. This mirrors the apostolic nature of the church sent by God on a mission to its culture. If the church of 21st century finds itself in a situation similar to that of the church in the first century, facing a hostile culture that offers a multitude of 45 Herrington, 116. Mead, 5-6. 47 Ibid, 6. 48 Ibid., 7. 46 14 spiritual options, then the type of missional model adopted by the early apostles to encourage and develop the first century church(es) should have relevance to our current situation as well. This proposed mental model embraces a missional perspective, recognizing that each church is unique and must be treated as such. This writer further suggests that this apostolic approach should be expressed in a team context, so that the gifts of all members of the leadership team may be brought to bear on the apostolic task of facilitating the ministry of Christ’s church in the world. If we adopt an apostolic team model as a framework for working alongside the churches, what leadership skills must our team members develop to facilitate this approach? These skills should reflect the actions of that early apostolic team. This writer suggests six core skills: first, developing spiritual and relational vitality, second, pathfinding; third, encouraging alignment; four, creating a culture of empowerment; fifth, coaching; and sixth, networking. Of first importance is the spiritual and relational vitality of the judicatory team. The early apostolic team devoted themselves to prayer, searched the scriptures, and shared their experiences with each other. They had a strong spiritual and relational core. When the team at the Union Baptist Association in Houston, Texas, began considering a transformational change process for churches, they placed spiritual and relational vitality at the center. They also discovered that they must have this same core commitment if they were going to lead churches in a change process.49 The driving force in congregational change is spiritual and relational vitality. Spiritual and relational vitality are two dimensions of a single reality taught by Christ in this way: 49 Herrington, 4-6. 15 One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question: 36“Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?” 37 Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’£ 38This is the first and greatest commandment. 39And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.” (Matthew 22:35-40) The fourfold elements of spiritual and relational vitality are encountering God’s holiness, experiencing God’s grace, embracing unity, and engaging community.50 The bottom line is that a church or a Christian organization must have spiritual and relational vitality at its core or it is incapable of either survival or transformation. The early apostolic team had a clear vision of their mission. They were principled individuals who knew where they were going, aggressively pursued the mission, and invited others to join them on the way. Stephen R. Covey has suggested three basic skills or functions of a principle-centered leader. They are pathfinding, aligning, and empowering.51 They are included here as necessary skills for a judicatory team that embraces an apostolic model. Pathfinding is based on a compelling vision and mission. The pathfinding leader has a grasp of the big picture, an understanding of the desirable future for the organization, and this leader “gets the culture imbued with and excited about a tremendous, transcendent purpose.”52 The judicatory team must have a clear vision of what God is calling them to do and be able to articulate that vision to the churches they seek to assist in missional transformation. They must also be able to help churches discover and articulate their respective visions. 50 35 Ibid., 18. Stephen R. Covey, “Three Roles of the Leader in the New Paradigm," in Frances Hesselbein, Marshall Goldsmith, and Richard Beckhart (eds.). The Leader of the Future: New Visions, Strategies, and Practices for the Next Era (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1996), 152-153. 52 Ibid., 152. 51 16 The second skill of a principle-centered leader is aligning. This skill assures that everything in the organization—structure, systems, and processes—are aimed at accomplishing the mission and vision. Covey observes, When people are filled with true understanding of the needs, when they share a powerful commitment to accomplishing the vision, when they are invited to create and continually improve the structures and systems that will meet the needs, then you have alignment.53 Alignment assures that everyone in the team is going in the same direction. This does not mean that they all do everything in the same way, since each member is uniquely gifted by God and makes his or her own contribution, but the goal is clear and shared. It does mean that all of the programs and processes of the judicatory serve the same mission and vision. In like manner, the team must be able to help each church achieve alignment of its programs, activities, and processes with the church mission and vision. Covey’s third skill is empowering. When individual purpose and mission overlap with the mission of the organization, a synergy is created that unleashes the “latent talent, ingenuity, and creativity”54 of the individuals in the organization. Empowerment, however, is not something that is bestowed. Individual empowerment happens when an environment or culture of empowerment is fostered. As Robert E. Quinn says, “We do not, however, empower people. Empowerment cannot be delegated. We can only develop an appropriate empowering environment where people will have to take the initiative to empower themselves.”55 Team members must live in a culture of empowerment and model that for the churches to which they relate. 53 54 Ibid. 152-153. Ibid, 153. 55 Robert E. Quinn, Deep Change: Discovering the Leader Within (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1996), 228. 17 Another skill needed by mid-level judicatory leadership is coaching. Much of the ministry of Paul and his associates consisted in standing alongside the leaders of the churches and guiding them through crisis, theological controversy, and ministry development. Logan and Carlton have explained coaching in this way: Coaching is a way of improving the map as the journey continues. It ensures that people have someone to travel alongside them as they discover their destination—someone to help them through their options and chart their course.56 They suggested that the steps of the coaching process include: relate--establish coaching relationship and agenda; reflect—discover and explore key issues; refocus—determine priorities and action steps; resource—provide support and encouragement; review— evaluate, celebrate, and revise plans.57 Team members will have their greatest impact on churches when they have the skills to stand alongside congregational leaders as coaches. Finally, judicatory leadership is in a unique position to carry out the role of networking—sharing new learnings from church to church. Peter Senge explains the importance of internal networkers or community builders in building learning organizations. He described such people as [T]he “seed carriers” of the new culture, who can move freely about the organization to find those who are predisposed to bring about change, help out in organizational experiments, and aid in the diffusion of new learnings.58 This is certainly a role that Paul and his companions played in their itinerant ministry, regularly communicating the both the successes and needs of the churches with each 56 Robert E. Logan and Sherilyn Carlton, Coaching 101: Discover the Power of Coaching (St. Charles, IL: ChurchSmart Resources, 2003), 17. 57 Ibid., 29. 58 Peter M. Senge, “Leading Learning Organizations: The Bold, the Powerful, and the Invisible,” in Hesselbein, Goldsmith, and Beckhart (eds.). The Leader of the Future, 46. 18 other. As judicatory team members practice this skill, they are promoting a climate of cooperation rather than competition among the churches. Conclusion This paper explores new territory in considering the role of a middle judicatory like TCBF in a postmodern age, an age of discontinuous change. Such exploration is necessary in order to provide the services and support needed by missional churches. This is only one part of a larger vision to serve the churches but certainly one with the potential for great impact. This writer hopes that within the next decade, TCBF will be seen as the preferred source of mission, leadership, and congregational services for missional Baptist churches in Tennessee. For this to happen, a fresh wind of the Spirit must guide and empower our efforts. 19 Bibliography. Ammerman, Nancy Tatom. “SBC Moderates and the Making of a Postmodern Denomination,” The Christian Century 110 (September 22-29, 1993): 896-899. Banks, Robert. Reenvisioning Theological Education: Exploring a Missional Alternative to Current Models. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1999. Baker, Robert A. A Baptist Source Book: With Particular Reference to Southern Baptists. Nashville: Broadman Press, 1966. ___________. The Southern Baptist Convention and Its People. Nashville: Broadman, 1972. Borden, Paul D. Hit the Bullseye: How Denominations Can Aim the Congregation at the Mission Field. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2003. Farnsley, Arthur Emery, II. Southern Baptist Politics: Authority and Power in the Restructuring of an American Denomination. Pennsylvania State University Press: University Park, PA: 1994. Fletcher, Jesse C. The Southern Baptist Convention. Nashville: Broadman and Holman, 1994. Freeman, Curtis W. “Can Baptist Theology be Revisioned?’ Perspectives in Religious Studies 24 (Fall 1997): 273-302. Gibbs, Eddie. ChurchNext: Quantum Changes in How We Do Ministry. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000. Guder, Darrel L., ed. Missional Church: A Vision for the Sending of the Church in North America. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1998. ___________. The Continuing Conversion of the Church. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2000. Herrington, Jim, Mike Bonem and James Furr, Leading Congregational Change: A Practical Guide for the Transformational Journey. San Fancisco: Jossey-Bass, 2000. Hesselbein, Frances, Marshall Goldsmith, and Richard Beckhart (eds.). The Leader of the Future: New Visions, Strategies, and Practices for the Next Era. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1996. 20 Kimball, Dan. The Emerging Church: Vintage Christianity for New Generations. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2003. Leonard, Bill J. “Baptists in the South: A New Connectionalism,” Review and Expositor 95 (Winter 1998): 75-85. ____________. Baptist Ways: A History. Valley Forge, PA: Judson Press, 2003. ____________, ed. Dictionary of Baptists in America. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1994. Logan, Robert E. and Sherilyn Carlton. Coaching 101: Discover the Power of Coaching. St. Charles, IL: ChurchSmart Resources, 2003. Mask, E. Jeffrey. At Liberty Under God: Toward a Baptist Ecclesiology. Lanham, MD: University Press of America, Inc., 1997. McGuckin, John. “The Early Church Fathers.” The Story of Christian Spirituality, ed. Gordon Mursell. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2001. Mead, Loren. The Once and Future Church. Washington, DC: The Alban Institute, 1991. Quinn, Robert E. Deep Change: Discovering the Leader Within. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1996. Senge, Peter M. The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. New York: Doubleday Currency, 1990. Shurden, Walter B. “A Solicited Letter to the Study Commission,” in Findings. Atlanta: Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, 1996. Van Gelder, Craig. The Essence of the Church: A Community Created by the Spirit. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2000. _______________, “From Corporate Church to Missional Church: The Challenge Facing Congregations Today.” Review and Expositor 101 (2004): 425-450. “Who We Are: What Fellowship People Do.” (Atlanta, GA: Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, n.d.), 2. Wuthnow, Robert. The Restructuring of American Religion. Princeton, NJ: The Princeton University Press, 1988. 21