*This post was originally published on 1 April 2013.

No Man Can Serve Two Masters: Trustee Oversight, Financial Influence & a Seminary’s Resolve.

No man can serve two masters.

This is true, and never truer than in theological education. Individuals and groups compete for institutional influence, adding their voice and, if permitted, interjecting their hand, into a seminary’s affairs. The U.S. Department of Education, accreditation agencies, donors, alumni, and all aspects of an institution’s constituency exert some measure of influence. Most of this is unavoidable and much of this is good. Yet for a seminary to exist for the Church, it must filter through this cacophony of voices and train its ear on the churches it serves.

There is no better way to ensure a seminary serves the church than for the churches served to exercise absolute oversight of the seminary. Indeed, for a seminary to exist for the Church it must self-evidently demonstrate this commitment at every institutional pressure point of accountability. To paraphrase Ronald Reagan, “trust, but verify” is an appropriate posture for churches to hold toward the seminaries they own.

Trustee Oversight

For Southern Baptist seminaries, local church oversight rests primarily in the trustee system. Elected by the Southern Baptist Convention, the seminary’s trustees act on behalf of the denomination’s churches to bear the governing and fiduciary responsibility for the institution.

At times, the Southern Baptist Convention trustee system reminds one of the Electoral College, with the same observers alternately defending or lamenting its peculiarities and function depending on their assessment of the board’s most recent decision rendered. Granted, it may even be true, to paraphrase Churchill, that the trustee system might be the worst form of institutional governance, save all other forms.

What is beyond dispute, however, is that without the trustee system the Southern Baptist Convention would not have been able to recover her entities during the Conservative Resurgence. The appointive power of the convention president, ultimately shaping the entities’ trustees, was the linchpin of the Conservative Resurgence.

Now with the trustee system, and especially in light of bylaw revisions, sole member designations and the ever-present lesson of our own denomination’s history, the trustee system is the best mechanism to perpetuate the denomination’s legal ownership and operational oversight of her seminaries. For Southern Baptists, the trustee system rightly honored and executed remains unsurpassed as the mechanism to accomplish church governance over the seminaries.

Financial Influence

Southern Baptists have proven themselves relentlessly generous in funding their seminaries. So much so, that currently the Cooperative Program supplies between 25 and 45 percent of each of the six seminaries’ budgets. In addition to being generous, this sacrificial support is also healthy. The surest way to maintain operational control over an institution is to continue to be its strongest financial supporter.

As Cooperative Program gifts become less of an institution’s operating budget, the temptation exists for a seminary to look elsewhere for funding and to succumb to external influence. As flowers grow towards light, institutions almost inexorably lean toward their sources of funding.

If one needs evidence, look to the many Baptist state colleges that have distanced themselves or altogether broken from their state conventions. For Southern Baptists, the pernicious taking of many of our state colleges and universities is one of the great tragedies in our denomination’s history. Those who engineer such moves bear judgment, and those who permit such moves bear little less. Though diminishing denominational support is a lamentable trend, it is not a permission slip to drift from denominational governance.

Whether the Cooperative Program supplies 100 percent of an SBC seminary’s budget or one percent, from an ownership standpoint, the amount is irrelevant. Southern Baptists have built, funded, and own their seminaries. Any cleavage between the seminaries and the churches that own them is a malicious act against which the denomination must guard.

As it relates to ownership and governance, the issue is not just current funding, but past funding and present ownership. This generation bears a moral stewardship to our Southern Baptist forebears who built six great seminaries. We honor them when we keep the six Southern Baptist seminaries faithful to the denomination.

A Seminary Responds

First, in order to be for the Church, Midwestern Seminary must be unambiguously committed to churches she serves. To this end, Midwestern Seminary is committed, even if it were to prove in some way to her own detriment, to serving under the accountability and scrupulous supervision of the churches of the Southern Baptist Convention. In addition to honoring the letter of her commitment, Midwestern Seminary is also determined to honor the spirit by seeking to meet the denomination’s needs, being sensitive to its concerns, and sharing its aspirations.

Second, the history of higher education is a history of institutions chasing and ultimately following the money. In the decades to come, revenue sources will either facilitate apostasy or ensure fidelity. We have it within our power to accomplish the latter. Midwestern Seminary, in order to ensure perennial faithfulness to the Southern Baptist Convention, will so contractually bind every endowment gift confessionally and denominationally that each fund will serve to provide perpetual accountability to the seminary’s confession of faith and the Southern Baptist Convention as a whole. To do so tosses to the wind conventional wisdom in higher education, which encourages institutions to word development memorandums of agreement for maximum institutional flexibility. However, institutional flexibility is not the goal. Institutional faithfulness is the goal.

Of course, the most consequential form of accountability a seminary maintains is its confessional accountability. Such confessional accountability will ensure that Midwestern Seminary’s identity and mission will remain for the Church. Confessional integrity demands hiring professors who share, without hesitation or mental reservation, the institution’s confessional commitments. This confessional accountability will be considered in the next essay: “Guard the Truth.”

Part I // Part II // Part III // Part IV // Part V // Part VI // Part VII // Part VIII

*This post was originally published on 22 March 2013.

In Arthur Schlesinger’s award-winning biography of Franklin Roosevelt, he famously labeled the economic and political malaise of the 1920s and ’30s as “the crisis of the old order.” Schlesinger argued that political, cultural and economic norms were changing so rapidly that, coupled with government inaction, they coalesced to form a crisis of the entire American status quo—a crisis that would upend society and necessitate re-conceptualization of American economic and social policy. Current observers of higher education, including theological seminaries, likewise acknowledge a crisis exists in many of the seminaries and divinity schools in North America today. This crisis is so profound it is forcing institutions to re-conceptualize their model of education and their means of delivering it.

Admittedly, crisis is a tired word. We hear often of political, economic, geopolitical, and cultural crises. Yet, when subjected to careful review, theological education in North America must be deemed as in a state of crisis. This current distress evidences itself in at least three areas.

First, most theological institutions in America find themselves, at least to some degree, mired in a crisis of resources. The escalating costs of higher education, nagging questions about the value of advanced degrees, encroaching federal regulations, and persistent economic sluggishness present even the best-funded institutions with daunting operational challenges.

This crisis of resources has forced historic institutions to merge or close, and has left the remaining ones searching for a sustainable business model. These fiscal realities, and more, have been like a spiraling whirlpool, drawing almost every theological institution into its vortex. The persistent generosity of Southern Baptists through the Cooperative Program has proven to mitigate this fiscal challenge; however, even Southern Baptist seminaries are not immune to this struggle.

Sadly, the most urgent and consequential crisis in theological education is not one of funding. It is more fundamental and philosophical; the crisis is one of identity. What is a seminary to be? Stemming from and coupled with this crisis of identity is a crisis of mission. What is a seminary to do?

The answers to these questions of identity and mission are predetermined because a seminary is to be a pre-committed entity that looks to Scripture for its purpose and mission. When a seminary looks to Scripture for its identity, it will be drawn to one inescapable conclusion: a seminary must exist For the Church. When Christ promised in Matthew 16 to build his church, it was more than a reference to a secondary kingdom initiative. Rather, it was a prophetic word, a declaration, as to his redemptive and kingdom intent.

After all, Christ died for his church. He is the head of his church. He is the church’s bridegroom. He gifts his followers for service in the church. He calls out pastors, teachers, and evangelists to equip his church. When baptized, believers are baptized into his church. Christ is currently building his church, and he will one day return for his church. In fact, Christ is so personalized with his church that he identifies persecution against his church as persecution of himself.

Therefore, Christ’s preoccupation with his church must inform a seminary’s rationale and mission. His pledge to build his church is not only a promise to which a seminary should cling, but it is also a mandate a seminary should embrace. After all, Jesus has promised to build his church—not his seminary.

Though in the New Testament the form of a seminary is more overheard than heard, the function of a seminary—teaching, equipping, mentoring, and sending—is heard quite clearly. In many ways, the entire trajectory and contour of the New Testament points to Christ fulfilling his promise to build his church. Moreover, the New Testament Epistles read like a veritable manual of how to do and how not to do church, conveying the predominant concern of health, growth, and faithfulness for the local church.

Cleavage between the seminary and the church is to the detriment of the former because it undermines its rationale for existence. That same cleavage also robs the church of further equipping for the work of ministry. If a seminary drifts from the church, the church will drift from it; if the seminary stops serving the church, the church will—and should—stop supporting it.

Of all denominations, the Southern Baptist Convention is uniquely positioned to enjoy seminaries that exist for the church. After all, the Southern Baptist Convention is nothing more than a confederation of churches, structured with a denominational framework that exists by, for, and as part of her churches.

By New Testament mandate, denominational expectation, and self-imposed determination, Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary stands without compromise in its commitment to serve the local church. Thankfully, there is no question of identity or mission. Trustees and donors are not being polled to inform the identity of Midwestern Seminary. Focus groups are not being assembled and queried as to what our market niche should be. Faculty and students are not being surveyed to find our mission. On the contrary, with appropriate self-confidence, Midwestern Seminary is unquestionably committed to serving the church and is unapologetically bending her resources and energies toward this end.

This is not to suggest that other SBC seminaries or institutions beyond our denomination are not serving the church and not serving the church well. Nor is it to suggest that Midwestern Seminary in her past has not served the church, and served it well. This is to say that regardless of what other institutions are or are not doing, and regardless of what Midwestern Seminary has or has not done, the future is certain: Midwestern Seminary exists for the Church. Every proposed event, initiative, class, program, personnel hire, or decision made will be subjugated to one over-arching question: How will this help Midwestern Seminary fulfill its mission to serve the church?

For the Church is a vision to be implemented over every square inch of Midwestern Seminary’s campus, and it is a message to be carried to every corner of this great denomination. In the essays that follow, I will flesh out what this vision means for Midwestern Seminary. In the meantime, know Midwestern Seminary’s identity and mission are clear: Midwestern Seminary exists for the Church. 

Part I // Part II // Part III // Part IV // Part V // Part VI // Part VII // Part VIII

This week marks an historic week for the Midwestern Seminary community, as we welcome friends from around the world to celebrate with us the dedication of our new chapel, the Daniel Lee Chapel. The chapel has been a source of great anticipation and expectation for Midwestern Seminary over the past several years, and many have dedicated their time and resources to see its completion.

It is not often that an institution dedicates a building, and even less often that it dedicates a chapel. So, it is with appropriate gravity and joy that we will gather together on Tuesday to dedicate the Daniel Lee Chapel for the glory of Christ and for his church. I will offer the following prayer at the dedication ceremony. May God be pleased to answer his servant’s prayer for this place.

Heavenly Father:

We come to you today in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, asking your special favor as we gather to dedicate this beautiful new facility and to recommit ourselves to the task of theological education and ministry preparation. We ask for your kind providence to abide on Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary this day, and every day forward, as we exist for the Church. We come before you today in an act of dedication, an act of consecration, and bring our requests before you.

We ask that this pulpit be used only and ever to preach your inspired, inerrant Word, and may those who fill this pulpit always be faithful to divide rightly the word of truth and to proclaim the whole counsel of God. May this pulpit prove to be a model of biblical exposition for students for generations to come, and may this pulpit be a constant force for doctrinal fidelity, demonstrating how to contend earnestly for the faith once and for all delivered to the saints.

In the years to come, may you be pleased to save many by the power of your gospel in this place. May the exclusivity of the gospel, the Lordship of Christ, repentance from sin and faith in Jesus be exhorted, and may the gospel always be preached in this building with full conviction and expectancy.

May in this chapel students find their calls to ministry deepened, their love for Christ enlarged, their gifts for ministry strengthened, their character refined, their biblical, theological, Baptist convictions reinforced, their passion for the gospel enflamed, and may in them grow an unremitting fervor for your Great Commission.

May this chapel only know worship that pleases you; worship that upholds and projects your glory, exalts your Son, and demonstrates the power and working of your Holy Spirit. May it know the singing of Psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs, the public reading of Scripture, the prayers of your people, and the preaching of your Holy Word.

May this day fill your people, especially Southern Baptists, with an appropriate sense of pride in you, gratefulness in your provision, and a renewed sense of the kingdom possibilities and advances from this seminary throughout the region and around the world. Moreover, may you be pleased to bless the many who have given so much these past several years to see this day come to fruition.

And for us, specifically, as the Midwestern Seminary community, may this day be one of celebration, of seminary growth and health, and joyful institutional accomplishment. May you fill us with a sense of optimism, knowing that you have brought us this far, and surely you will carry us forward to new and greater heights.

Father, there is no pool for baptism, nor is there the tray of communion. We do not gather as a church in this building, but we gather as the church, and we gather for the Church.

And in so doing we ask that if Jesus shall tarry for millennia more, that this chapel will be used for the glory of your Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, until that day when the kingdoms of this world shall become the Kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ, when he shall reign forever and ever.

Amen.

I was recently honored to have a conversation with Daniel Darling of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission about my role as a father. We spoke to issues such as the role that family plays in my identity, what it means to raise a gospel-centered family, and how we at Midwestern Seminary are training students to serve families in the church. We also spoke to the role families play in the life of the church as well as the role the church plays in the life of the family. I always enjoy speaking to the importance of children and families in the kingdom of God, and I was especially pleased to speak with Daniel Darling about these things. You can watch our entire conversation here.

Last week, I returned from my second Council of Seminary Presidents retreat, an annual event when the six SBC seminary presidents and their spouses gather for prayer, fellowship, and planning. My wife and I returned to Kansas City on a high note, and not just because we were thrilled to see our children and celebrate Thanksgiving.

As I shared with a number of friends, my encouragement is rooted in those five men, the institutions they lead, and our collective effort to serve Southern Baptist churches and advance the cause of Christ. Our time together strengthened my conviction that we have before us a kairos moment, an opportunity to accomplish much for the church and the Great Commission.

A Sacred Task, A Singular Stewardship

In order to understand the retreat, and our every gathering for that matter, one must understand the sense of gravity that hovers over each seminary president. Each one feels called to a sacred task and understands he enjoys a singular stewardship.

The task of theological education is as old as Holy Scripture itself. From Moses mandating the teaching and transmitting of the Shema in Deuteronomy 6, to Paul charging Timothy to, “entrust these things to faithful men who will be able to teach others also” in II Timothy 2, the Bible is replete with the call to proclaim, explain, and defend the faith. This sacred task, at its core, is quintessentially theological education.

The sacred task of theological education channels itself to the SBC seminaries in a unique and profound way. Some 16 million Southern Baptists, congregated in some 46,000 local churches, entrust six seminaries to train their pastors, ministers, and missionaries. The numbers are astounding. Collectively, the six Southern Baptist seminaries now enroll more than 18,000 students, with each one rating in the top-10 largest seminaries in North America. These numbers are staggering and remind us that those who lead the six SBC seminaries assume a singular stewardship.

The Logistics

This year, Dr. and Mrs. Paige Patterson hosted the retreat in Dallas, Texas. The retreat formally began Friday morning and ended Monday morning. The promise of inclement weather—and significant flight delays and/or cancellations—necessitated some early departures on Sunday afternoon. Nonetheless, from start to finish, the Pattersons hosted the event with great care, unmatched hospitality, and perfectionist detail. Those who have experienced Southwestern Seminary hospitality know exactly what I mean.

In addition to our formal meetings, we also enjoyed an unforgettable dinner with Dr. Charles Ryrie, an enjoyable tour of Guidestone and luncheon with Dr. and Mrs. O.S. Hawkins, gratifying worship with and tour of First Baptist Dallas, and a warm luncheon with Dr. and Mrs. Robert Jeffress.

Down to Business

The primary reason for the CSP retreat is the nearly three days of formal meetings themselves. The presidents discuss institutional and denominational matters while the wives plan women’s ministry and seminary wives’ curriculum, strategies, and events.

While formal business takes place, the event itself is much more than a business meeting. Significant portions of each day were given to Scripture reading and prayer. These times were not perfunctory. On the contrary, they consisted of protracted times of praying for one another, each seminary, and the particular needs and opportunities facing us and the churches we serve.

The most important “item of business” at the retreat was formally to approve each seminary’s full-time equivalency (FTE) report, which tabulates enrollment and thus Cooperative Program funding. Beyond funding the reports—which are available in the SBC Annual—also reveal seminary trends and broader movements in theological education.

Other topics of discussion included how we can best serve the churches of the SBC, strengthen our denomination’s Great Commission efforts, and provide theological education as broadly as possible. Additionally, we discussed theological education—and higher education in general—in the new normal of a soft economy and changing educational models.

Most Memorable Moment

To me, the most memorable moment of the retreat was an appeal made by Dr. Patterson, who movingly recounted the state of the seminaries three decades ago, the effort undertaken to recover them, and the doctrinal health the seminaries now enjoy. Hearing “the Lion” himself recount all that was nearly lost and all that has been gained—punctuated by an appeal for us to now serve with humility, godliness, and unity—was especially stirring and memorable.

Dr. Patterson’s plea was well-delivered and well-received. As SBC institutions, we more complement one another than compete with one another, and we stand united as men who love and respect their fellow seminary presidents. This is not due to a gentleman’s agreement about not meddling in one another’s affairs. On the contrary, if doctrinal compromise took place in one of the seminaries, the other seminary presidents would draw swords, as would I.

Our mutual appreciation is based in gratitude for what God has done in the seminaries in recent decades, what he is doing through them now, and the skill and care with which the other men fulfill their leadership responsibilities on behalf of Southern Baptists.

Conclusion

I left the CSP retreat deeply encouraged by our collective gospel work, and once again impressed by the men I am honored to know as colleagues. So much so, I’ve committed to pray daily—Monday through Friday—for each of my sister seminaries, the presidents who lead them, and their families, faculty, staff, and students. Would you join me in doing the same? Moreover, would you join me in praying that indeed we realize a kairos moment, and that God will accomplish an awakening through his seminaries, in his church, and to the advancement of the Great Commission?