I have to be cautious. All of the information is not yet out. My opinion is really really low on the scale of “Whose Opinion Matters”. And I am pretty upset about this decision. With that being said, I carefully offer my opinion on this dreadful decision by the MBC Executive Board. Here is the motion:
MOTION:Effective Jan 1, The Acts 29 Network is an organization which the MBC Exec Bd. Staff will not be working with, supporting, or endorsing in any manner at anytime.
Amendment:While recognizing the autonomous nature of all areas of MBC life beyond that of the Executive Board Staff, the MBC Executive Board directs the Church Planting Department and other ministry departments to NOT provide CP dollars toward those affiliated with the Acts 29 Network.
Motion as amended passed by a vote of 28-10 HT: Jim Shaver
What does this mean? It means that if you are a new church plant with the MBC and you are not yet “self-sufficient”, then you must decide whether or not you are going to drop your affiliation with Acts29 or the MBC. Because the MBC is providing much of their funding this puts them in a very difficult position. I would love to see Acts29 step up and provide funding in place of the MBC. I would love seeing Acts29 churches stay in the MBC–but the politicians have made this nearly impossible.
I will probably be posting more on this later. Until then there is a little conversation going on at
Founders, Scott Lamb at Thoughts and Adventures, and at Micah Fries blog.
Update: Here are a few additional thoughts I have after doing some research. They are also posted at the Founders blog:
Let me preface by saying that I am not very knowledgeable of all the inner-workings of the MBC; so I could be quite wrong in my hypothesis. Nevertheless after doing a little research I think I have figured out that this is more than just an “alcohol” issue. I think the Executive Board feels that they are doing us a favor by preserving us from the Emerging church movement.
If you know anything about Acts 29 you know that they are not affiliated with the emerging church movement (Emergent, McClaren, Tony Jones, etc.) However, the Theological Committee Review has reported that Acts29 and Emerging/Emergent are pretty much synonymous. Read section 3A of their report
It appears to me that the underlying problem is that they are lumping Acts 29 with the Emerging Church. Emerging Church we should be very concerned with as they often deny the biblical gospel…if you read the review you will see how Acts 29 is lumped in with Emergent…therefore, I think people associate the heresy of Emergent with Acts 29.
Here is the part I am unsure of…how serious did the Executive Board take the Report. But as I have studied I think it is more than “just alcohol”. It’s motivated out of misinformation and wrongly associating Acts29 with Emergent.
