|
(ABP) -- The Great Commission Task Force's recent progress report to
the Southern Baptist Convention Executive Committee suggests the final
report will at the very least be interesting, if not confusing,
reading.
Chairperson Ronnie Floyd suggests that "envy, strife and division
need to become unacceptable" and that a new denominational structure
should be characterized by Christlikeness, unity, trust and recognition
of the responsibility of the local church for fulfilling the Great
Commission. Those are admirable goals, but the task force's
recommendations could undermine some of them.
Study has led task-force members to recommend phasing out the North
American Mission Board’s system of cooperative agreements with state
conventions over four years. These are agreements whereby NAMB
designates funds for state conventions to help pay for ministries like
church planting. They also provide partial funding of salaries and benefits for
some state convention staff positions, particularly those that are
missions-related.
The task force appears to be suggesting a Robin Hood approach,
taking money that has been going to SBC Bible Belt states and instead
forwarding more to less-SBC-influenced areas of the
country.
In states like Missouri, this approach could mean that a slew of
state convention employees -- many of them field personnel -- might be
de-funded. Many Baptists will see this recommendation as discouraging
grassroots influence on the use of Cooperative Program funds on the
field in favor of more arbitrary use of funds at the national level. It
will be hard for many congregations to see this as recognition of the
responsibility of the local church for fulfilling the Great Commission.
Under one proposal of the task force, the Cooperative Program will
likely become less the primary tool for the SBC and its churches to
accomplish the Great Commission. Congregations will be encouraged to
designate gifts to SBC and other causes. In fact, if the task force has
its way, “Great Commission Giving” will become the new nomenclature not
for Cooperative Program giving, but for money designated to the
convention. Roll over, Lottie Moon and Annie Armstrong.
This recommendation has some history. For some time, SBC messengers
have elected presidents who are pastors of megachurches -- some of them criticized because of the paltry
percentage of their budgets committed to the Cooperative Program.
Current SBC president Johnny Hunt has become publicly defensive about
such criticism of him and his church. President Hunt has suggested that
a church’s CP percentage shouldn’t be a measure of its denominational
loyalty. He has pointed instead to money his church and others have
designated in large amounts to missions and evangelism.
This “Great Commission Giving” recommendation will become
increasingly embraced, not only at the local-church level but at the
state convention level.
If churches have reduced the share of undesignated gifts through CP
from an average of 10 percent to 6 percent over the past 10 years, they
will need little encouragement to keep reducing the percentage,
especially if that is how top leaders and new models in SBC life do it.
State conventions will keep more and send the SBC less CP money to
compensate for not receiving more back through cooperative agreements.
What appears to be less emphasis on the Cooperative Program suggests
a greater emphasis on the competition among agencies that existed for
funds before CP came into being in 1925. The emphasis on the value of
designated giving by churches will not be lost on entities that see
revenue declining if the whole CP pie -- and their respective slices --
experience significant shrinkage.
The increase in the International Mission Board share of CP from 50
to 51 percent may hardly be the “symbolic and substantial” change the
task force envisions. The result may not be a gain in real dollars at
all.
The Great Commission Task Force seems to want it both ways --
claiming a desire for more cooperation but with less emphasis on the
proven system of cooperative giving. Many will find it hard to see how
their recommendations will improve support for and improve SBC
ministries.
-30-
This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
is editor of the Missouri Baptist Word & Way.
EDITORIAL DISCLAIMER: As part of our mission to
provide credible and compelling information about matters of faith,
Associated Baptist Press actively seeks a diversity of viewpoints in
its columns, commentaries and other opinion-based content. Opinions
expressed in these articles are not intended to represent ABP editorial
policy and do not necessarily reflect the views of ABP’s staff, board
of directors or supporters.
|