Lately, we have been looking into the best way to use our missions money as a local congregation. The more I learn, the less satisfied I become with the Cooperative Program as a “missions” funding tool.
Attention LifeWay Research, I’m moving to the minority on this one.
Here is the way the math works for our church. We give about $24,000 through the Cooperative Program. The Indiana Baptist Split is (64.5%) 15,480, and the SBC portion is (35.5%) 8,520. Once the money gets to Nashville, the CP allocations gives half (4,260) to the IMB and the rest to other causes (NAMB, Seminaries, etc.). The bottom line is that only 17% of our CP offering ever makes it to the International Mission Board.
This may be fine if the church intends to send so much to non-foreign missions causes. But the common misconception is that CP = missions. As I’ve said before, no amount of market research will fix it. People need to know the truth about where 83% of their money does not go.
What Do You Think?
Is this the most effective way to accomplish the Great Commission? Is this something that an average giver in your church understands?
{ 20 comments… read them below or add one }
I’m completely with you. (One thing to note is that you may want to include LMCO and AAEO in your percentage totals. When you take those into account the situation is better, but still not good.)
I’m not in Indiana, but I want to see our state convention move, incrementally, to a 50/50 split. Tom Ascol recently posted about the same issue.
http://www.founders.org/blog/2008/12/its-time-for-southern-baptists-to-get.html
Tony, would you be happy with a 50/50 split, or do you think that’s still not enough getting to the IMB.
I know of one church in our association that is giving around the CP directly to the IMB with a portion of their missions giving.
Thanks for the comments, it’s an issue that I’m glad to talk about and understand more.
@ Brent: We’ll give the info to our missions committee, but I think a minimum of 10% of our local church budget should be missions outside of North America. That will mean less CP and more Lottie Moon.
@ Benjie: The main problem with CP = missions is the budgets of the state conventions. At that point I think it would be a hard case to define their ministries as “missions.” That is not to say there is not good work being done.
@ Ken: I agree that the info is out there, especially with the special offerings. But the CP is hardwired into most church budgets and in my experiences is not discussed.
@ David: I’m not saying to throw out the system. It just needs to get much more than 17% oversees. Why not make the priority the people groups who have not preaching of Christ in their culture.
Tony,
Much of this, of course, depends on your state convention. Mine, Southern Baptists of Texas Convention, sends over half of the CP it receives to the national SBC.
The SBC, then, sends half of what they receive to the IMB. Also, some state conventions have more expenses, and are struggling more than others. But many are slowly increasing their percentage going to the national SBC.
One other thought. I know not all will agree, but in one sense, it is all missions. Send money to a foreign country so they can replace a light bulb in a mission church – and that is considered missions. But buy a light bulb to replace one in an American church and that is not counted missions. Why?
This is not to say we should not send more to international missions; we should. Just that what we do here is missions too.
While I’m generally satisfied with the CP, I would agree that improvements can always be made.
David R. Brumbelow
Hi Tony,
I wanted to address two issues in your post.
First…
If people equate CP only with IMB, that seems to be inexcusable ignorance on their part. Most of the material I see from SBC/IMB/NAMB explains how it is broken down in pie charts and flow charts. In fact, we have a huge poster outside our sanctuary from the IMB that explains it. It was free in our Lottie Moon packet.
I am quite sure that WMU’s all across America receive the same info, Pastors as well. Not sure what else they (CP/SBC) could to to educate the laity, if their leaders aren’t going to do it.
Second…
I take it from your line of thought that, to you that missions funding = IMB (in the context of CP). So, is North American church planting not considered missions? Does the theological education many current and future missionaries (foreign and domestic) are receiving, like yourself, in the SBC seminaries and Baptist colleges not fit in the “missions” bucket?
If churches effectively “de-funded” state conventions, or even the CP and gave straight to IMB, you would see, over a relatively short period of time, an IMB that had few candidates to send. Local churches send missionaries but few train them, that is left to the state convention funded Baptist colleges and CP funded seminaries.
His…yours,
Ken
Agreeing that there are many inefficiencies that need to be addressed.
Ken Nicholss last blog post..Reading Plans for 2009
Tony,
Yes, CP = missions. In the mind of many (should we say most) Southern Baptists, and I still think that. The problem comes in when we begin to include another equation: IMB = missions. Excluding other ministries to which CP dollars go in the missions suggests that even those ministries that we do with the money that we do not send through the CP are not used in missions endeavors.
As a former IMB missionary (who would go again in a heartbeat were the Lord to direct me) I believe that many of the other ministries that get portions of the other half of CP dollars sent to Nashville, as well as the ministries supported in the various state conventions before sending the dollars on to Nashville ought also to have consideration as missions.
Benjies last blog post..Upside Down @ Christmas
Tony,
I think that most of the members in the pews, and deacon boards of our churches, would be troubled if they knew that only 17 cent out of every dollar given to the CP made it to the IMB.
And then you have to ask yourself of that 17 cent that did make it to the IMB how much actually makes it to the Missionaries? How much is spent on flying board members and their families all over the country to attend meeting? How much is spent on Administration cost? I mean, I as a Southern Baptist Pastor, don’t even know the answers to these questions and that in itself is another real issue that is hurting the CP.
I guess our SBC Missions work is like making sausage… the closer you look at the process, the more your appetite diminishes.
Grace Always,
Greg Alfords last blog post..Calvinist are not Christians?
Brent,
I know that the executive committee in Indiana has developed a plan to reach 50/50. Each year in which our income exceeds our budget, the allocation increases by 1%. Thus far, if I’m not mistaken, we have increased 3% in the last 5 years.
– Todd
I think people would be upset to know only 17% of CP giving goes to missions, but I also think you should educate them about the good other 83% accomplishes. In NC far too much of the CP giving stays in state and we see very little coming from this, so we give 6.5% to the CP through the state and an additional 6.5% directly to the Executive Committe which does go more to missions. In this way we feel like we are able to give more to missions through CP. We also started a missions committee and give a good bit of money to non-SBC missions. We have seen this grow every year because we have found we can support so many more national missions for the same money we can support a North American missionary.
Grace to you,
Bill
@Tony,
In your reply to Brent, you state that you “think a minimum of 10% of our local church budget should be missions outside of North America.” Seriously? What percentage are you currently giving to the CP?
If you gave directly to the SBC CP and bypassed your state convention (best/worst case scenario using the CP program), you’d have to give 20% of your budget to the CP (since the SBC would send half of that to the IMB).
The best case scenario for giving through a state convention would be something similar to Brent’s SBTC which has a 50/50 split. In that case you’d have to give 40% of your budget to the State CP program to have 10% of your budget land at the IMB. And that’s a best case scenario.
If your church can pull that off, then more power to you! The only way our church could meet a goal of 10% to the IMB would be to simply bypass the CP with most of our “missions” dollars.
We do 8.5% to CP and then support 2 missionaries that came out of our church but are not with SBC. Right now our overall is about 3% international and about 10% stateside causes (association, stateside CP, etc.).
It’s just a number I would like to see. An obvious answer would be do more Lottie directly through the budget. We definitely want to do more with the money we do sent, plus to send more money and people in the future.
My main point in raising this is to show how little of our CP gets to the IMB. I always knew that it went to various causes, but I never imagined that only 17% went international.
When did the CP start describing itself as mission work? It has never been solely about missions, has it? And if we are to get upset about how much of “Our” mission dollars get spent overseas, when will we look at the mirror and judge our own churches by the same standard? Why do most churches fail to give at least 10% of their budget to CP (ahem… missions)? If we want to get on a high horse about the CP should we not also look at our own budgets and declare that at least 50% of our budget should go overseas?
The fact of the matter is that there are other things that we have to do together, because we cannot do them on our own. The CP funds SBC seminaries, NAMB, IMB, and other things, some more valuable than others. Where we should really get upset is how our CP dollars are spent. In Oklahoma, it is a joke. The secretaries working at the BGCO can make 3-4 times that of our BCM directors working on the field. Inflated salaries (not that I am against men of God making a good living, most deserve more money… well some do anyway), unnecessary jobs, positions, and programs need to be reviewed. Missionaries who barely have 2 pennies to rub together need to be better funded.
Another thing to consider is the 17% that actually goes to the IMB does not mean that 17% makes it overseas. A good thing to know is how much of the 17% is held up in administrative operations verses what actually makes it to the frontline work. Does this mean we should all drop CP giving? I think not, but reevaluating the way CP dollars are spent needs serious refining.
Cole Hedgecocks last blog post..Why Churches Don’t Grow
@ Cole: Thanks for the comments, I’m actually going to deal with your first question in a new post. “Does CP = Missions”
About the 10% that I desire for our congregation. I would not make this a rule for any other church. I have heard of some that give much more and rejoice in their generosity. I’m simply stating that we need to be more intentional at my church about where the money goes.
I definitely appreciate your feedback and what a challenging thought to do 50/50 at the local level.
Cameron, If you wanted a certain percentage of your money to go directly to foreign missions, all you would have to do is send the money directly to the Lottie Moon offering. This would bypass both the state convention and the executive committee.
Cole, I would agree that for home missionaries, we need to fund the guys on the field much better.
– Todd
Todd Benkerts last blog post..Highlights from our State Convention
@ Todd: Thanks for stopping by, do you know of any definition of missions that is broad enough to accommodate all the SBC work that is funded by the CP?
I always think cross-cultural and to other people groups as missions.
Tony,
Me too. As a missiologist, I tend to think in terms of crossing cultural and/or geographic boundaries.
However, there are a number of factors that muddy up the waters when trying to define missions. Here are just a few:
1. The colloquial practice in many evangelical circles of calling every Christian a “missionary” (e.g. you are a missionary to your workplace, neighborhood, family etc. — see links at the end of my comment). Thus, any evangelistic activity may be considered a form of “missions.”
2. The close identification in recent times between missions and church planting. Any church planting, then, whether at home or abroad, is often considered “missions.”
3. A shift toward a “people group” model. This shift, by and large, is a good one because it recognizes that people are culturally distinct and different approaches should be used in different cultures. Because of the ethnic diversity in our own country, work with non-Anglo groups is often considered “missions.”
4. The globalization of missions efforts. No longer do Western missionaries dominate the scene. Christians from Africa, Asia, and South America are sending missionaries to unreached people in droves. Often you hear that other countries are sending missionaries here.
These are just a few of the factors, in my opinion, that make it difficult to pin down. I’m afraid that the word is slowly outliving its usefulness. For many Baptists, “missions”, at least as its used in the Cooperative Program sense, is any activity that fulfills the Great Commission.
Blessings,
Todd
_____
Consider Gordon Olsen’s comments: http://www.thetravelingteam.org/?q=node/159
or my own here: http://bemywitnesses.blogspot.com/2007/08/should-everyone-be-missionary.html
Todd Benkerts last blog post..Highlights from our State Convention
I think Greg raises some good questions, which need to be addressed in a separate post:
How much is spent on flying board members and their families all over the country to attend meetings? How much is spent on Administration cost?
Perhaps the problem is more complex (and deeper) than a simple redistribution of funds would correct. I’m afraid there’s a tremendous amount of materialism and waste that also needs to be addressed.
If we all (from CP employees to people like me sitting in the pews) followed John Piper’s suggestion that we adopt a war-time mentality and lifestyle, a lot more money would instantly be available for missions.
Barry Wallaces last blog post..2008 Blog Highlights (and a lowlight)
@ Barry:
Here are bits of information . . .
First, from the IMB website:
And this BP article:
Tony,
So we are now down to 12 cent out of every dollar given to the CP actually making it to support missionaries serving overseas…
Greg Alfords last blog post..The Bondage and Liberation of the Will
Tony,
I believe the 70% refers to the salaries of missionaries.
“Ministry expenses” of the missionary are part of the 30%.
– Todd
Todd Benkerts last blog post..Highlights from our State Convention
In Mississippi – deep in the Bible belt – only 35% of cooperative program dollars given to the state convention get sent on to the SBC. The average state convention employee’s salary (factoring in everyone, from receptionist on up to executive director) is almost $80,000.