For those with a surfeit of election year political stuff, I humbly offer some calming and pacifying (some may say ‘mind numbing’) information on our beloved Cooperative Program. Watch out for the high weeds, though.
_____________
The money collected under our venerable Cooperative Program, now in its tenth decade, is divided into two parts: the first part is the money kept by the state conventions, the second part is forwarded to the SBC Executive Committee, most of which is divided among the mission boards and seminaries.
Of interest to those who pay attention is the “split”; how much stays in each state and how much gets to SBC seminaries and mission boards. A few data points on this:
- Historically, state conventions keep most of the money. There has never been a year that state conventions divided the money equally or Have ban anywhere in the neighborhood of a 50/50 split. In nine decades of CP collections only twice (1949-50, 1950-51) have state conventions kept less than 60%
- The most recent data show that of every CP dollar, the state conventions kept 61.25% and the SBC received 38.75%.
- In the past half century the percentage kept by state convention has ranged between 61.29 and 66.56.
- Since the Great Commission Resurgence Task Force Report was adopted by the SBC in 2010 and called for a “return to the historic ideal of a 50/50 Cooperative Program distribution between the state conventions and the SBC”, the state conventions have kept between 61.25% and 62.20% of CP dollars.
- The most recent statistical year, 2014-2015 showed states reducing their percentage about a full point to 61.25%
- The Florida state convention made a drastic change that put their split at 49/51 making them the only legacy state forwarding a majority of CP dollars to SBC causes.
- Southern Baptists of Texas, the conservative state body in Texas, has been at 45/55 for a few years.
- Two smaller state conventions, Iowa and Nevada, are at 50/50.
For those who believe Southern Baptists are better served when the state conventions keep less money and forward more to the mission boards and seminaries, the call for a 50/50 split was a welcome one. Many of the states have responded with small steps in that direction. Some have responded with giant steps.
Over 90% of CP revenue comes from 16 legacy, southern states. In these, except for Florida and the upstart state conventions in Texas and Virginia, progress towards 50/50 has been slow but, to some, significant.
- My state, Georgia, is moving to a 58/42 split, a move made much easier as a result of a $25 million gift to the convention to retire the mortgage on the headquarters building. It is unclear how much progress will be made to move from 58/42 to 50/50.
- The Alabama convention, which gives the largest amount in CP revenues to SBC causes, is at 55/45.
- The Tennessee convention, third largest CP giver, is at about 57/43.
- The Louisiana and Mississippi conventions have the least favorable splits among the legacy states (not counting the more moderate conventions in Texas and Virginia) at about 63/37.
I think the recent trend in state conventions relative to the CP split is healthy but I’m not optimistic that we will get anywhere near 50/50 in my lifetime.
I would ask my colleagues what they feel is the ideal state/SBC split of CP dollars in your state.
I am 100% opposed to the 50/50 push! If we got rid of wasteful and worthless SBC entities like the ERLC and NAMB there would be PLENTY of money for IMB support. Most states need 60% to do what they are SUPPOSED to do to support the local church, including Church Planting and Disaster Relief, which NAMB has effectively taken over in recent years. The SBC has become a bloated and wasteful bureaucracy more dedicated to six fig salaries, bad-mouthing and ridiculing small churches, empowering mega-churches and enriching their mega$$$ pastors by pushing programs via NAMB and Lifeway based on… Read more »
Wow, wow, wow!
Breathe, dude.
Brain matter is supposed to stay inside your head – the way you’re going an explosion is impending!
Just trying to share a little reality out there….
I don’t know where you live or who all you are speaking of…
But, I live “out there” everyday. I Talk with multiple fellow pastors regularly – meet ones I’ve never met before on a weekly basis – and I don’t hear these kinds of things – ever!
I’ve even asked groups of pastors questions regarding some of the things you’ve mentioned and still – I find they’re vastly more interested in shepherding their flocks and expanding the kingdom of God.
Maybe you should expand your horizons.
I’m not sure you want a discussion but if you want to bring a little reality to your comments, and every SBCer ought to express their opinion of CP stuff, here’s a bit of reality: 1. ERLC: Gets about six cents of every CP dollar. I recognize that some SBCers think that is too much (adds up to over $3 million). 2. States need 60% of every CP dollar: Well, they are keeping that, on average but the largest CP giving states (AL, GA, TN) are already under 60% and seem to be managing well. States should justify the ministries,… Read more »
If the ERLC gets $.06 (6% of CP dollars?!) THAT is a significant amount of money that could be better used in international missions. Who does the ERLC speak for? Certainly not the SBC person in the pew! I am personally involved in DR. When the NAMB trailers roll in eyes roll as well because everyone in charge knows everything will now change. State Conventions SHOULD be where Church planting is managed and empowered. States know their states far better than NAMB does. Why should NAMB be ordained to pick Church Planting winners and losers? I live in MO. So… Read more »
Ummm, I misplaced a decimal. As Rick Perry would say, “oops.” ERLC gets about six tenths of a cent of every CP dollar, 1.65% of the SBC allocation which is for about 40% of CP receipts. If a state convention shows skill at planting churches, then I would have no problem with their keeping funds to do so. Problem is, the record is not very strong. In my state, one association alone puts more money into church planting than the state convention. The legacy states have an accumulation of older ministries that have first claim on the dollars. Local control… Read more »
Why should NAMB be ordained to pick Church Planting winners and losers? I live in MO. So NAMB tells us that STL needs new churches but Little Rock or San Francisco does not. Really?! Anybody with a Cal pulse in STL can get NAMB $$ to start a church in STL; but not in Cape, Joplin or Columbia. Knew this before hand b/c NAMB is pretty clear about it; but the pastors in my association had lunch with one of the KC NAMB guys the other day and he restated it. NAMB is an organization operating on finite funds, so… Read more »
Mike Bergman, I am well aware NAMB has limited funds. BUT my point is State Conventions are in a better position than NAMB to know where church plants are most needed in their states. That is the reason I believe state conventions and NOT NAMB should be IN CHARGE of Church Planting. The SBC needs to quit assuming everyone Baptist leader not in an SBC entity is an idiot. State Conventions, local associations and SBC pastors are the BEST people to be in charge of Church Planting, NOT NAMB!! That is SUPPOSED to be the Baptist way. The SBC used… Read more »
I am only comfortable pushing a specific percentage if we do so consistently throughout each level of the money trail. I propose the following ideals, for example: A. Christians donate 10% of gross income through the local church. B. Churches donate 10% of undesignated receipts through the CP. C. State conventions forward 50% of CP gifts to the Executive Committee. If we are going to establish percentage goals for Autonomous C, then I want us to push just as enthusiastically for percentage goals to be adopted within Autonomous B and Autonomous A. The goals are related in a package deal.… Read more »
“A. Christians donate 10% of gross income through the local church.” No one argues here and every SBC leader at every level has been advocating for this forever. “B. Churches donate 10% of undesignated receipts through the CP.” Rick Patrick votes “yes” on this but he only has one vote and doesn’t get to exercise executive fiat on it, leaving the option of having his association, state convention, or the SBC adopt his motion of making 10% the threshold for appointment of trustees, elected officers, leaders, etc.? Make the motion bro. “C. State conventions forward 50% of CP gifts to… Read more »
I’m for a 50/50 split minimum, would actually like to see a greater percentage go nationally.
On a regular basis, we have a greater focus on NAMB and IMB and local association. Take those out of the picture, and it changes some things about how we operate as a church.
Take the state convention out and it changes little to nothing. Perhaps part of that is communication on the state’s end being poorest among the levels, at least that’s how I feel about my state convention.
My state convention is invaluable for several things but those don’t add up to 58% of a CP dollar. I am willing to fund other ministries that aren’t so valuable to me or my church but not at the level that requires the majority portion of the CP. Churches can easily adjust their giving to prioritize NAMB and IMB, or local missions.
It is harder than it should be because the good Southern Baptists in the pew are reluctant to not just give to CP without thinking about it…If I could lead my church to change that I would do so in a heartbeat.
My ideal split for state/sbc cooperative donations would be 10/90%. But this percentage thing may be a waste of time because there are other ways to deal with this. I would also allow for churches to give, or remind churches that they may give, directly to the State with no CP split to the SBC, just in the same way churches have the option to give directly to the SBC. Churches can affect a 50/50% split (or any percentage they desire) simply by writing 2 checks. Since the founding of our church in 1992, we have given both (1) directly… Read more »
IMHO the SBC is far too bueraucratic. We are wasting mega-dollars on shuffling paper and making plans for the next big campaign designed for large churches to cram down the throats of small churches. Why should we have three layers of management when all companies and MOST other religious orgs have eliminated a level or more? Because of our polity, State Conventions or associations would be nearly impossible to eliminate across the board, although I recognize this is what NAMB seeks, to eliminate the State Conventions by emasculating them of any control over their own future. This leaves with the… Read more »
Way too much vitriol here but ignoring that, I’ll respond to issues raised. 1. state conventions control the entire CP flow. They are choosing to keep slightly less, presumably because that’s what their churches want. 2. NAMB can’t do away with anything. They can, and should, control their own budget. In the recent past when NAMB funneled a lot of money back to the states, they states would game the system and fund a lot of non-productive positions. Areas would be funded for years and not show results such as churches planted, sometimes because these were very sparsely populated areas.… Read more »
William: Sorry my comment was so harsh. It does represent my feelings about the history of state leadership in our state, but I should have been more reserved. My pastor attended last year’s state convention. The CP percentage issue was debated. Most of the speakers were from small, rural churches, and they favored the state keeping more money. I would say that the more urban churches favored seeing a larger percentage going to foreign missions. I would be interested to see if others here see this same dynamic. Your observations about bloated state offices due to the money returned to… Read more »
My reference to vitriol wasn’t directed at you. We all have specific complaints about stat convention actions.
NAMB is putting about half their budget in the SEND cities, leaving a lot of geography without church plants. If sparsely populated areas need churches states can find funds to do that work. They might free up some funds now locked down in centralized facilities, legacy ministries that are underperforming, or non-critical staff jobs.
Here in Alabama, we were actually downsizing our state convention and laser focusing on the Great Commission about a decade before the GCR. Our slogan is ONE MISSION—the Great Commission; ONE PROGRAM—the Cooperative Program; MANY MINISTRIES—Great Commission Ministries. This focus on fulfilling the Great Commission through the Cooperative Program is the reason that Alabama, though not nearly the largest state convention, donates more through the Cooperative Program than any other state convention. The CP may need some tweaking and promoting, but it does not need to be abandoned in favor of some other approach competing with it. I’m fine with… Read more »
Rick,
I totally agree with what you have said about the right of the state convention to select and fund its priorities, and that direction is determined by the churches that assemble to make up the state convention.
NAMB and the ERLC are not part of the purpose of the SBC. The SBC was founded to allow cooperating churches to fund an international mission board. NAMB and the ERLC are funneling money away from the true SBC mission. IF the SBC focused its efforts on its true mission it would not have to be browbeating churches and state conventions for MORE MONEY! When centralized orgs like the SBC get more money they WASTE and SQUANDER it….When NAMB gets more money it creates new departments and hires more bureaucrats FURTHER REDUCING the amount of money actually available to do… Read more »
Do you oppose the CP helping fund the seminaries too?
Did you oppose the ERLC when Land was at the helm?
The ERLC is NOT part of the SBC mission. There are plenty of other groups doing the same thing far better than the ERLC ever will no matter who is in charge. But that being said, Moore is a mess! IMHO, we need to spin the ERLC off and let it fend for itself. I see wisdom in the SBC supporting seminaries that are uniquely Southern Baptist. BUT supporting two seminaries would seem to make far more sense TODAY than supporting SIX. Brick and mortar seminaries are becoming irrelevant. Spin off the others and let them fend for themselves or… Read more »
Allen, I agree.
Let’s get rid of NOBTS and SWBTS.
😉
So other than sending in CP money, part of which goes to NAMB, what is your church doing to help reach ethnic immigrant populations on your side of the state, especially in STL, with the gospel?
Our church is supporting our state convention offering. And I know the STL Metro Association IS ALL OVER THAT, as it should be. Our church is doing what it can as a small church with limited resources to reach our Jerusalem and our Judea AND, through IMB the ends of the earth. The ethnic groups in STL are not in our Judea. I am not opposed to supporting that work. But I do not see it as our responsibility when STL Metro is doing such a good job of it, mostly on their own, although I am sure being a… Read more »
From a look at the STL Baptist website, they’re “all over that” through their partnership with NAMB.
Good catch mike.
In my state convention, Oklahoma, not quite 60 I think its fifty-seven or something like that. However we found. Great to RCP giving, our state YouTube. It’s the largest to camp in the morning However, we fund Falls Creek, our youth camp, through state CP. Falls Creek is the largest youth camp in the world. Last summer about 50k students came through there. About 18% of all students in OK come through FC, so I believe that’s a noble thing to fund. OK is a legacy state, but not as big as the others. We fund a college, but only… Read more »
Mike Bergman…ONCE AGAIN if NAMB did not exist the STL METRO would likely be EVEN MORE EFFECTIVELY ALL OVER THAT with just as much $$ because of fewer NAMB imposed restrictions . LOCAL CONTROL LOCAL CONTROL LOCAL CONTROL. NOTHING NAMB DOES IS LOCALLY CONTROLLED!
That’s your assumption. As Thornton pointed out above, when local places had more control the results weren’t that great.
And caps doesn’t make your point any better.
NAMB works with StLouis Metro to identify missionary and church plant opporrunities. NAMB works with StLouis Metro to partner future planters with local churches to get them on the ground and in the communities. And the NAMB works with StLouis Metro to provide churches free (or low cost) tools to better reach their communities. To say NAMB “controls” the association, shows pure ignorance of what goes on. And BTW, when the MBC defunded several church plants across the state, it was StLouis Metro that raised funds to provide those churches the support the lost suddenly, until those churches could get… Read more »
Yeah, Tolliver was not good for the state. I like the leadership Yeats is giving, warming me back up, slowly, to the MBC.
The MBC is definitely taking a turn for the better. Sadly Tollver’s vendetta against anything that looked like, smelt like, or sounded like Calvinism and Acts29 ended up being the “least” of his problems given why he resigned as Executive Director. His selection as Interim and then fully elected ED was suppose to be a “peace” between Roger Moran his MBLA and the majority of other Conservatives within the SBC. Tolliver took that “peace” and went after churches who did nothing wrong but affiliate not only with the SBC/MBC but other groups that share their theology and methodology as well.… Read more »
Moran–heh… I was trying to think of his name yesterday, couldn’t quite bring it to mind. Wonder whatever happened to him… Tolliver was interim pastor of my family’s church / my home church right up until he became interim exec. I hate seeing anybody go down the way he did, and it legitimately shocked me. How he exec directed did not. He did a study at the church about the heresy of C. He tried to spin it that those who hold to C aren’t necessarily bad people, but it’s a heresy nonetheless. As for the lawsuits–glad they’re winding down… Read more »
Hmm I got a few extra words in there somehow, but you get the gist of it
I am from OK, have many friends, pastor and lay leaders in OK and have ALWAYS been impressed with the OK state convention. They are a model other legacy conventions need to emulate.
This is a great tool that has come out recently. You can see how many of your dollars goes to the CP when you give. It lets you pick state by state, and some states you can see how the states spend it as well. http://cpcalc.sbc.net/calc/
It’s a useful calculator. States have had the practice, lately abandoned by many of them, of confusing the business of how much they keep. Some states still throw out categories like SC “entities”, SC “ministries”. Some even slap an SBC label on money spent in their state. The calculator clearly shows how much of a CP dollar goes to the SBC allocation budget – mission boards, etc. Chances are, though, that not one of your members has ever seen this calculator or knows how much of a CP dollar your church gives eventually gets to the mission boards. You can… Read more »
Listening to you all makes me very grateful to be in Florida.
The bottom line on any discussion of state conventions moving to 50/50 is that they, the state conventions, are in complete control of a CP dollar in their state. If they vote to keep 90%, there’s not a doggone thing anyone can do…except for a church give less to the CP and more directly to what they feel is a better use of their mission dollars.
William Thornton, It is such a copout to say the SBC does not have to take a look at its inefficiencies or do anything about its bloated bureaucracy or not longer needed or affordable entities because individual churches and state conventions can vote with their dollars. Do you really think that would be a healthy revolution for the SBC to endure?
I didn’t say that Allen…don’t put words in my mouth.
I get that you are unhappy. Find a level of participation where you can be happy. If you want a revolution, stop asking questions from the convention floor and make motions. Maybe you will have one that does more than show your displeasure and gathers actual votes.
William, you said, Since the Great Commission Resurgence Task Force Report was adopted by the SBC in 2010 and called for a “return to the historic ideal of a 50/50 Cooperative Program distribution between the state conventions and the SBC”, If we have never had a 50/50 split, how can they call it historic. We did have a history of churches giving 10% of undesignated funds to the Cooperative Program but they didn’t want to mention that because most of those leading the Great Commission Resurgence Task Force are from churches that have not been strong supporters of the cooperative… Read more »
It is historically accurate to say that 50/50 was the split at various times in some states over the years…
For example:
Notice Georgia 1948 – 1975 then again 87-90.
http://www.sbc.net/cp/statecontributions/georgia.asp
Yes indeed, Ron, churches in a state determine their state’s split and a growing number are moving to or towards 50/50. I don’t buy your point that GCRTF members did not understand the CP. The more cogent point is that they did, and recommended accordingly. Neither do I accept your implied point that all state spending is “missions.” Neither do I see anyone trying to “destroy” state conventions, since moving to 50/50 would leave about $250 million to spend. State conventions control the CP revenue. They are moving, consistently and relentlessly towards 50/50 because, one presumes, they judge that their… Read more »
Allen,
I am trying to understand why a church wanting to affect how it’s mission dollars are spent might simply write 1 check to the SBC and another check to the state convention – why that is a cop out?
As I mentioned, the heartbeat of our church is really not connected to the state convention and its ministries.
What action would you think would not be a cop out?
Btw, if you are in St. Louis – the convention there was great. I really enjoyed Pharoh’s Donut shop!!!
This has been suggested… http://baptist21.com/blog-posts/2014/cp-another-way/ …but has never gained much traction. Designated gifts direct to the XComm are made every year but are in the low single digit percentages of total CP giving. It is an option but an option that would be considered not to be CP giving, since state conventions are cut out of a check sent directly to Nashville for the SBC allocation budget. My appeal would be that churches would support the CP at a desired level without designations, support the two big mission offerings, then go direct with whatever else they wanted to do. But,… Read more »
As a former Exec. Director, I have been responsible for leading discussions and dealing with the consequences in the short-term and projected long-term implications as well. Some thoughts for consideration… 1. CP founders asked the congregations to use 50% of offerings locally and invest 50% in the C.P. 2. All money comes from local churches. SBC mission efforts have been funded off a regenerating ecosystem from the local up, not national down. Through some national and state decisions, it appears we are less focused locally. The stronger the base, the more human and financial resources available to use in the… Read more »
Few reflections… 1. 3 basic categories of state conventions in terms of size and funding. To treat them all the same or reference them all the same is not helpful to them or our collective mission. These are complex issues and a flat 50% is simple, but does not recognize the wide variety of factors in each state and their overall mission efforts. 2. FUNDING by NAMB … is spending twice as much in church planting, dramatically reduced funding in evangelism in favor of the single priority unproven approach, and not investing locally through Associations as the ones living in… Read more »
Louis, I agree! We did have a good convention in STL, a great convention town IMHO! …I have never had Pharaoh’s doughnuts. Will have to look them up.
Will McRaney is a strident critic of Kevin Ezell and NAMB, with history as to why that is so. Such doesn’t mean he is always wrong but should be considered as a caveat in all he writes that touches on the subjects. I am perfectly willing to trust NAMB. They are a large, sprawling entity and imperfect in several ways. As for NAMB being the only success story at the moment, earlier data from state conventions re: church starts and the earlier NAMB data is flawed. By most any measure the SEND program is successful. If “trust and goodwill” are… Read more »
More precisely, the difference in 5 years prior to transition in NAMB leadership in 2010 and 5 years since has a reported decline in number of church starts of 592/year (SBC Annual). Assuming some difference in counting, which has not be shared publicly that I am aware of, communicating we are starting 500 churches less per year is well beyond generous in looking at the facts. I am for NAMB/HMB, and have served it formally and informally in many ways for 24 years. For those in power stewarding well before God and Southern Baptists what they have inherited as a… Read more »
William, I cannot quickly put my hands on the 50-50 by local churches. It never happened in practiced on a wide scale. I could be mistaken in memory, but I am almost certain that was the stated goal. If I locate it, I will share it. Here is an article on the history. It is a summary article on the history of CP. http://www.baptist2baptist.net/b2barticle.asp?ID=240 The Cooperative Program was created with twelve basic working principles: 1. The Cooperative Program was an equal partnership between the Southern Baptist Convention and the state conventions; 2. General promotional responsibility rested with the “Commission on… Read more »