Louis has been a part of the blogging community for a long time. This is Part 1. Part 2 will come later.
I plan to attend the annual meeting of the SBC in Houston, Texas next week. I am looking forward to the meeting. I enjoy the reports from the SBC entities. I enjoy hearing about our cooperative efforts to share the Gospel and disciple believers around the world.
I also enjoy the fellowship that I have with many people in the SBC. I know people in the SBC from all over the country. The annual meeting brings us all together for fellowship and business.
There are two things that I expect may happen at this year’s annual meeting that I personally hope do not happen.
Here is the first.
1. Making SBC Church Members a Customer Base for Guidestone.
This is the most important issue the SBC will address this year, but most people do not know a thing about it.
In my view, this may be the most important decision that the SBC has ever made, but because it is not overtly theological in nature, it attracts very little interest or critical examination.
We are too busy playing small ball to notice what is going on right under our collective noses.
Guidestone, formerly known as the Annuity Board, historically provided retirement and insurance services to pastors and other workers in the SBC. Those are necessary services since most churches do not have a number of employees constituting a group that would allow pastors and other workers to purchase insurance services. Also, it has been good for pastors to have a place that understands their work and needs with regard to retirement savings.
But Guidestone wants to expand its customer base to include individuals, regardless of whether they work in a church or for an SBC entity.
This is a terrible idea. The reason – it changes the relationship between the SBC and church members.
Church members become a customer base. They become potential purchasers for SBC financial products. This is unprecedented.
Currently SBC church members are contributors to the Lord’s kingdom work, not customers. When the SBC starts treating us as customers for the sale of financial products, that is a new day. And it is a very sad day. It is way too similar to money changers in the Temple.
What if your pastor was also your investment advisor? How would that make you feel?
Do you really want the SBC to become your investment advisor?
What comes next? Guidestone stores with signs saying, “Southern Baptists Investments Sold Here!”
This is also a bad idea because it puts the SBC in a bad light. This makes the SBC look predatory.
The worst religions and cults are usually those that get entangled with their members’ money. “Join our church. Now, let me invest your money!” How does that sound to you?
Can you imagine the charges that can be laid at the feet of the SBC by people outside the SBC?
Do other denominations do this? I really do not know.
Does the Catholic Church sell investment products to Catholics around the world?
Do the members of the Jewish community buy investments from the Jewish Federation or other Jewish organizations?
If they do, shame on them. We should be different. If they don’t, why would the SBC want this to be one of its distinctives?
What has Guidestone said to promote this idea?
Guidestone has said that people want these services.
Really? Says who? It is hard to know how much demand there is for this. If there were (and I seriously doubt that is the case), this idea would have been demanded by people rather than Guidestone. Any claim that people are clamoring for this is anecdotal and self-serving.
And regardless, it is still a bad idea. Have the people who have supposedly demanded this really thought it through? I doubt it.
Guidestone has said that they money it earns will go to help struggling retired pastors.
Guidestone has the Mission Dignity program. That’s great. Let’s just fund that program.
We should not use poor retired pastors as a reason to promote a bad idea. Just because the proceeds of some money making scheme might go to fund a worthy cause does not mean that the scheme should be done.
Giving to the poor is a worthy endeavor. I am perfectly willing, for the sake of discussion, to attribute only the highest of motives to Guidestone. But good motives do not make a bad idea a good idea.
This is such an effective ploy I fully expect to see pictures of retired, impoverished pastors on display at the Convention meeting.
Guidestone says that while financial products are available for sale at many places, Guidestone does some special, unique socially screening not done by others.
This is not accurate. There are many social screened investment products available for purchase in the market. Guidestone does not offer a unique product that is not available on the open market. In fact, Guidestone offers some socially screened products that can be purchased directly from those who do the screening and manage the investments. Most, if not all, of Guidestone’s products are managed by others. Guidestone is a “manager of managers.”
Guidestone will say that it received an award for its financial products.
That’s good, but others have received the same awards. Guidestone has not received any award that has not also been given to others.
I am sure that this idea has proceeded so far along that there will be little opposition to it at the Convention. Most people do not understand this issue. Those who do will not be able to persuade a large majority of the Convention to vote against it.
But there should be opposition.
Guidestone will have some interesting years ahead. As large numbers of Southern Baptist ministers retire, they will be drawing down on their retirement savings. Given the demographics, this may significantly affect the amount of funds that Guidestone has under management.
Opening up Guidestone’s customer base to individuals may be a way to stem the loss that is coming from the payout of retirement accounts.
I would say that does not matter. Let’s just manage whatever we have, whether if be big or small.
Well, there’s these folks advertising on the radio all of the time. And I think at least one entity (Lifeway) probably regards Southern Baptist church members as a customer base already.
In saying those things, I’m not taking a position either for or against this idea. I haven’t pondered it long enough to have a strong opinion one way or the other so far. I’m simply offering my opinion that this would not make history in the way that the post seems to suggest.
Dave,
I find myself agreeing with your post more that disagreeing, but while there are some drawbacks to this change there are some positives. Because insurance is defined as ‘shared-risk’ (I learn that many years ago when I took the Life & Health test), I would rather ‘share my risk’ with people who life stye is decidedly like my own. However, as you have stated, there are some liabilities. I won’t be in Houston next week – expensive trip – so I won’t vote. If I were there I would probably vote in favor -just because of the trust I have in those Trustees and the leadership at Guidestone.
Thanks for your thought-provoking word. Grace…
Bart:
I obviously thought about LifeWay, and considered putting something in the post about that.
It seems to me that the great commission to go and preach the gospel and teach others to observed what Jesus commanded naturally includes the publishing and sale of Bibles and religious literature. I see that as very closely related to our calling. Only the church has been given that message, and we are stewards of that message.
Financial products, on the other hand, are in a different category. There are many great companies that sell those.
Purchasing financial products on the open market that is regulated is whole lot healthier, I believe, than buying them from your church.
Thanks, as always, for your thoughts.
Why is assisting people with money issues any less ministry than any other life issue?
There are so many holes in your argument it is more like a slice of Swiss.
For example: Guidestones proposal has nothing to do with a pastor being an investment advisor.
Also, you use a fallacy of appealing to fear by implying Guidestones is going to turn church members into “consumers”. Actually they are ministers and servants and treat Clients as masters.
I just don’t follow your logic at all.
Bart:
Thanks for the lead on Thrivent For Lutherans. That’s a private fraternal benefit society. It’s not that old, but it’s predecessor organizaitons had been around a long time. One of the societies was started so that Luthernan pastors could have fraternal lodge and get insurance products.
I tried to see if it was equivalent to the SBC selling investments. From what I can tell, it is not.
Guidestone is governed by a Board that is appointed by the SBC. I believe under the “sole member” rule, the SBC is the only member of Guidestone.
Thrivent has a Board of individuals, and they elect new people to the Board.
There is no official governance by or connection to the Lutheran denominations that I could see.
So I can’t say that the denomination runs this.
Apparently, an enterprising group of Lutherans came up with an idea of starting an financial organizaiton that targets Lutherans.
You and I could start – “Baptist Financial – a complete financial, insurance and retirement shop for Baptists.” Are you in?
I look forward to more comments on this because it will be interesting to see if any other denominations are doing this. The blog readers will know for sure.
We may all be Mormons before it’s over.
Thanks.
Louis,
I believe you are correct that Thrivent is not tied to any one Lutheran denomination in particular. It is a fraternal organization for Lutherans, regardless of what denomination they belong to.
Likewise, the Knights of Columbus is a fraternal organization for Roman Catholics. (I understand they were set up as an alternative to the Masons. Lutherans have also been strongly anti-Masonic so the same history may apply there as well with regard to their old fraternal organizations.) The KofC sell insurance, etc. to their members as well although I don’t think they are as big as Thrivent. Thrivent Financial certainly has a bigger presence, periodically recruiting agents on the job boards. Their agents don’t have to be Lutheran.
There are many other fraternal organizations that sell insurance of various kinds. Some of them are quite well known. In many cases, the coverage is more expensive compared with non-fraternal companies but they sell the fraternal benefits as being worth more than the difference in price. Some of the fraternals are quite sound financially, others are less so.
Louis,
I’m definitely not asserting an absolute equivalence between Lifeway’s marketing to Southern Baptists and the potential that Guidestone might do so—not saying that if one is a good idea then the other must be a good idea. Rather, out of the 100 points that you made in your post, 1 of them (“this is unprecedented”) strikes me as not being well taken. I’m still taking the other 99 under advisement.
You are a gentleman and a scholar!
But I did say the sale of financial products by the denomination to church members is unprecedented.
The Lutheran Church Missouri Synod runs its own Health/Life Insurance company as well.
The danger, in my opinion, would be if Southern Baptist’s were to assume that Guidestone has the best and cheapest coverages and terms. It could turn into another LifeWay where many congregants think LifeWay is the cheapest place to buy Christian literature and books and end up costing themselves money.
Thanks for bringing thios to my attention. I am very wary of this for some of the reasons you mentioned, namely its like shooting fish in a barrel. I don’t ever want to be in the place where I have something to sell and market it to the church I pastor. And I think the SBC should be wary as well. A private organisation could do this, but I wary of going this way with Guidestone.
I understand with Obamacare looming they may want to broaden the group with low risk folks, I understand that. But lets not rush into anything here.
I struggle for consistency in diet, exercise, and certain spiritual disciplines, but I have found amazing consistency in this – when I post guest columns I consistently forget to change the author from my name to guest blogger. This leads to confusion.
This post was authored by our friend Louis and not by me. My only role was to copy, paste and publish.
Louis,
I often agree with you, but disagree here. I think a lot of Baptists would welcome the opportunity to have Guidestone invest their money. But just like our pastors’ Guidestone retirement accounts, and just like other mutual funds, there would be no absolute guarantees.
A lot of Baptists would be glad to have competent, Christian financial advisors manage their money. While we will never agree on every detail of who to invest in or not, I also like the idea of them not investing in beer companies, porn, and other morally questionable companies.
As long as Guidestone was ethical and honest about their dealings, I see no reason to oppose this.
And I trust O. S. Hawkins.
David R. Brumbelow
David:
You are a great guy, and we do agree on a lot of things. Maybe I will see you at the Convention.
I, too, like O.S. Hawkins. It’s not a personal issue.
There are lots of fine Christian financial advisors who work for companies like Raymond James, Merrill Lynch, Wells Fargo etc. They are equally as Christian as Guidestone, but dealing with them would not create the concern that I have about a denomination selling financial products.
And as I mentioned, the advisors in any of these places can direct you to socially screened funds. Guidestone is not the only organizaton to offer those.
If you will be in Houston, I hope that we get a chance to meet.
Louis,
I will be in Houston.
I also hope we get a chance to meet.
David R. Brumbelow
Choices are a good thing…as long no one is compelled to invest through Guidestone….I am not sure I have an issue with it being offered.
I do agree though that I do not want to see sell jobs and commercials done from the platform…but honestly with Lifeway being a business and SB being their customer base…that door may have already been opened…so to speak.
If Guidestone should become one of the few safe havens where your insurance premiums would not pay for someone else’s use of abortifacient drugs and your retirement investments would not bankroll American Pie 14, then I would find value in that not only for myself, but also for those of my congregants who cared about such things.
And, although I might agree in the abstract that some entity not denominationally affiliated should provide such things as life-honoring medical insurance and socially-screened investment funds, it seems to me that the state of secular law is moving in such a direction that it is only by virtue of Guidestone’s tight connection with the SBC that it is able to do what it does without excessive government interference.
Thanks for making me think about this, Louis. You always write thought-provoking stuff. Even though I find myself, as I process this, coming down more on the other side of the question, I’m thankful that you have led me to give it careful and thoughtful consideration.
You are welcome, Bart.
Hope to see you in Houston.
We have never had a meal together or spoken for more than 10 mintues, but I somehow manage to see you, your lovely wife and her father at every Convention I attend.
Let’s not break the streak.
I’m all for it! I’ll look for you.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baptist_Foundation_of_Arizona
‘Nuff said.
Greg,
In the late 1920s embezzlement scandals rocked the Southern Baptist world when G. N. Sanders and Clinton S. Carnes in separate embezzlement schemes were able to walk away with $1 million of missions offerings. That time the entities bringing shame upon the SBC were the Foreign Mission Board and the Home Mission Board. I’m thankful that Southern Baptists in that era were able to see beyond the damage that poorly managed entities could do to the potential good that well managed entities could contribute to Southern Baptist life and ministry.
But you do raise another good point about whether this action would mark some milestone in the development of the SBC: The national convention and all of the state conventions already have foundations that market investments to Southern Baptists. Although the national SBC Foundation has an independent board, this is not the case with all of the state foundations. I think that they all have separate boards, but not independent, self-perpetuating ones.
http://www.sbfdn.org
One correction, at least to the SBC Foundation. The Foundation gives assistance to people who have decided to give to Baptist causes. It has been around for 50 or 60 years.
The Foundation does not sell investments or other financial products, or market them, to individuals.
That is what is unique about Guidestone’s proposal.
The Foundation exists to help other SBC agencies receive gifts that Southern Baptists have decided to give.
I can’t say for sure about the SBC Foundation, but most of these foundations will set up trusts, annuities, etc.; will receive funds from individual congregations to hold as investments; will assist people in making retirement plans in order to earn returns so that they can both leave an inheritance for their children and leave a bequest for SBC institutions, etc.; will invest CP funds held by institutions in order to earn a return for them.
I can see the difference that you’re pointing out…
1. Yes, Lifeway already markets to Southern Baptist individuals, but that’s for Bibles and curriculum and Evangicubes and Covered in Prayer Snuggies, not monetary investments promising to earn a return.
2. Yes, our foundations already market monetary investments promising to earn a return, but that’s only for estate planning, not retirement planning per se, and even at that it is only for people who are leaving something to a Baptist institution.
3. Yes, Guidestone is already providing insurance and investment services to Southern Baptists who are not necessarily leaving any sort of a bequest to Southern Baptist institutions, but only to those people who work the requisite number of hours for a Southern Baptist entity or congregation.
There’s a distinction to be made here, I can see that. But is there a difference? How does this nuanced expansion amount to a fundamental change in the relationship between the Southern Baptist Convention and the people in our churches?
My question is this:
Will we see Guidestone provide Covered-in-Prayer Snuggies to new health insurance accounts?
Because that would clinch it for me.
…and number two is……..or is that in another post yet to come?
Yes. Post two is awaited.
It seems to me that we ought to go along with Guidestone, since retirement investments will be drawn down due to retiring pastors.
Whatever makes Guidestone strong will make our retirement accounts stronger. This is the way investment operates.
I have no horse in this race, I lost all I had in there, crazy economy.
It seems to me the reasons you gave for not allowing everyone to invest just don’t stand up to scrutiny.
I wonder if feelings are outweighing common sense. Is a more powerful Guidestone better than a smaller one.
Would you give some better reasons not to allow the public in.
Jess, sometimes your brilliance blinds me.
I find myself agreeing with Jess here.
There’s no medicine for that
And the rash has become quite irritating. LOL. Seriously, Jess makes some good points here.
I personally believe that pastors and staff members of churches can benefit from a broader client base for Guidestone. See Bart Barber’s comment of support. I agree with him too. (That helps how I feel.)
And now that I’ve pondered on this all day, I’ve decided that I support this change enthusiastically. That’s not because (as I’ve indicated in some of the comments) I just don’t find Louis’s argument to be airtight or compelling (in my opinion). Simply not knowing a reason NOT to do something is a pitiful reason to do it. Rather, I’m in support because of three people I know. I’m going to change their names. Since we’re SOUTHERN Baptists around here, I’ll name them:
Jim Bob: Relocated from his church to attend seminary and then couldn’t find a job…no preaching job, no on-campus job, nothing. Worked through a year in school but finally reached a point that he was going to have to do something to support his family. He dropped out of school for the moment. He plans to re-enter SBC full-time pastoral ministry, but for now, he’s not in ministry at all. As a result, although he had Guidestone insurance, retirement plan, etc., suddenly he’s dumped out of all of that and has to try to find somewhere to replace it all and roll it all over. Under the new plan, during his hiatus and straitened circumstances he would not have the added difficulty of being required to change insurance provider and retirement planner.
John Boy: After a very serious illness and life-threatening surgery found himself unwittingly addicted to the pain killers his doctors had given him to take. The aftermath cost him his ministry—perhaps for good—and consequently cost him his insurance, just when he needs it more than ever before. Under the new plan, even as he goes to rehab and tries to get his life cleaned up, he can keep his current insurance.
Bubba: Having finished his MDiv and planning to pursue his PhD, he suddenly learns that his father is dying of cancer and that the pastor of his home church is going overseas with the IMB. He moves home, serves his home church as an interim pastor until they find a new pastor, helps with the family business throughout his dad’s illness and after his death, and then returns immediately to full-time local church ministry and his doctoral seminary studies. Of course, to do this he had to roll over his retirement investments twice and had to change insurers twice. Under the new plan this wouldn’t be necessary.
All of these are real scenarios. I know so in part because Bubba’s real name is Bart Barber. I know that Guidestone tries to work with people in difficult situations, but they simply cannot, as things stand now, continue to take retirement contributions from me or provide me with insurance unless I meet the current employment requirements connecting me with an SBC entity or church.
Since so many people obtain both their health insurance and their retirement plans through their workplace, I cannot imagine that teeming masses of “ordinary” Southern Baptists will come flocking to Guidestone products. But for the men in the scenarios that I mentioned above (and others like them), I think this change could be a good thing.
Bart,
Those are great examples.
But Guidestone is not doing this so it can provide insurance to uninsurable people. I actually might support that, strangely enough, because that would actually be a ministry. I am not sure it could be done in a financially feasible way, but I am not an actuary.
Guidestone’s proposal is designed to increase the investment side of the business. To put the SBC in the market with Merrill Lynch and the others.
You are right that it is not an airtight argument given how big the SBC already is and the things that it provides.
But I do see this as a different thing. We are supposed to be about proclaiming the Gospel and making disciples. All of the other things that we do are simply ancillary to that purpose.
Expanding into a strictly commercial enterprise is not good for a religious denomination. It creates a strange relationship between the denomination and its people by creating a financial incentive that previously did not exist. This is different from helping ministers get insurance and save for their retirements, Guidestone’s original purposes.
It also creates an unusual presentation to the world. We are now trying to sell individuals financial products, rather than just do what the church does – present the Gospel and make disciples. That’s why I don’t get all worked up about LifeWay selling Bibles and religious literature.
At any rate it will be interesting to see how this plays out in the years to come.
Thank you all for your interesting comments.
Is not the SBC doing this with the Southern Baptist Purchasing Alliance
All we are doing is adding financial products. I realize it is not exactly the same but similar enough.
http://www.bpnews.net/BPnews.asp?ID=15435
Rob:
These are private companies that make their services available at discount.
I actually think this may be a good idea. I have long wished that I could maintain the health insurance I had while a seminary student into the years I’ve now spent as a lay minister. Guidestone’s investment products have never interested me much, but I would certainly consider them in addition to or in place of my existing choices based on what good Guidestone could do with the profits they make from my investments that are currently padding the ledgers of companies that have no interest in helping anyone but themselves.
I appreciate the concerns over profiteering from SBC church-members, but Lifeway has not caused huge problems in this area and I doubt Guidestone would either. I have to think that the analogy of money changers in the temple is a bit of a stretch since I doubt many, if any, churches will setup Guidestone financial offices within churches themselves and if Guidestone wants a retail presence there are plenty of Lifeway stores spread across the country to accomodate that without Guidestone ever having to directly enter a church.
So, I think the pitfalls and concerns raised are overblown and that depending on the details this proposal could actually be a good thing for Guidestone and for Southern Baptists.
I love Guidestone. I have done everything humanly possible to support them and the ministry program. I wished I had read this earlier to respond. I have learned in life “EXPERIENCE trumps THEORY”.
I made the mistake in Arizona of helping the Baptist Annuity Program there by promoting it within the church, having a special meal for the rep to present it and a lot of my seniors got involved. Our DOM did additional investments in it.
For you that don’t remember, The Baptist Annuity program there was the largest non-profit to file for bankruptcy at the time. My members lost much of their retirement. Our DOM lost 80% of his.
I do want to state, unequivocally and without reservation I have the utmost confidence in Guidestone and will put every extra nickel I have with them, but I think it is a bad idea to use the church as a marketing means. God Bless
Pastor Al,
I inherited the problem with the Baptist Foundation of Arizona. Many of my seniors were devastated. The church lost a little.
The very same thing happened at the California Baptist Foundation but they were able to dodge legal troubles and basically it was swept under the rug. The loss was in the millions.
Our church lost hundreds of thousands.
Now, Guidestone wants to get into similar activities? I guess two State Convention Foundation examples were not warning enough.
Caveat emptor.
I think it’s much more than “caveat emptor”. There is a tremendous amount of pooled risk when anyone can leverage a relationship with a community of potential investors to scam the whole group. And it isn’t just Baptists that sometimes fall for it. For a bracing list of financial scandals, I’ll offer Wiki’s List of Ponzi schemes in the 21st century
I simply think there is reason for tremendous caution at turning the relationship with the local body of believers into a primary marketing channel for an investment firm no matter how trustworthy its leaders are. I used to fuss at my dad, too, when the BSSB had advertisements on the outside of the quarterlies that many of us carried into the church on Sunday. I kind of took Jesus’s turning over of tables seriously for some strange reason.
“But Guidestone wants to expand its customer base to include individuals, regardless of whether they work in a church or for an SBC entity.”
After a re-read of this post I think I’ve hit on something:
Maybe the Guidestone proposal is a way to reverse the 50 year decline we’ve all been bemoaning in our other discussions of late. Who can resist the possibility of salvation AND health insurance benefits?
🙂
Dale,
I know you are joking, but it’s not the health insurance they are wanting to expand. Pastors, as a group are notoriously unhealthy.
It’s the investment side they want to expand.
Yes, I was joking.
(So both temporal and eternal benefits?)
Well, this one passed handily. A few ‘no’ votes, but no discussions or questions. By observation, not many people understood this. It came as an executive committee recommendation.
The implementation of this in the future will be interesting.
“””no discussion””””
That alone cause me to have great reservations.
California Baptist Foundation, Arizona Baptist Foundation—apparently losing over a half-billion in investors money with two Southern Baptist leaders now sitting in prison, history just doesn’t matter.
No questions? Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.