You Make the Call – Episode 4
You make the call … on Cooperative Program support by denominational employees …
Here is our imaginary scenario:
A prominent, tenured, full professor at a Southern Baptist seminary, generously salaried through Cooperative Program dollars, also serves as a full-time pastor of a large church near the seminary.
The yearly Cooperative Program report of his state convention reveals that his church gave only $100 through the cooperative program during the past year. A study of the reports from previous years shows a similar pattern of CP giving.
How would you respond? How should Southern Baptists respond, especially in light of the plethora of calls from almost every Southern Baptist entity for local churches to increase Southern Baptist Cooperative Program giving?
Geoff,
Did you mean that he serves as a full-time pastor of a large church near the seminary? If not, I don’t quite understand why the professor is included in the question.
My best answer, given what I know about the situation is that if the CP wants more money, they should require it. If God hasn’t called them to give more money, then it doesn’t matter who else is calling for more money. Plus, this church may spend tons of money on its own missionaries.
So my response would be… “ok, thanks for supporting the CP”
and others should respond… “ok, thanks for supporting the CP”
God’s Glory,
Lew
Lew,
That’s right … pastor. Didn’t catch the error late last night.
So, you’re saying you don’t have any problem, at all, with the professor’s church record of leadership in CP giving?
Geoff,
Some people and churches give directly to the Executive Committee instead of through the CP. Some do this because they think that their state keeps too much of the money. The money given directly to the EC is not reported as CP giving.
-Alan
Geoff,
I’m not Lew but I don’t have a problem with the pastor in that scenario. I may have one with the CHURCH, but SBC churches seem bent on the fact that our pastors don’t “run” our churches.
The matter certainly bears looking into, but I’m not sure by whom.
Geoff,
Yes, given what I know about the situation, I can see no problem with what is happening. But I’m not assuming that they’re spending the money on sexy parties or anything like that either.
God’s Glory,
Lew
Thanks for making us think. I guess I see it from a different perspective, but I blame the seminary for hiring a guy whose church seems not to support it. When I worked for the denomination we were constantly reminded to encourage the churches where we were members to make the C.P. a priority. I suspect a few did, but certainly not all. I do know that a church’s giving to C.P. was a factor in the hiring of pastors to serve on the staff of the convention I served.
First, is it a good idea for someone to be both a full-time professor and a full-time pastor? It seems a bit much for one person to handle. While seminary profs can (and arguably should) gladly serve as interim pastors, preach revivals, or pastor very small congregations, the situation as described seems to go beyond that. So there is more going on here than just the CP issue.
As for the CP: there is a certain justice in seminaries hiring only people who are enthusiastically supportive of the funding sources that keep the seminary open. Yet this can also unduly restrict the pool of candidates. Over time the result may be a kind of “inbred” faculty that does not serve the students well.
Another issue, as someone already mentioned, is that pastors often have little control over the church budget. If the seminary punishes profs because their church doesn’t support the CP enough (whatever that is), then the seminary is in effect punishing the churches – profs will cease wanting to work for those churches. End result: yet more strife and division.
Another thing that you have to keep in mind about a scenario like this is that the Church where this Prof. Pastors may not be willing to give more. Maybe he’s encouraging it, and he’s teaching them to see it, but they just arent willing to give it. I have some Pastor friends in this very same boat. They want thier Churches to give more. They encourage thier Churches to give more. But, the people who make up the budget aint willing to go for it.
David
i think the CP has no right to interfere with the church decision process.
Leveraging the professor’s job to force the church to GIVE (a big part of that definition being “voluntarily”) more is, to me, entirely wrong.
Leave it alone.
Bernard,
I see your point. Leveraging anything against a local church would be completely out of line.
But I also see a blatant mass of hypocrisy here. There is not a week that passes by when I do not receive literature that lifts up the CP, or challenges the local churches to give more. So, as I consider a scenario like this one, I am a bit (pretend) offended. I find it outrageous that someone who receives a full-time CP salary (and another full-time pastor’s salary, to boot) leads a church that gives a mere whisper to SB causes.
Sure, the hypocrisy is obvious.
As it is when I sing “I Surrender All” and refuse to help the homeless.
I propose that we pray for our hypothetical church. Earnestly. Pray for God to bless them, revive them, and encourage them. Pray for God to burden them.
God the Holy Spirit USES the “pleas” from the SBC for the CP to encourage churches. Perhaps it’s working at this hypothetical church, and next year, they may give $10,000.
Step one – pray. Step two – have faith that God can and will accomplish His purposes. After all, we do say He is all-powerful, don’t we? Step three – glorify God regardless of HOW He accomplishes His purpose. (Perhaps the pastor loses his job at the seminary because God doesn’t like the hypocrisy, either, but that really wasn’t what we meant, was it???)
I think sometimes we try to invent man-made ways to solve God-sized problems so that we don’t have to give Him credit. :) I promise that God isn’t wringing His hands, wondering where the next $5 is going to come from.
Bernard,
Don’t get me wrong, brother. The purpose of this hypothetical post is not to champion the Cooperative Program. To be honest, the church that I pastor only gives a small amount to the CP. (Our strategy, instead, is to personally support church plants, mobilize dozens of our volunteers to the mission field each year, and support our work as a Church planting Strategist Church among the Panao Quechua people in Peru. This is about 20% of our budget.)
Instead, the hypocrisy in this scenario is found in the one receiving benefit from the CP is not re-investing in the CP. They don’t allow this with church plants … it should not be acceptable for other convention employees.
This scenario is the same (in my view) as a pastor receiving a full-time salary from a local church and not giving anything (from his own income) to the church’s general fund.
So where does this hypothetical professor hypothetically profess?
Now, Ted …
Don’t pretend like you don’t already know. ;)
Geoff,
So who is guilty of hypocrisy?
Scott
Geoff – I understand. As briefly as possible – my point is that the job of the professor is to, well, profess. If his credentials must include “comes from a church that gives us a lot of money”, that smacks of something akin to “good old boy club” or “insider trading”. In other words, we don’t hire professors because they’re good at professing, but because the churches they pastor give us a lot of money. I think THAT is a MUCH worse hypocrisy. If we only give to the programs that benefit US, doesn’t that seem just as backward? Should a pastor be required to tithe to the church that pays him? My opinion is that matter is between the pastor and God, and it’s VERY hypocritical of the church to say “we’ll give you a 10 percent raise, knowing that we’ll get 1% of it back anyway.” Childish, to be blunt. If a church “checks up” on a pastor to see if he’s “tithing properly”, every dadgummed person in the building had better be “tithing properly” before they cast the first stone. Likewise, whether a church is giving “a lot” to the cooperative program should be a matter for the church and God, not a matter that is decided based on whether or not that church’s pastor works for an entity that is supported by the CP.
I think it’s very unwise to “connect” the two.
Professors should be hired based on whether they can profess. Not whether they can bring a lot of funding along with them. No no no no no. Convention presidents should be elected on whether they can do the job, not on whether they bring a lot of money to the table. No no no no no.
That’s as brief and quick as I know how to be.
:)
PS – I don’t even think it’s good business to require it of the church plants, to be honest. That’s overstepping the bounds of autonomy right off the bat. If we’re planting a CHURCH, isn’t it autonomous? If not, let’s stop calling it a CHURCH planting movement and call it what it is – a business venture.
Geoff, not pretending at all. I’m so involved in meeting some deadlines and sort of in what I call denominational purgatory, I really don’t know. I’m sure when I find out it will be a “duhhh” moment.
I understand not wanting to put it on a blog. Shoot me an email if you don’t mind. I’ll respond. I do have some thoughts.
Ted,
I’m just kidding man … This scenario is purely a figment of my imagination, written only to provoke thought and discussion in my “You Make the Call” series.
No one in particular is in my mind.
Scott,
I don’t think I catch your drift.
To me, it seems like a test that no one knows about, yet everyone is secretly judging you by. Kinda like those old ladies who watch to see who drops an envelope into the bucket. Then they get to have little meetings with their friends where they talk about how “joe” didn’t put an envelope in the bucket last week.
Except, now it’s, “First Baptist Michigan only gave 100$ to the CP last year… but we know they bring in 100,000$ in tithes every year!”
It’s not a requirement to be a SB, it’s not a requirement from God, and there are a number of other ways a church can support SB’s without giving to the CP. A number makes it much to easy for us to judge, but without more information, than maybe we should just trust that these brothers are following what God is leading them to do.
Lew
Lew
OK. Strictly hypothetical.
Is it legal? Yes. The systems dictate that and it seems to be an axiom that some people learn the system, manipulate or milk it for all its worth. So, And, there must a great “buzz” for a preacher-professor to be “in demand”. Is that a “ministerial cocaine”? Systems must be reviewed and changed from time to time. If the system allows this (both church and seminary), then one or both need to change their system. Otherwise, the complaints are mute. Church and seminary created the system. The individual has just learned an economically advantageous loophole.
Is it moral? Can the person in question give that which is required of both employers and at the same time give to God and family that which they require and deserve? I don’t think so. No matter what the system with its regs, we still only get one body and 168 hours per week. So some choices have to be made and those choices made will reflect the true values of the hypothetical person in question.
Maybe someone should ask this person’s wife???
Just my hypothetical thoughts. :)
Interesting discussion. Is it just me or is allegiance to the CP moving up in the matrix of what it means to be SBC? I know all the “united around missions” stuff, but I’m thinking about what gets you “in” and what puts you “out”.
Just wondering if the ground is shifting under our feet.
David
Geoff,
Regarding my question as to who was being a hypocrite, I was responding to this paragraph in your original post:
“But I also see a blatant mass of hypocrisy here. There is not a week that passes by when I do not receive literature that lifts up the CP, or challenges the local churches to give more. So, as I consider a scenario like this one, I am a bit (pretend) offended. I find it outrageous that someone who receives a full-time CP salary (and another full-time pastor’s salary, to boot) leads a church that gives a mere whisper to SB causes.”
My point is simple, I don’t think you have even come close to proving that this professor/pastor is a hypocrite. It would be an entirely different matter if he was discouraging his flock from not giving to the CP. This may in fact be true, but you haven’t published anything of that nature.
Otay now I get it. ;)
But …
Were this scenario to actually exist, I would still think it hypocritical.
I know that in the world of SB church planting, most states REQUIRE a 10% return to the state’s CP (and also a percentage to the local association) for state-sponsored NAMB support. So, what that amounts to, is that in order for a church plant to receive a few thousand dollars in sponsorship, they must covenant to give this percentage … which, naturally, will amount to far more than the original support in the mid to long term.
But in this pretend scenario, there is a tenured professor who receives (maybe?) 60-80K a year from the CP gifts of other churches, yet his own church is (functionally) a non-contributor to the source of his own income.
Were this to exist, I would think it something of an ethical inconsistency (in the very least).
But, remember, it’s all pretend … right?
Geoff,
I think you are missing my point. On the one hand you have a pastor who takes CP funds, and on the other you have a church that doesn’t give to the CP. It is two different people/groups. The only connection between the two is that he pastors the second. How could it be considered hypocritical if the church, by the congregational form of government so dearly followed by SBCs, decides not to give to the CP? The only thing that makes it suspect is if he is telling them not to give (or something similar).
“The only connection between the two is that he pastors the second. How could it be considered hypocritical if the church, by the congregational form of government so dearly followed by SBCs, decides not to give to the CP?”
What makes you sure it has congregational polity? I get the impression SBTS emphasizes elder rule only.
The CP is one way (albeit the most common way) for SBC churches to give. A stingy church is outside the will of God, in my opinion. Let’s ask whether this church gives any $$ outside the CP and what proportion or percentage of receipts. Then, we find an easier time judging the situation.
[...] You Make The Call (CP issues post) from SBC Impact [...]
Leave your response!
Want your picture to show here? Get your own Gravatar!
Recent Posts
Most Commented
Hot Topics