A little lift for the Cooperative Program

They might break out the party stuff at the Executive Committee office in Nashville over the most recent statistics on the Cooperative Program.

CP 4.81% ahead of projection

Baptist Press reports the latest figures released by the EC. Budget projections for this year were, I presume, conservatively set and CP monies received by the EC are almost 5% above projections. Actual receipts for the fiscal year, five months of those hard dollars that are distributed mainly to the mission boards, seminaries, and ERLC are up almost 3% from the same period last year. That is about $2.4 million more than received by the end of February, 2014.

Small percentages might not seem like much but any increase is encouraging. We will see how the rest of the year goes. State conventions have varied in their schedule for sending the money to Nashville. But, for now it looks good for the year.

Which brings me to the survey of Southern Baptist pastors conducted last spring. Whenever such surveys are conducted, results are all rosy and the future predictably bright for the Cooperative Program. I mean by that, 81% of pastors agree that the CP supports SBC ministries and missions that their church values.

Don't get too excited by that, even though the comparable figure for the 2012 CP survey of pastors was only 73%. Pastors have always replied to surveys that the Cooperative Program is great, apple pie, motherhood and all that, while leading their churches to decrease their percentages.

Still, some good news is welcome. A few reasons for optimism on the CP:

• NAMB's Send North America program of church planting and partnerships has clearly engaged a segment of Southern Baptist churches, pastors, and potential church planters. The attendance at the SNA event in Nashville in August should eclipse the SBC annual meeting attendance in Columbus, OH set for June.
• Many younger Southern Baptists are enthused about thirtysomething David Platt being the new CEO of our IMB. He has outlined a reorganization recently but I have no idea from reports exactly what this entails other than doing some reassigning, shuffling, and stuff like that.
• The CP can't go much lower, can it? Is around 5% of each church's undesignated offerings the floor? Maybe so. 
• No one is mad about much that is going on at the SBC level. Give it some time, though. This is our practice.
• State conventions, the main recipient of CP dollars (they average getting about sixty cents on every CP dollar) are behaving and not alienating their in-state constituent churches.
• Some are taking Frank Page up on his latest CP increase program.

Of course, let's not overlook the fact that most of the money our Executive Committee receives from the state conventions is designated money - mainly Lottie Moon and Annie Armstrong offerings. After the state conventions take their 60% cut of the CP, what's left to distribute totals less than money that churches designate. I see no CP increase that will shift this back to the CP being the greater sum for SBC ministres.

Maybe I can finagle an invitation to the Executive Committee's CP increase party.

Can't get a crowd at any national SBC event these days?

"No one goes to the convention anymore," laments some of the brethren who have been around long enough to remember the sardine days where 20,000, 30,000, and 40,000 messengers could pack into a meeting venue.

Not quite true. It's just that the crowds are heavily diminished. Here are the past five years:

2010    Orlando          11,070
2011    Phoenix            4,814
2012    New Orleans    7,814
2013    Houston           5,103
2014    Baltimore         5,294

Toss out Orlando, the attendance bump for which we can thank Mickey Mouse. Look askance at New Orleans because it's a nice venue with the crawfish, beignets, and all that. That leaves SBC attendance in the 5k range. Pretty low for a denomination where millions gather each Lord's Day to worship in almost 50,000 churches.

Consider this: The North American Mission Board's SEND NORTH AMERICA conference scheduled for this summer already has over 7,200 registrations. Toss out maybe a couple of hundred unpaid registrations and that is 7,000 registrants paying $129 per person (early registrants paid $89) to attend.

The SBC annual meeting costs zip, only food, transportation, and lodging, nothing to attend.

So, why would seven thousand Southern Baptists pay good money to attend an SNA conference when the SBC meeting is free?

There are a lot of reasons why in 2015 Southern Baptists aren't that keen to attend the SBC annual meeing and slap backs, glad hand, and engage in the annual bragfest with old friends.

• It's boring.
• There's nothing much going on these days.
• Folks don't see much value in attending.
• Nothing much will change in the old ship SBC.
• Neither my presence, my vote, nor my voice count for much in the SBC.
• Decisions are pre-made by an oligarchy of SBC grandees and conventions just ratify them.

In contrast, NAMB's SNA conference engages enthusiastic participants who have an interest in planting churches. Church planters, potential church planters, churches that are interested in sponsoring a church plant all are eager to attend.

Of course, the goal is not to have a rousing conference with a great attendance. The goal is to plant churches. So far, SNA is young enough not to have a reportable track record of churches planted and a record of how they are doing, but Southern Baptists are engaged in the process.

Factor in the reality that a vocal segment of SBCers don't really like NAMB and the attendance figures are indeed impressive.

Suppose, pastor, you have a modest budgetary item, say $1,000, to spend on conventions and conferences. How would you spend it?

Many are choosing to forego the SBC annual meeting for SNA or other opportunities. 

Why?

You tell me.

Top SBC Good News Stories of 2014

Bah humbug! Bad news all around...but...here's my list of the top good news stories for SBCers in 2014:

1. Lottie Moon hits record total, $154.1 million.

Southern Baptists may be giving less to the Cooperative Program and less of their disposable income to churches and mission causes, SBC entities may be mired in retrenchment mode because of flat or declining giving, but the Lottie Moon Christmas Offering for International Missions is at its highest level ever (but I am not allowing anyone to recalculate this in real dollars, adjusted for inflation, so as not to rain on good news).

2. Messengers elect a president who has greatly increased his church's Cooperative Program giving.

OK, so Ronnie Floyd's church is still below the average percentage and Baptist Press didn't report what that percentage was but he did lead his church to give substantially more to the CP than in earlier years. The CP has no chance of any increases if messengers elect leaders who show no interest in supporting it and most megachurches are not heavy CP supporters. This year, the election of a megachurch pastor was a positive move relative to the Cooperative Program.

3. Our housing allowance is safe from federal constitutional challenges.

At least it is safe for now, the previous federal district court's ruling that it was unconstitutional having been overturned on appeal.

4. IMB trustees show a willingness to embrace the 21st century.

With the election of thirty-six year old David Platt as the new IMB leader, replacing his seventy-year-old predecessor, trustees demonstrate that they recognize that some new thinking is in order for our flagship institution. Younger Southern Baptists are encouraged thereby.

5. Southern Baptist leaders and entities recognize mental illness as a grave problem.

The SBC, it's leaders and entities, have been AWOL on the serious business of mental illness among us. While leadership cannot force change at the local church level, at least there has been a steady stream of sensible initiatives from our folks. Regretfully, this has come as a result of the suicides of two children of high profile SBC leaders.

6. At various levels, the SBC is showing engagement on racial issues.

The response to racial turmoil of Ferguson, Missouri and of the death of Michael Brown in New York has generated sensible commentary from our leaders and mostly civil and profitable discussion among us. This is a change and is good news.

7. NAMB's church planting initiative, Send North America, is continuing to thrive.

While some critics snipe about it, SNA is engaging large numbers of younger Southern Baptists who are interested in church planting and large numbers of SBC churches who wish to partner in planting churches in North America. One is hard-pressed to name any other national SBC initiative that shows success.

8. Great Commission Giving is up.

Southern Baptist churches gave $777 million in Great Commission Giving for 2012-2013, an increase of $23 millions from the previous reporting period. GCG is the aggregate of giving to all SBC causes. Although these figures are somewhat soft in that churches self-report as they choose, any increase is good news. Critics of GCG will have to explain why it is not good to give to SBC causes and why such should not be celebrated.

9. The key Cooperative Program percentage increased.

That would be the percentage of undesignated church offering plate dollars given to the CP. We moved up ever so slightly from 5.414% to 5.5%. This makes two years straight there was a tiny, tiny increase. Frank Page concludes that the CP has reached its "nadir". An increase of 0.086% isn't much...but it's something.

10. Average SBC clergy salaries are up.

The 2014 LifeWay Compensation Study revealed that total "package" compensation for senior pastors was up 1.8% from 2012. Not much but up is up and not down...has to be good news. Senior pastors are advised to thank God for this and not to complain that the average pay for non-senior pastor staff positions were up by a good bit more than for senior pastors.

Record low attendance? Not here.

Southern Baptists are all about numbers, ad nauseum, ad absurdum, and often to our harm. Admit it, pastor, when numbers are declining in your church, you feel bad, you feel inadequate, you feel unfulfilled, you feel unsuccessful.

So, when there is an SBC event with low attendance, it is usually followed by grave handwringing sessions, laments about the decline of our grand denomination, and a surfeit of analysis and expert opinions.

This past June the SBC met in annual session in one of our major southern states, Texas, in one of the cities where we have shining megastars, Houston, and the attendance in June was pathetic, just over 5,000. At the meeting a VP was elected with just a few hundred votes, nowhere near a quorum of 25% of registrants.

The laments commenced.

How about something that is good news? Stellar numbers? How about something that has caught the enthusiasm and support of significant numbers of SBCers, particularly younger ones?

The North American Mission Board's Send North America conference met in Texas this week, Dallas metroplex rather than Houson, and the attendance was almost as large as the SBC annual meeting. Baptist Press reported  attendance of over 4,200.

NAMB President Kevin Ezell said he was "ecstatic about the turnout" for the event. "Not only the energy and electricity among the participants, but the passion and heart of pastors and planters -- it all exceeds our expectations. The ethnic diversity is fantastic. Obviously this confirms the launch of a new day. It is a new day and a new NAMB."
Most important, Ezell said, were the partnerships and commitments that were made at the conference.
"We've had more than 500 participants say they want to take the next steps in church planting. And more and more churches are stepping up to say they will partner with our planters. So the ongoing impact of these two days will really be the measure of success," Ezell said.

Of course, the goal is not to have large meetings but to share the Gospel, see people in North America saved, and plant churches. The critical metrics for all this aren't beginning to register just yet but one cannot help but be optimistic about the interest of Southern Baptists in the effort.

This is the same NAMB that was our most dysfunctional entity just a few years ago and the same Kevin Ezell who was welcomed with skepticism and criticism when he became the new NAMB CEO.

I lack both the calling and the skill set to be a church planter but I have worked with many. They all complained about meager support from NAMB and from Southern Baptists. I don't hear as much of that as I did earlier. I get the feeling that planters have greater support both denominaitonally and from established churches and pastors.

We should all be glad to see it.

No problems with a quorum at this SBC meeting

While the annual meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention had its lowest registration when meeting in a southern city since the youngest Baby Boomer was a toddler, and while some lower level SBC business was conducted with far less than a 25% quorum, there was one SBC event that had no problem with a quorum but had a decidedly gaudy attendance in comparison.

That would be the North American Mission Board's Send North America luncheon held during the SBC Pastor's Conference (BP photo above).

The attendance was an estimated 3,500.

Hmmm, we scratch and scrape to find a few hundred for some business sessions of the SBC's annual meeting but are bulging for a special interest luncheon where the focus is planting churches in North America.

There may be something of a lesson here.

SNA is the only big new thing in the SBC's playbook. It is a year old and although the metrics thus far are only things like attendance at conferences, numbers of churches involved, and church planters who have signed on, there is reason to be optimistic. The enthusiasm factor is evidence of that.

Quorum schmorum. 

It is good to see something that generates some positive numbers in the SBC.

Baptism miasma? Here's a possibility for a cure

The preconvention reporting of SBC statistics usually triggers a spate of old fashioned Baptist hand-wringing.  This year's total baptism figure puts it on steroids.

Baptist Press reports that baptisms for 2012 were at their lowest level since 1948 when the earliest Baby Boomers were toddlers. Total baptisms, 314,956 for 2012, are down over 18k from the previous year. The 5.5% drop is the largest percentage decline in quite some time.

"Woe is us" sayeth any and all SBC leaders and others:

"heartbreaking"  Thom Ranier, head of LifeWay

 "God forgive us and God help us." Frank Page, Executive Committee CEO

While the figure for 2012 is a continuation of the well-established, long term trend of declining baptism, this has been evident for decades, no one wants to say that it is business as usual and to be expected, even though it is.

The SBC is a declining denomination and has been for five years or so. We reluctantly join the other mainline denominations in a slow statistical slog southward. In spite of assurances otherwise, The Conservative Resurgence didn't stave off a decline but merely conserved the status quo a little longer.

Baptists may not be good at baptizing folks these days we we are still pretty good at finger pointing and there is no end to morbid self-introspection about declining baptisms: we're not reaching youth like we used to, we're not evangelistic, pastors are not aggressive enough, were not praying enough, we're not going door-to-door with big, thick, heavy King James Bibles like we used to, we are too culturally irrelevant, we are too culturally relevant, we sing to many hymns, we sing too many peppy contemporary dittys, we don't use vocational evangelists any longer, God just needs to send revival etc. etc., ad nauseum.

Overwhelmed and drowned out, pardon the pun, by the sagging baptism figure was the fact that the SBC showed an increase in the total number of churches. It was slight, 270 or a 0.6% increase from the previous year, but slightly up is better than markedly down.

That's good.


I offer the possibility that Southern Baptists are already doing something that has the potential to improve our baptism statistics. 

To not an inordinate bit of complaining, our North American Mission Board has redirected a considerable part of their budget and retooled much of their emphasis towards the planting of churches. Their flagship church planting initiative is Send North America. My association near Atlanta is part of this and there are already new churches being funded and planned through SNA.

Is it not settled that new churches grow faster than mature churches and that new churches baptize more with fewer members than legacy churches?

Yep.

And while various state conventions have church revitalization programs that are aimed at reinvigorating the thousands of sepulchral congregations around the SBC, most of us would predict failure in that lugubrious task, chiefly because churches are happy where they are and simply do not wish to be revitalized.
        
So, is it reasonable to think that a goal of increasing baptisms will more likely be reached through new congregations than by trying to persuade, cajole, or badger existing churches to make changes?

Yep.

After we're done with our annual pre-convention hand wringing session over declining baptisms and church membership, perhaps we could put some energy into doing the things that might help reverse this trend.

It is too early to measure the success of NAMB's work but it is about the only thing we are doing right now that holds out the possibility for a positive increase.

Doleful talk and tired, boilerplate warnings about the future may make us feel good but will not put more people in the baptistery.

Send North America probably will. Any church, any pastor will find a place to contribute through this, so take a day or two to be disconsolate about the latest baptism statistics and then start doing something positive about it. 

NAMB, State Conventions back on the same page

The big news back in February coming out of the Fellowship of State Executive Directors annual meeting was the naming of a state executives' special committee, "A Study Committee on Implementation of NAMB Initiatives with State Conventions."

The concern was over how the North American Mission Board was redirecting its budget to reflect new priorities. The changes at NAMB meant that some state conventions were to get less money and sacred cows were mooing mightily all across the SBC landscape; hence, this highly visible study committee, sort of a shot across NAMB's bow.

The study committee thereupon went into the deep freeze, since not a syllable has been heard about it since...until now.

Sensibly, the state convention leaders have decided to go along and get along with NAMB. Baptist Press reports this today in their story,

State, NAMB leaders to move forward 'in unity'.

All that was said publicly on this is in the quote below:

On September 13, 2012, state executive directors met with North American Mission Board president Kevin Ezell. David Hankins, executive director of the Louisiana Baptist Convention and chairman of the special study committee, presented a report that was enthusiastically received by the Execs. The result is that the Conventions and the North American Mission Board have determined to move forward together in unity to impact the lostness of North America.

"'It is our desire that all of us can join ranks around the task of evangelizing and congregationalizing North America,' said Hankins. 'Southern Baptists can have confidence in our united effort.'

"Ezell added, 'We are excited to be moving forward together in unity for the sake of the kingdom.'"

There was some kind of internal report. Guess we will never see that. Regardless, this is good news, although one might be curious as to the process and discussion.

State convention leaders may have been given pause by one or more of the following factors:

• Kevin Ezell, NAMB's leader, has NAMB doing quite well in the eyes of many SBCers and had made efforts to mollify some of the state exec's complaints.
• No less than retired IMB president Jerry Rankin labeled NAMB's kickback funding for state conventions, the trigger for the study committee, as "entitlements," hardly helpful to the states in shaping SBC opinion.
• While NAMB received criticism for some of their changes, it's tough to argue against NAMB's putting a laser focus on church planting.
• Early high profile critics of  NAMB's changes did not gain much traction in the SBC. 
• It  has been tough to argue against NAMB's policy redirecting mission money from heavily churched states like Arkansas and putting it in less churched areas. 
• The Annie Armstrong offering was up over one million dollars this year, indicating SBC support of the new NAMB.
• NAMB's signature Grand Program, Send North America, is off to a promising start with thousands of SBCers and SBC churches on board.

Slice this any way you want. It is good news for Southern Baptists to stop complaining and lock arms in reaching the lost in North America.

Simple, obvious solution to modest clergy pay

The churches I have served were different I many ways but were all mature congregations which ranged in age from 96 to almost 200. One could say that they were quite well established. Some might use the dreaded term, "traditional."

In each congregation the history included a time looked upon with great pride when the church "went full time," an event that occurred in the 1950s for each of the three. Prior to that the church shared a pastor with one or more other churches. 'Half-time' and even 'quarter-time' churches were an important part of the Baptist landscape in those days.

A full time church with a full time pastor is great but the pay scales are not. What I read regularly is that seminary trained and educated pastors have difficulty in smaller and average sized SBC churches. Whatever the expectations of compensation for an MDiv pastor, the reality is determined by the size and income of the church. A smaller church translates into lower pay regardless of the education level of the pastor, regardless of the student debt of the pastor, regardless of the number of children of the pastor, regardless of what the pastor could make with equivalent education in a secular job.

So what is this simple, obvious solution?

Going bi-vocational, of course. 

The average annual salary of a bi-vocational pastor in the SBC is about $20,000. That plus a 'real' job adds up to a decent income. Churches benefit by not having the pressure to provide a minimal living wage to a pastor and family and pastors benefit by having a job for his primary income and the church as supplemental income.  

So, why not solve pay problems with churches and pastors going back to part time ministry as bi-vocational ministers?

I can only think of a couple of problems with this:  (1) the church does not want to do it, and (2) the pastor does not want to do it. Other than those, I'm thinking it is a slam dunk, done deal. Unfortunately, both groups seem to consider this a backward, regressive move.

My humble hacker and plodder opinion is that this would be a very good move. A little secret in SBC clergy life is that 'full time' pastors often envy their bi-vocational colleagues because the latter have a higher degree of independence. Churches with only part time pastors are forced to lower their expectation for pastoral duties and to assume many of these that have been automatically handed over to the preacher, "because that is what we pay him to do." Happier church. Happier minister.

Alas, our system is not conducive to this. Seminaries are expensive and depend on a head count of warm bodies in classrooms for much of their funding. It would be tough to sell an expensive education on the basis that the student would then serve a part time church. Neophyte pastors are taught to look down the road and see larger churches, more prestige, and better pay and are willing to make a short stop in a smaller church even if the pay is parsimonious.

At the recent North American Mission Board church planting conference Jimmy Scroggins led a session entitled, The Math Doesn't Work: Why Bivocational Church Planters are the Future. The thrust of his session was about a deliberate effort to approach church planting by enlisting and training bi-vocational pastors. Why do that? Well, because the math just doesn't work for full time pastors. I liked the concept.

The pay scale math for many average and smaller sized SBC churches with full time pastors doesn't work too well either. But it will work, however poorly, as long as there is a steady stream of churches who provide such and pastors who are willing to accept it.

Only the Lord and current economic realities may force the bi-vocational solution upon some churches and ministers.

....but what do I know. I'm not even a mega pastor.

Have SBCers lost the will to fight?

Fight each other, that is.

Maybe.

I hope so.

It would be a good thing.

I have no stomach for another Conservative Resurgence-style of SBC conflict where partisan candidates aim to move the convention away from some demonized SBC subgroup, not that I impute that to any of the candidates for office this year, but the jizz I was getting was that there were rumblings of such things.

No thanks.

If the convention by their actions this week said the same thing we are all better off.

We have a black president, a moving story, and one that might move the convention away from the rumblings of controversy. I'm all for it.

That there are always some Southern Baptists who aren't happy unless they are in conflict with some segment of their Christian brethren is still a reality among us but I hope not to the degree that it dominates the Southern Baptist landscape.

We increased the number of SBC churches by a total of 37 last year, a pathetic average of less than one per state convention. NAMB is launching the Send North America initiative which has a chance of doing better if we care enough to get behind it.

The International Mission Board still has a daunting task made much more delicate as a result of the realities of world events and attitudes. They could use all of our help.

The best thing coming out of New Orleans besides I-10 might be an enhanced sense of optimism about things SBC.

SBC: One net new church per state convention.

37/42

I enjoy the statistics that are released prior to our annual meeting each year even though there isn't much for any self-respecting Southern Baptist to brag about, and if we can't brag, we tend to pout.

We're pouting.

Thirty-seven is the net increase in SBC churches in the period 2010-2011. There were 45,727 SBC churches reported in 2010. There are 45,764 reported for 2011.

Forty-two is how many state conventions there are in the SBC.

So...actually...the largest non-catholic denomination in the United States increased their number of churches at a rate of about one per state convention.

How about that?

The Obama administration, if presented with similar stark statistics would be hard pressed to find any positive spin for it and they are masters at it.

Let's be accurate here:

• Net new churches, .88 per state convention
• One net new church per 431,840 members
• One net new church per 31.7 Baptist associations

But consider this. Our North American Mission Board reports an unexpected increase in church plants for 2011. That figure is 990, almost a thousand church plants.

I am unsure if NAMB's plants are also reported on the Annual Church Profile as new churches, some or most may not be constituted, but if we are starting almost a thousand churches and show only the tiniest net increase, there must be a lot of congregations that went defunct, folded up, merged or got lost.  

In the last six months have preached and worshiped in some churches that are very small but I am unaware of any that disbanded in my area. Maybe there is a rash of church closures in other states. I don't know.

I am aware that NAMB has taken steps to stop the reporting of phantom church plants (explanation of which may be found in this article). Hard numbers are always better than SBC-style 'soft' numbers, even if we have to postpone our annual bragging session.

I'm thinking that we can do better than this if we can avoid a Calvinist/Traditionalist meltdown.

NAMB thinks we can do a lot better than this; hence, the Send North America initiative that is aiming at an additional 5,000 churches by 2022.

I like the concept. That's why we are here.

Less than one net new church per state convention. Ruminate on that for awhile.