Do Cooperative Program percentages, divisions, and accountings really matter?

The answer is: YES and NO.

Yes, it absolutely matters...

...to state convention executives because many continually offer various complex calculations of what portion of Cooperation Program revenues are kept in-state and what portion is forwarded to the Executive Committee for distribution to our International Mission Board, North American Mission Board, the six Southern Baptist seminaries, the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, and the Executive Committee itself.

See last week's post on the Georgia Baptist Convention's Cooperative Program Accounting. I make no hint of an implication of any ill motives or practices but the GBC figures the CP percentage kept in a manner that is not always clear to those who aren't steeped in this stuff. The GBC maintains a 60/40 split but footnotes that 9.82% of CP revenues are "used for the Promotion, Support, Accounting, and Distribution of Cooperative Program Funds" so it is implied that they don't really count as being "kept." This is historically correct, since from the start the state conventions agreed to promote, collect, and distribute the CP funds.

When some state conventions speak of moving towards a 50/50 split of CP revenues, sometimes it means that they are moving to a 55/45 split. They just call it 50/50 because they take 5% of the table because they keep and use it for in-state for CP promotion and collection. I wrote on this over two years ago (CP Math: 50/50 = 55/45 or 60/40). While there have been some changes in this, often this is still the math.

Consider the action of the Missouri Baptist Convention this month. Here's how Baptist Press reported their Cooperative Program budget and explanation:

A $14.5 million CP budget was approved, a decrease from last year's $14.6 million budget. Nevertheless, messengers moved toward the "50-50" cooperative giving plan, approving 60 percent of the CP budget for state causes and 40 percent for SBC causes. Additionally, 5 percent of the 2014 budget was placed in a separate "shared expenses" category, which would not count toward the 50-50 goal. The funds will be allocated for annuity protections and The Pathway state newspaper. In contrast, messengers at the MBC's 2012 annual meeting allocated 62.5 percent for MBC causes and 37.5 percent for SBC causes.

Got it? The MBC is aiming at a 50/50 split that will actually be a 55/45 split. They explain that money budgeted by the MBC for "annuity protections" and, presumably, all of the state paper money is to taken off the table in arriving at a 50/50 split. Exactly how annuity protections are justified as promoting, collecting, and distributing CP revenues by the state convention is not explained. There are no set rules for this stuff. No one dictates to any level of Baptist life how this should be done.

No, it does not matter...

...to the people who drop their tithes and offerings in their local church offering plate each Lord's Day.

I cannot imagine that Bob and Betty Baptist who work hard and happily support their church, their state convention, Lottie and Annie have any level of understanding of this state convention sausage making process. If they did understand, I'd suspect that they would not care.

What they care about is this. Where does my money go?What are you doing with it in this state? How much of it gets to the IMB, NAMB, and the seminaries?

While the state conventions fiddle with accounting, budgets, pie charts and historical precedents, average Baptists want to know how serious we are about reaching North America and the world for Christ.

There is a push within many of the state conventions for a 50/50 split in CP revenues. It is my view that if we call it 50/50 it should divide a dollar into 50 cents for the state convention and 50 cents for the Executive Committee to distribute to SBC causes. No one asked me. No one may care about my opinion. And I certainly haven't been appointed Czar of Baptist CP Percentages. I humbly offer my opinion.

In the end, I would speculate, state conventions will win this insider baseball debate about CP percentages. Rather than fight it or complain about it, churches will just continue to give less to the Cooperative Program and more directly to causes that have higher priorities.

Autonomy and clergy sex abuse

Southern Baptists have no real power when it comes to removing even the most offensive pastors from their church staff positions. No associational missionary, no state convention executive, no Southern Baptist Convention CEO, no megachurch pastor - no one compels even the smallest SBC church in the handling their church matters.

So, what should be done when a local church affiliated with a Southern Baptist association, state convention, or national SBC has as their pastor a man who has credible accusations of and pending charges for child sex crimes?

Such is the question raised concerning a pastor and Baptist church in Missouri that is affiliated with a local Baptist association, the Missouri Baptist Convention, and the SBC.

The story is reported by a local television station:
Missouri pastor remains in pulpit after sex crimes allegations

The pastor faced child sex crime charges in 2010 that resulted in one charge dropped and acquittal on the other. There are two new charges against the pastor.

Some people in his church are openly supportive of the pastor. Others associated with his former church are aghast at it all.

The Missouri Baptist Convention has issued a statement that provides an explanation of local church autonomy and the high standards for church leaders. It then says:

We're aware of the situation at First Baptist Church, Stover, and are in contact with the association's director of missions, who is working closely with the pastor and the church. While we respect the independence of the local church and have no direct authority over it, we are deeply grieved by the allegations. We pray that the courts will administer justice fairly and swiftly, and that there will be healing among the wounded church members. We also pray that the church members will have the wisdom, grace and courage to act biblically in their dealings with their pastor. The biblical qualifications for pastor as spelled out in 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1 are clear that a pastor must be above reproach — and even above suspicion. God is gracious to forgive all sins — even grievous sins — and we should be forgiving as well if and when our leaders suffer moral failures. At the same time, we should understand the Lord holds leaders in the church to a higher standard that, when violated, disqualifies them from continuing in their leadership role.

Clearly, the state convention and association desire that the pastor resign or be terminated by the church. One hopes that if the church fails to take action that the association will move to disfellowship the congregation.

But there is a glaring omission in this article. With child sex abuse by clergy being so prominently reported and discussed for the past decade or more, how could a state convention possibly issue any statement that fails to include anything about the alleged victims of an accused abuser?

Not a syllable.

How much is enough to spend on lawsuits? $5 million and rising isn't enough...ask the Missouri Convention

When is enough, enough? Is spending $5,220,000 suing your Christian brethren over trustee actions enough? How many more millions should be taken from folks in the pews in a futile quest to recover assets that were legally ‘taken’ from one Baptist group and now controlled by another?

If I were a Missouri Baptist I would be thinking that it might be time to end the legal efforts to restore to the status quo ante certain Missouri Baptist Convention entities, The Baptist Home, Missouri Baptist Foundation, Missouri Baptist University and the Word & Way newspaper.

The lawsuit, lawsuits really, are complicated and have been plodding along for almost nine years now. Missouri moderates appear to be the most clever of all SBC moderates with their actions to hijack these MBC institutions. Loyal MBCers wouldn’t be happy but you win some and you lose some and sometimes you get to the place where you cut the line and let the fish go.

As the ABP article reports, the convention handily rejected a motion to end the lawsuit. Messengers were dutifully lectured on the fact that they “cannot be apprised of everything board members know because of attorney/client privilege, [one of the MBC VPs] said. "The Executive Board has the whole story.... You need to trust them. If you knew what they know, you wouldn't be discussing this today."

Oh? The continuing appeals are a slam dunk for our side? Light at the end of the tunnel? How much will it cost to trust them next year...and the next...and the next? I'd be just a little unsettled were I an MBC messenger listening to this.

The above quote from the ABP story on the matter. A simple search can find multiple stories from BP, ABP and other news outfits over the past years.