How many times during my decade of membership in the SBC did I hear my pastors encourage the congregation's giving along these lines: "Remember that when you place your contribution in the offering plate, you are supporting the Cooperative Program…" It was always stated in such an affirming way that my husband and I were happy to be combining our financial gifts with fellow Southern Baptists in order to fulfill the Great Commission.
Times they are a changin' . . .
Before the Cooperative Program goes the way of the dinosaurs, I thought it might be useful to understand why it came into existence in the first place and how it has served the Southern Baptist Convention well for almost a century. Sorry to bore the SBC experts out there who may be reading. This post is meant for those who don't know much about the Cooperative Program (like yours truly) and want to understand how we have arrived at a place in SBC history where Southern Baptists strongly believe they need a "Great Commission Resurgence".
Here is the background for the Cooperative Program at its official website http://www.cpmissions.net/2003/what%20is%20cp.asp:
WHAT IS THE COOPERATIVE PROGRAM?
The Cooperative Program—How it came about
"Since its inception in 1845, the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) has always had one mission—the Great Commission (Matt. 28:19-20). To fulfill its assigned part of this divine mandate, each SBC entity made special offering appeals to the churches. This method was referred to as the “societal” approach to missions and resulted in severe financial deficits, competition among entities, overlapping pledge campaigns, and frequent emergency appeals which greatly hampered the expanding ministry opportunities God was giving Southern Baptists. Some entities took out loans to cover operating costs until pledges or special offerings were received.
In 1919, the leaders of the SBC proposed the 75 Million Campaign, a five-year pledge campaign that, for the first time, included everything—the missions and ministries of all the state conventions as well as that of the Southern Baptist Convention. Though falling short of its goals, a God-given partnership of missions support was conceived—The Cooperative Program. Since its launch in 1925, the effectiveness of the Cooperative Program has been dependent upon individuals, churches, state conventions, and SBC entities cooperating, working toward a common goal of sharing the gospel with every person on the planet."
What happens when you give to the Cooperative Program? (see above website)
Cooperative Program — How it works
"Simply put, it begins with you. You give yourself first to God (2 Cor. 8:5). Next, out of gratitude and obedience to God for what He has done for you, you commit to give back to Him, through your church, a portion of what He provides. This is commonly called a tithe and represents ten percent of your income (Lev. 27:30, Mal. 3:10).
Your church decides the next step. Every year your church prayerfully decides how much of its undesignated gifts will be committed to reaching people in your state and around the world through Cooperative Program. This amount is then forwarded to your state Baptist convention.
During the annual meeting of your state convention, messengers from your church and other churches across the state decide what percentage of Cooperative Program gifts contributed by local congregations stays in your state to support local missions and ministries. The percentage to be forwarded to the Southern Baptist Convention for North American and international missions and ministries is also determined at this time.
At the Southern Baptist Convention Annual Meeting, messengers from across the country decide how the gifts received from the states will be distributed among SBC entities. These gifts are used by Southern Baptist entities to send and support missionaries, train pastors, and other ministry leaders; provide relief for retired ministers and widows; and address social, moral, and ethical concerns relating to our faith and families.
The bottom line – people around the world hear the gospel and receive Christ.
Note: Your local Southern Baptist association does not receive Cooperative Program gifts directly. It ministers through gifts received directly from churches and often receives Cooperative Program gifts indirectly in the form of support from state conventions and the North American Mission Board."
Now let's take a look at what the Cooperative Program does with the funds it receives (from above website):
Cooperative Program — What it does
"Churches in your state work together through your state convention to support a wide array of ministries and missions including: evangelism efforts, children’s homes, volunteer missions, missions education, new churches, colleges and universities, collegiate ministries, camps, and much more. For additional information concerning your state convention, log on to www.sbc.net and click on state conventions.
Through the International Mission Board (www.imb.org), Southern Baptists support approximately 5,541 missionaries who are engaging 634 people groups, of populations greater than 100,000, around the world.
New churches numbering over 1,578 are planted through the efforts of more than 5,611 North American Missionaries, whose efforts are coordinated through your North American Mission Board (www.namb.net) and individual state conventions.
Working together, Southern Baptists saw 908,165 new believers baptized in 2008!
Six Southern Baptist seminaries (Southern, Southeastern, Midwestern, Southwestern, Golden Gate, and New Orleans) educate in excess of 16,000 pastors, missionaries, and future church leaders each year.
The Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission is dedicated to addressing social, moral, and ethical concerns, with particular attention to their impact on American families and their faith. They also provide print resources that offer scriptural responses to the moral and ethical problems of our culture.
Although they receive no Cooperative Program support, LifeWay Christian Resources, Guidestone Financial Resources and the Woman’s Missionary Union (WMU) actively promote Cooperative Program in publications and missions resources."
Finally, here's the rationale I often heard from Southern Baptist pastors who endorsed CP giving (from the above website):
Cooperative Program — Its Potential
"If 'two are better than one' (Eccl. 4:9), how much better are more than 16 million? This is the current membership in more than 44,000 Southern Baptist churches across the United States. With a global population exceeding 6.5 billion and a command to take the gospel to every nation, we must enhance our cooperative efforts if we are going to fulfill Christ’s command."
After the 2010 SBC Annual Meeting, it certainly appears that the Cooperative Program is the scapegoat for everything that is wrong in the Southern Baptist Convention. Tomorrow we'll go deeper into this topic, and we encourage your thoughtful insights.
The CP is a great thing. It goes too far to say it is the “genius” of the sbc. I have loved many people in the sbc and I appreciate the sbc – but let’s leave “genius” out of this.
But while the CP is a great thing, it’s not the ultimate thing.
Churches are autonomous, and can chose to give how they give.
The sbc is on the wrong path when it tries to lecture churches and force compliance and a certain type and amount of giving (much like the “tithe” sermons that you have rightfully criticized).
The sbc is on the right path to encourage churches to give and to celebrate any time any church participates in the way that it chooses.
I think things have changed quite a bit and wonder if the CP is not a dinosaur. We (my family) supports missionaries WITHOUT giving to the CP. As a matter of fact, I do not have to even wonder how many layers the money goes through before I know it reached the right person. I am not paying any part of Patterson to live in Pecan Manor. Nor Russell Moore’s six figure salary while he makes lots of money on the side writing books and speaking gigs. Nor am I supporting a bloated bureaucracy filled with “created jobs” (Can you say Hemphill and Welch) who are paid quite well. Those are just a few examples of MANY.
This is a global economy. There are better ways to make sure the money gets to the right place. AND, one does not have to worry about whether the missionary has a PPL or not…Because you know them and communicate with them.
Lydia,
Excellent points! I’m just not sure that the typical Southern Baptist will be able to avoid paying for Pecan Manor or Russell Moore’s salary if they are making contributions through his/her church. One way or the other, these expenses will be funded by the SBC whether it’s through the CP or some other funnel.
Does anyone know exactly what Russ Moore makes? Is that information even available?
I don’t know what is meant by six-figures. Obviously, there’s a big difference between making 100-150K and and Robert White’s reported 530K (anyone have a citation for that too or just gossip?)
But a six-figure salary is certainly not outrageous for a person who is a Dean at a large educational institution. I know quite a few Professors (not Administrators) who make over 100K at large Baptist-affiliated institutions. It’s not unheard of. I guess I don’t see why it’s okay for folks in the pews to make as much $$ as possible but it’s inappropriate for an accomplished academic (who went to school nonstop until the age of 29-30) to make anything more than chump change.
I believe Russ Moore has a large family. His wife, I think, is a stay-at-home-mom. A 100K or so household income doesn’t exactly allow a large family to live a lavish lifestyle!
Cliff
We (TWW) posted the documentation of Robert White’s salary from the GBC website. It is not gossip,
However, might I add a comment about the “gossip” word? This word leaves a sour taste in my mouth. It is like the word “bitter.” It is an overused expression to dismiss people who have a legitimate concern about pastors, conventions, etc.
I suggest you refer to the book “The Subtle Power of Spiritual Abuse.” That book carefully explains how some use this word to bring shame to the person raising the concern. A person says, “Gee, why does my pastor live in a 6000 square foot house in a gated community?” Or, “Gee, why does my pastor’s kid get a pass on how she dresses but the pastor comes down hard on other kids who wear the same thing?” The response by insecure, authoritarian types is “That’s gossip and that is unBiblical so shut up or you will be disciplined.”
In case you think this alone is gossip, I suggest you read the extensive number of reports on this site and Sovereign Grace survivor sites to see this pattern. (Funny how the SBC pastors invited the Apostle of SGM to address them….and this is not gossip).
We have no problem with $100K-this is not what we are referring to. Secondly, I would listen to Lydia if I were you. She has some insider info and I have consistently found her information to be accurate.
As for accomplished academics…that is a story for another time.
This is a bit of a ramble, thoughts prompted by the line of responses that encompass Cliff’s reply. It is not a necessary response to any comment made so far, and in some cases it is not responding to anything necessarily suggested by anyone posting.
I am not one who would necessarily limit a pastors salary … but I do think there are real guidelines that make sense, and I can’t imagine a truly Godly man in good conscience being able to accept a salary that allowed him to live like a prince relative to those he serves.
These issues of salary, what is lavish etc. are to a large extent culture sensitive. Just about every pastor in the US lives a lavish lifestyle compared to their third world counterparts.
In the US, in a typical urban area (not NY,NY but not Clemmons NC) a comfortable household income is $80-$130k depending on family size. But most households in the US now have two incomes, so a single salary of $100k or more seems on the high end by most peoples standards. Yet few expect a pastor’s wife to work. So there is a bit of hypocrisy if we expect a pastor to live on a single income, but we want his salary to match the median single income of his typically two income parishioners.
Having said this, I often puzzle over this. A pastor in Beverly Hills might need to make $500K to be able to ‘match’ his parishioners – but does that make sense – even in the US, even in Beverly Hills? I don’t think so. OTOH, does it make sense to demand a pastor actually need to have food brought to him to be able to feed his kids in the US just so we can make sure he is not ‘over paid’ or doesn’t provoke jealousy from his parishioners?
It seems we instinctively, even overtly from scripture, recognize that Christians are not supposed to ‘love the world’ or be overcome by the trappings of earthly life. And we also, I think, expect that our Christian leaders will tend to exemplify this as they are supposed to be men truly dedicated in all ways to all the scripture teaches – even if we don’t necessarily embrace it ourselves.
Is it our own hypocrisy in this area that results in softening this for our pastors, (being willing to pay some of these guys $500k salaries). OTOH, Is it our own hypocrisy that tends to want our pastors to live on less than we ourselves (in our 2 income option) make?
I know the purpose of this blog is to root out blatant excess. But I think there are deeper issues here that are unresolved in most of us. Very few of us, pastors included, take the option of forsaking the world in all its pleasures.
Jim (Zeta)
Dee,
So how do you define gossip? Is there a point at which concern becomes gossip and how do you recognize that point? Thanks for your thoughts.
JT,
Allow me to respond to your question of how we at TWW define gossip. Dee and I agree with the Free Online Dictionary, which states:
gos·sip
n.
1. Rumor or talk of a personal, sensational, or intimate nature.
2. A person who habitually spreads intimate or private rumors or facts.
One of the hallmarks of TWW is our documentation, and we will continue to pursue God’s truth.
Thanks for the book recommendations again. I’ll pass though and I doubt I’ll be removing the word “gossip” from my vocabulary. Most understand that words are used differently. Context matters. And there is such thing as “gossip.” The word has a useful purpose.
Your comment, however, kinda reminds me of the Rev. Bill Gay who made a motion several years back calling on the Southern Baptist Convention refrain in their publications, etc. from using the word gay to refer to homosexuals!
When I was the personnel committee chair, the guideline we used was that the pastor’s household income should be about the 60th percentile of the household incomes in the congregation. This took a bit of confidential surveying, then finding the number that was more than 59% earned and less than 39% earned, adjusting for the tax-exempt housing allowance part of that, adjusting for Social Security (self-employed vs. only paying 1/2) and matching other benefits as much as possible. And that was for a pastor with an earned Ph.D. who was a great preacher and teacher, who kept out of the business administration of the church (handled by committees reporting to a monthly business meeting where all decisions were made).
Cliff,
Don’t you find it incredible that we allow dissenting opinions such as yours here at TWW? Is this the attitude you have toward those in your CBF church who must obviously hold to positions contrary to your own?
Arce,
It’s really great to hear from you. Hope you are doing well.
JT
The crux of gossip is the motive. There are those who speak about their pastor’s $725,000 home because they are confused, want answers, is their tithe being used appropriately, etc. Then there are those who gossip because it is fun-“Did you hear the real reason that the Smiths got a divorce. Susie said he was sleeping with all the ladies in his office.”
There was an interesting account on the SGM Survivors site (they are not gossiping, they are exposing what appears to be consistent spiritual abuse). A woman’s husband walked out on her and the family. The suppose “leaders” (I just can’t call these guys that) told her she wasn’t to tell a soul since it would be gossip. This woman suffered in silence for over a year because she couldn’t tell anyone. Finally she broke, much to the dismay of her “pastors.” Guess they don’t want to admit that their “godly” churches suffer the same problems like the rest.
Unfortunately, pastors can use this word to prevent people from exposing painful truth of ongoing sin. Ask Doug Pittman about that one.
Hope this helps.
Cliff
Actually that example is really funny!
And, if you read my response to JT, you will find that “most” don’t always know the context of the word when it is used to manipulate people and make them feel guilty. In fact, I really, really think you should read the book. I am not sure you get it,yet.
Actually, Deb, Cliff sounds more like a “conservative” than a CBFer which is good. It prevents us from stereotyping.
ARCE
As usual, you have a good solution.It seems fair. My own church would fit very closely with your church’s structure.I am interested in hearing about what others think of your suggestion. You are in my prayers.
There are some really wise comments on this thread.
Lydia, I know that you did not care one way or the other about the GCR task force, but with the report’s adoption, your kind of giving is a whole lot closer to being acceptable (though the convention doesn’t measure individuals’ gifts).
Arce, that is a good practical guideline.
We use a survey from the national church administrators’ group. They have salary ranges broken down by denomination, size of congregation, size of budget, length the pastor has been at the church etc. They have ranges for all sorts of staff positions.
We are not bound by it, but it does provide us with a guide of sorts.
I think that using local information is helpful, too.
To Dee and Deb,
The underlying assumption here is apparently that A)I’m conservative and B)because I’m supposedly “conservative,” I must disagree with others in my “CBF church” (and disagree with a negative attitude).
I don’t quite understand how you reached those conclusions. My dissenting opinions here have largely had nothing to do with theology or politics. I’ve disagreed with your broad-brush generalizations and mischaracterizations. I’ve noticed that another reader shares similar criticisms. See Scott’s comment in Keeping SBC Secrets. Although his opinions were received a bit more warmly. My thoughts often get a lecture followed by a book recommendation. 🙂
Seriously though, who woulda thought that the use of the word “gossip” would ruffle feathers? I suppose you’re not a fan of Gossip Girl then huh?
Again, not sure how either could reach the conclusion that I’m the slightest bit conservative. I try to avoid Young Earth vs. Old Earth debates because I hold to theistic evolution. I don’t weigh in on inerrancy vs. infallibility because I agree with neither. I don’t believe that the Bible is infallible but believe that the truth of the Bible is infallible. I don’t believe the Bible is God’s revelation but a record of God’s revelation. I’m a theological inclusivist not a theological exclusivist. I’m a proponent of marriage equality and embrace a welcoming and affirming position towards gays and lesbians. I’ve been influenced by both neoorthodoxy (Barth, Niebuhr), the Social Gospel (Rauschenbusch, Fosdick), liberation theology (Brueggeman) and Southern Baptists like T.B. Maston, David Gushee, Glen Stassen and especially E.Y. Mullins. Life-long progressive Democrat as well!
So being called a conservative is certainly a new one! 🙂
One more thing: just because nefarious individuals use a word that is rather common in the English language to manipulate (abuse) others does not mean we should scrub that word from our vocabulary. Many words are misused to manipulate, abuse and offend. The word “articulate” is sometimes used to put down African-Americans. Should we drop the word “articulate” from our vocabs? Context is everything as is motive. I did not misuse the word “gossip” to make someone feel guilty. What I don’t “get” is someone taking offense to a popular word used in an appropriate context.
Cliff
Now I understand. Because of your background, you have not been placed into a position where hyper-authortarian pastors have attempted to manipulate the congregation. You are like I was (not in all ways but in some) prior to an illuminating experience in an SBC church.
Have you ever been in a church where you would get kicked out of a Sunday school class because you were an old earth proponent and they only allowed Young Earth views? I hadn’t seen one until a few years ago.
Have you ever seen small group Bible study leaders write up reports on those in their small group so that the pastors could learn who were following their edicts and who were questioning?
Have you ever seen accusations of “gossip” used to shut up people who found porno on the pastor’s computer? How about the word “bitter” applied to you when you find out that the pastors did not help a group of boys who had been seriously molested by a “volunteer” seminarian in a church?
Perhaps you have largely escaped this stuff. Many have not and are still reeling from the spiritual abuse they received at the hands of arrogant pastors and deluded churches.
When I was reading your criticisms, it seemed to me that you were dismissive. I have only seen dismissive in two circumstances. The first is the dismissiveness by those who lead in an abusive manner.
The second is from those who have not experienced or seen or heard of abusive church practices.That is me. Up until about 5 years ago I would have reacted the same way. But, my eyes have been opened. Please read the stories of those on this blog who have been hurt. It is far more pervasive than I could have ever imagined.
Once again, I suggest you read the book for your own edification. It may open your eyes to the pain many have due the actions of crass and arrogant pastors. There is a lot of this stuff around and, unfortunately, I am one who has seen it with my own eyes.
“Because of your background, you have not been placed into a position where hyper-authortarian pastors have attempted to manipulate the congregation. ”
This isn’t a good assumption to make. In fact, many of us moderate/progressive Baptists grew up in Southern Baptist churches and were burned by fundamentalism. That “Conservative Resurgence” was really a nasty “Takeover” for many of my friends, colleagues and church members. It was a “Takeover” that affected our national denomination, our state convention, our associations and most importantly our churches.
The church where I was baptized split in the late 80s, a mini fundamentalist takeover of sorts led by a dictatorial deacon and his puppet pastor. A few years later my family left a small rural church after the anti-education pastor drew a line in the sand one Sunday morning and announced that you’re either with him or against him (and by extension, God). We left. A second church (and the last SBC church that I was a member of) had a split around the time the BFM2000 was passed. It was another nasty takeover led by a hyperauthoritarian pastor. We (the ousted group) started a new church affiliated with the CBF.
Indeed, many moderates who grew up Southern Baptist and now affiliate with CBF and/or Alliance of Baptists have experienced ugly fundamentalism up-close-and-personal. I have a chapter to be published in an edited volume by Carl Kell, author of Exiled, on my own personal experiences with Southern Baptist fundamentalism. I can’t answer YES to every single question you posed but I can answer YES to other very similar questions.
I’m not dismissive of fundamentalism and spiritual abuse. I may be, however, at times dismissive of unfair generalizations and hyperbolic conclusions that apparently aren’t meant to be hyperbolic.
And while I have no love lost for the SBC (and GBC), I do still have several friends – friends whose names you would know – who are quite visible and increasingly influential in Southern Baptist circles. Consequently, I’ve come to realize that we can’t make sweeping assertions and judgments because the shoe doesn’t always fit and not everything is black and white, good vs. evil, etc.
Cliff
There are serious issues within the SBC. Have you read “Hardball Religion” by Wade Burleson? Do you understand the rise of hyper-authoritarianism within the ranks? How about the statements of patriarchy and the Eternal Subordination of the Son which was designed to make the point, so stated, that women are eternally subordinated to men.
What about the removal of women from teaching any courses in a seminary including Hebrew, which now elevates men as the only ones who can spiritually and authoritatively conjugate a verb?
What about seminaries calling birth control sinful (we have written on this and have proof if you need it) and calling for young marriages? CT wrote about this and I even had a pastor who said it is his vision to see the married students dorm to be the biggest dorms on campuses.
Why has a man like CJ Mahaney, not a Baptist, become the darling of the Baptist circles when his own churches have many claims of abuse against them?
What about sexual predators? Have you visited the Stop Baptist Predators website? Why hasn’t the SBC started a database to alert their churches of these predators?
Cliff, I do not think we are speaking in broad generalizations. I am glad you know some good leaders. I hope you are right, and I pray that the SBC will raise up leaders that will challenge the status quo. And there sometimes is evil in institutions that needs to be confronted.
Perhaps the book that you are contributing to will have a positive effect on the concerning trends that I see in the SBC. Any idea as to publication date? I would love to read it.
“Lydia, I know that you did not care one way or the other about the GCR task force, but with the report’s adoption, your kind of giving is a whole lot closer to being acceptable (though the convention doesn’t measure individuals’ gifts).”
“Closer”? That is a good one. It cuts the middleman a bit but I KNOW the Middleman personallyand whether or not he/she is a person of character and integrity. :o)
I just don’t want to help pay for the large salaries at Headquarters…NOr Mohler, Akin, Patterson’s or their minions salaries at all.
Lydia
I make this a personal policy-direct giving to missionaries. And, on a secular level, I give directly to an organization such as Vets groups and do not go through middleman agencies. Good policy!
I tend to agree with “A Baptist in Georgia” who posted a couple of weeks ago. That is not White’s salary. If you look at the entire budget no salaries are listed. If they were going to publish salaries, it certainly wouldn’t be his. You’ll notice the budget category is “Division IV-Shared Responsibilities”. That category has nothing to do with salaries but with responsibilities related to Administration (CEO-White) and down below that (VPO-Williams).
“I make this a personal policy-direct giving to missionaries”
Me too, and it is not just money but packages, direct communication so we can pray over specific needs and for specific people, etc. People on the mission field need lots of encouragement and emotional support. And in turn, we need to be aware of how hard and frustrating are their situations. How can we share the burden when we really have no idea what the burdens are?
Lydia,
Well stated.
Anon
This is sure a strange way to do a budget and raises many questions. If you are correct, then why is there not salary stated? Don’t those giving the money have a right to know? Do you have any thoughts as to how much he makes?
I sometimes wonder if it might be a good thing if churches were to loose charitable status under IRS code. Under the current system, if we want a tax deduction for charitable giving, we must give through an IRS recognized charity, such as a church. So if we give directly to an individual who has a genuine need (as the Scriptures teach we should), we get no tax deduction. Maybe if no one got a tax deduction for giving to a church, it would reduce the motivation to give there, thus reducing their power base. Just a random thought.
Oh, I think this is key, Junkster. For me, it had to do with motivation of the heart. I was “ms deduction” for years and years. Now, I cannot take a deduction. I do not think that makes me more holy but it was a personal decision.
I think the legal status for churches is going to change eventually. Too much abuse of the status in areas of employment laws, finances, reporting, etc, and many “churches” have gotten so large that the government is not going to ignore it forever.
Look at the Klouda lawsuit. Patterson claimed the seminary was a church. This got him around the employement laws. It worked.
Some members had to sue Two Rivers church to get records! Some of them were found in a dumpster.
There are tons of examples of the abuse. So what is the tax/legal status ultimately doing to hearts? Especially to those who benefit?
That is the question I had to ask myself. I hope others will ask it and decide the tax breaks are not worth it.