Last night, Southern Baptist leaders from all across the country came together with the Great Commission Resurgence Task Force (GCRTF) for a progress report led by its chairman, Ronnie Floyd. The GCRTF Report is slated to be released on May 3, 2010 with a final report in print on June 15-16, 2010.
Below is the video of Dr. Floyd’s progress report. After watching it, let me know what you think. Let’s pray for a Great Commission Resurgence made possible through the resurgence of the local church.
[vimeo http://vimeo.com/9602983]
I haven’t fully processed all of it yet. My initial impressions are that it recommends “needed” changes. I’m interested in seeing if they can really get 51% of all CP giving to the IMB. I may have missed something, but does this mean money that is not kept in the states or does it in fact mean ALL cooperative program giving. I’m not against the idea, but either way it will drastically affect everything in SBC.
I was so inspired last night. “If the Lord wills, we will live and do this.”
Adam,
Regarding the 51%, I’m still a little unsure as to what that entails. If I understand that to mean that all state convention breakdowns meet the requirement that 51% goes to Convention causes outside the state, that would be huge because the current average is around 63%. We’re talking missions more going to missions (potentially). I need to go back and read carefully what Dr. Floyd presented so that I have a better understanding of what exactly that 51% is in reference to.
Adam and Timmy,
Just watched the portion of the video that deals with IMB allotment. Floyd distinguishes the SBC CP. He means the part that comes to the ExComm to be distributed to the entities. 1% from the ExComm, 1% to the IMB. The ExComm will pay for this by moving the costs of CP promotion out of their budget to the State Conventions budgets…as they are willing to pick it up. Remember, this is a suggestion and has to have action in a budget to work. Here’s hoping…
My understanding is that the 51% is a reference to how much of the SBC Allocation Budget the IMB gets. Right now they get 50%. I believe that the other 1% is coming from the EC. I do not think that they necessarily addressed how much the state conventions currently give.
Scott:
That’s my understanding as well.
Thanks for the clarification guys. I’m curious to know difference the SBC allocation to the IMB from 50% to 51% is going to make.
But be that as it may, this does not address the bigger problem with the CP, and that is the state convention percentages. It was reported and retweeted like crazy that 2/3 of our money is spent on 1/3 of the population in the U.S. That is because the primary donors to the CP are from southern states who choose to keep the money for themselves. Until the situation with the state conventions is addressed, I’m not sure how “compelling” the GCR vision is going to be, at least for me. 1% change *feels* a lot like rearranging deck chairs.
Furthermore, churches should not be penalized if they choose to give directly to convention causes outside the state convention. The CP is a great idea and can be an even greater tool if it is administered with priorities aligned to God’s heart, not our individual agendas.
Thanks for the clarification.
I heard the word repentance, but I was unable to discern of what we are to repent, other than pride, rhetoric, and dissention. I would have felt much better there was a statement of repentance for losing the gospel, and losing sight of the great commission, and a delineation of the things they believe we have done corporately and individually that have been an offense against God. I don’t doubt the committee’s sincerity, but I would appreciate some clarity.
Also, on a humorous note, am I the only one who thought the lighting made Ronnie look like Max Headroom without the glasses?
GF:
Good point on your first comment, LOL on your second.
Timmy:
I do think the GCR Task Force, in recommending 51% to international missions, is trying for a symbolic gesture that will also have some practical significance (with an operating budget as large as that of the SBC, even 1% will have some tangible effect).
re: “churches should not be penalized if they choose to give directly to convention causes outside the state convention.”
I think that this is what the fifth recommendation is intended to address.
You are, of course, correct in pointing to the problem of the state conventions keeping too great a portion of CP funds (and, I would add, there is an even greater problem of individual church members only giving an average of 2% to their local church), but the GCR Task Force can only make policy recommendations at the Convention level. (Although the point you make may call into question the idea of taking away the 1% apparently designated for ministry assignments concerning promotion of the Cooperative Program and stewardship education, and giving such promotion and education to the states, per the fourth recommendation; perhaps the GCR Task Force would do better to recommend specific ways that the Convention could be more biblical and effective in executing CP promotion and stewardship education.)