Roads to revolution can be paved in many ways. One way is to say nothing revolutionary is even taking place. More about that in a moment.
Don KirklandSince its release on May 3, the report of the Great Commission Resurgence Task Force has been uppermost in my mind. It has been at the forefront in my prayers.
I have pored over its contents. I have wondered about some of its recommendations. I have struggled with some of its components, supporting many of them and objecting to others.
Perhaps I am like you. There is much to absorb. Perhaps too much in the short time between the report’s release and a vote on it by messengers to the Southern Baptist Convention meeting in June.
We did get a preview in a preliminary report. There were no surprises in the final version.
I smiled when I read, “The components of our report do not represent a revolution in Southern Baptist life.” I wondered whether they smiled when they wrote that.
A revolution ushers in major change. The report calls for change on a number of fronts. Nowhere is this more obvious than in the plan for a new funding stream for Southern Baptist work called Great Commission Giving. GCG combines Cooperative Program contributions with money designated for particular causes.
The report does say this: “At the center of our funding stands the Cooperative Program, which since 1925 has served to mobilize the stewardship of Southern Baptists for worldwide missions and ministry.”
The document goes on to “call upon Southern Baptists to honor and confirm the Cooperative Program as the most effective means of mobilizing our churches and extending our reach.”
And there is this: “We also call upon all Southern Baptists to celebrate all giving to our common work.”
The task force is offering little more than lip service to the Cooperative Program. There is no real loyalty there.
Great Commission Giving is a recognition of “what is,” more than “what should be.” For years, megachurches have chosen favored Baptist causes – the International Mission Board, to name one. These churches have thrown their support behind these causes by pumping their money – lots of money – into them. Typically, their contributions through the Cooperative Program – though perhaps big in dollar amounts – represents a tiny percentage of overall receipts.
As the report recommends, we can, and should, be thankful for “all giving to our common work.”
However, this also must be said: The practice of designated giving is detrimental to the Cooperative Program. It does not undergird the CP. Rather, it undermines it.
Great Commission Giving puts a “smiley face” on a pick-and-choose practice that poses a serious threat to the Cooperative Program.
The new GCG plan is a signal of alarm to Southern Baptists who cling to the Cooperative Program as more than how we pay for our ministries. It also is a symbol of what holds us together. It represents the cooperative spirit that made us who we are as a denomination and is a driving force behind what we are able to accomplish together for the cause of Christ.
Great Commission Giving sounds a discouraging note to the smaller Baptist churches who make up the majority of our convention. They will wonder, Why should we sacrifice to give a tithe or more through the Cooperative Program? The megachurches do not.
This I believe: Smaller churches will become more apt to imitate the megachurches in their giving patterns than to stick by straight giving through the Cooperative Program.
There is much to consider. As reported previously, Missouri Baptists have recommended delaying the vote on the GCR plan for a year. Some in South Carolina agree.
I think the GCR Task Force will push hard for adoption of its plan in June. Some push back should be expected.
The Great Commission is good. Some components of the GCR report are less so. Great Commission Giving falls into the latter category. Does Great Commission Giving sound the death knell for the Cooperative Program?
Perhaps not. For sure, GCG will cripple it.
It will move the Cooperative Program from its deserved place “at the center” of the SBC’s funding mechanism for its ministries. It sets the CP alongside, and gives blessing to, a methodology that moves us backward rather than forward as a denomination. It puts in peril perhaps the best denominational unifier we have had as Southern Baptists.
We established the Cooperative Program in 1925. It was our invention. God has used it to do many and mighty things for his glory through the years. The CP became the envy of other denominations. For effectiveness in ministry, it was without an equal.
Are we smarter now than Southern Baptists were then? Will a giving plan that did not work well before 1925 work any better today? Some will say yes. Others will say no. We have to decide. Sometimes the revolutionary road is the wrong road. Southern Baptists, beware.