Based on the reported financial figures, the BGCT seems to have reached a leveling off place. Albeit somewhat of a lower place than in previous years, it appears the slide has just about reached the end. The income for this year is just about at budget levels (actually 98 plus %), and the number of churches has stabilized, it appears the new Executive Director, whoever he is, will be able to start at the end of the decline and begin to rebuild. In my view, the number of churches can be rebuilt by helping to fund an aggressive church starting program.
Now, I know that scares a lot of people, because the aggressive church starting program we once had got us in a heap of trouble. However, it is still true that the best way to aggressively seek to fulfill the Great Commission is to start new churches wherever they are needed. This time, however, let them be real churches, in real locations, meeting real needs. Some dream that many of the churches who left the BGCT will return some day, but I think that is a pipe dream. Oh, a few might return, as a few already have, but there is not likely to be a large scale return to the BGCT fold. That means expansion will have to be by starting new churches.
I would like to see the new E.D. become a catalyst for an expanded program of church starting all over Texas. That will do ore to increase baptisms, and increase dollars to the BGCT than anything else we could do. I sincerely hope whoever this new guy is that he will have a vision for starting hundreds of new churches in Texas.
A second thing that I believe would help things in our state is to undo some of te organizational mistakes we made in previous administrations. In particular, I believe we need to show that we really do believe in evangelism by separating the evangelism work from that of the missions department. Both of these pursuits are worthy and both should stand alone. Missions and Evangelism are what define us as Texas Baptists, and I think we would be better served by having them stand side by side instead on inside one another. That is the way they were featured in the best days of our convention and they should be again. We may never again return to the days of the great evangelism conferences, but at least we could show that we mean it when we talk about evangelizing Texas by organizing ourselves to do it.
Finally, a third thing this new E.D. could look at would be a renewed effort to communicate the meaning of Cooperative Program. I recall when Bill Cathey would go all over this state telling people about the C.P. Who is doing that today? As far as I can tell, no one is. There is, as always, a great need for educating people to the virtues of cooperative giving. Unfortunately, we have grown up a generation of Baptists who do not know what that means at all.
The new E.D. has his work cut out for him, but at least he will start from a stabilized base.
9 comments:
Ken,
Your blog reflects some of the information messengers heard at Amarillo. It is based upon information shared by BGCT employees in their reports. Data can be used to prove or disprove a position.
Everett reported in one of his last meetings that BGCT is now comprised of around 3500 churches (half are anglo and half are ethnic). SBTC reports that they are receiving a call every other day about their convention. Stalwart BGCT churches from the past are in the process or have requested paperwork for connection with SBTC.
I have wondered at the budget reports of BGCT. The budget has been reduced over the last few years by 38 percent. This year income has dipped another 2 percent or loss of 40 percent of revenue. Most churches are currently running 10 to 12 percent behind their budgets for 2011. How can the churches be running behind this much in their budgets and BGCT be only reporting 2 percent. Ken, could it be that some accounting procedures are being used to manipulate the reports with deferred income.
Why the false reports and decisions based on Sarbane-Oxley which doesn't even apply to Not for profits. Perhaps an effort to strengthen investments? You could hear Exec. Board members reports, "We have around 200 million in reserve, its okay to lose churches."
Ken you served in days of high ethics and accountability. Gone are the days.......
Its hard to talk about the cooperative program when most in the BGCT don't actually believe in it. They would love to keep most, if not all, right here in Texas. I'm not sure we need a bunch of new churches though. Maybe we should find a way to get the hundreds of churches that we have functioning the way they should be.
Sadly, the two choices we have in Texas aren't very good ones.
Its always refreshing to see the Panda writing in response to one of your editorials. That's like comparing apples (your post) to rotten oranges (the Panda's). The anger and vitriol on his post makes his opinions useless.
Keep up the good work. You are well read and it shows.
I don't want any of them speaking in the church I pastor about the CP, not with the TX giving plan arrangement. No Thank You.
The leveling off also depends on who the new ED will be and his direction. A completely wrong choice could result in even more churches leaving for the SBTC.
I wish all of you anonymous people would find a way to distinguish yourselves from one another. Perhaps you could find a pseudonym you could use. I love having you comment, but it is confusing when three or four people use the same "anonymous" designation. I appreciate all of you taking time to comment here and I especially appreciate you reading this blog. You arer an encouragement to me. Regarding this post, I try not to be a hater. Samurai does that well. I prefer to seek positive things to say.
Ken,
I agree with you a hundred percent that our focus must be on evangelism. Helping churches reach lost people is one of the major keys to turning them around. True many churches have histories of conflict they have to overcome. But I am learning that many churches are like mine. They are simply dying because evangelism and outreach were not a priority. We need an ED who can assist in bringing change.
Starting churches is always a good thing, but like one of the anonymous posters said we should also try to bring new life to the ones we have now.
In terms of sending someone out to be an evangelist for the CP I disagree. The BGCT needs to be relevant again before they send someone out to ask for money. Let's face it there is a lot of trust that needs to be rebuilt first. And churches need to feel like the BGCT cares. Now I know the majority of the staff does care, but sometimes it seems like the current leadership only sees churches as a way of sustaining themselves. Now that sounds a good deal more harsh than I mean it to be, but sometimes that is how I feel. People give to things that matter and to people who help them. The CP status won't change unless the issue of trust and support is addressed.
Ken,
Revitalization of existing congregations! In tough economic times a church could work to strengthen its own ministries at home through the reduction of its CP giving to Institutions. This re-allocation of money would serve to strengthen the financial position of the church and provide more resources for reaching its community. BGCT has around 200 million dollars in reserve. Most of the other Institutions are endowed as well. Fiscal resources could strengthen the response of a church to its community. Foreign sounding...but it could become a reality in tough economic times and when conventions forget the importance of their realtionship with the local church. The declining gifts toward CP must reflect this type of thinking in the local church.
John
Ralph and Anon.: I am not so much concerned about the dollars as I am the concept of Cooperative giving. If we lose this completely, we will never regain it. I hold out that we need to improve our education of people on the concept of cooperative giving, as opposed to societal giving (giving to support one entity or effort). I agree with you that the BGCT needs to work on its credibility, but I do believe we need to emphasize that we have always been able to get more done with coopwerative giving than by designating funds to specific things.
Ken - I would like to clear up a couple of points here. At the end of 2010 we had 5494 churches affiliated with the BGCT. Of those, 3512 had given something to CP in the previous 12 months. Second, we have a great deal of scrutiny of our financial records - independent audit (as we always have) plus internal audit as recommended by the valley investigation report. Our audit committee and finance sub-committee closely scrutinize our reports. The reporting to them has been significantly increased over the past few years. Thanks for letting me comment!
Post a Comment