Annually, over $13,000,000 is given to the Evangelism and Home Missions Budgets on the state/regional level for the express purpose of “new field work and in the case of an emergency, small church assistance.” This is mandated by the General Assembly Minutes in response to the missional directive of Jesus in Matthew 28:19-20.
It is well understood that those monies are spent for everything from administration to senior adult retreats and state evangelists…all good things. But, in this case to quote Jim Collins, “good is the enemy of great.” The good has led us to truly objectionable places. However, with a focused spending of these resources, we could: be faithful to the Minutes and begin a Gospel revolution through the Church of God. Picture this:
- 260 church planters per year receiving matching funds up to $50,000 each for a total $100,000 each.
OR
- 130 church planters per year receiving matching funds up to $100,000 each for a total of $200,000 each.
This would would be a return to the Gospel mandate of Matthew 28:19-20. This would lead to a revitalization of the Church of God. This would:
- spark a wave of young ministers staying in the Church of God.
- spark a wave of young ministers from sister organizations flocking to the COG to launch churches through us.
- begin the difficult process of realigning our stated positions with our behavioral realities.
- And, all of this in some form should already be happening according to the Minutes.
The residual effect of these annual church launchings would be seen in the decades to come. Imagine what would happen 10 years from now as 1,300-2,600 new churches have grown from a founding heart of multiplication and Gospel advancement? New churches start new churches. New churches also baptize more people than churches that are 10 years old and older.
It would not be a stretch to say that in 20 years, our churches started in that time from this budget alone could equal the number of churches started in our previous 122 years. You could add to those numbers from the resources turned over in our properties of closed churches and you have the real potential of doubling those monies (a couple sold properties in Florida or California could easily surpass the EHM funds alone).
Unfortunately, because of the decades old, inherited mismanagement of these funds and the language proposing the removal of this designation, we are standing at the precipice of potentially the greatest lost opportunity in the history of the Church of God.
Therefore, I am calling on the Executive Committee, the members of the Council of 18, our Ordained Bishops, and the members of the General Assembly to take every opportunity to preserve this designation AS WE REDUCE the mandated funds going to Cleveland. There is most certainly a path to this place if we will only take it.
Filed under: church of god
If the COG guaranteed me $100,000 to start a church, I’d stay COG, and wouldn’t think twice about it. And I’d be more than happy to give 10% or 15% upon the church’s launch/organization.
I have no problem with paying the dues, as long as the local churches are benefitting from it…
Amen. With $100,000 to start a church 14 years ago in San Francisco I wonder how many COG’s we would have in the Inner City of SF by now? I planted in 1994 and it’s still the only English speaking COG in a population of over 800,000 people. I think we have three Spanish COG’s under the Spanish office but they are not right in the heart of the inner city. And of course now here I am in Charlotte NC trying to plant again with NO MONEY. Man! You have to love the COG church planting model……BROKE.
You know, vision requires more than words…it requires a plan that enables the future. Too often we are short-sighted in evangelism and church planting because we don’t anticipate the future. If it takes five years to have a self-sustaining church going, then we need a five year plan…or if it takes 3 years or whatever. When Brent Stephens left Louisiana to go to Acworth, I spent some time with him talking patience and waiting. The farmer prepares soil, plants seed, gives attention and waits on harvest. We cannot rush the process in such a way that it does allow for healthy growth. Money is never the problem…the lack of planning is. God has the money. I pray our church/leadership and constituency can align with a long-range plan to plant church and make disciples.
Great post, Travis. Seriously, I think this is very insightful and offers a potential starting point for a vision to plant churches. In an earlier comment, someone “tongue in cheek” inferred if a guarantee were made, they would plant. For me, the larger point is a strategy which enables success. Can we set people up to win, to succeed?
How so?
Bill, thanks for the courage to share your thoughts in the open so that everyone can see them. You are a great leader who always gets my support and vote! I would like to share an answer to your question, “How can we set up people to win (in church planting)?”
1. Do something different that signals to the “winners” that we actually want them on board. Right now, we have a system that rewards the losers or the mediocre with a promotion if they can only survive and remain “loyal” to the powers that be. On the other hand, we marginalize anyone who is confident enough in his/her abilities to think independently. Conversely, most of the “producers” move on to other fields and leave the COG to the rest.
2. Recognize the proven “producers” and use their churches as a model. By producers I am not talking about good campmeeting preachers, but ministers who can actually draw the lost to their churches and produce sustained church growth. Right now, because our COG model is not conducive to much church growth, anyone who does produce real growth through new converts, has to do it in a non-traditional way. And when someone does anything non-traditional in the COG, he is immediately demonized by the “system” people (not necessarily all state/general officials are “system” people).
3. Because denominations do not do a good job at planting churches, we need to set up the church planters with proven “producers” as mentors. This will require some real FAITH on the part of EV directors and AB’s as they will be forced to set up young church planters with non-traditional emerging leaders. Thus, they will have to let go of the DEATH-GRIP many old-line COG leaders have on “how things are done.”
4. Bonus suggestion: change the way AB’s do their jobs. Instead of seeing themselves as a celebrity who travels around to other churches to preach, they should see themselves (& the state office) as a resource of knowledge for other churches in the state. In so doing, they would have to turn more to relationship development and actually learning the intricacies of their state. This would help them to better know the human resources within their state and utilize them in a more productive way. This would require the AB, ED, YD to actually visit churches that did not want them to preach. This way, they could actually learn what resources were there and what the abilities of that local church pastor might be. This model would probably require much more humility than many of our AB’s possess, but I think it would revolutionize our church planting success rate.
Bro. Isaacs,
We can’t guarantee success. I’ve planted once. After two years, a lot of hard work, and some busted up relationships, it failed. I’ve replanted once. After 5 years of hard work, we’ve turned the corner but we have a lot more people than we have money. We had 502 people last Sunday. The offering didn’t match. It’s improving…getting better. But, it’s a butt kicker. Still, its good. It’s the only thing I want to do. God made me to do this.
I’ve learned that when you’re a church planter, everything is in flux. It would be nice to know that some things are predictable. When you’re failing on some important fronts, its encouraging to know that the denomination has your back. For church planters in the COG, that doesn’t seem to be the case. Sometimes it is. Sometimes it isn’t….its actually quite unpredictable. And, it doesn’t even matter who you are. A lot of the sons of our denomination are no longer associated with the COG and it is our fault as a church. We’re unpredictable and we haven’t kept our word. We need to repent.
After repentance, what we can do is create an atmosphere where we are predictable, a place where we honor our word, where we speak truth, where our “yes” equals an unequivocal “yes.” That’s all the plan we need. When I was on staff at North Cleveland, Cecil Guiles would often put a sign in the middle of the table at staff meeting that said, “JDWYSYWD.”
“Just Do What You Said You Would Do.”
2.5% Evangelism and Home Missions. JDWYSYWD. That’s a plan for success. Instead of planning to succeed, we’re trying to send Uriah out to the front lines to be killed so we can cover up for our sin.
This General Assembly is a battle for the soul of our church. Win or lose. I’m not going to be on the wrong side of this discussion.
Jerry,
I guess I understand about this being “the open” but really we just among friends whom we trust…that’s all. If we truly cared for each other, all space would be open but we don’t care enough so there are places where we feel threatened.
Can’t comment on all that you wrote but thought the idea of identifying winners was a keeper. The system of the Church of God protects non-producing pastors but few of us have the courage to change. For example, pastor is not making it happen but is faithfully reporting and attending state meetings…he is left alone by most leaders. When what we need to do is evaluate and determine fruitfulness…but then the question is who is qualified? We don’t want a pastoral vote every 4 years and I agree..but how do we evaluate effectively?
Any ideas?
Travis,
You blow me up…seriously. When I read the intensity of your writings, I feel like every moment is the final two minutes of the game…you make me look around and say…did I miss the 2 minute warning…?
Love your passion man, but seriously you’re making me nervous! Take deep breathes and whisper something soft in Kelly’s ear…(I’m joking…….)
Bill
Travis,
One final thought tonight before I go to bed…
There are more people who believe in what you are saying than you might think. They may not write here or there but they desperately want to see us embrace a more missional future….and believe me, I’m convinced we will.
Get some sleep and we’ll pick up later.
Love you guys…
Bill,
You asked, “How do we evaluate fruitfulness?” That is a good question. I would love to see an AB step up and tell his men exactly what he expects, exactly what he calls success, and exactly what he wants to see. THEN, WHOEVER clears that hurdle should be spotlighted and used as a model to follow. The problem is, we all know that numbers (sustained over time) is about 98% of the evaluation. I mean, if you find a guy who has grown the numbers and sustained it over a long period of time, you’ve found the model we need to exemplify (most of the time). However, the moment an overseer says that he opens himself up because a guy (like Travis) who doesn’t follow the “company line” is going to go out there and blow the walls out and then the overseer is going to have to validate his ministry. And, at least for some AB’s, they are not ready to validate anything that is not standard, camp meeting COG.
Thanks for the conversation…..night!
I think you are asking for men to evaluate something that could not do themselves. I think many AB’s are very disconnected from the missional church and success in any different capacity than campmeeting style
It’s ok to have administrative gifts but that does not mean that you can evaluate successful pastors does it?
I think for the most part the average pastor in the COG does what they have been trained to do. Seek Revival! Hasn’t the last 4 years of Bro. Mcguire’s tenure been about finding our Pentecostal roots, and seeking the outpouring of the Holyspirit. He by all means has every right to cast the vision the Lord has given him. But by definition the main requirement for a great pastor is to pray and wait on God to move.
How do you evaluate that?
I can fall guilty of being to systematic with church structure. I could probably pass a good examination with my systems, but I don’t know that I pray and wait enough. Do you get my point? As the denomination expands in styles how does a 50-60 year old man 10-30 years removed from pastoring examine and evaluate?
maybe there’s an AB around here with a great putting stroke who could answer that for me : )
Bill said, “Money is never the problem…the lack of planning is.”
Not sure how I feel about that statement.
Travis said, “Unfortunately, because of the decades old, inherited mismanagement of these funds and the language proposing the removal of this designation, we are standing at the precipice of potentially the greatest lost opportunity in the history of the Church of God.”
I would like for you to speak more to this money issue Bill if you will. I’m just having a hard time processing everything. I know money follows ministry because I’ve seen God’s faithfulness over many years of church planting in San Francisco and now NC. However, it just seems to me we (the church) exist to support the top instead of the top supporting us in the filed.
We want more churches planted but it seems planning is not the problem on a starter level but it is a problem on the upper level. I’ve been here in NC since December of 2006 and I’ve only had one phone call checking on my new church plant along with one letter turning me down for any funding for a new work. The people I have as a core group are not COG and ask some hard questions that I have to answer over and over again, all while trying to protect what I feel is a broke system of church planting. They hear when we organize we will send in 15% and they almost lose their minds. Then they ask how the top is helping us now and I have to look at them like a lost kid.
Talk to me brother.
Just don’t send in your reports for 6 months, they’ll call you : )
Bill,
Thanks so much for entering the forum of public dialog on these matters. Arguably there is some degree of risk given your position and responsibilities within the denomination. So thanks for courageously jumping in.
Having said that…in response to your earlier post……
I am 51 years old and have served faithfully in the COG covenantal structure….and I do not share the perceived intensity of my younger comrades, that we are in the “last two minutes of the game.”
I instead hear the sound of the collective voice of the stadium in unison in the background, “10….9……8…..7……”
My intensity is perhaps beyond theirs by reason of greater length of life invested and the end being closer in view. than the beginning. Perhaps I have only moved from the “young and impetuous” category to the “old and desperate.” I hope it is more spiritually driven and spiritually informed than that.
While I’m not necessarily opposed to a unified budget and the restructuring of COGWM to become “like every other department,” I do not understand why there has not been more opportunity to choose a different path for arriving at 10%?
What makes more sense to me is 2.5% to the International Offices, 2.5% to the State Offices, 2.5% to our International Missional endeavors, and 2.5% to our State Missional Endeavors.
I feel confident that the International Offices can withstand this 50% cut if done over a similar span that is now proposed for COGWM and State Evangelism. Perhaps the State Offices would feel the greatest pressure. However, the surge of new churches and church growth would also bring new revenues in and conceivably make up the difference.
Is that a stupid idea? If so, why? If not, why has it not been offered as a potential option? It seems more in line with what the pastors would like to see.
I would think if a plan like that were on the floor of this General Assembly and you were responsible for getting it there, you’d be carried out of the Alamo Dome like Rudy in his only Notre Dame football appearance.
Unfortunately, we are having to deal with multiple issues in one proposal, which creates a challenging environment. That was obvious on the floor of the last GA.
I can hear them now: “Stoney! Stoney! Stoney!”
I’ll propose it……oh wait a minute I can’t I will in 6 years how will that do?
Jason, unfortunately that’s about how long it will take to get there anyway. So, you may be the perfect guy for the job!
Several years ago, the Church of God set up a home missions program to organize State evangelists to help build up small and struggling churches. I thought, “Finally, I can really use their help!” So I called to set up a date for revival services. When they told me that I would have to guarntee the speaker thousands of dollars for them to come, I said, “I thought this program was to help small and struggling churches? I don’t know any small and struggling churches that have thousands of dollars!” Their response was, “If you get together all the churches on your district and everyone chips in a little, then you can have them come.” When I told them that the next closest Church of God in my region was over an hour away, and my district church was over three hours away, they had no other alternatives to help. If I couldn’t guarntee the compensation, they wouldn’t come. We were in the center of a wide open home missions area. It would have been nice for the people there to see the quality of ministry our movement has to offer. If our Evangelism and Home Missions money doesn’t go to help churches like the one I was pastoring, what is it used for?
Tom,
Thanks for your comments. They are heartfelt and reflect some of the true needs on the field.
One quick administrative note if at all possible, please use a name that distinguishes you from Tom Sterbens. It will make things a lot less confusing as missionalcog continues to get more and more activity.
Thanks for taking the time to share your really good insights.
As we concentrate our efforts on trying to do something different in a church that I have learned to love as both a member and a pastor, I would like to point to the practicality of why we need to change our financial structure. This is an election year where we here that all politics is local. I believe the heart of church ministry is local. We have to get to that place where we understand that this change in structure will have positive impacts on the local church which will positively impact the states and the international body. The greatest president in my lifetime, Ronald Reagan believed that cutting taxes would prime the pump. I believe we need to prime the pump in the Church of God if we are going to continue to have a pump.
Danny,
Agreed. But, let’s not prime the pump by removing the only money on our corporate level designated for “mission.” Why aren’t we taking a look at the other monies which by far outmatch the amounts we are talking about at World Missions?
If there was a choice between eliminating World Missions money or strictly administrative resources, which would you choose?
If there was a choice between eliminating funds from the only department that has chose complete financial transparency or the one which has failed to comply with the Minutes by offering financial disclosure, which would you choose?
The choice seems obvious to me. I believe there is a path to get away from targeting World Missions as THE only source for General Assembly mandated financial downsizing…if only we’re courageous enough to take it.
Travis,
I think the cut should come from the 5% to international and the 5% to state. We have to be mission minded and evangelistic. We have to then allow that cut to free the local bodies to increase local ministry and not just sit on it.
With that said, I believe if the local bodies increased their opportunities to minister it would then bring a greater desire for the local body to support world and home evangelism that would hopefully help us plant new works.
Grace to you brethren, I realize that I am late to this party but I would like to get a better handle on the impact of this proposed change. It seems to me that the COG is at a crossroad. The current church-plant craze has produced what I consider to be mixed results. Are we winning new souls or just shifting sheep? The churches get bigger but the community impact gets smaller. How do we measure the impact of a pastor? Quantity ot Quality? I am 4th generation COG and PK, my father pastored 35 years and never had more than 150 max at any one time. His 35 yr avg was probally around 70 actual attendance. However, he was there for every birth, marriage and death in those families and his sheep were sound in doctrine and practice. Was he productive? I am not against new ideas or change but I wonder if we aren’t getting swept up in wave of populism. I agree that the home missions money needs to be invested into new works and makeovers of exisitng churches and have no problem contributing my fair share. As you can see I am conflicted on this proposal and would appreciate your thoughts.
James,
I think it takes all sizes and kinds of churches to accomplish the work of Jesus on the earth. There is no right size church. In fact, we really only have one big church, led by a bunch of undershepherds around the world.
I’d love to see us be true to our founding hope. Let’s not continue to “change route” we are presently on, where we’ve changed away from the General Assembly mandates. Let’s let our “yes be yes” and spend those designated funds on “new field work” as required originally by the 1942 COG General Assembly.
Church planting is how we began. Picture this: This EHM budget is to fund a practice that has been going on since Paul’s missionary journeys to cities like Philippi where he evangelized Lydia, a Roman soldier, and a demon possessed girl. Miami is much like Philippi. We need to more Gospel-faithful churches here.
The Church of God has a lot of resources that could/should be going into towns like mine and yours to rescue dying men from a real hell. Current practice says we don’t value dying men like we value our present denominational structure.
That’s unfortunate. But, it can change with prayer, courage, a plan, and more importantly, the power of the Holy Spirit..
I will use Tom N. from now on to distinguish myself from Tom S.
This monumental Assembly will see the Church of God forced to it’s knees. In my opinion, this is the very place we belong. As I pray for our leaders, my prayers will also be with Missional Church of God and those with similar convictions. Long overdue change is on the horizon. Although I don’t expect the “surgery in San Antonio” to be pretty… after the recovery we will be stronger. Please continue to pray for your Executive Committee. Though their opinions may indeed differ from ours, they are good men. Godly men. There is an enemy but he does not reside in Cleveland, TN. Our passion (whatever the outcome or timeline balloted) must be to remain brothers in arms against the enemy of our souls.
The word out here is not very positive about maintaining the financial system as it stands. I am concerned about how the realignment will affect missions and evangelism. But why are we trying to plant so many new works when we should be trying to strengthen the ones that are not growing first instead of throwing money into New church Plants. We should evaluate the demographics where we have Church that are struggling and if there is no chance for them to grow sell the properties and reinvest in a more fruitful fields. Many Pastors are given Churches and facilities that are rundown, with outdated equipment in bad locations with a bad history and expected do miracle with no resources. The truth is that we are not ready to really invest in taking a good look at what already exists and strengthening it. And at this same time we want to put money in new adventures of Church Planting. Also there is nothing wrong with downsizing the General Offices by eliminating the Five percent and keeping it at the local church for their use. It should be up the Local Congregations to prayerfully support Missions and Evangelism in their budget. As a pastor of a small church we have to downsize all the time. We have use money wisely and eliminate all waste to function. Also many of us do not even consider the waste the precious money that could be use for missions and evangelism if we did not have General Assembly every two years. We talk about Church planting but we must strengthen what is already in place.
In regards to the need for church planting. I believe that we need to provide resources to strenghten struggling churches, but as a veteran of years of mission state ministry we must not forget the unreached areas of our own nation. Church planting is desperately needed to reach our own nation as well as abroad. I have planted churches in regions where few others of any denomination or movement preach the gospel at all. To be “born-again” is considered radical. If you are Pentecostal they think you have a mental illness. Millions of people in our own country do not have a strong Pentecostal church near their home. There are no other Church of God members to “transfer” around in these places as was stated earlier. Most of my members were new converts or people severly wounded in traditional churches. We as a church need to make a plan to reach the entire United States with the full gospel message. Our home missions resources would be better used if we were better organized and targeted population centers in yet unreached regions, with trained, and financially supported ministry teams. Planting a new Church of God church in a city where we already have several that are stuggling just to survive has never made any sense to me either, but there are many places in our nation where that is not the case. I believe that we have enough resources as a church to both strenthen stuggling churches and plant new ones in unreached areas.
Tom N.,
Those are powerful thoughts on our unreached areas. Many of our unreached areas are cultural centers. If we tap into those areas, the potential for downstream cultural transformation is significant.
I think your post is the point with this EHM fund. Consider that over the course of a 10 year span, there is at least $130 million dollars. Add that to funds the church planter should raise on his own and there is up to $260 million available for church planting.
We’d have to have a heck of a church planter development and deployment plan to pace with those funds. We would see significant Gospel revolution.
Then, in addition to that, look at churches like mine which were not necessarily prospects for receiving “church planting funds.” It was a resource that needed a mission. The first couple years were very difficult financially. But, we have been able to refocus our resources in a way that makes sense.
Our denomination has a treasure trove of Gospel resources within the EHM budget and within our properties of declining churches. Absent a Gospel plan though, they are assets to be used to maintain our denominational structure.
We can take advantage of this Assembly to bring Gospel correction and provide a renewed commitment forward that:
1. honors the local church by reducing fees to Cleveland and the State.
2. honors the mission of Jesus by protecting the fees going to Cleveland and the State that focus on mission.
3. mandates we focus again on the main business of our Gospel mission.
Tithes, by scriptural definition, are 10% of the tither’s substance, missions offerings are just that, offerings. Offerings are not mandated, and I don’t think that churches should be mandated to give to missions. That being said, we are told in scripture that the Lord loves a chearfull giver, therefore we should, as churches, and most certainly as Pastors be giving to missions, both home and world missions without being told to.
As I read it, this is not a reduction of the TOT, we will still be sending 10% as the scriptures instruct us. If we are following the leadership of our Lord, this rewording of the missions offering should not result in a reduction in funds, it should result in an increase. If we are not mandated to send a certain amount we should continue to send what the Holy Spirit leads us to. If we don’t, that means that we are not chearfull givers. I know that this is seemingly over simplified, but if we are teaching it to our local churches, we should be living it. This means some will send less than 5% and some will send more than 5% and some will be greedy and send none, and some will send none because there is none to send, and it will all depend on how we teach the principle of scriptural giving. That is how it works on the local level, and I think that it should work that way on the state and international level.
It’s not about us, it’s all about HIM!
Lovingly,
John
Travis,
Grant here. Good words buddy. I must say my heart is pumping with passion as I see the transformation God is doing among us. Two years ago I sat at the GA wandering if I even still fit in this organization. After 26 years of student pastoring I started realizing that where God had led me in my approach to church, the world around me, and the mission of my life, had become extremely different than many of those who lead the COG. At 44 years old sitting there on “Missions” night, I began to hear of a new direction for the future of our church….how that we had evangelized the world and now the US was in great need of missionaries. And how some countries were sending people back to us to be missionaries. Then they showed a video of what the future of “Church Planting” will look like, and I must say it described exactly who and what I am. I got home, rallied a team and launched a church. Like you Travis, I’m in one of the most extreme cultures in our country. I’m talking Huntington Beach; Surf City USA; Orange County; home of “The O.C.”, “Laguna Beach”, “Real Housewives of Orange County”, “The Hills”, where 1 out of 5 people are either adding silicone or sucking out fat to make their bodies look like the status quo. How’s that for a mission field?
Well here’s what I’ve learned so far about planting a MISSIONAL church…..
• We exist for those who are not yet apart of us yet…
• You must get out of the office and make authentic friendships with people even if they drink smoke and cuss. Kinda like Jesus did when he went to Mathew’s house. Don’t be so easily offended and self righteous… you can handle it, Jesus did.
• It’s a dirty world out there. So if you’re really out there in the world and not just hanging out with church people…you better shower off everyday with a scrub brush. And I’m talking spiritually.
• In regards to the unchurched…people don’t go to church anymore. The church must go to them. One on one discipleing is a long process especially when there’s so much bad press out there about church and religion.
• “If you win them to yourself…you can win them to your God”
• Most people like Jesus…they just don’t like Christians. If you don’t believe that, man you got to get out more.
• Success is measured primarily by pews, or chairs, or couches being filled up by un-churched; unsaved; ungodly people who are now living as Disciples of Christ.
• And most of all…WE ARE MISSIONARIES. American missionaries.
Most of who we’re reaching have no history or idea about tithing or giving. So there MUST BE FINANCIAL SUPPORT to this mission field, so that our main focus can remain on reaching and descipleing people for Christ. We can not take 6 years to haggle over what we should do. We must send funds to those who would brave the front lines of our culture and step out by faith and bypass the safe place of that secure staff position, and get out there and BE the church as a church planter. But I know we must be wise in our decisions and move together as one.
There seems to be two issues on the table in this discussion; first, the best way to raise funds for missions;, second, the best way to use said funds. To the first I would share that when I took this pastorate I found that the practice of the treasurer was to take the 5% offering out of the tithe. I immediately put a stop to that, the minutes are clear that 10% of the tithe goes to state/international and 90% is for the support of the local ministry. The 5% extra for missions is to be raised separately. So in our case the 5% has never been an issue because its not our money. It is raised specifically for missions and to missions it goes. I don’t include it in the budget as retithe, it goes in a line item category as being self-funded. BTW since we began this practice we have never raised less than the amount required to send and to this day we run a surplus in our missions fund which we designate for WM projects each year. Whatever is decided at the GA our church will continue to invest in the Great Commission. The problem is that many look at that extra 5% as “their money” but if you are following the proper procedure in raising it, it is money you would not have otherwise.
Second, how to spend the WM/EHM? Again the minutes seem reasonably clear in a general sense, but there is certainly room for improvement. While church planting is a priority, I would not be so quick to abandon established congregations that may just need a few cosmetic upgrades to be relevant. I understand the appeal of “new and improved” but the task of reaching souls is not complete at the point of conversion (unless you are a calvinist). While we tend to exalt the risk-taking evangelist/pastor, it is the shepherd/caretaker pastor who ultimately delivers those souls safely into the arms of Jesus. Remember those “new” souls you are so excited about today are going to be those “same old” souls you (or the pastor who comes after you) will be complaining about tomorrow. It is not a sprint, it a marathon. Just thinking out loud.
[...] this becomes a generally accepted expression redefined by “mission drift” and the response is to eliminate our commitment rather than alter our behavior, then on what basis or what principle can we declare that any [...]
You wrote:
“This gross mismanagement is evidenced by various state financial documents in our possession.
Based on other data to be found through independent audits of every state and region, we believe this
will show a systemic disregard for the mandates of the General Assembly, which is our highest
governing body”.
Your wording is so intense, I cannot take you seriously .
That one paragraph alone suggests felonious acts, that would take it out the realm of Church Polity and put it in the jurisdiction of the FBI.
[...] Minutes are not being followed in the way we spend over $13 million per year designated for Evangelism and Home Missions [...]
Travis,
This is very interesting discussion that seems premised upon reducing our fees to the International and State Offices to a total of 10% with 1/3 of the funds on both International and State offices being spent on World Missions and Home Missions respectively. I have to admit that I was completely captivated by the thought on a number of levels the most important being that this is supported by the scriptural tithe and the mission of the Church.
Then I went to numbers crunching and came up with the following that gave me some pause. My numbers represent only how this would be affected by the giving of the Tennessee churches as I used the tithe reported in the latest issue of Tennessee Tidings. This is what I found:
During this period (November 07-Feb. 08) TN churches reported $2,984,988.90 in tithes.
In this small sampling we collectively send $149,249.44 to International and State monthly.
Respectively we send $74,624.72 to World Missions and Home Missions. This is all under present system of TOT (15%).
Under the Proposed GA Item #2 We would begin in 2010 with the reduction to 2% it would look this way (assuming all states adopt the same measure for Home Missions):
We would still send $149,249.44 to International and State with $59,699.78 sent respectively to WM and HM. This would reduce by 1/2% every two years until it eliminates in 2018.
Under the Proposed Amendment here mandating we reduce to 10% with 1/3 going to WM and HM using the same TN tithe model it would look like this:
99,499.63 going to International and State with $49,749.81 to WM and HM.
A question and some comment – would the above be phased in or would it be mandated to be in force from the ending of the 2008 Assembly? The observation initially is that we are cutting the WM and HM allotment more than the initial cuts of the International Assembly Suggested Measure. If this passes how does the WM department balance such cuts immediately (if that is the intent of the motion) not to mention the International Offices and State as well as Evangelism and Home Missions.
I am not saying that the 10% total amount sent in is not a good idea with even mandating the thirds as mentioned but if this is without a phasing in period then WM and HM stand to lose more without the benefit of phasing the cuts in than if we follow the suggested path.