Southern Baptists across the nation sit by and watch the battle of the
Titans as officers of the Southern Baptist Convention and the leadership
of the Baptist General Convention of Texas clash. What may very well be at stake
is the future of the Cooperative Program, which has been the funding engine
that has driven the work of national Southern Baptists and the Baptists of 34
state conventions since 1925.
Southern Baptists across the nation sit by and watch the battle of the
Titans as officers of the Southern Baptist Convention and the leadership
of the Baptist General Convention of Texas clash. What may very well be at stake
is the future of the Cooperative Program, which has been the funding engine
that has driven the work of national Southern Baptists and the Baptists of 34
state conventions since 1925.
In the last 22 years that the controversy has rattled the Southern Baptist
Convention, the Baptist General Convention of Texas has gone its own way. While
Texas Baptist churches have provided some of the key leadership of the movement
to take the Southern Baptist Convention in a more conservative direction, the
state convention overall has not been in lockstep with the national convention.
Perhaps the differences in direction were most clearly seen this past June
when the newly-elected executive director of the Baptist General Convention
of Texas, Charles Wade, argued for certain revisions to the proposed 2000 Baptist
Faith and Message. Charles Wade’s arguments were aimed primarily at leaving
unchanged certain key elements of the 1963 Baptist Faith and Message. Charles
Wade’s motion failed, but they became something of a gauntlet between the
two bodies. Earlier, the Baptist General Convention of Texas in annual session
had passed a motion that rejected the change the national convention adopted
on family, specifically the submission of women.
In recent action, the Executive Board of the Baptist
General Convention of Texas voted to revise the way it sends
Cooperative Program funds to the national organization.
Since its inception, this is how the Cooperative Program has worked. Churches
send their Cooperative Program funds to the state convention. The state convention
keeps a portion of this money and forwards a percentage through the Southern
Baptist Convention. The percentage is decided by the state convention and runs
from 18 percent in some of the smaller conventions to as much as 40 percent
in others.
The money that goes to the Southern Baptist Convention has been undesignated
and used according to whatever formula was approved by the annual meetings of
the convention.
Now, the Baptist General Convention of Texas Executive Board is recommending
to the state convention that meets next week that the money it recommends sending
to the national convention be designated around the six Southern Baptist seminaries
(except money to support students from Texas), the Executive Committee and the
Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission. The money that would have gone to these
SBC agencies would be kept in Texas, according to the state convention’s
Executive Committee for Texas Baptist seminaries and missions.
This would be the first major fracture of Cooperative Program giving since
all state Baptist conventions signed on to the unified funding program 75 years
ago.
To compound the preponderance of what Texas does, the Baptist General Convention
of Texas is by far and away the largest state Baptist convention with 3.5 million
members. Some researchers say the Baptist General Convention of Texas represents
what would be the third- largest body of Baptists in the nation, if it were
a national convention by itself. The Texas convention is, by far, the largest
contributor to the SBC Cooperative Program and would continue to be even if
the proposed reductions are accepted by the state convention.
Certainly, the leadership of the Southern Baptist Convention vigorously and
even stridently opposes what the Baptist General Convention of Texas’ Executive
Board has recommended. While the amount of money involved is significant, what
the action represents is far more significant. Every denominational leader knows
that society is moving into a day when loyalty to national organizations and
movements will be tested, and even questioned. Studies show “brand loyalty”
will be mostly lost – and that, the experts say, may include denominational
loyalty.
Breaking ranks on the Cooperative Program by the largest state convention may
encourage some other state conventions to consider such action. There are at
least
two other state conventions that may seriously consider designation of Cooperative
Program funds if Texas does so. At least all other state conventions will be
watching to see what effect Texas’ action has, if it is approved.
The battle in Texas over how to give to the national Cooperative Program has
become very public. After all, in Texas, one person out of eight is a Baptist
related to a church of the Baptist General Convention of Texas. The Texas convention
is running public media advertisements on the issue, and the Executive Committee
of the Southern Baptist Convention is sending materials directly to Texas Baptist
churches explaining their position. The story is in every newspaper and on every
television news program.
So, what will happen next week when the Baptist General Convention of Texas
meets in annual session? Based on state convention actions of the last decade,
the Executive Board’s recommendations will be approved. At previous conventions,
when a vote reflecting the differences between the Texas convention leadership
and the national body was taken, messengers have supported the Texas leadership
by a four-to-one margin.
Whatever happens, the last month has been a dark one for the Cooperative Program.
For the first time, a state Baptist convention’s leadership group has moved
to alter the pattern of Cooperative Program giving. And for the first time,
the national Executive Committee has moved to influence local churches in a
state convention to oppose the recommendation of its state leadership group.
Some convention observers saw this coming at some point, but as it happens,
it is still shocking and sad.
Participation and cooperation among Baptists is voluntary. Baptists must trust
one another, and they must be inspired to cooperate with one another if there
are
to be joint efforts of evangelism, mission, education and benevolence beyond
the local church. Baptists cannot,
for long, be coerced or cajoled to sustain a working relationship. Regardless
of what happens in the Baptist General Convention of Texas, other Baptists can
learn from the experience. The majority rules, but they must
be willing to pay the consequences of their rule. Texas Baptists will be making
decisions we wish they did not have to make. While we can do nothing humanly
to
affect the vote, we can pray for wisdom and guidance for the Texas messengers.
The weight of their vote is beyond comprehension.