Baptist Pastoral Ministry, Missions, and Church Leadership — Unit 7: Cooperative Missions and Funding: Conventions, Associations, and Independent Alternatives

Key Verse

"I thank my God upon every remembrance of you, always in every prayer of mine making request for you all with joy, for your fellowship in the gospel from the first day until now." (Philippians 1:3-5, NKJV)

Learning Objectives

When you finish this unit, you should be able to:

1. Explain why Baptist churches, though each is autonomous, choose to cooperate in missions.

2. Describe the three Baptist ways of organizing mission work: the society, the convention, and direct church sending.

3. Explain how the Cooperative Program of 1925 works in general terms, and state its strengths and its weaknesses.

4. State fairly the objections of Independent Baptists to boards and conventions, and give the answer of those who cooperate.

5. Apply five biblical principles of stewardship, accountability and partnership to a local church's missions giving.

The Voice of This Course

This course is written from inside the Baptist tradition, for Baptist pastors. We hold that every local church is a self-governing body under Christ, and that Christ also calls His churches to work together to carry the gospel to the nations. These two convictions pull in different directions, and Baptists have argued about how to hold them together for more than two hundred years. We state each view fairly. We then say why most conservative Baptists have chosen voluntary cooperation, while granting that some faithful Baptists chose another way. Church autonomy and the associations that grow from it are studied in Course 3, and the early story of missions in Unit 6 of this course, so here we refer to them only briefly.

Why Autonomous Churches Cooperate

Baptists believe that the New Testament shows the local church as the basic body Christ has built. No bishop, council or convention rules over it. But the same New Testament never shows a church living alone. Churches greeted one another, sent messengers, shared news, and gave money across great distances.

Look at four examples.

First, the church at Antioch, while worshiping and fasting, heard the Holy Spirit say to set apart Barnabas and Saul for the work. The church fasted, prayed, laid hands on them and sent them away (Acts 13:1-3). A local church was the sending body, under the Spirit's direction.

Second, the church at Philippi supported Paul again and again. Paul wrote that no other church shared with him in giving and receiving in the early days of his mission (Philippians 4:15-16). Their "fellowship in the gospel," in our key verse, included money. A small and poor church in Macedonia was a faithful partner in a mission in another region.

Third, the Macedonian churches gave to the poor believers in Jerusalem, out of deep poverty and with great joy (2 Corinthians 8:1-4). Paul asked the Corinthians to set aside gifts on the first day of the week (1 Corinthians 16:1-2). Churches in different cities were bound to each other by love, and they showed it by sharing.

Fourth, when a hard question arose in Acts 15, the church at Antioch sent Paul and Barnabas to Jerusalem, where the apostles, elders and the whole church considered it together. Baptists do not take this as proof that a council may rule over churches. We take it as a sign that churches seek counsel from each other.

From these examples Baptists draw a principle. Cooperation among churches is voluntary and not forced. No church must join. Each decides for itself how much to give and with whom to work. This is what the Baptist Faith and Message 2000 means when it speaks of cooperation: churches work together because of shared love and shared mission, and not under the command of any outside power.

Three Ways Baptists Have Organized Missions

Baptists have used three main methods. Each has strengths and each has known weaknesses.

1. The society method

William Carey and Andrew Fuller formed a society, as Unit 6 told. In this method, individuals and churches who care about missions join a society, pay what they choose, and the society chooses and supports missionaries. The Baptist Missionary Society of 1792 worked this way. The American Baptists who formed the Triennial Convention in 1814 followed a similar pattern at first. The strength of the society method is that it is focused on one task and attracts those who truly care about it. The weakness is that it can leave out churches that do not join, and it depends on individuals who may come and go.

2. The convention method

In 1845 Southern Baptists formed the Southern Baptist Convention in Augusta, Georgia. In place of a single-purpose society, they formed a body of churches that sent "messengers" to a yearly meeting. This body then supported several tasks together, such as foreign missions, home missions and, later, theological education. The strength of the method is that it brings many tasks under the shared gifts of the churches. The weakness is that a large body can become a bureaucracy and may seem distant from the local church. Other conventions elsewhere in the world, including national Baptist conventions in Latin America and Africa, follow related patterns. Convention practice varies from country to country, so a pastor should learn how his own convention works.

3. The association and direct church sending

The oldest form of Baptist cooperation is the local association. The Philadelphia Baptist Association, formed in 1707 by several churches in the Philadelphia region, is a well-known example. An association is a group of neighboring churches that meet for fellowship, counsel and shared work. It does not rule its member churches. Associations often support local missions, church planting and training, and some also support missionaries abroad. Churches may also send and support missionaries directly, without any board. A single church, or a few churches together, calls out a missionary, prays for him, and sends his support. The strength is closeness: the sending church knows its missionary by name. The weakness is that small churches cannot carry the cost alone, and a missionary may depend on a few friends.

The Cooperative Program

For many decades, Southern Baptist churches gave to each cause through separate appeals. In 1925 they adopted what is called the Cooperative Program. The idea is simple. A church gives a part of its regular offerings to its state convention. The state convention keeps a share for its own work in the state and sends a share on to the national convention. The national convention divides that money among its mission boards, seminaries and other agencies. Churches choose the percentage they give. Nobody is forced to give.

Supporters name these strengths. Every mission field and every agency shares in a steady stream of money, instead of depending on whichever cause has the best appeal that year. A tiny church that gives a small amount still joins the support of missionaries around the world. The large and the small stand together. Planning is easier because income is steady.

Critics, including some Baptists who give faithfully, name these weaknesses. A great portion of gifts can be used up in administration and in many layers of agencies. A church may not know where its own money goes. A small donor may feel that he has no voice. Central bodies may spend money on matters that the local church would not choose. Some say the system makes churches give by habit instead of by personal knowledge of missionaries.

We should state a plain fact: both lists contain truth. The Cooperative Program has helped to support one of the largest missionary forces in Baptist history, and it also needs honest watching, as every large organization does. A pastor who supports it should ask for clear reports, and a pastor who criticizes it should do so openly, as a member of the family and not an enemy.

Not all conventions use this model. In many countries Baptists have different ways of sharing funds, and the sums available are small. The principle behind the Cooperative Program, that many churches give a regular share into a common stream, can still serve any size of church.

Independent Alternatives

Some Baptists decline to join conventions or give to boards. Many are called Independent Baptists. Their reasons deserve a fair hearing.

Their first argument is autonomy. The New Testament, they say, knows only the local church as a mission-sending body. A convention or board stands between the church and the missionary, and that is a human invention. In the late 1800s some Baptist leaders, among them the Southern Baptist missionary T. P. Crawford, argued that missionaries should be sent and supported directly by local churches and not by a board. Landmark teachers also stressed this point.

Their second argument is control. Large organizations, they say, can drift in doctrine or in practice. If a church sends its own missionary, it can supervise his teaching and see his work.

Their third argument is stewardship. They say that more of the gift reaches the field when fewer people handle it.

Our answer, from those who cooperate. Churches that cooperate say, first, that autonomy is not lost. A church that gives to a convention remains free to stop at any time. Autonomy means that a church governs itself, not that it avoids every partnership. Second, the New Testament shows churches combining to meet a need, as with the offering for Jerusalem (2 Corinthians 8:19 tells us that Paul's gift was carried by a brother chosen by the churches). Third, a single church often cannot do alone what many churches can do together, such as training pastors, translating Scripture, running a hospital or supporting a worker in a very dangerous land. Fourth, doctrinal safeguards come from confessions and from the churches' vote, as with the Baptist Faith and Message.

What both sides can agree on. A Baptist church that sends directly is doing a good work, and so is a church that gives through a convention. Neither should call the other unfaithful. The test is whether the church is obeying the Great Commission, giving cheerfully, and keeping honest accounts. Pastors should also remember that direct support can be a fine thing, but a church that supports only a missionary it personally likes may give less to places that no one has visited.

Principles for Funding Missions

Whatever method a church uses, the Bible gives principles.

1. Giving is worship, and it must be cheerful. "So let each one give as he purposes in his heart, not grudgingly or of necessity; for God loves a cheerful giver" (2 Corinthians 9:7). Pastors should teach this and avoid pressure or guilt.

2. Giving is regular and planned. Paul asked for gifts to be put aside on the first day of the week (1 Corinthians 16:1-2). A monthly line in the budget for missions is better than a single emotional offering.

3. Giving is accountable. Paul took care that the gift for Jerusalem was handled openly and by trusted men (2 Corinthians 8:20-21). Churches should ask for reports from missionaries and agencies, and should give reports to their own members.

4. Giving builds partners who can stand alone. The Philippians were partners, and they were not Paul's employers. A good mission aims for churches that govern, support and spread themselves. Money from abroad can help at the start, but it can also create dependence if it continues without end. Missionaries and sending churches should plan from the beginning how local believers will take over their own support.

5. Giving is joined with prayer and going. Money alone does not make a missionary. A church that sends money should also pray by name, write letters, and encourage its own members to go, as Antioch did.

Pastoral Application

A pastor in a village church in Mexico is visited by a missionary from another country who asks the church to support his ministry each month. The same week, his convention sends a letter about its yearly missions offering. The church has very little money, and some members say, "Why not give only to the man we have met?" Others say, "We should give through the convention, which we have always done."

The pastor does not choose a side and ask the church to follow him. He teaches from Philippians and 2 Corinthians about partnership and accountability. He invites the missionary and a convention representative to speak at separate meetings. He asks both for written reports. Then he leads the church in a business meeting to set a missions budget, with part going through the convention and a small part given to the missionary they have come to know. The members agree. The pastor has respected both loyalties, kept the decision in the hands of the congregation, and set an example of open accounts.

Summary

Baptist churches are autonomous, but the New Testament shows churches sending, supporting and counseling each other. Cooperation is voluntary. Baptists have used three methods: the society, as in Carey's day; the convention, as in the Southern Baptist Convention of 1845; and the association or direct church sending. The Cooperative Program of 1925 gathers regular gifts from many churches through state and national conventions, with the strengths of steady support and shared effort and the weaknesses of distance and administrative cost. Independent Baptists argue from autonomy, control and stewardship, and those who cooperate answer that autonomy is not lost, that the New Testament shows churches working together, and that many tasks need many churches. Both sides can agree on five principles: cheerful giving, regular giving, accountable giving, giving that builds self-supporting churches, and giving joined with prayer and going.

Further Reading

• The Baptist Faith and Message (2000), the article on cooperation.

• J. M. Pendleton, Church Manual (1867).

• William Carey, An Enquiry into the Obligations of Christians to Use Means for the Conversion of the Heathens (1792).

• Charles H. Spurgeon, Lectures to My Students.

• David Bebbington, Baptists Through the Centuries (2010).

• Chute, Finn and Haykin, The Baptist Story (2015).

Submit Exam & Check Pass Reset