by Sandy » Thu Oct 27, 2011 7:46 am
The BGCT has been blaming the downturn in financing on the "recession" as long as there's been a recession. The problem with that is it began long before the recession did, and the steepest declines in giving occurred during the first six or seven years of the formation of the SBTC. The biggest mistake the BGCT made was in attempting to drop the default percentage of SBC support several years back, and then trying to correct the problem in the face of the storm that followed by setting up a form that allows individual churches to determine on their own how the BGTC-SBC split will come from their particular gift and counting all of that as Cooperative Program giving. The leadership grossly underestimated the level of support that most BGCT churches desired to provide to the SBC. The consequence of that has been that while the convention's default percentage to the SBC was set at 27%, the churches have gradually increased theirs to the point where the average is now close to 45%, which is where most of the money has gone in the last four or five years.
I'm not sure I would go along with the idea that the SBTC isn't interested in affiliations with the universities. They do give 55% of their CP money to the SBC, but they take in about 10% more money each year than they've budgeted, and even in the 45% of what remains in Texas there is a lot of room to add support for more institutions and agencies. The SBTC is probably the most efficient of all state conventions in the SBC, spending a lower percentage of their income on convention operations, including executive salaries and personnel, than just about any other state convention body. They're already in at HBU. With the SBCT full of churches pastored and served by alumni of the Texas Baptist schools, and with the BGCT contributions shrinking, it certainly seems increased involvement of the SBCT is within the realm of possibility, at least at UMHB, ETBU, Hardin-Simmons, and Wayland.
Although the selection of individuals to serve as trustees at most Baptist colleges (including the one I attended) in recent years has involved the individual trustee's ability to generate contributions more than it has their ability to assist in governing an educational institution based on Christian values (which is why I believe a lot of the "Christian values" part has eroded substantially at many "Baptist" universities), the current financial situation is not necessarily a reflection of the full level of Baptist support. I recently read that almost 40% of the endowed scholarships at Baylor have a requirement that the recipient be a "member in good standing," or some other similar language, of a Southern Baptist church, in most cases, within the state of Texas. A large share of the endowment at all of the Texas Baptist schools, and most likely at all schools that are either currently or were once related to Southern Baptist state conventions, was given by Baptists with a specific purpose in mind for their use. Nor is paying tuition and fees at a Christian university always necessarily "payment for services received." I've worked in private, Christian educational institutions most of my life, and I've never seen one where the amount of money paid by the student covered the actual expense or value of the education received. It is a partnership, and there are contributors who are investing in the lives of the school's students to help provide the education in good faith with the mission and purpose of the school. The faculty and staff are making sacrifices, in most cases earning less than they would at a state supported institution, which is also a subsidy of sorts to the students.
Trustees are exactly what their name implies, individuals in whose trust the governance of the school has been placed. Once that becomes attached to a dollar amount, the values and principles upon which the school was founded, and which it is attempting to educate its students, are compromised.