BGCT approves reduced budget, Baylor agreement

[Sandy]

http://texasbaptists.org/2011/10/messen ... agreement/

The BGCT essentially legitimized the recent Baylor board of regents unilateral decision to select non-Baptists to its board, and to have more input into who gets picked for the 25% of seats that the convention still elects. They did alter the funding for Baylor and for Houston Baptist University, excluding the per-student allowance and cutting back, for those two schools, to a general budget and scholarship fund. They are distinguishing between an "affiliated" relationship for schools as opposed to those which relate to the convention by "special agreement," which would include Baylor and HBU.

I doubt that the funding reduction has much of an effect on either university. HBU more than makes up for the per-student allowance from gifts through the SBTC, and Baylor has a lot of its own sources. There's been a fear that, as the SBTC grows, the colleges and universities might be tempted to drop their exclusive relationship with the BGCT and dually affiliate, simply because of the increased funding it would provide. But through these actions, it appears the BGCT is sending a message to its colleges that they can more or less do as they please, since there is little they can do to stop it. The SBTC is the growing source of Baptist revenue outside the churches in Texas, so I would expect that there may be more colleges which will change their relationship from "affiliated" to "special agreement" in order to get closer to them.

Also, there were fewer than 1,000 messengers registered, quite small for BGCT meetings, especially in Amarillo. And the anticipated CP revenue of $32 million is a shocker, in a convention body that, just a little more than a decade ago was collecting nearly $70 million in CP revenue. The SBTC will collect about $27 million in CP revenue this year, almost half of that amount.

[Big Daddy Weaver]

[Sandy]

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.

[Ed Pettibone]

Ed: Sandy I am inclined to agree with most of what you say above however I am convinced that a large part of the problems in Baptist institutions are that for the most part they where designed , established by, and run for too long by Preachers, many of whom had no practical preparation for the task they assumed.

[Jerry_B]

First, the moment you agree to have a convention in one of the furtherest reaches of Texas, McAllen and Amarillo, you are going to have a smaller attendance. Everyone knows this and I for one am glad the BGCT moves the meeting around like they do. Sure there has been less attendance, but I think if you looked around all the conventions are having a hard time getting folks to come to a business meeting.

Remind me again how many institutions, schools, hospitals, children's homes the SBTC supports again?

[Sandy]

[Jerry_B]

"Depending on how you count" - typical SBC talk, never straight with the numbers

Those higher attended conventions where during the fight to keep fundamentalists from controlling the BGCT, of course their would be more people there.

The SBTC isn't really interested in starting anything that could rightfully be their own, instead they manipulate and scheme to try and gain control of institutions with the one "tool" they have, "Hey, we have money, want some?", a despicable tactic for sure.

[Sandy]

[Gene Scarborough]

This lust for control is getting out of hand!!!

We have seen it in NC and now each meeting is less and less attended. What's the point when the Executive Committee now runs the show!

Whatever happened to the joy and love of renewing friendships that used to be a part of any good Baptist meeting from Association to State Convention to National Convention?

I think as the media reports the fuss and fight, more people decide there are better ways to be Christians.

[Matt Richard]

Gene,

this was my first state convention to EVER attend. Sadly, I wasn't very excited or impressed by much that went on. I did enjoy some of the break-out sessions, but he quibbling over Baylor, funding for other institutions, etc. got old and tedious. As people were elected to new positions, I had to wonder what the future of the organization they were being elected to had.

On a bright note, my favorite part was getting back in touch with friends I went to seminary with, that are now serving in various other capacities. Perhaps this aspect of the annual meeting is not totally lost for those of us who are young (and perhaps naive) enough to be detached from the long history fueling some of these squabbles.