A Look at Giving to the BGAV 

by T. C. Pinckney                                                                                           Vol. XIV, No. 3, March 2001

In Southern Baptist polity every church makes its own decisions from the color of the carpet to which pastor to call and how much money to give to what organizations. Because of this autonomy it is difficult, if not impossible, for observers to know the exact meaning of many changes. However, that is not the same as saying a pattern of changes over an extended time has NO meaning. Though we may not know the precise reasons behind the changes, their impact may be clear. And that is certainly true of budgetary trends.

The following tables show (Table 1) the number and percentage of churches enrolled in each BGAV giving track over the last ten years, and (Table 2) the total dollars given by all the churches in each track and the percentage that amount comprises of the grand total contributed. Three points in time are shown: 30 September 1994, 1998, and 2000. The end of September is ten months into the BGAV fiscal year and is just the date for which the data are available. Because of the ten-month spotlight, please keep in mind that the BGAV will have received another two months of donations by the end of its fiscal year. The figures were produced by the BGAV treasurer.

Table 1: Churches as of 30 September
                                                                                                                                #Change         %

Track            '91      '92        '93      '94      '95      '96   '97   '98    '99     '00    93 to 00         in 00

WM1            273     165      233      255     273    293  280  280  289    307      +74              20.6%

WM2         1170   1255    1063      934     908    870  830  909  855    850     -213              57.0%

WM3               *          *           81      127     143   150  152  151  144    150      +69               10.1%

ID>SBC**    95      118       168     202      199   189  146  134   203   185      +17               12.4%

ID<SBC**     --         --            --         33       38     68     52     --     --         --           n/c                  0%

Total        1538   1538     1545   1551    1561 1570 1460 1474 14911492

 

Table 2: Dollars: Number & Percentage
 

                    1994                  1998                           94-98                 2000                                  94-00 % 

                                     $ Given      % $ Given  % Change       $ Given             %                 Change

WM1 ***      22.9%    3,100,232          26.7%         + 3.8%           3,576,009       30.1%             + 7.2%

WM2           44.1%     5,265,813         45.3%          - 1.2%            4,700,040       39.7%             - 4.4%

WM3           12.8%     1,997,862        17.2%          + 4.4%            1,795,740       15.1%             +2.3%

ID                 20.2%    1,263,710        10.9%           - 9.3%            1,805,466       15.2%              - 5.0%

10 mo. total CP    $11,627,617                                                $11,877,255

* WM3 was not available until 1993.

** ID>SBC = a local-church-designed plan that gives more to the SBC than the WM tracks.

ID<SBC = a local-church-designed plan that gives less to the SBC than the WM tracks.

*** Dollar amounts in '94 not available.

Some facts behind a few of the numbers may make them more meaningful. In 1994 as shown in the top table, 235 churches had individually designed plans. Of those, 202 designated more than 35% to the SBC, 33 specified less than 35% to the SBC. Obviously, the 202 were strongly loyal to the SBC, the 33 less so. Interestingly, the 134 churches with ID plans in 1998 and the 185 in 2000 ALL gave 40% or more to the SBC.

One of the more striking facts of these tables is the growing number of churches giving through WM1 (which favors the SBC) and the increasing (since 1998) number of ID plans ... all of them as designed by the local churches favoring the SBC. This is paralleled by a decrease in WM2 churches. Churches in WM3 grew from the first year of that track (1993) through 1997 but seem to have plateaued from then through 2000. ID churches increased considerably from '91 to '96 when they reached a total of 257 but have since decreased.

What can explain these changes?

-- Presumably the 68 liberal churches with ID plans in '96 giving less than 35% to the SBC moved to WM3 so that their money would go to the CBF, but this is an assumption. The process of more churches adopting the most liberal giving plan seems to have run its course, as the number has remained essentially constant over the last four years. Though there may be a few more in the future, it seems unlikely that there will be a large movement to that liberal budget track.

-- We know that approximately 245 of the more conservative churches have left the BGAV entirely and aligned with the SBCV, and another 55 or so have dually aligned with the SBCV. It seems evident that as these churches left ID plans or WM1, 84 others have moved from WM2 (the default plan) to either WM1 or ID. Such an important and often heart-rending movement depends upon the pastors and members of churches becoming well-informed on the real issues and penetrating the fog of misinformation or lack of information so prevalent. That educational process takes time, often a lot of time.

Clearly most of the churches in WM2 are likely to be smaller and probably less prosperous. This can be seen in the fact that whereas WM2 churches comprised 60.2% of all BGAV churches in '94, they gave only 44.1% of the dollars, and constituting 56.9% of BGAV churches in '00 they gave 39.7%. Likewise, they tend to be less involved in denominational matters because the pastor is either bi-vocational or the only staff member and has little or no time to study issues or even become aware that they exist.

Implications for the Future: Although drawing conclusions from such partial information is at best subjective, nevertheless these data suggest that the Southern Baptist Conservatives of Virginia will continue to grow. Clearly all 307 churches in WM1 identify strongly with the SBC and it seems likely that many will at some point move their affiliation to the SBCV.

Similarly, the 185 churches with individually designed plans -- all of which give 40% or more to the SBC -- also identify with the SBC, if anything even more strongly than those in WM1. Consequently, these 185 churches may also join the SBCV over time.

Less obvious are the prospects for the 850 churches in WM2. However, a large percentage of small churches are theologically conservative. And as these churches recognize the true issue (biblical authority) and come to understand the directions the BGAV and SBCV are headed, it would not be surprising to see a continued decrease in the number of WM2 participants as more churches move to WM1, SBC-oriented individually designed plans, and subsequently to the SBCV, or even go directly to the SBCV without pausing in WM1 or an ID plan.

The impetus for SBC-oriented churches to leave the BGAV can only be heightened by actions such as last November's decision to cut funds going to out of state causes by an additional 2% and by rhetoric like the words of outgoing BGAV president Tom McCann (read his speech in "A Time to Decide" in the February Banner). While such words and acts may serve (1) a psychological need to lash back at the "right-wing fundamentalists" and (2) to temporarily counteract receipts that are shrinking as more churches leave the BGAV to align with the SBCV, in the longer term they do not hamper the SBC and will prove counterproductive by impelling more and more churches to join the SBCV. In short the BGAV and its strongest partisans appear to be its own worst enemies.