![]() |
| Smile, Gordon, God loves you too... |
One of the most pleasurable aspects of my role is when I
visit churches that contribute to the Baptist Home Mission Fund, to thank them
for supporting churches like mine through their giving.
Without the financial support of our big Baptist family,
Church from Scratch would not have been able to afford its current budget. We celebrated our 11th birthday as
a church this weekend and the fact that we have grown and developed as we have owes
much to our annual Home Mission grant.
I would also want to acknowledge that we receive a double
grant – one of very few churches to do so – for which I am deeply grateful.
These annual grants are made towards up to 50% of the costs
of a minister’s basic stipend. However, they do not contribute to:
- housing costs (pioneering churches are unlikely to have manses)
- employer’s National Insurance
- employer’s pension contributions (the Baptist Union strongly encourages its ministers to belong to the Baptist Ministers’ Pension scheme or to make alternative arrangements)
- the costs of ministry (e.g. travel: my church ‘parish’ covers an area of around 48 square miles)
The amount of our grant for 2014 has just been announced. It is reducing to 40% of the basic
stipend. In real terms this amounts to just
24% of the full ministry costs to be carried by the church.
The taper (a reduction year on year) is presumably intended
to encourage churches to grow and to take greater responsibility for their own
financial needs, so that the HMF can be redeployed to assist other, perhaps
new, churches.
I suspect, however, that the underlying assumption is that
churches like this one should bring in enough higher earners to balance the
bias we have towards sharing the gospel with people on lower-incomes or who
live on benefits.
So I face a personal dilemma (I speak for myself only, not for
CFS on this topic).
Should we focus on building relationships with accountants,
architects, GPs, lawyers and stockbrokers – all of whom God loves and all of whom
are welcome here – at the cost of time spent with people who have fewer opportunities
and choices?
And if we abandon them to search for richer members, who will
take up our work?
Or do we continue to reach out to those who will never be
able to give enough money from their hand-to-mouth incomes to make this church
financially self-supporting?
And has anyone really thought through the Gospel implications of
this policy?
[Note: as well as the comments below, there is quite a debate on the issues raised here on my Facebook page here. Scroll down to the item headed "New Baptist strategy for evangelism"]
[Note: as well as the comments below, there is quite a debate on the issues raised here on my Facebook page here. Scroll down to the item headed "New Baptist strategy for evangelism"]



