Institutions and ministries partnering with the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship potentially could receive more funding than recently proposed, and the number of theological schools eligible for the maximum financial support could be greater than previously announced, judging by the final report of the CBF Coordinating Council's partnership study committee.
The council will discuss and vote on the committee's report at its June 29-30 meeting in Grapevine, Texas, prior to the annual CBF General Assembly. If the report is approved by the council, CBF moderator Bob Setzer of First Baptist Church in Macon, Ga., then plans to ask the General Assembly to affirm the action.
A key recommendation in the final report includes placing a cap on CBF contributions for partners at 25 percent of an organization's previous year's receipts, up from the proposed 20 percent cap.
The committee adjusted the threshold from 20 percent to 25 percent to “minimize disruption to existing partners,” Setzer said.
Current partners-excluding educational institutions-include Associated Baptist Press, the Baptist Center for Ethics, the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty, Baptists Today news journal and the Baptist World Alliance.
Only one partner-Associated Baptist Press-would be impacted by the funding cap, but not as significantly as it would have been if the proposed 20 percent ceiling had been recommended.
The Baptist Joint Committee and Baptist Center for Ethics both would have lost funding with a 20 percent cap, but neither necessarily will be impacted negatively by the 25 percent threshold.
None of the theological schools funded by the CBF is close to the planned 25 percent cap.
The partnership study committee presented the first draft of its report to the CBF Coordinating Council in February and received comments on its proposals through April 15.
The revised report also sets a limit of up to six theological schools classified as identity partners-a designation reserved for schools that explicitly identify themselves with the CBF and are thereby eligible for greater funding. The earlier draft proposal limited the number of identity partners to three-to-five schools.
In addition to increasing the limit to six, the revised report adds that the limit is necessary “due to present financial constraints and a core commitment to preparing ministerial leaders for CBF partnering congregations.”
The study committee does not designate which schools will qualify as identity partners.
In another change, the revised report commits the CBF to promote the work of the partners.
“It is appropriate for the CBF to expect those with whom it partners to acknowledge the CBF's role and to promote the greater work of the CBF,” both drafts say. “It is also appropriate and expected that the CBF will acknowledge and promote the work of the partner within the context of CBF life,” the revised report adds.
The committee report notes the “unique and significant” relationship between the CBF and its “historic partners.”
“They have needed us, and we have needed them,” the report states. “As in any healthy relationship, partnerships need to be reviewed and goals need to be revisited to determine if a given partnership remains in the best interest of both partners. Through a process of regular review and evaluation of its partnerships, the CBF enhances its ability to provide important resources to individuals and churches that are part of the CBF movement.”
The report acknowledges many donors see the CBF as the channel through which they can make a single contribution that is then divided among multiple ministries and institutions. Without mentioning it by name, the document appears to refer to the Southern Baptist Convention's Cooperative Program model of unified budget giving, with which most moderate Baptists have been familiar.
“The reason behind the 25 percent cap comes from the philosophy by which the CBF has operated from its beginning,” the report states, citing the Fellowship's desire “not to own or control institutions.” However, the report states the 25 percent threshold “should be seen as a level not to exceed. It should not be seen as an automatic level of funding nor as a goal to be sought.”
The proposed plan allows for some exceptions to the 25 percent funding cap, such as new partners that might need greater start-up funding. However, the committee report recommends that funding for any partner beyond the 25 percent cap be reduced to that level over three years.
Associated Baptist Press