Finance comm. report response

[free]

Pastor Bill...I pray that I never have the wrong attitude when it comes to tithing and giving...But it frustraes me (and always has) that IO gets more money from our local churches than the state office does.

I'm sure you've got pastors in KY and every other state who are struggling to make it...Their families go without new clothes, possibly food and even some of the nicer things in life. That's why I prefer the 5%/5% concept...It's just seems right to support the other ministries on a state level as long as the state offices use that money to sow back into the ministry with it.

I'm off of my soapbox for now and will read what others think about it.

[rjjunior]

We've discussed this long ago, but I think it bears repeating. A true 'pay up the ladder' tithe from the local churches to region to area to IO would bankrupt the IO. Consider the numbers.

Let's say NA local churches currently tithe $10,000,000 (I don't recall the true amount). That is now redirected and disbursed to the regions. It is, in turn, tithed on to the NA pres =$1,000,000. The area Pres tithes to IO $100,000.

What organization could handle a 99% reduction in income?

I'm not saying it isn't the theoretical right thing, I'm saying it is a practical impossibility.

[Pastor Bill]

Pastor Bill...I pray that I never have the wrong attitude when it comes to tithing and giving...But it frustraes me (and always has) that IO gets more money from our local churches than the state office does.

I'm sure you've got pastors in KY and every other state who are struggling to make it...Their families go without new clothes, possibly food and even some of the nicer things in life. That's why I prefer the 5%/5% concept...It's just seems right to support the other ministries on a state level as long as the state offices use that money to sow back into the ministry with it.

I'm off of my soapbox for now and will read what others think about it.

I agree, I'd rather see more going to the state offices, we've sort of shorted them it seems to me. I know it takes money for IO, but the issue I see is that where the relationships and ministry are, we are short, and up the line we have more money, but less relationship, and too many people feel disconnected/distrustful which hinders giving. I can't speak to how well the budget is being spent at IO, because I don't know it, or see it, and that is part of the problem. I'd be glad to see more going to the state offices, because I KNOW how it's being used.

Most from the outside seem to feel we could cut down on IO, that may not be the case, they may be short of funds too, but the shortage of relationship seems to be a bigger problem to me. Fixing that, I feel, would go much farther than mandating more rules and regulations.

[rjjunior]

Most from the outside seem to feel we could cut down on IO, that may not be the case, they may be short of funds too...

Actually, reports seem to indicate that they are short. Family Ministries is being discontinued, perhaps due in part to a lack of resources to go around. They are being forced to prioritize, which isn't necessarily a bad thing, I guess. Not sure what other specialized ministries will follow the way of FM, but I'm sure there's more to come. I assume if it can't somehow be strongly connected to world evangelization and leadership development, it'll suffer a similar fate.

[Pastor Bill]

I see that, and that's what I mean, most FEEL that IO is getting too much of the money, regardless of what the actual situation is. Are there things that should be prioritized, cut farmed out to the states or local churches rather than centralized, possibly, but the key isn't in the organization, but in the relationship.

If strong relationships were there, building the trust and confidence in the ministry of the IO, then I don't think funds would be as much of a problem.

[Rob]

Family Ministries is being discontinued, perhaps due in part to a lack of resources to go around. They are being forced to prioritize, which isn't necessarily a bad thing, I guess. Not sure what other specialized ministries will follow the way of FM, but I'm sure there's more to come. I assume if it can't somehow be strongly connected to world evangelization and leadership development, it'll suffer a similar fate.

Could it also be that those or Ministries to be performed at a local church not an IO?

[paul]

If strong relationships were there, building the trust and confidence in the ministry of the IO, then I don't think funds would be as much of a problem.

Let's go to the next level. How do you propose that a better relationship and trust be established between IO and the local church.

What would that look like..specifics

[Dr. Ron]

Before you can address many of your concerns, there needs to be a quantitative assessment of the relationship between each of these levels.

The AG has an IO and only asks for 3-5% of income. They maintain a very loose-tight properties style and the churchs are affiliate in most cases. Properties are all owned by the local congregations unless they are considered a "corporate" type church.....then as soon as the congregation is able ...IO stands aside.

I would compose a list of questions to be posed.

What is IOs responsibility to the local church?
What is the intrinsic relationship between local, state and IO?

I put a list of ten together when I was a state overseer......notice that I am not longer one.

That said, I think that is germaine to the issues you raise.

[rjjunior]

Family Ministries is being discontinued, perhaps due in part to a lack of resources to go around. They are being forced to prioritize, which isn't necessarily a bad thing, I guess. Not sure what other specialized ministries will follow the way of FM, but I'm sure there's more to come. I assume if it can't somehow be strongly connected to world evangelization and leadership development, it'll suffer a similar fate.

Could it also be that those or Ministries to be performed at a local church not an IO?

I would agree with that, yes. But for many smaller churches, they still need that emphasis packaged nicely for them and that's a function IO has done for them in the past. Not saying its right, it's just reality in many areas still, I'm afraid. I personally agree that the shift should go to the local churches (the region can help, if need be).

I would compose a list of questions to be posed.

What is IOs responsibility to the local church?
What is the intrinsic relationship between local, state and IO?

I put a list of ten together when I was a state overseer......notice that I am not longer one.

What are the other 8?

[Dr. Ron]

The other 8 might or might not be appropriate to the organization as it now is operated.

The existance of an IO is in the eye of the beholder. Most do not need anything that it supports.

The existance of SO is actually more important and realistic for the benefit of the local congregations...and should be funded far more than the IO.

I worked in "mission states" that had to have financial support from IO to operate....but we sent 55% of our total income to IO to accomodate that. If that funding had been left on our level, for our location, I could have done infinitely more.

I was given a stipend of 1500.00 per YEAR for new field development. The churches I planted had to have "private" funding from other people and churches....I held many revivals and funnelled the offerings into those locations.

[Pastor Bill]

We've discussed this long ago, but I think it bears repeating. A true 'pay up the ladder' tithe from the local churches to region to area to IO would bankrupt the IO. Consider the numbers.

Let's say NA local churches currently tithe $10,000,000 (I don't recall the true amount). That is now redirected and disbursed to the regions. It is, in turn, tithed on to the NA pres =$1,000,000. The area Pres tithes to IO $100,000.

What organization could handle a 99% reduction in income?

I'm not saying it isn't the theoretical right thing, I'm saying it is a practical impossibility.

With that type of financial restructuring would also have to come a restructuring of responsibilities, you are correct. This would put more of the work regionally rather than all in Cleveland, but that in itself would cut some costs and focus the work better.

[Pastor Bill]

If strong relationships were there, building the trust and confidence in the ministry of the IO, then I don't think funds would be as much of a problem.

Let's go to the next level. How do you propose that a better relationship and trust be established between IO and the local church.

What would that look like..specifics

Honestly I don't think IO can establish those directly with the local church, but more working with the state/regional ministries first. Building opportunities for cooperative work between states/regions, facilitating missions work/funding, right now other than Assembly, most pastors don't really even know what's going on in Cleveland. A shared vision for the future, not for the local church, but for the organization.

Serve as a resource.

[Pastor Bill]

Family Ministries is being discontinued, perhaps due in part to a lack of resources to go around. They are being forced to prioritize, which isn't necessarily a bad thing, I guess. Not sure what other specialized ministries will follow the way of FM, but I'm sure there's more to come. I assume if it can't somehow be strongly connected to world evangelization and leadership development, it'll suffer a similar fate.

Could it also be that those or Ministries to be performed at a local church not an IO?

I would agree with that, yes. But for many smaller churches, they still need that emphasis packaged nicely for them and that's a function IO has done for them in the past. Not saying its right, it's just reality in many areas still, I'm afraid. I personally agree that the shift should go to the local churches (the region can help, if need be).

I would compose a list of questions to be posed.

What is IOs responsibility to the local church?
What is the intrinsic relationship between local, state and IO?

I put a list of ten together when I was a state overseer......notice that I am not longer one.

What are the other 8?

If a local church is relying on IO to provide them ministry direction, there is a problem, I think IO can provide resources (although I'd first go to the State/Regional resources) but the vision, direction, and influence a church has differs so much depending on so many local factors that anything IO could package would fall short.

[Pastor Bill]

The other 8 might or might not be appropriate to the organization as it now is operated.

The existance of an IO is in the eye of the beholder. Most do not need anything that it supports.

The existance of SO is actually more important and realistic for the benefit of the local congregations...and should be funded far more than the IO.

I worked in "mission states" that had to have financial support from IO to operate....but we sent 55% of our total income to IO to accomodate that. If that funding had been left on our level, for our location, I could have done infinitely more.

I was given a stipend of 1500.00 per YEAR for new field development. The churches I planted had to have "private" funding from other people and churches....I held many revivals and funnelled the offerings into those locations.

I think IO would be useful as a resource for SO's, just as SO's are a resource for the local church, but those relationships would have to be much different. a "Mission State should be receiving support more than sending it, no different than a foreign mission, where a stronger state could sow into those ministries through the IO.

[paul]

The other 8 might or might not be appropriate to the organization as it now is operated.

The existance of an IO is in the eye of the beholder. Most do not need anything that it supports.

The existance of SO is actually more important and realistic for the benefit of the local congregations...and should be funded far more than the IO.

I worked in "mission states" that had to have financial support from IO to operate....but we sent 55% of our total income to IO to accomodate that. If that funding had been left on our level, for our location, I could have done infinitely more.

I was given a stipend of 1500.00 per YEAR for new field development. The churches I planted had to have "private" funding from other people and churches....I held many revivals and funnelled the offerings into those locations.

I think IO would be useful as a resource for SO's, just as SO's are a resource for the local church, but those relationships would have to be much different. a "Mission State should be receiving support more than sending it, no different than a foreign mission, where a stronger state could sow into those ministries through the IO.

Pastor Bill, I know I sound reduntant. but specifically what are the resources that are to be made available, other than a mission connection ?

Both State or International. I quess I am still trying to get a grasp on what it is that churches are looking for in a relationship and resources being made available.

My ministry operates on a relational level, and is set up as a resource center for our work. But it is different in that it mainly is set up as a mission organization.