Finance comm. report response

[Rob]

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 could not disagree with you more on this subject. How could the IO be a resource for a SO? In this day and age with all the resources available to us via internet, etc., most resources can be found there.

[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.

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.

Isn't that what we are all supposed to be? What you've described is basically what I am saying the IO should be, a resource center for the work. Resources is a fairly broad category, and frankly what I need is probably different from what others need, but generally, educational opportunities, mentoring/support, financial support for new works, giving opportunities for those that are not new works, and are ready to help outside their local area.

I know that may still be broader than you are seeking, but I don't know that I can really come up with a definitive list either. As you have left a denomination, you have become a part of an organization that while it does not claim to be a denomination, it fills the purposes that denominational affiliation would. Much of the structure you have is what denominations have or should have.