There has been some discussion in recent months about the possibility of changing or adjusting the definition of what constitutes a Cooperative Program gift. The official definitions were only nailed down precisely by the Southern Baptist Convention at the annual meeting in June 2007 and by the Kentucky Baptist Convention at its annual meeting in November 2008.

This isn’t to say these definitions are really new though. In both instances, the committees working on crafting the language simply sought to put into writing what has been in practice since the establishment of CP in 1925.

The official SBC definition is as follows:

“The Cooperative Program (CP) is Southern Baptists’ unified plan of giving through which cooperating Southern Baptist churches give a percentage of their undesignated receipts in support of their respective state convention and the Southern Baptist Convention missions and ministries.”

The Kentucky definition is very similar:

“A Cooperative Program gift is an undesignated gift made through the Kentucky Baptist Convention and distributed for the support of KBC and Southern Baptist Convention missions and ministries according to a formula approved by messengers to the KBC annual meeting.”

While simple in their construction, these definitions are important because they help to spell out Southern Baptists’ practice of having a unified budget to support all approved Baptist causes. As I’ve shared in a previous post, this process was put into place because churches realized that the societal method of giving, through which every cause had to go out and raise support from the churches independently, was both frustrating for the churches and inefficient for the various Baptist organizations. Baptists in 1925 realized that while they might not individually be passionate about every ministry that received CP funding, much more could be accomplished by working together cooperatively than by working alone.

This approach has withstood the test of time because it is both fair and effective. I say “fair” because the allocation of CP funds is decided in each state by the churches that make the gifts. In Kentucky, Cooperative Program budget goals and CP allocation formulas are proposed through the Business and Finance Committee of the Kentucky Baptist Mission Board, approved by the full Mission Board and then approved by messengers to the annual meeting.

I say “effective” because the Cooperative Program has enabled Southern Baptists to put together an unparalleled missionary force to help spread the gospel; establish outstanding organizations to start new churches and help existing churches be strong; and financially support literally hundreds of well-run ministries. And CP has allowed this to happen consistently over and over, year after year.

Is the system perfect? Of course not. As needs change, the focus of CP giving has to change to meet them. That’s why in Kentucky, messengers have steadily approved over the last few years incremental adjustments in the CP allocation formula to move more CP funds to meet needs around the world. (If Kentucky messengers approve the latest recommendations on Nov. 10, the CP allocation to the SBC will jump by more than a percentage point in the next budget). The foundational principles of the Cooperative Program are sound, though.

I do understand and appreciate the concerns that some have regarding our focus as Baptists on the Cooperative Program. Some churches do tremendous work in missions around the world or make large designated gifts to the Lottie Moon Christmas Offering, the SBC Executive Committee or to other specific entities. I say “hallelujah” and these churches should be appreciated for their wonderful faithfulness.

Yet, I would not want to count these beautiful gifts as Cooperative Program gifts because they are not, well, cooperative. As nice as these special designated gifts are, they are not the same as CP gifts because the individual church is reserving the right to direct its gifts rather than allowing the funds to be pooled and distributed by the body of churches as a whole in a cooperative fashion.

These designated gifts are to be celebrated but it’s important to maintain the integrity of the Cooperative Program definition so that we don’t fall back into the societal method of giving where various Baptist causes end up competing with each other for funds. As I said in an earlier post, I think every pastor can both appreciate the specialness of a direct gift to meet a special need in the church while at the same time being grateful that the majority of the gifts are undesignated so that they can be distributed to meet all of the needs of the church, even those unglamorous things that no one would ever think of making a designated gift to support.