What Is a Cooperating Baptist Church?

Critics of Southern Baptists frequently assert that a church has to “buy” a seat at the table in order to participate in the life of an association, a state convention or the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC). They are referring to the emphasis placed on missions giving through the Cooperative Program (CP) and special offerings. Southern Baptists have long advocated that churches give at least 10 percent of undesignated receipts to missions through the CP.

When the CP was first formed in 1925, the expectation was that churches would give 50 percent of undesignated receipts to missions causes, which would allow state conventions to forward 50 percent of their receipts to the SBC.

Critics charge this emphasis on giving proves that a church has to “buy” a seat at the table in order to participate in the corporate life of Southern Baptists.

That charge is false.

For the Alabama Baptist State Convention (ABSC), any Baptist church “cooperating with the convention” is eligible to send messengers to the annual meeting. That has been the convention’s practice since its founding in 1823. The first constitution used the phrase “in good standing” to describe those eligible to send “delegates” (now known as messengers) to the annual meeting.

For the SBC, any Baptist church in “friendly cooperation” with the convention and “sympathetic with its purposes and work” is eligible to send messengers to the annual meeting. The SBC does require a church to be a “bona fide contributor” to the convention’s work but does not specify a minimum amount of giving or the channel for giving.

It also should be remembered that neither the state nor national convention ever votes on a church’s membership in its body. A church takes the initiative to send messengers. Challenges to seating messengers do occur from time to time, but they are as rare as hen’s teeth. Challenges usually relate to a church’s doctrinal beliefs and not its giving record.

A church cooperating with the ABSC may or may not belong to a local association. A church may or may not participate with the SBC. Likewise a church may participate with the SBC and not the state convention or may even belong to an association but not the state or national convention.

In Alabama, there are examples of all of the above scenarios.

Through the years, no one has ever defined what it means to “be in cooperation with the convention” or “sympathetic with its purposes and work.” Basically it is left to the local church to determine if it considers itself in cooperation or sympathy with the state or national convention. That includes doctrinal teachings, the way churches work together (polity) and the emphases and programs the conventions promote.

Still giving is important. The apostle John wrote in 1 John 3:18, “Dear children, let us not love with words or tongue but with actions and in truth.” A church “in cooperation with the convention” and “sympathetic with its purposes and work” will want to support that work with giving. That is why both the SBC and the ABSC provide for expanded participation in annual meetings based on contributions to the work sponsored by the respective bodies.

In Alabama, a cooperating church is entitled to a second messenger if it contributes between $1,000 and $2,000 to Baptist causes. Additional messengers are earned at $2,000 increments after that up to a maximum of 25 messengers.

The SBC still uses the dollar amount established in 1845 for additional messengers — $250 for each messenger up to a maximum of 10 messengers. That means that over the years, the importance of financial support of Baptist causes has diminished in relationship to participation.

One study sets the value of an 1845 dollar at $23.275 in today’s currency. If that study is correct, then to keep the same value, a church today would have to contribute $5,818.75 to Baptist causes before earning a second messenger to the annual meeting.

Evidently the SBC’s founders were serious about including all cooperating churches in the convention’s fellowship and encouraging those churches to support the convention’s work financially. When one considers that all the work supported by the ABSC in 1845 drew contributions of only $2,239.84, according to the treasurer’s report, one realizes the SBC’s expectation set a high bar.

In 2010, only about 1,000 of the 3,256 churches listed as cooperating with the ABSC gave at least $5,818.75 to Baptist causes through the CP. Fewer than 500 churches gave between that amount and $3,500, and about 1,800 churches gave less than $3,500.

More than 600 churches reported giving nothing financially to missions causes through the CP or giving information was not available.

Of the 1,800 churches giving less than $3,500, more than 800 gave more to support Baptist work through designated offerings than they gave through the CP.

Again it is not CP giving that is used to determine additional messengers from a church. It is the total financial support of the cooperative work done by the respective conventions.

If the SBC today called for the same level of financial support sought in 1845, then participation and leadership in the convention might be much different than they are.

The question “What is a cooperating Baptist church?” remains unanswered, perhaps on purpose. Any answer involves doctrine, polity and program. Any answer keeps the initiative with the local church. And any answer calls for “bona fide” financial support of what Baptists do together. As John wrote, it is not enough to just say the right words. One’s words must be confirmed through actions.  

A church that claims to “be in cooperation with the convention” and “sympathetic with its purposes and work” will want to back those words up with financial support. When that is done, there is no question about whether a church is a cooperating Baptist church.