The Baptist Paper has released a series of Explainer articles related to this year’s SBC Annual Meeting in Dallas.
What is the Cooperative Program?
The Cooperative Program is the primary funding mechanism of the Southern Baptist Convention. Established in 1925, it enables SBC-affiliated churches to pool their financial resources to support a wide array of ministries, including theological education, missions and church planting. This unified approach allows for coordinated efforts in fulfilling the SBC’s mission objectives.
Covered in this article:
- How does the Cooperative Program work?
- What are the current challenges related to the Cooperative Program?
- What do proponents of releasing CP funds for the EC’s legal expenses say?
- What do opponents of releasing CP funds for the EC’s legal expenses say?
- What are the broader implications for the SBC related to releasing CP funds for the EC’s legal expenses?
- In light of the CP controversy, what reforms are being called for?
- Terms to Know
How does the Cooperative Program work?
Here’s how the CP works — from the pew to the missions field:
- A person gives. When a person tithes or gives an offering to a Southern Baptist church, these contributions support the church’s local ministries and are also the foundation for its Cooperative Program giving.
- The church sends a portion to its state convention. Each church voluntarily decides what percentage of its total budget will be designated for the Cooperative Program. That amount is then sent to its affiliated state Baptist convention, which is typically administratively handled by that state’s state board of missions.
- The state convention distributes funds. The state convention retains a portion of the funds to support state-level ministries such as evangelism, church planting, collegiate ministry and children’s homes. The remaining portion is forwarded to the Southern Baptist Convention.
- The SBC allocates the CP funds to its national entities. The SBC Executive Committee distributes the funds among SBC-wide ministries and entities based on a budget approved each year at the SBC Annual Meeting. These typically include:
- International Mission Board (IMB) — global missions.
- North American Mission Board (NAMB) — church planting and evangelism in the U.S. and Canada.
- Six Southern Baptist Seminaries — theological education.
- Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission (ERLC) — public policy and cultural engagement.
- SBC Executive Committee — convention operations and communications.
- There are no mandates for giving. Participation in the CP is entirely voluntary; churches and state conventions determine how much to give and how funds are distributed.
- The CP provides a unified budget. The Cooperative Program is unique in its unified budget approach, allowing all Southern Baptists to support a comprehensive network of ministries through a single giving stream.
What are the current challenges related to the Cooperative Program?
Declining Contributions and Financial Pressures
- Giving Trends. In recent years, CP giving has declined. Some churches are reallocating budgets or reducing their CP percentages due to local priorities, financial strains or concerns over SBC leadership decisions.
- Broader Financial Concerns. The decline in CP giving comes at a time when the SBC is facing significant legal and administrative costs — particularly related to ongoing litigation and abuse reform efforts.
The Executive Committee’s Request for Legal Funds
- Background. Since 2019, the SBC EC has faced increasing scrutiny over its handling of sexual abuse allegations. In response, messengers at the 2021 SBC Annual Meeting mandated an independent investigation into the EC’s actions and later voted to establish an Abuse Reform Implementation Task Force (ARITF).
- Legal Exposure. The EC and other SBC entities have been named in lawsuits related to sexual abuse claims. Legal fees — along with efforts to establish a Ministry Check database and implement abuse prevention measures — have created unexpected and mounting expenses.
- Funding Shortfall. In 2024, the EC publicly stated it lacked the funds to continue paying for legal defense and compliance with abuse reform mandates. It reported a projected $4 million shortfall and warned it could become insolvent by fall 2024 if additional funding was not secured.
- Request to Use CP Funds. In February 2024, the EC formally requested permission to use Cooperative Program funds to cover legal expenses tied to the abuse-related litigation.
- The request was added to the agenda for the 2024 SBC Annual Meeting. The EC cannot unilaterally repurpose CP funds for uses not previously approved in the SBC’s unified budget. Because CP funds are allocated according to a budget approved by messengers, any significant change requires a vote of the messengers at the Annual Meeting.
What do proponents of releasing CP funds for the EC’s legal expenses say?
- Crisis management. Supporters see the use of CP funds as a necessary step in addressing a denomination-wide crisis that threatens the SBC’s integrity and future.
- Shared responsibility. Because the EC acts on behalf of the convention, proponents argue that all churches and entities share responsibility for funding its mandated legal obligations.
- Survival of convention infrastructure. Some leaders caution that without CP assistance, the EC could default on its obligations — potentially destabilizing the SBC’s entire administrative structure.
What do opponents of releasing CP funds for the EC’s legal expenses say?
- Breach of trust. Critics warn that diverting CP funds — especially those designated for missions, seminaries and church planting — violates the trust of churches that gave sacrificially for ministry purposes, not legal fees.
- Lack of transparency and accountability. Some question how past CP funds were managed and whether the EC has exercised proper financial stewardship.
- Slippery slope concern. Some express concern that this could set a precedent for using CP funds for institutional protection rather than kingdom-focused ministry.
What are the broader implications for the SBC related to releasing CP funds for the EC’s legal expenses?
- Autonomy vs. Cooperation. The controversy has reignited debates over the nature of cooperation within the SBC. Some churches have reduced or withheld CP giving in protest, asserting their autonomy while expressing dissatisfaction with national leadership.
- Calls for Reform. As financial realities mount, some leaders are calling for structural reforms to how CP funds are allocated, how entities are held accountable and how the SBC responds to crises.
In light of the CP controversy, what reforms are being called for?
A number of Southern Baptists are calling for reforms — both to the Cooperative Program and to the SBC’s overall structure and leadership practices. These calls are coming from a variety of people, including pastors, state conventions, lay leaders and institutional heads.
Greater Financial Transparency and Accountability
- Entity oversight. Some leaders have called for increased oversight of how national entities use CP funds. Proposals have included requiring more detailed financial reporting and making budget line items publicly accessible.
- EC finances. After the EC disclosed its legal funding crisis, questions arose about prior budgeting decisions, reserve fund management, and communication with messengers. Reform advocates want better safeguards to prevent future shortfalls.
- Audit and oversight proposals. Some messengers and state convention leaders have proposed stronger audit mechanisms or a third-party review process to evaluate how CP funds are spent across the SBC.
Redefining the Role of the Executive Committee
- Mission creep or structural gaps? The EC has been criticized for both overstepping and underperforming. Some say it has acted beyond its authority, while others argue that its limited powers make it unable to respond effectively to crises. Reform suggestions include:
- Clarifying or limiting the EC’s authority
- Restructuring the EC to improve communication with churches and state conventions
- Reevaluating how trustees are nominated and trained
- Crisis leadership. Critics argue that the EC has not provided adequate leadership during the abuse crisis. Proposals include adding crisis management protocols or creating a standing ethics and accountability committee.
Revisiting the Cooperative Program Model
- Flexibility vs. Unity. Some churches are shifting away from the traditional CP model in favor of designated giving — sending money directly to specific SBC entities or ministries. Reform advocates disagree on the implications:
- Supporters want to reaffirm the unified giving model as a reflection of shared mission and cooperation.
- Skeptics argue for more flexibility, citing concerns about centralized decision-making and misuse of funds.
- Adjusting percentages. Some state conventions have begun revisiting how much of their CP intake is retained for state ministries vs. the amount passed on to the national level. Advocates of reform are asking for more local control, particularly in light of national controversies.
Restoring Trust Through Abuse Reform
- Implementing abuse prevention systems. Many reformers argue that the SBC must prioritize completing and funding the reforms mandated by messengers, especially those recommended by the Abuse Reform Implementation Task Force.
- Long-term commitment. Some express concern that once legal threats recede, reform momentum will slow. Reform advocates are calling for a permanent cultural shift in how the SBC handles abuse allegations, survivor care and prevention training.
Rethinking Convention-Wide Governance
- Messenger Engagement. Some messengers have expressed frustration that their votes at the Annual Meeting do not always translate into swift or clear action by SBC entities. Proposals have included:
- Increasing the frequency of messenger input
- Adding more mechanisms for accountability between annual meetings
- Structural Modernization. A few voices have suggested a broader reevaluation of the SBC’s decentralized structure, arguing that the convention may need modernization to function effectively in the current legal, financial and cultural climate.
Terms to Know
Cooperative Program (CP): The SBC’s primary funding mechanism for missions, theological education and ministry work. Churches voluntarily contribute a portion of their budgets to the CP, which is then distributed among state conventions and SBC national entities.
Executive Committee (EC): A group elected by SBC messengers to act on behalf of the Convention between annual meetings. It manages the SBC’s day-to-day operations, recommends budgets and coordinates with SBC entities. It does not govern the entities but facilitates cooperation among them.
State Convention: An organization of Southern Baptist churches within a specific state or region. It receives CP funds from local churches, uses part of them for state-level ministries and forwards the remainder to the SBC for national and international work.
State Board of Missions: The ministry and administrative arm of a state convention. It usually handles the financial operations, including receiving and distributing CP funds.
Messengers: Delegates elected by local Southern Baptist churches to represent them at the SBC Annual Meeting. Messengers vote on resolutions, budgets and leadership elections. Each church is allowed to send a designated number of messengers.
Entities: Organizations created by the SBC to carry out specific ministry and educational work.Each entity operates independently but cooperates with the SBC through shared values and accountability to messengers. These include:
- International Mission Board (IMB)
- North American Mission Board (NAMB)
- Six SBC seminaries
- Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission (ERLC)
- Executive Committee (EC)
Abuse Reform Implementation Task Force (ARITF): A task force authorized by messengers in 2022 to implement abuse prevention and response measures across the SBC, following an investigation into the convention’s handling of sexual abuse allegations.
Ministry Check Database: A planned public resource being developed by the ARITF to list individuals credibly accused of sexual abuse within SBC-affiliated churches and ministries.
Autonomy: A foundational principle of Southern Baptist polity. Every church, state convention, and national entity is self-governing. Cooperation is voluntary, not mandated by any central authority.
