Bishop Willimon reflects on 2009 connectional giving

1/28/2010

Financial Faithfulness in North Alabama

When the earthquake hit Haiti this month, the United Methodist Church was ready to step up to the challenge. Three of our lead missionaries in Haiti, leading Methodist sponsored development and aid projects, died in the earthquake. Six Volunteers in Mission teams were working in the country at the time. Within hours we began shipping supplies from our big mission warehouse in Decatur. Within a week, North Alabama Conference members had given thousands of dollars to UMCOR, every dime of which goes directly into in money and had over a thousand health kits on their way to Haiti.

Why were we prepared? How have we managed to be working in Haiti long before the earthquake? It is because our churches, in the Wesleyan tradition, understand that the church exists to partner with Jesus in his redemptive work in the world. It is because our churches know that the church does not exist to the pay the salary of the pastor, to expend all their resources on themselves. Our churches are committed to sharing in the support of world wide mission – apportionments.

This year we collected 78.29% of the 2009 Conference budget, compared with 79.61% of the 2008 Conference budget (2008 was our lowest year in a decade). While all of our Annual Conferences experienced a drop in giving, our Conference’s 78% puts us at the bottom of Conferences in the Southeastern Jurisdiction. A particularly sad note is that a few of our churches still owe a total of $351,890 for 2009 clergy benefits. These must be paid in full for the church to continue to receive a pastoral appointment.

While these results are deeply disappointing and indicate real problems in faithfulness to the mission of Christ’s church, we should also note that 448 churches paid 100% of their 2009 Conference budget asking. Four districts paid greater than 80%, including Southeast (88.60%), Northwest (86.55%), Northeast (82.91%) and Southwest (82.86%).

Considering the current financial crisis in our country the work of many of our churches in paying their fair share of our missional, benevolent support is amazing. For instance, at our little Bangor church Hilda Walker pastor, was so determined that Bangor would again be at 100% that she paid the church’s apportionments herself out of her own meager salary. Clearbranch, under Robin Scott‘s leadership went from 0 to almost 50% in 2009 and is tracking toward 100% for 2010. Two of our largest, most dynamic congregations, First Huntsville and First Tuscaloosa experienced severe financial stresses in 2009. They made some painful cuts in their administrative and staff expenses and proudly continued their tradition of 100% apportionment participation.

I could continue. Our congregations who have been unfaithful in their apportionment participation in 2009 are far outnumbered by our congregations who, in tough economic times, have shown that they understand the purpose of the church and its ministry by their financial faithfulness. Thanks to these churches we are still in expanding, vibrant mission in the name of Christ.

William H. Willimon

Comments

1. gary heathcock wrote on 1/29/2010 3:12:18 PM
"It is because our churches know that the church does not exist to pay the salary of the pastor, to expend all their resources on themselves. Our churches are committed to sharing in the support of world wide mission – apportionments." I believe there needs to be a viable Pastor, Local Church, & Annual Coference for Wesleyan Missions to be viable.
2. Herb Williamsonm wrote on 1/30/2010 8:25:37 AM
There are several reasons for the failure to be "faithful in apportionment participation". Lack of trust of leadership is a piece of it, lack of leadership all along the connection another, and education of the mission the apportionments accomplish. We give heavy for a crisis like Haiti which tells us the problem is not a desire to be in mission or ability to give. We give to those causes because we are clear about the mission. The 4 districts mentioned as leading have always lead this conference because there is a better under-standing of the connectional mission there.
3. billy brown wrote on 1/30/2010 9:28:24 PM
So will we support needy countries and not support our own needy church’s? Wouldn’t that be kind of like the hand saying to the foot “you are not pulling your weight so we are not going to send you any more shoes”? I think one of the things Jesus was trying to tell/show us was "like it or not we are in this together".
4. Kathrine K. wrote on 2/1/2010 3:43:49 PM
Apportionments are not always fairly assessed, especially for smaller churches. However, something Herb Williamson said made me think. Apportionment giving does tend to be pegged directly to trust/faith in the pastor. I'm a lifelong UMC and it's nearly a foolproof indicator: see a church's apportionments drop drastically, and you've got a church desperately unhappy with the pastor. It's difficult to keep everyone happy all the time, I realize, but a church in harmony with the pastor is more likely to respond to requests for apportionments with, "Let's give" rather than with, "Yeah, right."
5. L. Berry wrote on 2/2/2010 11:43:05 AM
you identified the problem several years ago in your book... We are constantly told about "worshiping God with our tithes and offerings." Dr. William H. Willimon and the late Dr. Robert L. Wilson have written, "Keeping a steady flow of funds necessary to maintain the institution receives the highest priority. Despite the rhetoric, maintaining and managing the institution are what many officials feel is important." (Rekindling the Flame,* page 63). Since less than full disclosure is provided to the people in the pews and their money is often spent in ways distasteful to them, the problem is exacerbated. I don't believe much has changed...