Proposed changes to Remittance System

At the General Assembly in May 2007, the Board of Trustees was instructed to develop proposals for a “more efficient and Biblical Scheme” for congregational remittances.  Following lengthy and detailed discussionthe Board has arrived at a set of proposals which it hopes to present to the General Assembly later this month. 

At present, congregations are expected to remit a substantial percentage of their income to central funds.  There has been a growing feeling that this is having a detrimental impact on the ability of many congregations to grasp opportunities for local ministry and outreach, thereby stifling their ability to grow.  The percentage is set at such a high level because, as well as supporting a fairly substantial programme of central projects, the Church has a relatively small number of larger congregations who are asked to support a large number of small congregations, some of whom are weak and declining.

After considering a range of options, the Board of Trustees settled on a proposed system that has three key elements:

• Ministry Costs      Congregations with a settled ministry would be expected to meet the full costs of that ministry.  In situations where a congregation fails to meet this requirement, if it believed that there were strong grounds for maintaining a full-time ministry in the congregation, the relevant Presbytery would need to make a compelling case to the Home Missions Board which would have to decide if it was willing to support such an application.  The Home Missions Board would be tasked with meeting income shortfalls in marginal situations and in situations where special concessions are made.

• Administration & Training Levies      Congregations would pay, on a sliding scale in accordance with income, a levy to cover the central overhead costs of the Church.  In addition, a training levy would also be charged to cover the costs of training students in the Free Church College.  This would replace the current student levy collected by Presbyteries.

• Central Projects      Congregations with higher levels of income would contribute a percentage of their remaining income towards central projects at home and abroad. This would include support for weaker congregations where the Home Missions Board approve applications from Presbyteries to sustain full time ministries in such congregations. The contributions levied on congregations under this element of the proposals would typically be lower than under the current system and would be reduced gradually over a three-year period.  By the third year, only 50% of funding for Home and International Missions projects would be raised through required levies. The necessary additional funding would be raised by the Home Missions Board and the International Missions Board through project led fundraising.

Clearly, this represents a significant shift in the Church’s approach to raising finance.  However, the Board of Trustees believes that the proposals will have several key benefits

• The central Church will become more accountable for its expenditure and will be forced to be more realistic about its stewardship responsibilities. This will include making explicit decisions about the sustainability of full-time ministries in certain situations.
  
• Central Boards and Committees will not be able to take their income for granted and will need to become more pro-active in sharing information on their work and vision with the wider Church.  This should promote greater interest in the work of the central Church, enable individual contributors to feel greater ownership of central projects and therefore, generate increased financial and prayer support for this work.
  
• In many cases, local congregations will have greater control over more of their resources and will be able to exploit more opportunities for local ministry and outreach.

The Board of Trustees acknowledge that there are risks involved in changing the remittance system but believe that the risks of not changing are even greater.  They believe that these proposals shift the balance from obligation to voluntary giving, increase opportunities for local ministry without which the Church cannot survive, create a mechanism to increase support for central projects, and enhance efficiency at local and central level.

The proposals were presented to all Presbyteries during March and April and we now await with interest discussion of them at the General Assembly. 

Jonathan Innes
Finance Manager