Budget 'Crisis' Not the First

Touchstone June 2005

"Budget 'Crisis' Not the First "

By Yvonne Wilkie

As you wander through the papers and reports of the General Treasurer you can not but ask the question “Did the Church ever meet its Budget?” A decade does not pass where Commissioners at General Assembly are reminded that the Church is falling far short of it budgeted commitments. What's more, at least every 15 to 20 years the finances of the church are described as being ‘in crisis'.

The immense task of balancing the budget lay with the General Treasurer's Office but the authority for expenditure lay with the Commissioners of the General Assembly. This fact is generally overlooked by the local parish member and minister which results in a trail of all too familiar criticisms. “Get the spiritual life right and money will flow” (1910), “we are commercialising the Church, how can God work?” (1936), the finances are controlled by a “small coterie stationed in Wellington ” (1936), are just some examples.

The development of the Budget and Financial management structure for processing the Church's schemes and projects is fascinating to follow through. Until 1920 each Committee with oversight for the projects of the General Assembly had the responsibility to raise its own funding. This naturally resulted in some projects gaining a larger slice of the ‘booty' then others. As a consequence where shortfalls became apparent special appeals for funding were instigated. The regular appeals raised much ire among local church members and tended to overshadow what claims for funding already budgeted for.

Observations made by the General Treasurer in 1921 suggest a lack of trust existed between parish groups and the administration processes as each attempted to “get past the General Treasurer” and some acted as if “the Assembly Committees were least to be trusted”. “Is it too much to expect the members of the Assembly to a greater spirit of confidence in those to whom the direction of these activities is entrusted?” he asked.

The Budget controls implemented in 1920 meant that a tighter reign over funding could be envisaged. The Committees submitted their budget proposals for the coming year to the Finance Committee who was to also control any special appeals. With the Presbyteries having the power to allocate a realistic levy on each parish for the General Administration fund, and the introduction of a regularised envelop free-will giving system, it was hoped that the income for the Church's projects would begin to stabilise.

However in 1925 the Treasurer noted the Budget system was not being given a fair trial and “when 95% or more is allocated to a particular fund it is only a farce to send a mere pittance to the [overall] Budget.” The flaw in the ‘new' system became apparent and highlighted that little had improved over the previous system. As congregations chose which scheme to allocate their contributions some funds continued to be in debt while others held a credit. The request for a quarterly remittance fell on deaf ears although the some heed was taken to remitting unallocated money. The debate to introduce a Comprehensive Budget process would be 30 years into the future.

Cartoon from a 1976 "Outlook" magazine

After some tweaking to the structure of the Budget System during the Depression years, the General Treasurer wrote with confidence in 1936 that the Budget control had succeeded. The level of giving had risen from 85 cents per member in 1920 to $1.11 in 1935. As to the continuing deficits he placed the blame on those in the Church who had not made themselves conversant with either the budget process or the church's projects.

“Tell the People” became the slogan for future General Treasurers and over the next 40 years a continuous flow of publicity emerged highlighting the church's work, outlining where the funds went and encouraging increased giving.

The Church faced one of its largest financial crises in the two decades following World War Two. The General Treasurer in 1954 spoke of the need for a financial revival if all the financial needs were met. Questions on the ability of the congregations to finance a total comprehensive budget began to be put forward. Issues relating to Budget management were raised once more.

Stewardship Programmes provided one answer. These flourished and many parish incomes rose as a consequence but so did the outgoing costs. However, Assembly after Assembly continued to believe that the Church had the “capacity to provide what is necessary for expansion”. And each year a deficit was reported. Each year appeals to congregations to reassess their giving were made. Each year continuing scaling down of General Assembly projects took place; some by natural attrition and others through restructuring. And every so often it was a financial crisis.

As we ponder the current situation you can't help but wonder what else must go …?

Close This Window to Return to the Main Screen