For those familiar with Louisiana, the answer should not come
as a surprise – nobody else does it quite the same as the Bayou State.
Three basic approaches are found elsewhere:
Associational directors of missions are selected,
funded and administered solely by associations.
For those familiar with Louisiana, the answer should not come
as a surprise – nobody else does it quite the same as the Bayou State.
Three basic approaches are found elsewhere:
Associational directors of missions are selected,
funded and administered solely by associations.
Associational directors of missions are selected
and administered by the associations, with the state convention providing funding
supplements.
Associational directors of missions serve as missionaries
through the Southern Baptist North American Mission Board. Usually, funding
is provided by the association, state convention and mission board, with various
administrative approaches.
Florida and North Carolina are examples of the first director
of missions approach.
In Florida, associations determine everything – even job
descriptions, and the state director of missions simply serves as conventions
point person to the associational workers.
In North Carolina, state convention leaders help to train associational
search committees and provide regular training events for potential directors
of missions. In doing so, the state maintains a list of persons interested in
serving as associational directors of missions. If search committees are interested,
the state forwards a profile of the associational opening to persons on the
list. Those persons then may contact the search committee or not.
Tennessee and Arkansas are examples of the second director
of missions approach.
In Tennessee, most local associations receive a supplement
to help fund their director of missions.
In Arkansas, small associations are eligible to receive a supplement
– although only one does now.
West Virginia and Iowa are examples of the third option for
directors of missions.
In West Virginia, an associational search committee works with
state leaders to select a director of missions candidate. The state convention
and North American Mission Board then must agree on the candidate before an
official call may be issued. The worker is evaluated each year by the state
director of missions and associational leaders.
In Iowa, all three entities – local association, state
convention and North American Mission Board – are involved in the selection
and funding process as well. However, the workers are supervised and evaluated
by the state director of missions.
Other states have combined approaches.
For instance, Alabama Baptist Convention leaders have no selection
or supervisory responsibilities for directors of missions. However, they provide
two avenues of financial support – a small program supplement based on
the number of churches in an association and reimbursement for the cost of medical
insurance for the directors of missions.
Meanwhile, Georgia comes closest to Louisiana in its handling
of some directors of missions.
The state uses two approaches for associations.
In 70 associations, it provides a stipend for the associational-selected-and-supervised
director.
Twenty-three other associations are divided into seven areas,
with a director of missions jointly funded by the state and the associations
in each area.
The workers are considered employees of the state and are supervised by a convention
leader and an advisory committee for each area.