Church of God of Prophecy Shifts Television Ministry

The Administrative Committee of the Church of God of Prophecy has announced that the television ministry, Voice of Slavation, is being shifted to a joint project with funding from the Center for Spiritual Renewal. This shift will eventually result in the Voice of Salvation continuing under the leadership of the Center of Spiritual Renewal.

The International Center for Spiritual Renewal has been established to bring before the Church on a continuing basis the primary need for revival and renewal, both personal and corporate. The Center seeks to accomplish this purpose through the conducting of research, the development of material, the facilitating of special meetings, and the sponsorship of an academic chair.

IFCSR is a non-profit corporation that works with all denominations, as well as non-affiliated local churches and ministry agencies. (http://www.icfsr.org/index.cfm). This move is seen as a very positive opportunity to take for the church.

For the first time ever, the COGOP is taking steps to project their vision through the budgeting process of what is supported at the International Office. But this is not the first time that an Administrative Committee has made the decision that the VOS television ministry was not the highest priority of the International Offices.

Back in 1996 that Administrative Committee made the decision that the International Office could not afford to continue to fund the media ministry. They felt those ministries should be carried at a local level from a strong local church for the most part. It was then that they asked both media directors (English and Spanish) to seek out locations where they could shift the television ministries. That was never fully realized, but the decision and intent of that Administrative Committee was clear. They apparently did not feel the media ministries contributed in a manner strong enough nor direct enough at the International Office to be a central factor in advancing the Turning to the Harvest thrust at that time. Therefore it was decided to move them from the International Office umbrella of support for the most part.

It was in the year 2000 that the Administrative Committee again came to a decision concerning the media ministry of the Church of God of Prophecy. After it was apparent that costs for these ministries would continue to escalate, the Administrative Committee reviewed each ministry and came to a conclusion. The feeling was that the International Office could not afford to continue to support these ministries with increasing funds annually. Therefore the Administrative Committee at that time made a decision that no further budget funds should be allocated for the media ministry - in effect a line was drawn so that no greater support would be expected from the International budget. At that time, the Administrative Committee asked these ministries to begin to raise funds through their media channels that would provide the additional funds they felt were needed. They were asked to report those funds raised in good accountability for their efforts.

That brings us to 2007 when the Administrative Committee decided to accept the offer of transition that William Wilson offered to the Administrative Committee. The idea was to benefit all parties.

This transition gives VOS an opportunity to continue the ministry track that the Church of God of Prophecy had supported for over 50 years. It also gives the International Office the opportunity to allocate resources once used for VOS to the values more closely connected with current vision. Finally, the transition gives the Center For Spiritual Renewal the opportunity to voice their vision and activities on a wider scale via television, as well as raise funds more broadly.

The decision to transition VOS was a decision to do everything possible direct funding toward those things that contribute to Harvest and Leadership Development. Though VOS does speak the Gospel to a wide range of nations and people, it was felt that this ministry is a seed sowing ministry and not a discipling evangelization ministry. It was also felt that the VOS English as a church sponsored ministry through the years, contributed little to local church outreach. These factors were important in justifying $200,000 to $250,000 of Church of God of Prophecy budget support annually.

While the seed sowing aspect of the television ministry is certainly biblical and vital, the question faced by the Administrative Committee was whether to merely sow seed, or evangelize, win the lost, bring them into a body of believers, nurture them, disciple them, and equip them to go out and win others, even possibly planting other bodies of believers. As they looked at the environment, they felt there are many that are doing great seed sowing in the Kingdom of God through television. They have even succeeded in funding their own ministries through their television presence. At the end of the day, the Administrative Committee did not feel that the COGOP needed to add to the contributions of so many others, and felt more strongly that what they do should be aimed at the more profound goal of evangelization, and even church planting, rather than seed sowing alone.

The economic environment of the International Office was certainly another factor in the decision making process. While funds were available to support all the ministries which have existed for many years, it was not a pressing issue to evaluate VOS (or any other ministry) based on our callings and values. But when funds became an issue, and the ministries of the International Office had not realized an increase in support for five years or more, then the pressure was felt to evaluate all efforts and see clearly what was contributing to the core and what was contributing elsewhere. Naturally, the media ministries came under scrutiny more quickly since they held larger budgets than many other ministries, almost $500,000 together.

The pressure to fund the core activities of Harvest (church planting) and Leadership Development amply, if not more abundantly was real. The sense that all ministries were not equal in their contributions to the core values became more and more apparent. As core ministries seemed to contract due to lack of resources, it weighed heavier upon the hearts of the Committee that less contributing ministries should not detract from the main callings of Harvest and Leadership Development. The fact that a ministry has been in existence for a long time does not justify allocating resources to it for the present or for the future.

What do you think about this move? (Click "comments" below).