Tithing #3

In my continuing inquiry into the supposedly authorized practice of tithing in this era, I’m wondering about a few chunks of funds.  Should 10% of any of the following sums be skimmed off the top for the clergy’s coffers?

• A quarter you find on the street?
• Cash received for returning bottles and cans for which you paid a deposit?  IRS tax refunds?  (This would amount to double taxation, wouldn’t it?)
• Proceeds from loans?  From grants? 
• Gifts received?  Even casual, in-kind ones, such as the gift of a meal from a college meal plan? (The notion of offering steamed broccoli and hummus points up the disparity between Levitical/Jewish tithing and the reality of 20c life.)
• If Christians are really supposed to be giving 10%, are Christian institutions supposed to be giving 10% to something else?  I mean, just because they’re on the receiving end of gifts, does that mean they’re not supposed to turn around and re-gift?  You know, like orphan homes and Christian colleges and (gulp) churches?

For prior posts on this topic, see Tithing by Choice, and Tithing by Choice #2, at the end of which there are more links.

Tithing by choice (2 – practicalities)

This post jumps right on in to perhaps even more troubled waters after the toe-dipping of yesterday’s post.  I’d like to offer practicalities, philosophies, and other thoughts related to tithing and contributing.

Nowhere in all the New Covenant documents is the tithe enjoined upon believers.  Charitable giving is a choice—a good one, but a choice nonetheless.  Yes, “God loves a cheerful giver,” but He does not say, “First, love me.  Next, love your neighbor.  Third, give 10% of your money.”  The decision to give, and the percentage are up to the individual.

I once felt good about approaching 10% and even surpassing it over a fiscal year or two, way back when.  As I recall, more than half of this was given to Christian organizations other than my church, and that was because I found the church budget philosophically and practically wanting.  I would have been found in direct contradiction to scripture if scripture had any command for Christians to tithe, but it doesn’t.  (There is no Levitical priesthood in the church, so there is no reason to tithe.  That part of it really is that simple.)

Since then, I have had to feel good about smaller amounts.  It’s not easy, because I would like to give more to Christian and humanitarian charities I believe in.  If I had more of a surplus for daily living, I would give more.  Remember the widow with the two pennies, I try to tell myself in my discouragement.  But I still have questions.  Here are some more.

Should we “tithe” according to our pay schedules—every two weeks, on Fridays?  bi-monthly on the 15th and 30th? or every month, in some cases?

In calculating, does the 10% come off the top, or after tax?  Should we wait to calculate until after the final reckoning of the tax return? How can we know how we’ve “prospered” until after April 15? What would the institutional church do if no one paid the bills until sometime after April 15 every year?

Would the answer be different if paying taxes to Caesar were a choice and not exacted by mandated withholding?

What about tithing by credit card? (Although that might be convenient and get me “rewards” which I could then tithe based upon (!), it sure does seem cold and institutionalized.)

When a Christian college student receives a paycheck for $72.51 for two weeks of every-other-day work, does he exempt himself from tithing because he is a poor college student, or does he give $7.26 (rounding up would seem to be safer than cheating God out of a half-penny) to the collection plate next Sunday?  Does he hold Christians around him to a different tithing standard because they’re not college students?

When college students or foreign missionaries receive care packages from Aunt Sue or Martha Supportive, do they offer 10% of the cookies to poorer students or to indigenous neighbors?

Does contributing to the Red Cross or to Hope International or to the World Bible Translation Center “count” as part of your tithe?

Does an individual have the right or responsibility to approve or support the spending of the money she tithes?

This last question makes me think of the question of ownership of a retail establishment and spending money in that store.  For instance, at one time, a large grocery store chain was owned by Mormons.  Did buying a gallon of milk there give me the right to say “No, you can’t send a penny of my $2 to the LDS Church”?  Well, no, but it did give me pause about patronizing that store when I had a choice.)  In this age of mobility, global communication, and lots and lots of free choice, I figure I have some responsibility to be prudent in where I spend and contribute money.

If large portions of a church budget are allocated to salaries for staff positions I don’t believe in, or for physical plant/facilities, it makes me look elsewhere for a greater “return” on my dollar.  While this may seem overly humanistic and even crass in its monetary outlook, the alternative, for me, is a careless, thoughtless, or even halfhearted dropping of a check into a plate–which ends up being a gesture of upholding the status quo and religion’s establishments than a faith-based offering to advance God’s Kingdom.

All this would be pretty troubling if tithing were an in-force law, wouldn’t it?  :-)

~ ~ ~

For further reading:

1. This prior post, (which says some of the same things I’ve said above in different ways), and/or
2. This one on the inhospitable nature of church offerings, and/or
3. This brief article (not my own), with caution and with the caveat that I do not necessarily endorse its spirit or even the ramifications of the actions suggested therein.

Tithing by choice

Tithing is a matter of choice under the New Covenant, not having been explicitly continued from the Old.  Here are a couple of ideas that manifest choice:

1. I know of one couple that puts money aside over time, considering it part of their “tithe,” and using it periodically for a scholarship at a Christian school.  They don’t know that I know this.
2. I know of another couple that has for years been sending rather significant sums to a large church in another city for safekeeping in their investment fund.  This couple’s intention is to have large sums available to draw out for the funding of mission or benevolent efforts when those needs present themselves.  This couple’s practice began during a time of detachment from viable churches, and I think it was a terrific way to “lay by in store,” as the KJV has 1 Cor. 16:2.

I find both the above practices to be a) within the prerogative of individual Christians in our age, and b) smack-dab in the intentions of the wording of I Corinthians 16, which encourages setting aside money on the first day of the week.  To be clearer:  this brief passage, which contains a relatively rare NC-document mention of money, does not require, or even suggest, passing plates around, dropping money in a bag in the pews or in the back, a weekly corporate collection at all, or any sort of reincarnation of the tithe.   Paul spoke more of putting money aside or away–saving, if you will–than putting it forward.

If one wants to tithe in subservience to an imagined law, one may.  Far better:  if one wants to tithe in honor of God and in support of His kingdom, one may.  My points are that a) there is more than one way to go about it, and b) since tithing is nowhere indicated in the New Covenant, it is a matter of choice.

Next:  practical considerations of tithing/contributing

It ain’t necessarily so

Just because he says it doesn’t mean it’s so. Just because someone with a human title and a pedigree says something doesn’t mean it’s so.  I do so tire of religious drivel that am nearly driven to retitle my blog with a moniker from someone else’s:  “Losing My Religion.”

Among the recent moments which seemed physically to force my head to commence shaking in disgust was the reading of a letter from missionaries in which the opening sentence was “Hi … I’m Reverend Thomas Smith.”  The uninhibited pretentiousness of labeling oneself with a descriptor reserved in scripture for God is superseded only by the unmitigated stupidity of starting a letter this way when it’s supposed to influence others to send him money.  He followed quickly with the line “My wife, Reverend Jane Smith, and I …”  Why not a simple “Jane and I”?  I suppose there are some who would say to themselves, subconsciously, “Oh, since he’s a ‘reverend,’ he is worthy of my writing out a check, so here I go.”  I, on the other hand, was driven deep–not into my pocket, but into despair for the condition of religion.

Later came this exhortation:  “We believe that God is calling our church to support a faith-pledge of $3,000″  Well, what if I believe that God “called” me to ignore such a faith-pledge?  Or what if He “told” me the faith-pledge was to be $2,842?  I wondered just how ignorant this church was of charlatans like Herbert W. Armstrong, Joseph Smith, present-day ones like Jimmy Swaggart, Jim Bakker, and many other televangelists who claim to receive such specific (self-serving) messages from on high.  Pardon me, but what horsehockey….

“Tithes and offerings” are Old Covenant things.  They were instituted to support the special-class priesthood, which is not in existence under the New Covenant (except in under-informed or deluded minds).  I would never argue with someone who gives 10% or 11% or 23% of his income to Christian charities.  I do resist anyone who claims that financial percentages are currently enjoined by scripture.  They are not.

Ubiquitous “God is teaching me” and “what God is doing in my life” phrases may stem from desperation or from a sincere desire to seem spiritual.  It’s one thing to presume some inclination or guilt-feeling or desire is the call of God for an individual.  But when such “calling” theology extends to a corporate body through its leadership, a relatively innocuous baselessness can become fraudulence that plays on the gullibility of the masses.

I’m glad I looked up the lyrics to the Gershwin song “It Ain’t Necessarily so” from Porgy and Bess before finishing this post.  I had no idea how irreverent the words are.  (The song seems to suggest that things in the Bible aren’t necessarily so.)  1.  Just because it’s a pastor or preacher sayin’ sumpin’ don’t mean it’s so, no matter whether he’s tellin’ ya to drop a nickel in the plate or to listen to him ‘cuz he has heard from God on high.  2.  On the other hand, if it’s the message of the Bible, it is necessarily so.

The conceptual problem comes in the tension between the two, and the practical problem comes in the repeated alignment of religious people with #1 over #2.

On bill-paying (follow-up)

Rachel writes, in response to my post September 25 post “On being inhospitable,”

Does this mean the 10% tithing is for Old Testament only, and now we are only “required” to “be charitable and support the Lord’s work”?

My home church has a pretty good system for taking the collection, in my opinion. Not wishing to guilt trip people into an instantaneous and non-thought-out decision, they place boxes near the entrance/exit so that those who choose to may give, and those who don’t wish to give don’t feel awkward or forced into putting something in! Some churches might not want to do this because they feel they wouldn’t get as much money this way, but it seems to work just fine.

I think you have hit it on the nose about that system of church contributions — it’s much more hospitable, although it probably doesn’t bring in as much cash. If the church is confident in the relative psychological “investment” and contentment of its members with what’s going on, boxes near the doors ought to work well. But if people aren’t on board with the church programs, the establishment is in trouble if it wants to keep funding the programs, regardless.

I once read a booklet written some 40-50 years ago by someone a lot more upset than I about contribution practices and the tyrannic momentum of church business. The booklet was called Stop Paying the Bills! There’s an assumption inherent in the title that the system, the church programs, etc., are not inherently God’s, so if one stops funding them, there is no irreverence to God’s will. On the surface, I agree and feel the demurrence is well placed, but I don’t feel quite that vehemently radical about it.

Yes, tithing itself is about supporting the religious professionals; I’ve found no New Covenant corollary to regular, measured giving called tithing since there are no Levites. What we are told to do, instead (and this is so stated only in one verse, so perhaps not nearly as essential to weekly Christian living as church staff members make it out to be), is to save so that we can support Kingdom work financially when needs arise. Dozens, maybe hundreds of times I’ve heard the KJV phrase “lay by in store” from 1 Cor. 16 quoted as though it means to drop stuff in a collection plate on Sunday morning. Rather, it means (and this is clear in any translation, it seems to me) to save so that one has resources laid aside when they’re needed for God’s work.

A new surge of resistance rises in me when preachers and other church staff members spend time publicly encouraging a higher contribution level. This seems so obviously self-serving that it embarrasses me for them. “Give more money, please, so I can continue to draw my salary or maybe even get a raise…. And remember that the Lord said, ‘Bring forth the whole tithe.’ And He also said to ‘test Him’ to see if He can’t be more generous than you are. And He also said that He loves a cheerful giver, you know, so smile as you drop those checks into the plate!” Aarrgghh.

It has been years since my family put all our available financial “stock” in local church collections. Other recipients have included the World Bible Translation Center, Camp Shiloh, Camp Manatawny, another church that’s helping a family with distinct needs, Wellspring Ministries, Fillmore Powerhouse, United Way (designated for such things as youth programs and agencies that work for adoption of unwanted babies), Red Cross (designated for victims of natural disasters), and individual missionaries engaged in what I perceive to be indigenous methodologies. Our intent is to give much more to individual mission works in developing countries and in urban settings in this country. Particularly purposeful giving may not be specified in the NC scriptures, either, but it surely makes sense to my 21st-century (partly late-blooming-Boomer, more-Gen-X-ish, with some postmodern sensibilities) mind.

Not at all suggesting that all congregational offerings, or all Christians’ contributions, fall into this category, I do resist thoughtless, obligatory, perfunctory, blind giving to a plate (or a box, for that matter). The more purposeful, and the less the money goes to “overhead” and professional salaries, the better … for my conscience, at least. At the core, my Ekklesia ideal does not depend on professionals, so my heart does not do well when “forced” to fund them. Not that professionals are all bad; on the contrary, most of them in my personal experience have their hearts generally in the right places and want to do God things. But the momentum of the system can easily be an impediment to true Kingdom work.

As to amounts, .04% or 4% may be the right %age for some, or 7.2%, or 10%, or 11%, or 32%, but 10% is not legislated. Having a generous spirit is encouraged.

As with many personal statements in various arenas, it’s quite possible that a bit of personal bias has entered the picture here. Among other possible biases, I would like to acknowledge that New York State taxes have put unexpected pressure on our family finances. Giving more generously is something I think our family might benefit from — both spiritually and financially — but at this time, because of burdensome taxation and a couple of other factors, 10% isn’t a viable option, and I think God understands.

On being inhospitable

Despite the relatively recent (in the modern era, at least) push toward “seeker sensitivity” and “seeker orientation,” churches have a penchant for being inhospitable to guests. We insiders rarely realize how un-oriented we really are to those who are not us. It’s not that we’re intentionally rude toward outsiders; it’s just that we’re obtuse and intermittently stupid about some things.

The collection/offering/so-called “tithing” opportunity offers us but one example of how blind we can be to the feelings, if not the presence, of visitors in our assemblies.

Picture this real experience from our life (perhaps you will be able to relate) … the collection is in progress. We’re sitting on the end of a row. No one is beside us; in fact, no one is sitting anywhere else on our pew. One of the servers/collectors is coming down the aisle toward us. There is no one on any of the four rows in front of us, and, despite my attempts to avert my eyes, the man’s dutiful gaze meets mine. I’m a visitor in his church, and he has never seen me before. He looks at me expectantly, beginning to hold out the tray in my direction. I shake my head almost imperceptibly, also raising my forearm and bending my wrist back, giving the universally recognized “stop” signal. My message is clear: please don’t bother handing me the tray, for I am not prepared to put anything in it.

It’s a mildly awkward moment for both of us. This has happened to me far too many times, though, and I’m saying something about it.

Given a) the last 30+ years of history with money-grubbing televangelists in this country, not to mention sordid stories of CEOs and CFOs in the business world, and b) the utter lack of clear, New Covenant example for regular, required offerings in the assemblies of the church, all ushers and servants and leaders and all other type of collectors should think five times and pray for guidance (and forgiveness) before offering an unknown visitor a collection tray.

I’d like here to repost some previous comments I made about tithing:

There is precedent for paying someone to do the work of the Kingdom. There is also precedent for paid “regular staff” under the Old Covenant — the Levites were professional regulars.

But I see no precedent for anything like what we have today in churches. We are not Jews, and laws such as tithing are not applicable, per se, since we should not have Levites to support. The vast majority of our religious professionals work in roles that are fabricated from human tradition much more than they emanate from the pages of scripture. . . .

I realize that if I’m in a 2% minority on fighting the clergy system, I’m in a .02% minority on fighting the notion of tithing … so I hasten to point out that the idea of being charitable and supporting the Lord’s work is *not* relegated to the Old Covenant. It’s the strict tithing concept that is an Old-Covenant thing.

Whether you find the notion of the tithe foreign to the New Covenant or not (and at least one of my good friends has verbally disagreed on this point), I hope you will accede on this final statement:

It’s uninviting, inhospitable, and downright dumb to assume a visitor will help to pay your church bills.

Please also see this follow-up post.