The Church of Money

I want to continue with the direction I started in the previous two posts so here are some thoughts I recently have had.

One of the greatest challenges that the church faces on a daily basis is what to do with the money it gets. How is it used and to what extent is it used for ministry purposes? I think of the “rich young ruler” who approached Jesus and asked what seemed a simple question of what he must do to inherit eternal life. Jesus responded and told him to follow the commandments. The man replied and said he has done that since he was a child, then Jesus’ response drove him away. You lack one thing, he said, go and sell all you have and give it to the poor. It’s a message that has haunted the church for hundreds of years now. What must we do to inherit eternal life Jesus? I believe he’s let go of what you have and give it to the poor, the oppressed, the widow and the orphan. It’s a message that has been lost in the desire for bigger and better. We spend millions on buildings, salaries and utilities while we spend only pennies on those who are in need. Our programs are even drained of their finances to feed the monsters that we have created. We often tell those who are attending our services each and every week that they need to be good stewards of the resources that God has given them, yet our churches are rarely good stewards with what is given. Each and every year around Christmas we are reminded to check out those institutions that are clamoring for our donations to determine how much of our money is actually going into the lives of those of whom it is designed to touch. We are skeptical of institutions that spend more than fifty percent of the donations on salaries and overhead expenses. Yet, if we were to take a close look at the percentage of the money spent at our local church we would be appalled at the amount of money that is consumed by the mortgage, utilities, denominational budgets, and salaries in comparison to how much is spent in the different ministry arms of the church which is directly impacting lives. I would venture to guess that it is far less than twenty-five percent of the total income for the vast majority of churches. If we didn’t feel obligated to bring our tithe and our offerings to the church, I doubt we could in good conscious give to such a cause. I am not saying that we should not tithe or give offerings, nor am I saying that buildings and salaries are wrong, but what I am suggesting is that we begin to change the percentages of what is staying “in-house” and what is going out. I, personally, would not have a problem with seventy-five percent of the tithes and offerings that I give to go to those areas and people of whom we are trying to meet with the reality of Christ, and twenty-five percent paying for overhead. I enjoy and depend upon our pastoral staff and the buildings we have to execute our ministry through and understand the necessity for them. Several problems arise, however, when we are so dependent upon the finances to pay the “bills” per se. First, the pastor is limited by what is said or done in the name of Christ. If, for instance, the pastor has felt directed to preach a certain direction or deal with certain issues in the church, but knows that in doing so, some people will withhold their offerings or leave, the pastor may be reluctant to head that direction, because the bills will need to be paid. I cannot count how little, we've in the church, have done to keep people accountable for things that should not be happening because we knew in the back of our minds how that would affect the church financially. (God forgive me) Another problem arises when a ministry needs funds to operate yet finds itself closed off to those funds because to fund that program or ministry would jeopardize the fiscal responsibilities that have been committed to set bills. While on staff at my last church all ministry branches were on a spending freeze for the past two years so we could pay the bills. A third problem that tends to arise out of this scenario is the body’s dependence upon the paid staff to be the spiritual ones in the church who are responsible for the care of the whole body rather than being one part of many in the body. I don't know how often I heard people upset because the pastor didn't make it to the hospital to see someone before their surgery or something like that. The people failed to realize that neither did anyone else in the church. (God forgive us all)

Now critics would argue that the buildings and the bills are a part of the ministry, in which they would have a valid point, but with only limited validity. As I eluded to above, I believe that we enable our pastors to “minister” to the people because they are paid through our tithes and offerings. This is how I made my living for the past 10 years or so and I am very thankful that I was allowed to minister to those of whom I was responsible for more freely because of my weekly paycheck. I also believe the resources that are at the disposal of those trying to minister, ie buildings, books etc. help create new avenues for people to grow in Christ. However, much of what is done in the name of ministry in both of these scenarios could also be done through other means. An example that I personally know of is a local church that is in the process of raising funds to build an extension. The extension would be a gymnasium, classrooms and storage. The have raised $300,000 in cash and pledges, but the project will cost $500,000 to $600,000. Across the yard and directly behind the parsonage is a building that has been offered to the church for $200,000 which includes the land that goes with it. The large building is in terrific shape and could easily be converted into a gymnasium, classrooms and whatever else they could dream of. And have it all paid for. But, they are going to build anyway because they don’t want to have to walk or drive the distance between the buildings. In doing so, they will have to take out loans and account for overruns. I guess my thought is if they really wanted to take out an additional $200,000 for something worthwhile they could really create a great food pantry, shelter home, or senior’s center. Think how many meals could be served with that kind of money and in the little town that this church is in, it could probably eradicate the hunger problem there for the next few years. Instead they want to make a $2,000 payment each month for the next 30 years. Even that would be $24,000 a year toward a worthwhile ministry. What youth ministry couldn’t use that kind of budget?(If you haven’t added that up yet, that equals $720,000 over the life of the loan compared to the original $200,000 that was taken out)

Anyway, my argument is simple; money rules the church when Christ should. It dictates almost every aspect of the church. We may want to believe something different, but our church treasurers can tell us differently. If you don’t believe me, how long would your church survive if your attendance dropped in half if that represented half the finances and what would be cut from the annual budget first, the mortgage, the electricity, the pastor’s salary, the denominational budgets or the ministry to the people? I know the answer. Do you?