building funds
There comes a time in almost every church's life when they start thinking about building a new, larger, fancier, more comfortable building. The church starts a "building fund"...sometimes they give it a catchy name to make it more appealing, but deep down, it's just a building fund. They aproach the congregation with their vision and building plans, make sure everyone understands how necessary this is, and then attempt to convince everyone to donate x amount of money toward the monetary goal.
I don't know if I would say that church building projects are always, inherently wrong. No, I probably would not. The problem I see is this: a church decides to raise millions of dollars to build this great new building when the majority of the world doesn't even have enough money to live off of, and even worse, when a great deal of the world's population is dying from starvation, disease, and bad water.
One of the main themes of the Bible is that of caring for the poor and oppressed of the world. That is a major part of the heart of God. However, you would not know that from what is being preached, both in words and actions.
In the book I just finished reading, it says that you can provide a well that serves an enitre village for only $2,000. That's it. Let's assume that there are 300 people in a village, and let's also assume that a church raises $1,000,000 for the building fund. If my math is right, that's clean water for 150,000 people, versus a couple thousand people who would benefit in terms of comfort and convenience from a new church building. Which seems like the more efficient use of God's money? Because that's really what it is: God's money.
Then there's the issue of regular congregational tithes and offerings. I wonder how much of all that money that comes into the church every week goes to caring for the poor and oppressed. I would venture to guess that the majority of that money goes to maintaining the church building, improving it, paying the church workers, and other internal things. Don't get me wrong, the pastor needs to be paid, and the building needs to be maintained so no one gets hurt from it collapsing or something. I just highly doubt that very much of the church's money is going to those who really need it.
Shane Claiborne, in aforementioned book (The Irresistible Revolution) says this:
"I did a ton of research on tithes and offerings in scripture and discovered they are unmistakably intended to be used for redistributing resources to the poor and not to go toward buildings and staff for the church."
He goes on to say this:
"One of the underlying assumptions is that money from the offering or tithe belongs to the church. But the scriptures consistently teach that the offering is God's instrument of redistribution and that it belongs to the poor. Giving to the poor should not make it into the budget; it is the budget. One could argue that small portions of the Israelite offering (no more than 10 percent) was given to the Levitical priesthood (Neh. 12:47), and that in the early church an even smaller contribution could be given to the church's itinerant evangelists, who, incidentally, were themselves poor (1 Cor. 4:11). But it is not a coincidence that the first major organizational structure in the early church was created to assure order in the redistribution of resources to widows and orphans (Acts 6:1-6).
He even goes so far as to suggest that our churches may be embezzeling from the poor, since that money rightly belongs to them.
We in America are sitting on so much disposable income, and it's been proven that the more money we have, the less we give, both individually and corporately. The disparity between us and our global neighbors ought to make us uneasy to the point of action.
I feel very strongly that I need to talk to my church leaders about how our church is spending its money. I urge you to do the same.
I don't know if I would say that church building projects are always, inherently wrong. No, I probably would not. The problem I see is this: a church decides to raise millions of dollars to build this great new building when the majority of the world doesn't even have enough money to live off of, and even worse, when a great deal of the world's population is dying from starvation, disease, and bad water.
One of the main themes of the Bible is that of caring for the poor and oppressed of the world. That is a major part of the heart of God. However, you would not know that from what is being preached, both in words and actions.
In the book I just finished reading, it says that you can provide a well that serves an enitre village for only $2,000. That's it. Let's assume that there are 300 people in a village, and let's also assume that a church raises $1,000,000 for the building fund. If my math is right, that's clean water for 150,000 people, versus a couple thousand people who would benefit in terms of comfort and convenience from a new church building. Which seems like the more efficient use of God's money? Because that's really what it is: God's money.
Then there's the issue of regular congregational tithes and offerings. I wonder how much of all that money that comes into the church every week goes to caring for the poor and oppressed. I would venture to guess that the majority of that money goes to maintaining the church building, improving it, paying the church workers, and other internal things. Don't get me wrong, the pastor needs to be paid, and the building needs to be maintained so no one gets hurt from it collapsing or something. I just highly doubt that very much of the church's money is going to those who really need it.
Shane Claiborne, in aforementioned book (The Irresistible Revolution) says this:
"I did a ton of research on tithes and offerings in scripture and discovered they are unmistakably intended to be used for redistributing resources to the poor and not to go toward buildings and staff for the church."
He goes on to say this:
"One of the underlying assumptions is that money from the offering or tithe belongs to the church. But the scriptures consistently teach that the offering is God's instrument of redistribution and that it belongs to the poor. Giving to the poor should not make it into the budget; it is the budget. One could argue that small portions of the Israelite offering (no more than 10 percent) was given to the Levitical priesthood (Neh. 12:47), and that in the early church an even smaller contribution could be given to the church's itinerant evangelists, who, incidentally, were themselves poor (1 Cor. 4:11). But it is not a coincidence that the first major organizational structure in the early church was created to assure order in the redistribution of resources to widows and orphans (Acts 6:1-6).
He even goes so far as to suggest that our churches may be embezzeling from the poor, since that money rightly belongs to them.
We in America are sitting on so much disposable income, and it's been proven that the more money we have, the less we give, both individually and corporately. The disparity between us and our global neighbors ought to make us uneasy to the point of action.
I feel very strongly that I need to talk to my church leaders about how our church is spending its money. I urge you to do the same.