user pays
Money makes the church go round. And it is my experience that churches and christian organisations which rely on gifts and tithes to fund their ministries and mission are going through a transition. Institutional giving does not have the same status that it once did. I, and people like me, will not give money purely because we are a part of an institution in the same way that my parents and grandparents did.
So organisations look at different ways to promote and approach stewardship, including the idea of “user pays”. There seems to be a theory that we need to stress to people that they use certain services and programs, and therefore they should contribute financially to support those services and ministries. Great. This approach will probably encourage more people to put their hands into their pockets than merely appealing to one’s loyalty to an institution.
But I can’t get past the fact that the “user pays” approach to giving is an offensive corruption of what church is about, an obsence commodification of the gospel. The inherent logic is that the reason we give is to get something in return. It paints the picture of church as a supermarket, where the product is market driven, where the consumer holds sway. Does this mean if we disapprove of some programs or activities, then we don’t have to give?
The logical corrolary is that the more profitable ministries are more important to the life, or at least the balance books of the church. Worship deserves funds, because people who attend worship give money. The soup kitchen or the drop in centre aren’t as worthy of our attention, because they don’t bring in the dough.
Every time someone brings up the idea of selling stewardship with the “user pays” idea, I want to stand up and start turning over the tables in the temple. So let us stop this seductive line of reasoning dead in its tracks.
We don’t purchase our church experience. Tithing is not a price. The reason that this line of reasoning is seductive is because it is based on a truth - people give to the things that they value. One of the measures of value is whether we benefit from something, but that is not the same as saying that value = use. I don’t give money to world vision because I get something out of it (except for my nifty tax break), I give to world vision because I value the difference that they make in the world and because I want to be a part of it.
In this circumstance, it is not the youth group who should pay because they benefit from having a youth minister, or the older people who should pay because they benefit from pastoral care and visitation. Rather, we all give because we all value the organisation. We value an organisation which has a place for old people and young people and everyone in between. We value contributing to something which helps to feed the hungry, to clothe the naked. We value the discipline of giving, of submitting ourselves to the power of something greater.
Okay, rant finished now.
March 17th, 2006 at 5:27 pm
(Maggot’s minions, as we speak, now making arrangements to move the Copeland ’seminar’ to a ’secure location’.)
March 17th, 2006 at 5:34 pm
I never left
March 17th, 2006 at 5:56 pm
Really, Lance? We’ll just have to find out where.
March 17th, 2006 at 9:41 pm
Maggot’s just being cagey….that’s all.
“Tuesday 10th & Wednesday 11th
Kenneth and Gloria Copeland (program & venue to be announced)”
March 19th, 2006 at 8:09 am
Is that a real Ken Copeland web site asking peopoe to buy a plane for him?
That’s just unbelievable
March 19th, 2006 at 3:40 pm
I prefer the offering “sermon” my previous pastor gives
“This is an opportunity for people who call this church home to give. If you are visitor, please just ignore this, because we are not here to ask you for money”.
or something like that
Janet McKinney
March 20th, 2006 at 8:24 am
Janet,
Many sermons like the one above end in the one you are talking about. When I went to Riverview, one of the churches that is lumped in with Hillsong on this board, they said at offering time:
We have learned that part of our discipleship, and following Jesus is what we do with our money. We have learned that giving and being generous is part of our calling as Christians, and this is an opportunity to participate in this, and support the church (paraphrase, and shortened a bit. Original speack lasted maybe two minutes)
and then ended with almost the exact thing you said.
the rev
March 20th, 2006 at 3:28 pm
If the people of Revenue church have “learned that part of our discipleship, and following Jesus is what we do with our money. We have learned that giving and being generous is part of our calling as Christians”….then why do they need to harp on about it at length each service?
They must have raced through it ..to get the offering pitch out in under 2 minutes.
The Revenue Church standard is 5 to 10 minutes….and I’ve seen Duane Dixon go 10 minutes plus on the offering sermon.
Your pathetic defence ‘The Rev’ of Revenue Church’s exploitation of people reveals just how much you’ve been compromised by accepting funding from Phil Baker.
It would be nice if you could declare that you’re a beneficiary of payments from Revenue Church, when commenting here.
March 20th, 2006 at 4:34 pm
Lance,
I am sharing my experience. When I was there it was done that way. And my comment was sharing that even though they say that, it doesn’t mean their understanding of giving is correct. Why can’t you accept that I may have had a different experience than you, on one Sunday night?
And in my conversations with Phil he has said point blank that he has changed his position on tithing. Now I have not seen any proof that this is not true, and my experience at the church that one time I was there would suggest that this may be true, (notice I said may be true, not is true, this is because I understand that one night with a congregation is not enough knowledge to say I know for a fact one way or another). I also was told by Phil that he had tried to meet with you a number of times but you refuse, it would appear to me that any serious jounalist like yourself would go and meet with someone to find out what they had to say for themselves.
Now I will say that I am disappointed that the planned meeting with Lionfish has not happened, this bothers me. And it is my understanding that it was not Lionfish but Phil that is the reason. I also have some concerns about the “huge honorariums” that I hear Lionfish talking about, but I do not know about those either so I am awaiting some proof. The thing I do know is that Phil seems willing to talk to me about these issues, and appears to take my concern for the poor, and the marginalized, as well as my concern for the abuse of power, to be important subjects. Should I in your not so humble opinion stop talking to him because he doesn’t seem to sell everything and quit his job after each conversation?
Now I know that you believe I have been trying to make excuses for Phil, but rather, in your tradition of fine journalism I am merely stating what I saw, and what Phil told me. Being that I do not live in Perth, and cannot, nor probably have the inclination to do further research I will leave it up to you to show whether or not he actually believes and lives what he told me. As for me, I have seen some evidence that makes me question somethings, and will ask Phil about some of these issues since I am still willing to talk to the man.
As to my being a benificiary, I will tell whoever wants to know, that the night I was interviewed at Riverview, (an interview in which I shared what it means to pick up your cross and follow Jesus, and shared a vision I had that said you cannot just sit outside of the plight of the poor and marginalized and send money, but must actually go and live among them), they took an offering for me, (the speach at that offering was that people like me often never get a chance to speak to as large a group of people, and that because of this it is often hard to get by, and that they could be a blessing to me) this offering totalled about $3,500 it was I think a little bit less, but if the exact amount is important I will get it for you. This was deposited straight into my FORGE account which goes to pay my salary, and actually kept me from missing a paycheck at a time when I was pretty low on support. The fact that I preached the same message I would preach to anyone else, and the fact that I continue to challenge Phil on some of his issues would suggest to me that I have not been bought off.
Now I understand that you have a bunch of reasons for which to be angry at Riverview and Phil, but you must look objectively at the fact that I have not had those experiences, I have been allowed to even be critical of the whole mega church concept, the word of faith crap, and the prosperity teaching as well as the concept of power. If I was cast out of his friendship for these critiques, then I would be more inclined to believe in your theory that he is irredeemable, but at this point I still have hope. The bible says that love hopes all things, and I do hope that Phil will not only begin to see things differently, but in so doing lead others to do the same.
the rev
March 20th, 2006 at 5:32 pm
I have no problem..with someone in ministry who’s doing it tough being ‘blessed’ by a significant donation from a church.
However.
Generally, these ‘love offerings’ are restricted to people who are ‘on the circuit’.
They don’t go to Shirley Nobody of Orrong Rd Carlisle or Joe RiffRaff of Yarraville Rd Spotswood.
They go to the ‘Christian Stars’…in nearly every service, every week.
Darlene can flit from Planetshakers, to Garden City to Christian City to Revenue Churches and pick up 5 grand here, 7 grand there, 4 grand here, 9 grand there.
Each week.
And I don’t think Sy Rogers did too badly out of the regular ‘love offerings’ from Revenue…..which partly explains why he kept coming back to speak at Revenue….even though Phil and the church had no idea how to put Sy’s message into practice..and the message was falling on dead ground.
A reminder of this post by ‘otherendup’…..who, without giving away their identity, has the inside knowledge to state this accurately.
http://www.signposts.org.au/2005/08/01/bryan-and-bobbie-an-australian-story/#comment-56723
“and then there is always the world of “love offerings” - these are not wages but gifts, paid out of the generosity of those who give. the speaker does not charge, but the host take up an offering which could be $5, but could also go into the tens of 1,000’s - i’ve seen youth speakers get more than 40K from a group of uni students on one weekend. not to mention the way they are showered with all types of VIP treatment - airfares, hotel accomodatio, nice cars, lunches, dinners etc as all in-kind generosity - not income. now, if you were to spend half the year or more on a speaking circuit like the one that operates in this day and age inside many of the evangelical and pentecostal circles, it’s a pretty nice lifestyle indeed.”
If there’s nothing wrong with all this, then what is wrong with mandatory disclosure of these ‘love offerings’….just as ‘The Rev’ has done.
I’m not even asking for churches to go to the same level of disclosure of political parties, which are now required to disclose the amount of money donated, and the donor’s identity.
I’m asking for disclosure of monies received by churches and their ministers from ALL sources.
Then we can make an informed assessment of whether the system that’s set up to assist low-paid ministers is being heartily and arrogantly abused for personal pecuniary gain…..which I must remind some people here, particularly the Hillsongists, is against Australian state law…
“If I was cast out of his friendship for these critiques, then I would be more inclined to believe in your theory that he is irredeemable, but at this point I still have hope.”
Don’t get your hopes up.
We’ve all been there, believing that one day Phil Baker and other pastors would ‘get it’.
It’s just sad to see that there is no end of supply of new recruits, unaware that a senior pastor could so convincingly say he believes in one thing, yet consistently do and live the opposite.
March 20th, 2006 at 5:37 pm
By the way, I earn approx….$33,000 a year, which roughly equates to ‘half an honour’…according to the Lionfish Honour/Double Honour scale.
March 20th, 2006 at 5:40 pm
And I have two unused restaurant vouchers …for being a good boy at work.
March 20th, 2006 at 6:19 pm
Lance,
For most of my life I lived with a family of four on less than that. And I worked part time doing construction or other jobs so I could minister without receiving anything from my church. I would do the same here but for the visa requirements. I believe that is why the comments about my integrity being for sale have bothered me, if my integrity were for sale I would hope to get much more than one offering. Maybe a monthly stipend of two grand for a guaranteed five years. You think Hillsong might be up for it?
the rev
March 21st, 2006 at 5:56 am
Actually Rev - that was ALL of the sermon!!!!
March 21st, 2006 at 7:14 am
Oh and lance, as for the double honour, I think the double honour should be you get to rely on God double, and should therefore get payed what you get payed. What a blessing to need God on a daily basis.
the rev