But I am a christian
She was heavily pregnant, wore little make up and wore a small silver cross at her neck. We were discussing options for the recovery of a substanial amount of money which she had loaned. As I am accustomed to do, I laid out the different steps that could be taken, the costs and risks involved. But when I came to discuss bankruptcy, she said “I could never bankrupt someone because I am a Christian”. I wondered whether I was in the wrong profession.
But this was just another example of issues of financial management becoming tied up in religion for no good reason. And I see it a lot in my line of work. I could have spoken to her and pointed out that bankruptcy is actually designed as a form of restorative justice - a process which balances the rights of those that are owed money while giving the debtor a chance of a fresh start. It developed as a replacement for the system where hopelessly indebted people would enter into a spiral of prosecution which ended with their being imprisoned until their debts were paid in full. Due to the fact that they were imprisoned, they were unable to earn money to pay these debts and therefore the effective result of financial difficulties was life imprisonment. I could have explained all of this to my client, but I doubt she would have appreciated it.
We all know that religion has a messed up relationship with money in all its forms. Prosperity theology, dodgy teaching on giving, lack of accountability - we have talked about all of these on this site. This week I received an alert to an article about Christian financial counsellors - the debt slayers. We come across these people from time to time. There are the real Christian debt counsellors - the priests and ministers and church leaders who deal straight with us lawyers and counsel their “clients” to be honest and open about your abilities to pay and cooperate to arrange the resolution of the situation (in whatever way) with a minimum of evasion, costs and manipulation. But those saints never advertise or present themselves as financial counsellors. And they are not the focus of this article. Rather, this article is about the ‘other’ kind of Christian financial counsellors:
Dave Ramsey is a fast-talking, in-your-face kind of guy whose tough-love guidance—both in books and over the airwaves from Nashville—connects with a lot of Americans. Every few minutes on his three-hour weekday afternoon radio program, callers who recently paid off massive amounts of credit card obligations scream, “I’m debt-free!”
Although he is overtly Christian, Ramsey resonates with a market beyond the evangelical niche: His show is carried on 272 secular stations. In March, cbs television began filming a pilot for a reality series that will follow Ramsey around the country, helping families conquer overwhelming debt and cut the credit umbilical cord.
“I’ve cried over this stuff, too,” says Ramsey, who established a $4 million real estate portfolio by age 26 and lost it four years later. “I’ve done stupid with zeroes on the end.”
I don’t want to impugn Mr Ramsey’s ministry, but I just don’t see the difference between this and any other financial counselling service. Just what are the Christian principles in relation to debt? I would venture that we are called to be good stewards of our resources (which would mean avoiding waste, consumerism, excessive spending etc). We are called to give sacrificially to others. And we are called to deal honestly with other people (ie that there is a moral aspect to clearing debt and not leaving people in the lurch). But except where you want to justify your tips with a bible verse, I can’t see how the nuts and bolts of Christian financial counselling is any better than the more principled of secular financial counsellors.
So I don’t really think you are getting anything extra from Christian financial counselling than you are from secular financial counselling, except the warm glow that comes from being told that becoming debt free is pleasing to God (in itself a little creepy). But putting such a religious overtone on paying off credit card debt can be profoundly manipulative:
According to Mary Hunt, who says her Debt-Proof Living website attracts more than 8 million monthly hits, multitudes of Christians have curtailed church giving because of overspending.
“People can’t believe it when I tell them they need to tithe and save even if they are deeply in debt,” says Hunt. “Most of them think, I’ll do that when I pay all my bills off.“
“A whole bunch of us got all this stuff we really didn’t want with money we really didn’t have to impress people we really didn’t like,” Ramsey says.
And all of it is built around that old chestnut, that God likes us better if we are not in debt. Or, even if we are wealthy. And correspondingly, if we are in financial trouble, then we are not living as God wants us to live. But in order to find this in the Bible, you have to really want to see it:
Most Christian financial leaders acknowledge that debt isn’t called sin in the Bible, but they believe that Scripture discourages debt. They concede that debt is a reality of modern life and even drives the economy, but warn against a lifelong pattern of debt.
“We can’t make a blanket statement that all debt is wrong,” says Blue, author of Master Your Money, now in its 32nd printing. “But it doesn’t make sense to borrow your way to prosperity.”
And it should be no surprise that the ‘typical’ success stories from such counsellors follow the “I paid off my debt and God blessed me with money and success” formula:
Doug and Sherrie Spracklen of Fair Grove, Missouri, are typical beneficiaries. They believe an intensive 13-week Crown Ministries course at Peace Chapel Assembly of God strengthened their marriage and transformed their lives.
Doug, 35, says in his younger years he bought things like a car stereo system and golf clubs, but didn’t have the money to pay for them. His credit card balance further escalated when he started his own insurance business and bought office furnishings and business suits.
Four years into their marriage, the Spracklens had amassed $20,000 in unsecured debt. They had two vehicle payments, an older house that needed repairs, and no equity. They made minimum payments on their credit cards and rolled debt over whenever a zero percent credit offer came along, but those introductory benefits soon expired. The Crown classes helped them devise a plan to get out of debt in two years, just before the birth of the first of their two sons.
Although he always had tithed, the Crown course taught Doug Spracklen to view giving as something more joyful than a mere obligation. Since becoming debt-free, the Spracklens have increased giving to missions, benevolence needs, and savings. He hired three agents, and his business income quadrupled in six years. The Spracklens have purchased 30 acres, but are in no hurry to go into debt by borrowing to build a home.
Want a real Christian attitude to debt and stewardship? Then you are better off going to this guy:
On the other end of the spectrum is the Sarasota, Florida–based Gary Moore, who provides “counsel to spiritual and ethical investors.” He advises the Templeton Foundation and is a board treasurer of Opportunity International, an organization that sees loans as a means of empowerment for the poor. “Small loans,” its website proclaims, “sometimes as little as $50, in the hands of a poor entrepreneur, can transform the lives of individuals, families, and entire communities.” Not surprisingly, then, Moore paints a much different picture than Dayton, Ramsey, Blue, and Hunt.
He argues that Americans are in the top 1 percent of all wage earners in history and that less than 2 percent of Americans have serious credit card debt. Federal Reserve reports indicate that of the households that carry a credit card balance (45 percent of all households), the median amount owed is $1,900. “As the average American lives on $40,000 a year, that’s hardly an economic earthquake,” Moore comments. Only 29 percent of households owe $1,000 or more on their cards, 4 percent owe $10,500 or more, and 1 percent owe $21,400 or more. Moore contends that debt can be empowering rather than enslaving, and that credit is compatible with Christian values.
Or better still, how about we listen to this guy:
Then he said to the crowd, “Don’t be greedy! Owning a lot of things won’t make your life safe.”
16So Jesus told them this story:
A rich man’s farm produced a big crop, 17and he said to himself, “What can I do? I don’t have a place large enough to store everything.”
18Later, he said, “Now I know what I’ll do. I’ll tear down my barns and build bigger ones, where I can store all my grain and other goods. 19Then I’ll say to myself, `You have stored up enough good things to last for years to come. Live it up! Eat, drink, and enjoy yourself.’ ”
20But God said to him, “You fool! Tonight you will die. Then who will get what you have stored up?”
21″This is what happens to people who store up everything for themselves, but are poor in the sight of God.”
Who here really thinks that Jesus would be mad if I borrowed money to give it to the poor?
May 20th, 2006 at 1:25 pm
Wow….
That’s powerful and moving and truly causes one to pause and examine their life and finances. The timing of your post is uncanny/ironic. I’ve been obsessing about saving money for the future, as I approach my 40th birthday. Great food for thought.
May 20th, 2006 at 3:43 pm
That’s a good post Phil & Dan.
Certainly I believe in generosity and giving couched in terms of good stewardship and this is what should be taught by the Church - coupled with living frugal temperate lives.
I have reda much of the Crwon material and generally it is good. I have no problem if tithing is taught as a Roman’s 14 issue, (up to each believer) - but the way it is taught by most contemporary churches is unethical (for reasons discussed before).
Over the Centuries, tithing has been a tradition or practice adopted by Christians and encouraged / enforced by Churches. As with indulgences, there has been a tendecy to abuse the practice.
Planned giving is a great discipline and the pre-tax, post-tax, amount, to whom decision shopuld be left to each individual - as God has purposed on ones heart.
There remains no excuse for the teaching of tithing, signing up for tithing on Partnership forms, in return for God’s blessing … as there is no scriptural bais for it, it was no practiced in the early Church - then Churches and counsellors should be honest and say “this is a practice based upon tradition that some Christians throughout history have elected by their own free-will to do - without expectation”
Without complusion, You should give to bless … without expectation … and discreetly.
There is beauty and freedom in Christian liberty and freedom as well as discipline. Maybe this feeling is the Spirit moving within me that bucks up against false teaching and legalism - as once you have understood and tasted the freedom of the Gospel - then you cannot go into a system of legalism and falseness.
May 20th, 2006 at 4:21 pm
nothing wrong with borrowing to give to mission work as long as you can pay it back.
If you can’t you are using other people’s money.
God makes you the steward over the money you have earned.
May 20th, 2006 at 5:54 pm
I was encouraged by my parents to give my tithe as a child, and it certainly has put me in good stead as an adult.
I give to certain groups because I want to - not because I have to and I don’t work out the exact amount.
Giving needs to come from the heart not the head or the wallet.
May 20th, 2006 at 6:23 pm
Two things…firstly, I find it interesting that Judaism and Islam has picked up on verses about interest, yet Christians haven’t…I wonder why that is??
Secondly…I actually agree with Homer (for once!). I certainly have seen people behave as if they’re making an enormous sacrifice when in actual fact it’s perhaps others that are…a good example is those that choose to work voluntarily, but have a sense of “entitlement” to the money made by others. I would hope that those that have the financial capacity to do so would fund things like purchasing houses for church communities, but nobody is *obliged* to do this simply because they have the capacity to do so. People who choose not to work so that they can spend time doing things like community development mightn’t have much money, but they’ve got other resources I wish I had - time and flexibility. If we had a theology that was based more on the use and distribution of RESOURCES rather than MONEY, I think we’d see greater understanding and less self-righteousness in our Christian communities.
May 21st, 2006 at 6:19 pm
What a wonderfully refreshing look at money. I often wonder about this debt thing. We live on debt; in our small business we borrow to buy stock and repay as we sell and borrow more to buy more stock (which just happens to be real estate - so the amount borrowed is quite freaky at times). At times i would love to be debt free. Oh hte joy! And there may come a time when the Lord says, “OK James, you can sell this and this and this live debt free now”. He might say, “… and give it all away” (but lets not go there, because i honestly hope not - although, have you ever noticed the Lord never asks to do something without equipping us faith to obey …).
Anyway, on this matter of borrowing to give. For us it is a non-issue. We borrow to live; we look unto the Lord for future sales sufficient for this. We dont not buy food because we havent made a sale. So it would be ridiculous for us to then claim an inability to give as we have purposed in our heart to give just because we have not had a sale for awhile or because the market is quiet etc. I dont think the same principle applies to those who are wage-earners
A wage earner generally borrows to buy a home and a means of transport and then lives on, including making house and (possibly) car payments, the positive income stream from working. IMO, such a person should be only give from their income stream. Of course individual circumstances differ, but for those of modest means, it seems to me that borrowing to give should be entirely avoided.
I thought “themerryrose” expressed the joy of giving in a lovely way.
May 22nd, 2006 at 7:36 am
All you Christians out there, here is some more examples of what your fellow born-again Christian, George Bush, is responsible for in Abu Ghraib.
http://dahrjamailiraq.com/weblog/archives/informational_posting/000393.php
http://mparent7777.livejournal.com/8757944.html
May 22nd, 2006 at 9:19 am
DD, are you going to take responsibility for everything your fellow atheists have done?
May 22nd, 2006 at 1:51 pm
You’re all part of the body of Christ. To which organisation do all atheists belong?
May 22nd, 2006 at 2:21 pm
Joseph stalin butchered 60million of his own people and he was an atheist.
Atheists caused more MASS MURDER in the earths history than any other organisation.
I haven’t included Pol Pot, East communist countries, communist china etc.
Atheists hang your head in shame for the atrocities of your brothers
May 22nd, 2006 at 2:24 pm
It doesn’t matter whether atheists belongrd to an atheistr club
it is the ideology and atheist ideology produces mass murderer.
Why was atheist east germany necessary in building a WALL to stop its people leaving.
Why is atheist Cuba so angry that its people want to live in the “evil” christian america. - think about that donald
May 22nd, 2006 at 2:26 pm
Most of the churches are full of ex atheists/agnostics.
May 22nd, 2006 at 9:02 pm
Christian America? With born-again George Bush?
May 22nd, 2006 at 9:57 pm
DD: You’re all part of the body of Christ. To which organisation do all atheists belong?
There are only two types of people in the world Duck. Those who say to God: “Your will be done” and those to whom God says “OK, your will be done.”
Me thinks your prognosis isn’t pretty good.
May 22nd, 2006 at 10:42 pm
DD
Why do SO MANY atheists, hindus, buddhists etc. from other nations want to live in the evil empire of George Bush.
If atheist fidel Castro opened the borders he wouldn’t have many citizens left in Cuba.
If atheism is so wonderful why do ATHEIST leaders need walls, terror etc. to keep their people in???
Why all know the answer - now if only atheists would open their minds to the truth.
Atheist govts always lead to dictatorships and tyranny.
May 22nd, 2006 at 10:48 pm
George and Jesus have little in common in my assessment. Unless a hidden gospel turns up revealing Jesus actually made massive profits from investments in oil and armaments, and advocated miliatary invasions into countries without provocation.
May 23rd, 2006 at 7:38 am
It’s interesting to see how one comment from Donuld Duck seems so consistently to hijack the theme of a thread and move it toward something totally unrelated.
On something semi related, one aspect of my job involves helping people in financial hardship. Unfortunately, an increasing number of these cases have been exacerbated by “Christain” money lenders. They are insidious leaches who use the promise of heaven to entice gullible parishioners (and others, yes even atheists are welcome) to part with their money.
One such scheme was operated by the “Jesus is Alive International Ministries”. Their particular little entreprise revolved around the “Jesus Housing Program”, whereby people would pay around $400 per week under the assumption they were buying their own home. Not so, they were only renting and did not have their name recorded on any mortgage or title deed. The scheme was exposed when one of the parishioners reached retirement age and wanted to pay out his mortgage, only to find there wasn’t one. Times this by 11 parishioners equals a tidy little earner for these clowns. Same organisation- the “Moving with Jesus” car plan- pay the “Church” a weekly repayment and in 4 years you can own a car. Turns out they were all leased and/or owned by the “Church” and the parishioner again dips out. I might add that they were also required to pay their 10% each week to the plate.
These people had a “church” building and conducted weekly services, until they got busted. The result, many people losing lots of money and being evicted by banks from what they thought was their own home.
Another fine example is the “Christian Power Loans” company, who immitate the first scam, except they take deposits of $500-$1,000.00 to process a home loan application and are never seen again. Interesting to note with these guys was thath they held their Christian help tal/sales pitch in the auditorium of Hillsong Church.
Beware the wolf in sheeps clothing.
May 23rd, 2006 at 7:44 am
If George Bush is born again, it must have been a breach birth.
May 23rd, 2006 at 1:37 pm
(A) Don’t people even attempt to read contracts first. Sure, some contracts require slow careful study to be even partially understood by the average person, but wouldn’t certain clauses or words alert them to what type of contractual relationship was being entered into?
(B) Do people disbelieve George Bush’s born again claim because of war atrocities in Iraq and other places, amongst other reasons? In reference to the war atrocities, isn’t there old testament analogies where Kings and leaders of ancient Israel committed acts of genocide and similar in the name of God?
(C) More generally, there are examples of leaders of many faiths (including none or minimal) committing atrocities. I don’t think you can conclude that the faith is the primary reason - there are probably underlying psychological reasons that also contribute . I’m surprised that ned flanders didn’t try to a more balanced view, instead of lashing out at so-called atheists.
It’s interesting to throw a way-out comment in that can hardly be justified on a reasonable view of evidence, and then see so-called Christians jump to another extreme. This Christianity of yours, ned flanders, doesn’t seem to do a lot for your thinking ability. Using the body of Christ analogy, it’s easy to see that ned flanders is not the brain part of the body. Perhaps he’s the arsehole.
May 23rd, 2006 at 5:43 pm
DD
Atheists like yourself hate to be challenged with statistics of how atheists in the past have committed atrocities
YET
the same atheists love to stigmatise every christian due to the spanish inquisition or other events etc.
Only proves that atheists are hypocrites and cant handle it when you give them their own medicine
The facts remain that ATHEISTS in the 20th century butchered, raped, tortured and murdered more people that every other religion and political
institution put together.
How the atheist HATES HATES HATES this FACT and will try to deny the truth.
May 23rd, 2006 at 6:07 pm
It’s interesting to see how one comment from Donuld Duck seems so consistently to hijack the theme of a thread and move it toward something totally unrelated.
It’s because DD behaves like a troll. Normally people don’t feed trolls in cyberspace.
May 23rd, 2006 at 7:14 pm
Hi quietriot, i understand what you are talking about and find myself absolutely outraged. For a number of years i was a licenced financial planner and have graduate university quals in finance. So i know something about which you are speaking. For years i witnessed the strong ripping off the weak - exploiting hte vulnerable to build their own wealth. Worst of the lot is the exploitation of hte weak and the poor and the trusting “in the name of the Lord”.
I thought, with all the schemes id witnessed, i was beyond shock. But youve done it again! Outrage upon outrage! Shame upon shame.
Beware the wolves indeed. Thanks for the insight, would be interested to learn more
May 24th, 2006 at 11:53 am
Who here really thinks that Jesus would be mad if I borrowed money to give it to the poor?
Yes, I’ll bite. I think the idea of people borrowing to give away is undesirable. Is it permissable? Yes, but that doesn’t nesessarily make it a beneficial habbit.
I think when we are faced with another in need we are called to give, even sacrifically give, what is within our means but not what is beyond our means.
Would Jesus be mad if we did borrow money to give away: Well that would probably come down to what level of debt is within our means and what level of debt is beyond our means.
But I would never ask someone to borrow to give. And, if I thought someone had crossed the line into giving beyond their means I would prefer not to receive it/reccommend they not give it.
May 24th, 2006 at 2:32 pm
So in that case, it is okay for me to borrow to buy myself a house, but not desirable that I should borrow to buy the homeless a house? I don’t accept your assumption that borrowing necessarily means that something is “outside of our means”.
May 24th, 2006 at 3:58 pm
Its all about giving within our means; im with just_nigel on this one. I hear your point Dan, but there are usually other issues here such as a man providing for his family, paying off a home rather than paying rent … I reckon quietriot would have some good case studies of the troubles people have got themselves into, borrowing to buy for “good causes”.
May 24th, 2006 at 4:56 pm
Dan, I didn’t assume that borrowing necessarily means that something is outside of ones means. I gave a more nuanced response that included questioning “what level of debt is within our means”.
But now that you mention it, yes that does complicate it. Isn’t borrowing by deffinition a way of paying to use other people’s means?
What I do think, is there is an principle here, that to borrow to give should be the abnormal and therefore require greater justification or reason for it to be done. I dind’t say Jesus had to get mad if you did what you describe, but I think there is the real potential for him to get mad and one that needs to be given particular attention.
Meanwhile adding to the ethical puzzle:
How about if my borrowing money to buy a second house for someone else, pushed up demand for borrowing money and so pushed up the interest rates (the cost of borrowing money) so that a third person was unable to buy one house for themselves.
May 24th, 2006 at 5:08 pm
James, I want to separate the two things. On the one hand there is the question of financial security/stability and whether this is something that we should strive for. The gut reaction is that we should - “a man (sic) {should] provide for his (sic) family” etc. But is this a christian value?
Jesus in fact said that we should give away all of our wealth to the poor. Jesus called the disciples to leave their nets and “follow me” - in fact instructing them to abandon those to whom they might have had responsibility.
Nigel, you said that borrowing money to give it away is “undesirable”, though “permissible”. I want to know what part of it is undesirable. With the people quoted in my post, the argument seems to be that debt is undesirable because it prevents us from achieving financial wealth quickly. While I disagree with this, at least it is consistent - all debt is bad. But the position where we say that debt per se is okay but borrowing to give to others is undesirable is difficult for me to grasp. This indicates to me that our own needs are a priority over the needs of others and therefore ‘worth’ incurring debt for.
I don’t see why it should be (from a christian perspective) ‘abnormal’ to borrow in order to give, but not abnormal to borrow in order to meet our own material needs. If the problem is the question of whether it is within our means, then this is an assessment which should apply to all debts, and naturally should reflect what our priorities are for the way that we spend our money. For example I don’t think that it is within my means to borrow to buy a ferrari. However, it actually is, so long as I am not also borrowing to buy a house. But I prioritise the house which means that the ferrari is on the backburner for now. If we say that borrowing to give is not within our means, where other forms of borrowing is, then I ask - what is it that we are prioritising over giving, and why?
May 24th, 2006 at 5:27 pm
Interesting discussion. How about this comment by George Monbiot in Guardian Unlimited yesterday…
Second-home owners are among the most selfish people in Britain.
Every purchase of a second house deprives someone else of a first one…… What greater source of injustice could there be, that while some people have no home, others have two? Yet the vampire trade in second homes keeps growing - by 3% a year - uninhibited by government or by the conscience of the buyers. Every purchase of a second house deprives someone else of a first one.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1780789,00.html
May 24th, 2006 at 5:34 pm
Purpose Driven Pastor Season
http://www.stupidchurchpeople.com/2006/05/purpose-driven-pastor-season.html
It’s Purpose Driven Pastor Season here in Southern California.
Pastors from all over the world are here to visit Saddleback Church and learn how to help their churches grow.
Every year around this time the tell-tale signs appear in our area (a stones throw from Saddleback).
• Unusually long lines at Starbucks, Denny’s, Chili’s, donut shops and other eating establishments.
• Men in their 40’s and 50’s with slick backed hair, jeans or pants pulled up too high, wearing Hawaiin shirts like all Californians do. ||wink, wink||
• Women with big hair, lots of makeup, wearing knit slacks, with lots of big jewelry.
• People gathering together at resturants, holding hands and praying loudly with reverberating resonance.
I can only imagine that most of the conversations in and around these conferences include many phrases such as:
“Where you at brutha?”
“How many ya runnin’?
“How many you got on staff?”
“How many small groups you got?”
And of course the old standbye, “Well, Praise the Lord” or “God Bless Ya!”
Standing in line at Starbucks the other morning and watching these people interact, I was so thankful not to be a part of the theatrical drama that is played out in ministry conferences like this and others like it around the world. Everyone puts on their best face, smiles their best smile and places that best foot firmly forward. But like the Hollywood sets located about an hour north of here, once you walk behind the door and peek behind the curtain you discover it is only a facade… it looks good on the outside, but it has the same problems, shallowness and sin that your church has. It’s just bigger, that’s all!
May 24th, 2006 at 5:41 pm
Jesus in fact said that we should give away all of our wealth to the poor. This is simply not the case dan; Jesus said to ONE MAN to go sell all that he had give to the poor and come follow Him. It is gross misinterpretation of Scripture to take this one example of a specific instruction to one man (who, if we take the context had asked Jesus what more he should be doing other than keeping the commandments) as a blanket instruction to all. And again, that Jesus selected 12 and called them to leave their trades and follow Him is not an instruction for all to do likewise. In fact, if you would care to read Scripture you will notice that Jesus appeared to hundreds after His resurrection but only issued the Great Commission to the 11.
Equally, the argument seems to be that debt is undesirable because it prevents us from achieving financial wealth quickly. I would reject out of hand an argument such as this … I am not a proponent of greed, nor do i read anything in Nigel’s post that suggests he is either. Paul says a man should give in accordance:
TO WHAT HE HAS NOT WHAT HE DOES NOT HAVE
If you have to borrow, then you dont have it and according to Scripture you should not be giving it.
Jesus said, You seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness and all these things (material needs) will be added to you.