|
|||
|
SSCOC Financial Philosophy February 4, 2008 Money is so often divisive. Most of us can remember parents or grand-parents soberly abjuring us from discussing money, religion, or politics, in or out of our households. For disciples, two of these three are still sensitive topics, and none more so than cold, hard cash. Money can bless the church or divide the church. Since disciples tenaciously strive for the “complete unity” that Jesus prayed for, coming to a consensus about money in the church is a serious and essential step in “contending as one man” for the gospel in Seattle. What can God’s word tell us about such sensitive waters? Among other things, we know from scripture that the love of money is the “root of all kinds of evil.” And we know the longing to get rich pierces the seeker with many griefs (1 Timothy 6:10). And yet we also know, when we stop to think about it, that money is an abstraction that (usually) represents some tangible thing that is valued and usually something that has been made or produced. This produce, whether from the land, the craftsman, the factory, or the computer, is something that according to scripture God historically brings as He sees fit—His blessing to His people (Deut 8:6-20). The blessing of prosperity—and the money that represents it—is always from God, but in our world often replaces God. Prosperity itself is not a curse, but loving and enthroning it is. How, then, do we graciously accept God’s prosperity while abhorring financial idolatry? In particular, how should we view “sacrificial living” as a feature of Christian life—what exactly does it mean?—and how should we view the support of ministers and missionaries in our congregations and abroad? Times and topics that engender confusion always beg for clarity, and though we long, perhaps, even more for simplicity, often clarity and simplicity are not the same thing. It may be tempting, for instance, to use the Spartan example of Jesus—no possessions that we are aware of—to rid ourselves of any monetary questions: let’s just rid ourselves of everything but the Birkenstocks on our feet in an effort to “be like him.” The simplicity and assumed purity of such a philosophy is quite attractive but begs an avalanche of serious questions: if minimalist living is a holy mandate, why did the first century church even have wealthy members? Or middle class members for that matter? And why does God prosper any of us at all if He only wants minimalist living? Just to tempt us? How might we live differently if we were only supporting ourselves instead of a spouse and children? What does it mean to responsibly provide for children (another Bible mandate)? In a modern economy, how do we labor and save, then, in order to someday retire and not be burden to our children or to society as we age (Gal 6:5)? What if Jesus had planned on living for 60 years not 33? Was Jesus prosperous before as a carpenter—and we assume He was a very good carpenter? As a full-time minister, did Jesus live on more than John the Baptist—he of the leather belt, desert quarters and locust diet? Does it matter? Can we frame a solid theological teaching on how much money we should make, or how much we should sacrifice based on Jesus’ three year ministry? In Seattle, we don’t think so. Godly peoples have been wrestling with these and other questions of money since the first century and this struggle ought to be respected. It seems unlikely that we will be able to hang our hats on one or two scriptures to solve all of our money conflicts. Instead, we will need humility and a persevering suspension of judgment to reach a unity about money that brings joy to the church (Romans 14:1). Each of us must do his or her own wrestling and form opinions of maturity about our finances and our sacrifices. As we do this, we must strive to humbly hesitate making an emotional or theological commitment to what may simply be our opinion—what works for us. At the same time, we need a limited base of shared financial convictions in order to thwart Satan’s divisive strategies and allow our community to build with zeal and confidence. With these caveats guiding, we in the Seattle church want to humbly but confidently affirm these few godly principles for basic guidance in our financial work together: 1. We believe in Stewardship, not Greed, nor Asceticism. The material world was made by God and all prosperity is from God (Deut 8, 1 Tim 6:17). This means, first, that we are to worship the Creator and not the creation. We appreciate the providence but love the Provider. We put our hope in God, not in the wealth that he bestows according to his purposes. Materialism is idolatry. Second, this means we must not despise His providence. If we despise the bacon we bring home by His grace, we might as well despise all careers and all jobs, all enterprise; we might as well despise all natural providence as well—His lakes, mountains, oceans, birds, fish, and animals, the seasons, the sun and moon. Asceticism—trying to guarantee holiness by rejecting the material world—is Gnostic and another form of idolatry, for we put our hope in God, not in our relative level of economic austerity. We are left, then, with the commission of Stewardship. What we have, God brings—it should neither be worshipped nor despised. Because it is all a gift from Him, though, we should use our money—no matter how much or how little—knowing all of it belongs to Him in the first place, and ask Him for wisdom in using, investing, or spending it. 2. We believe in amply supporting full-time ministers as we can and where we can. Paul wrote that God actually commands us to financially support those who preach the gospel (1 Corinthians 9:14). He also wrote (though this is an observation, not a command) that the Philippians provided him with generous support—that he was amply supplied and had also known times of “plenty” as a missionary (Phil 4:12, 18). The point here is not that ministers must be generously supplied, but rather that they ought to be financially supported, and that ample (i.e. abundant, generous) support is neither unusual nor unspiritual. In Seattle, acknowledging that our ministers live in a 21st century, not a first century economy, our board and salary committee have created a salary model that amply provides for the ministry staff. We have distributed this model in the past and you can view it again by clicking here. Again, eschewing the doctrine that insists our goal is to be as Spartan as Jesus was for three years, our board has striven to find a rational place to financially “plant the goalposts,” in the absence of a strict and clear Bible command. They did this by tying ministers’ compensation to that of other comparable public servants—teachers, firemen, policemen, and the like. As in the case of these public servants, our salary model generally calls for a series of small yearly raises to acknowledge longevity, expertise, and the financial demands that raising families brings. Unlike the public servant models, our model has no medical benefits package—like many small companies these days, the church is no longer in the business of administrating health coverage. Staff members are on their own to individually or collectively find their own health insurance. Consequently, the board has raised the salaries a bit higher than, for example, those of teachers so that the overall salary-plus-benefits package is similar. Certainly the goal is not to make our ministry staff wealthy (although it’s possible some may become wealthier due to blessed investments or family inheritance—it’s not our business to judge. Those so blessed will prayerfully in turn give generously!) but at the same time, we hope to set them free from financial concern and pay them in a way that speaks of both high respect and high expectations. In a modern economy, all salaries are ultimately decided by market decisions of value—supply and demand. In the private sector, the results are often dramatic—NFL players are rare and so receive rare compensation (that is, assuming fans still want to see games). But the public sector, collectively, is also market-determined—how many tax dollars do we really want to allocate for road-repairmen, meter maids, teachers, principles, or chief inspectors? In the long run, the market lands where it probably should, for both private and public roles. We therefore compare our salaries to those of teachers with some confidence. 3. We reject envy as both a sin and a distortion. Are ministers/teachers/ firemen middle class? Upper-middle? Lower class? Does it matter? Who judges? Some members may be tempted to envy the level of compensation of ministers. Others may be tempted to pity that level of compensation. Some ministers may feel that being compensated like a public servant is an incredible blessing; others may feel it is more of a cheerful sacrifice, depending on a host of factors such as upbringing, education, work ethic, ambition, and experience working in the world’s private or public sectors. The point is that all of it is subjective—there simply is no clear right or wrong compensation. In the Seattle church, we have landed near the level of teachers and other public servants, and we commend our staff as one of spirituality and excellence. We want to financially support them in a way that is encouraging and inspiring; we expect, in return, the very best from them. We want each of them to feel not like a charity case but rather as a workman who truly (as much as any sinner, that is) “deserves his wages” (1 Tim 5:18). 4. We each commit as faithful members of the Seattle church to giving a faithful financial sacrifice to the Lord. We do not accept the idea that one can be a faithful member of God’s church yet withhold a financial sacrifice—an obvious contradiction. If we lack faith in the affairs of the congregation enough to withhold our sacrifice, then clearly we are worshipping in the wrong place. In this congregation, faith in the work and sacrificing for the work go together. The Bible teaches spiritual men and women to sacrifice as part of their worship. Such sacrifices are as old as Cain and Abel. The patriarchs offered sacrifices, first fruits and even tithes to God and to His priests (Gen 8:20, 12:7, 13:18, 14:20, 15:10). Abraham foreshadowed God’s own sacrificial heart in Genesis 22:9 when he prepared to sacrifice Isaac. The Israelites were commanded to make many agrarian and animal offerings to God (Leviticus) and various tithes to support the spiritual work of the Levites. We worship a God who sacrifices and who commends us to do likewise. It requires distorted, inverted proof-texting to assert that we are not required today to sacrifice. It’s obvious that first century disciples supported full time ministers and missionaries (1 Cor 9:14). It’s obvious they saved and collected special contributions for special needs (1 Corinthians 16:1, 2 Cor 8-9). But most of all, it’s obvious that God’s people have always lived a lifestyle of tithes, offerings, and sacrifices, even as He prospered them. Trying to take this out of the Bible culture is like trying to take the miracles out of Jesus’ profile—it just runs too thick to excise. But are we sacrificial? The Bible teaches that our whole lives are to be living sacrifices (Romans 12:1), but who judges that? By what standard do we judge whether or not we are being sacrificial? Where do we land on this? By definition, sacrifice hurts. It is not convenient. It means giving up something. While we do not have a proof-text command in the New Testament to tithe (10%) we are commanded to be sacrificial. We stand for every member deciding before their God what that means. No doubt what we decide to give sends a message to Him. We acknowledge that sacrifice is always relative and that the need around us is always endless. With this in mind, we commit to giving and sacrificing in such as way that we each can feel personally inspired. We pray that our offerings, in turn, can also inspire our God. 5. We disavow the practice of scrutinizing what ought to be private, personal, spiritual financial matters. Whether in giving (our weekly and missions offerings), compensating (ministry staff salaries) or spending (will you buy a Toyota or a Volvo?), we follow the implications of Matthew 6:2-4—that these matters are between the individual and God. None of us is fit to judge, let alone knowledgeable enough to judge these choices. Out of respect, and to protect ourselves from a misguided and controlling culture of judgment, we do not demand to know what members give, how they spend their finances, or what their personal salaries are—ministry staff included. Curiosity about personal details is, in reality, a kind of “unhealthy interest in controversy” and must be resisted for the sake of one’s own faith and pure-heartedness (1 Timothy 6:4). In the SCC, we just don’t “go there.” May God bless us with peace and faith about our finances that both overcomes and inspires the world! With much love and respect, The ministers, deacons, and BTLs of the Seattle church of Christ and South South Sound Church of Christ. |
||
