Dear Church: Here's Why People Are Really Leaving You [Church Finances]

[RobertArmerding]

I am new here. This is my very first reply. I am very open to suggestions, tips, corrections. The American church is a business model. Each church must organize as a corporation with the state. This immediately gives money/wealth a place in that local church. As a result, the local church must bring in money to pay the bills. This one factor creates all kinds of issues. In my own talking with people who have left the church, the constant push for money is a concern that is often expressed. And, in order to raise more money, many have taken to putting on ticketed events. As I read the New Testament, it seems that the leaders deliberately kept money out of the picture. It also seems that the local church did not generate its own expenses, such as buildings, programs, or staff. In the New Testament church, the collections seem to be taken for the poor, or to support missionaries, but not for local expenses. So, I have asked myself, is it even remotely possible to model that kind of church in America today? Does any of this make sense? Maybe more importantly, the Bible says that our Lord Jesus Christ is the Head of the church. I wonder, is He the Head of the incorporated church?

 

[Angelina]

Hi Robert,
Welcome to CyB...as I understand it, there are two main reasons why a Church may incorporate itself.

1, To secure their "501(c)(3) tax exempt status with the IRS, exempting them and their donors from paying taxes on its offerings and/or property"
2, To protect private individuals from personal liability on the organizations behalf.

This immediately gives money/wealth a place in that local church. As a result, the local church must bring in money to pay the bills

You're gonna incur the same problems of paying bills without being incorporated...but it was not where I was going with the O/P.

Thanks for your input though...and I hope to see you around the board.

 

[Axehead]

I am new here. This is my very first reply. I am very open to suggestions, tips, corrections. The American church is a business model. Each church must organize as a corporation with the state. This immediately gives money/wealth a place in that local church. As a result, the local church must bring in money to pay the bills. This one factor creates all kinds of issues. In my own talking with people who have left the church, the constant push for money is a concern that is often expressed. And, in order to raise more money, many have taken to putting on ticketed events. As I read the New Testament, it seems that the leaders deliberately kept money out of the picture. It also seems that the local church did not generate its own expenses, such as buildings, programs, or staff. In the New Testament church, the collections seem to be taken for the poor, or to support missionaries, but not for local expenses. So, I have asked myself, is it even remotely possible to model that kind of church in America today? Does any of this make sense? Maybe more importantly, the Bible says that our Lord Jesus Christ is the Head of the church. I wonder, is He the Head of the incorporated church?

Well stated, Robert.

When you make money as big a deal as it is in the incorporated/institutional churches it does introduce all kinds of problems and I don't think anyone will disagree with that and the manifestation of these problems is very evident, even in smaller incorporated/institutional churches.

Also, it is well known that when you "receive a privilege" from the government, you are also giving up some personal freedom (rights) and by entering into contract (501c3) with the government you in effect are becoming a ward of the state and they can exert control over you whenever they desire and hold you hostage to a threat of removing your "status" with them. That alone to me is a big red flag. I would think the church would want to steer very clear of the government, but they have actually become "government churches" in effect and the full manifestation of that is yet to come.

I notice that many today also have a vision of what that portends and are voluntarily giving up their governmental "status".

We cannot condemn any churches, we can only bring to light what money does and is doing and what being yoked to the government does and can do. Examine the fruit.

When salaries are paid and a budget must be met on a weekly basis, it does most definitely become a corporation with a business model and then please everyone, don't discount the competitiveness (of nickels, noses and numbers) that springs from this kind of foundation.

This is all very foreign to the New Testament.

All the best,
Axehead

 

[Methinks]

This is a good thread and I hope it stays active for a long time. I also hope that commentors keep their ideas and views in the format of simply stating their own perspectives and do not cross the line and become abusive to people posting other perspectives. We all believe in God. We all accept Jesus Christ as our saviour. We all let the Holy Spirit guide us. We are all Christians and we all have an individual relationship with Jesus. So why shouldn't we expect to come to a consensus about how any particular church can stem the membership bleeding and start being a relevant, sought after pillar in the community where that church is placed. If we treat each other with dignity and respect (love) we will be able to do this.God says so.

 

[Wormwood]

When you make money as big a deal as it is in the incorporated/institutional churches it does introduce all kinds of problems and I don't think anyone will disagree with that and the manifestation of these problems is very evident, even in smaller incorporated/institutional churches.

Well, from one who has been in church leadership for a number of years, I can say this about church finances: The church is not making money a big deal and finances are usually not a problem. Most churches pay the utilities for the building, repairs, pay salaries for the staff (which is generally about what the local kindergarten teacher makes at the local public school), uses about 10% for Bibles, Sunday school materials, and finally sends about 10-20% to worldwide missions. No one is getting rich at your local church or making money a big issue. I think you are confusing the local church with the televangelist on your cable programming.

So, lets review. About 60% of the finances that go to the local church are dedicated to teaching the Word of God, and ministering to local Christians (Bibles, class material, minister salaries), about 10-20% goes to worldwide missions and local ministries, and about 20-30% goes to pay the light bill, fix the windows and keep the heat on. No grand conspiracies here. Just good ol' ministry and caring for the sick, teaching the Bible, and giving to the guy in Africa who is teaching the Word of God in a 3rd world country. Pretty simple...and good.

Also, it is well known that when you "receive a privilege" from the government, you are also giving up some personal freedom (rights) and by entering into contract (501c3) with the government you in effect are becoming a ward of the state and they can exert control over you whenever they desire and hold you hostage to a threat of removing your "status" with them. That alone to me is a big red flag. I would think the church would want to steer very clear of the government, but they have actually become "government churches" in effect and the full manifestation of that is yet to come.

This is not accurate. Essentially, the only thing a church has to do as a 501c3 organization is record minutes in leadership meetings. First, the government never actually looks at these minutes. Second, the government does not demand anything from the local church. No rights are lost. The government only asks that you not campaign for a particular candidate by name from the pulpit. However, the teachers are fully able to teach on political issues such as abortion, homosexuality, etc. Perhaps one day, the government will try to dictate what churches teach in order to be a 501c3, but that is currently NOT happening today. Preachers can teach whatever they want and churches can do whatever they want with the donations given...and they are not taxed on those donations. If the government did decide to try to dictate what churches teach....no biggie. You just forfeit your 501c3 and pay taxes on the charitable donations. There are no deals with the devil here or surrendered rights to be a puppet of the state. Simply not true.

When salaries are paid and a budget must be met on a weekly basis, it does most definitely become a corporation with a business model and then please everyone, don't discount the competitiveness (of nickels, noses and numbers) that springs from this kind of foundation.

This is all very foreign to the New Testament.

Paul received donations for his ministry at times, as did Jesus. Budgets in themselves are not evil. I am sure every wise family has a budget. I would hope the church has a budget if they take seriously the fact that they are about doing the Lord's work. A budget ensures that money is used wisely and the church is ensuring that certain amounts go to various ministries (which is helpful for missionaries and other ministries planning for their own work!). Most competitiveness amongst churches has to do with differing doctrines or traditions. Not money. Sure, there are pastors who get caught up in the numbers game and there are churches that get too business-oriented. There are also Christians working at the local department store or law office who get caught up in careers, money and success as well. Lets be fair here. Yes, sometimes each of us needs a kick in the pants, but we also need grace. There are a lot of good-hearted church leaders who live paycheck to paycheck and have passed up on more lucrative lines of work in order to serve, teach and love on messy, complaining and combative people. Lets not try to fit all churches in the one-size-fits-all bag.

 

[Axehead]

Well, from one who has been in church leadership for a number of years, I can say this about church finances: The church is not making money a big deal and finances are usually not a problem. Most churches pay the utilities for the building, repairs, pay salaries for the staff (which is generally about what the local kindergarten teacher makes at the local public school), uses about 10% for Bibles, Sunday school materials, and finally sends about 10-20% to worldwide missions. No one is getting rich at your local church or making money a big issue. I think you are confusing the local church with the televangelist on your cable programming.

Neither party on either side of this conversation can paint a broad brush and say either, everything is fine or everything is not fine. We can only look at contemporary practices in modern Christendom and compare it with the practices of the Early Church and the NT.

So, lets review. About 60% of the finances that go to the local church are dedicated to teaching the Word of God, and ministering to local Christians (Bibles, class material, minister salaries), about 10-20% goes to worldwide missions and local ministries, and about 20-30% goes to pay the light bill, fix the windows and keep the heat on. No grand conspiracies here. Just good ol' ministry and caring for the sick, teaching the Bible, and giving to the guy in Africa who is teaching the Word of God in a 3rd world country. Pretty simple...and good.


This is not accurate. Essentially, the only thing a church has to do as a 501c3 organization is record minutes in leadership meetings. First, the government never actually looks at these minutes. Second, the government does not demand anything from the local church. No rights are lost. The government only asks that you not campaign for a particular candidate by name from the pulpit. However, the teachers are fully able to teach on political issues such as abortion, homosexuality, etc. Perhaps one day, the government will try to dictate what churches teach in order to be a 501c3, but that is currently NOT happening today. Preachers can teach whatever they want and churches can do whatever they want with the donations given...and they are not taxed on those donations. If the government did decide to try to dictate what churches teach....no biggie. You just forfeit your 501c3 and pay taxes on the charitable donations. There are no deals with the devil here or surrendered rights to be a puppet of the state. Simply not true.

What I said was that a body of believers puts themselves into a position where the government can threaten them and control them. They do not "ask" that the Church not campaign for a particular candidate, they "tell them" not to and churches are threatened with having their tax exempt status pulled and many have had that done.


Paul received donations for his ministry at times, as did Jesus. Budgets in themselves are not evil. I am sure every wise family has a budget. I would hope the church has a budget if they take seriously the fact that they are about doing the Lord's work. A budget ensures that money is used wisely and the church is ensuring that certain amounts go to various ministries (which is helpful for missionaries and other ministries planning for their own work!). Most competitiveness amongst churches has to do with differing doctrines or traditions. Not money. Sure, there are pastors who get caught up in the numbers game and there are churches that get too business-oriented. There are also Christians working at the local department store or law office who get caught up in careers, money and success as well. Lets be fair here. Yes, sometimes each of us needs a kick in the pants, but we also need grace. There are a lot of good-hearted church leaders who live paycheck to paycheck and have passed up on more lucrative lines of work in order to serve, teach and love on messy, complaining and combative people. Lets not try to fit all churches in the one-size-fits-all bag.

Let's be clear here: this is not about being good-hearted because if it was about having good intentions and being good-hearted and not following the scriptures that have been given to us, then many more things about the scriptures can be ignored and in fact are being ignored. If you want examples from non-televangelists, from local, "good hearted", churches I can give many, but I was hoping we would not have to go down that road. It should be enough to compare the Word of God with today's practices.

Also, we are not talking about individuals or specific church organizations, we are talking about practices, conduct and behavior that is not in line with Christ and the Apostles.

Axehead

 

[Wormwood]

Neither party on either side of this conversation can paint a broad brush and say either, everything is fine or everything is not fine. We can only look at contemporary practices in modern Christendom and compare it with the practices of the Early Church and the NT.

Agreed. In no way am I saying that there are not churches with lots of issues out there. At the same time, we live 2,000 years removed from the Early Church and on the opposite side of the planet. Clearly there will be differences with regards to practices, teaching styles, etc. Just because early Christians met in catacombs rather than large buildings does not mean it is more godly to meet in graveyards. Certainly there are leadership structures and principles that are timeless. However, I don't think the issue of paying someone to work full time to minister to others is unbiblical or necessarily leads to corruption.

What I said was that a body of believers puts themselves into a position where the government can threaten them and control them. They do not "ask" that the Church not campaign for a particular candidate, they "tell them" not to and churches are threatened with having their tax exempt status pulled and many have had that done.

Axe, I have never had a government official demand anything of me. Churches apply for tax exemption with the understanding that the church will not be lobbying for a particular government official. This only makes sense. It would not be right for a group to claim a religious and tax exempt status and then make that group a platform for the Republicans or Democrats. I have no issue with these expectations as the Kingdom of God is a monarchy, not a democracy. The church should be focused on the Gospel of Jesus Christ, not lobbying for Joe Smith to become the next governor. Of course, if a church wants to lobby for a person, they have every right. They will just have their tax exempt status removed. No one is going to show up to the church with machine guns and trench coats because the church is tax exempt and violated a rule. They will simply be required to pay taxes on the donations that were given that year since they have become a political group. If the government didn't do this, politicians would funnel all their donations through churches. This is not a manipulation tactic by the government...if anything it protects churches from government manipulation.

Let's be clear here: this is not about being good-hearted because if it was about having good intentions and being good-hearted and not following the scriptures that have been given to us, then many more things about the scriptures can be ignored and in fact are being ignored.

Most evangelical pastors study and teach the Word daily. Thus, "good-hearted" implies that they have good intentions about following God's word. That is what I meant, anyway. Just because someone disagrees with you about a practice does not make them evil. There is a chance you could be wrong on a few things ya know. I think we all need to have that kind of humility. At least that is what Scripture teaches.

Also, we are not talking about individuals or specific church organizations, we are talking about practices, conduct and behavior that is not in line with Christ and the Apostles.

What specific practice are you referring to? So far I have only heard you argue against paid ministers, budgets and tax exemptions. I have tried to answer all of those concerns as to why I do not think any of them are inherently evil. In fact, I think they are good things.