The
Impact of Tithing
Stephen
Terry
Commentary
for the February 24, 2018 Sabbath School Lesson
“If
we have sown spiritual seed among you, is it too much if we reap a material
harvest from you? If others have this right of support from you, shouldn’t we
have it all the more? But we did not use this right. On the contrary, we put up
with anything rather than hinder the gospel of Christ.” 1 Corinthians 9:11-12,
NIV
Our lesson this week focuses on 1 Corinthians, chapter 9
and Paul’s reference to the worker being worthy of his hire, talking about the
need for the churches to support the full-time preacher of the gospel so that
they do not need to work at secular labor to support themselves. However, the
lesson author overlooks the fact that Paul saw this as a hindrance to the
preaching of the gospel because of the financial burden it places on the church,
therefore Paul and Silas chose not to be supported in this way. In fact, In
Corinth, the very city this epistle was penned to, Paul worked with Priscilla
and Aquila as a tentmaker, for these worthies chose to support themselves with secular
labor to finance their ministry. One may wonder why this model is not followed
today. Instead tithe is to be paid in order to pay for ministers who preach
each week to the already converted. Those members may be paying into the tithe
fund to support this weekly gathering, and having done their financial bit, and
listened to the weekly pontification they are free to return to their secular world
and give little or no thought to the church until the cycle repeats in a week.
The tithe becomes a spiritual “get-out-of-jail-free” card, allowing them to
feel as though they have done their bit without really infringing on their other
interests.
This system encourages the utilization of the minister
as the paid proxy for evangelism. The paradox is that the church members expect
so much of the minister’s time for everything from committees to counseling and
refereeing various church squabbles in return for their financial support that
there is often little remaining time for pure evangelism. It also holds the
minister hostage to the politics of the church, for a falling tithe due to parishioners
political hostility to the pastor can hinder, if not end, a promising pastoral
career. It is hard to envision a modern minister being as direct with his or
her congregants as Paul seemed to be from his epistles. Nonetheless, the
Seventh-day Adventist Church has chosen to base its clergy solely on the
tithing system for their income. While tithing may not be demanded of all
members, it is strongly implied that it is necessary, making it into the
Fundamental Belief on Stewardship published by the denomination. In short, a
person not paying a faithful tithe is deemed not to be in compliance with the
fundamental beliefs of the church. But what does that truly mean?
The Fundamental Beliefs,[i] first published after the
Glacier View Ranch inquisition regarding Desmond Ford and his theological
perspective,[ii]
have over time become essentially an Adventist creedal document. Recently they
have been cited as the proposed basis for terminating educational employees who
fall out of line with portions dealing with Creationism. To use the document in
this way is to establish precedent for enforcing any provision of the document
in a similar manner. For instance, if someone can be terminated from employment
for failing to agree with some aspect of Creationism, it is only logical to
assume that they can be similarly terminated for failing to agree with some
aspect of the Stewardship portion of the creed. How one can associate God loving
a cheerful giver[iii]
with the coercive environment of creedal enforcement is unclear at best. Since
Glacier View was only a few decades ago, our understanding of the use of the
Fundamental Beliefs continues to evolve amid dynamic tensions within the
denomination regarding their language and possible usage as an enforcement
tool. One would think that anything necessary for inclusion in a creedal
document would need to be critical. In other words, it would need to be a
threat to the very existence of the Christian Church. Lest we wish to end up
like the church in the picture, we would need to enforce rigorously its tenets.
But is that truly the case in regards to this particular document?
To make it so, we would first have to assume that
salvation does not exist outside the Seventh-day Adventist Church. Denying
salvation to those outside the mother church is what produced the historical inquisitions
of the past by the Roman Catholic Church against both Jews and heretics who did
not submit to her authority. The Reformation rose up in answer to those zealous
attempts to enforce official dogma. Protestants claimed the right to dissent from
the official teachings of the church based on their own reading and
interpretation of scripture. In spite of that dissent, the Church of Rome did
not fall. It continues with us to the present. As Adventists we claim descent
from those Protestant forces that struggled for freedom of conscience. Have we
come full circle now and do we today make the same arguments for enforcement of
dogma as Rome? If so, perhaps our fears are driven by the same worry of abandonment
that drove those ancient inquisitions as well as a need to offer the only salvation
we deem possible, that of membership within the Seventh-day Adventist Church.
If so, we regress and have learned little from those who have gone before.
Some may feel that the tithe system of supporting clergy
is so bound up in the survival of the church as to be critical. But is it truly
so? It was not necessary in Paul’s day, for he clearly ministered independent
of it. It is also not necessary today, For example, the Mormons do not pay their
local clergy. The ward bishops serve as volunteers while supporting themselves
with secular employment.[iv] This has not seemed to hinder
their denominational survival. They do have paid clergy at higher levels of
administration, but the ward bishops constitute the bulk of their clergy and
they are unpaid. This is not to say that Mormons do not tithe, but it is used
differently and because they are not dependent on a salary based on tithe that
fluctuates with economic conditions, their local bishops can remain constant in
number and tenure regardless of church finances. In short, like Paul, they are
not a financial burden on the church.
Some might say that the Adventist tithing system is
better because it allows small churches with an inadequate tithe base to have a
pastor. This claim is made because the tithe for all pastors is paid out of the
centralized “storehouse.” However, does it really work out to the advantage of
the smaller churches? When I pastored in the Midwest, I pastored three small
churches in a common district. This meant that ideally, each church would get
one third of my pastoral efforts. This was determined to be the best
arrangement because the three churches together could produce enough tithe to
support one pastor. In effect, each church was able to pay for a part-time
pastor and that is what they got, notwithstanding any centralized storehouse
for salaries. How this is more advantageous than simply hiring three pastors
for those churches, paying them 1/3 salaries for part-time pastoral ministry
while they worked at secular employment in the community is not clear. Several denominations
employ pastors in this manner and have done so for generations. If every
district were like my district with three churches, this would put three times
as many pastors in the field at no additional cost. If we are truly wishing to
be faithful stewards of resources, this plan makes more sense.
Perhaps we are wrong to be making the pastoral
profession a career like dentist, lawyer or doctor. We encourage the
accumulation of massive educational debt to achieve a university bachelor’s degree
followed soon thereafter by a master’s degree. As a result, the pastoral candidate’s
expectation is a career that will provide adequate remuneration to pay off
those debts and support a family. But a career is not a ministry. They have different
motivations and different loyalties. A pastor with secular employment away from
the church will be focused more on effective ministry than on career
development, knowing that they answer to God rather than to some administrator
with their own agenda which may be in conflict with the local church’s needs. A
tent-maker[v] minister can say no
without jeopardizing their career.
Contrary to prevailing belief, the church does not need
to depend on tithe to accomplish its mission. That support comes entirely from
God, who has resources we cannot even imagine. Still Waters Ministry is a
tent-maker ministry. We began in 1999 and in almost two decades, we have grown
to a presence in almost 150 countries, with an ongoing online congregation of
over 480 members. We have been able to publish several major commentaries on
books of the Bible and Bible doctrines, and all has been done entirely through
the blessings of God and His leading. We receive no tithe or offerings, nor do
we solicit any. We know therefore by experience that if the work is in God’s will,
He will sustain and grow it. Perhaps you will also consider what you may be
able to do for God with His leading, even though you may not see a way. Don’t
be tempted to worship money in your desire to work for God. Per the words of
Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount, God will take care of you. Why would He not
do the same for the ministry He has called you to?
