How to enforce tithing
- Thread starter Pergamum
- Start date
- Status
he beholds
Puritan Board Doctor
nah. what if someone tithes in cash to be purposefully anonymous?
Scottish Lass
Puritan Board Doctor
So you would say that even though the tithe was inaugurated before the Levitical priesthood, since it was still given to a priest (Melchizedek) it is only connected with the priesthood?
John Piper says that tithing is middle class American Christianity's way of robbing God. I suspect he may be right.
You can preach the creational order before the Mosaic law which includes tithing, a sabbath day, and husband headship. But trying to "enforce" anything never works, it just breeds resentment and backfires. Churches may need to discipline over things like adultery, but for tithing I would just preach the gospel and let progressive sanctification take care of any financial selfishness.
You can preach the creational order before the Mosaic law which includes tithing, a sabbath day, and husband headship. But trying to "enforce" anything never works, it just breeds resentment and backfires. Churches may need to discipline over things like adultery, but for tithing I would just preach the gospel and let progressive sanctification take care of any financial selfishness.
bookslover
Puritan Board Doctor
No. Grace-giving is the New Testament model.
What do you mean by 'tithing'? Giving exactly 10%, or the regular offerings of church members? If the latter, it wouldn't seem totally inappropriate to have some kind of financial obligation written into the membership covenant. I don't know how it would be enforced.
reformed_vanilla
Puritan Board Freshman
Sure, elders have responsibility to ensure they are living lives righteously, but my understanding would be that this definitely does not extend to "enforcing" tithes. There is a clear line between an elder explaining tithing to a church, and an elder controlling the financial affairs of a churchgoer. I would expect to find the latter in cults, not churches holding to reformed theology.
I think it is proper if a minister expresses how tithing is Biblical and proper in the pulpit, and the elders explain about tithing where appropriate, but I do not think a church should go further than this in "enforcing" tithing.
In addition, while tithing is a good principle, there are definitely those amongst Christians who for various reasons would be unable to tithe, and those who have been blessed by God to an extent where they should be giving much more than a tenth to His work.
I'm reminded of two Bible passages which those who tithe and those who raise up tithing should remember.
And Jesus sat over against the treasury, and beheld how the people cast money into the treasury: and many that were rich cast in much. And there came a certain poor widow, and she threw in two mites, which make a farthing. And he called unto him his disciples, and saith unto them, Verily I say unto you, That this poor widow hath cast more in, than all they which have cast into the treasury: For all they did cast in of their abundance; but she of her want did cast in all that she had, even all her living. - Mark 12:41-44
Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a Pharisee, and the other a publican. The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican. I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess. And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner. I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted. - Luke 18:10-14
I think it is proper if a minister expresses how tithing is Biblical and proper in the pulpit, and the elders explain about tithing where appropriate, but I do not think a church should go further than this in "enforcing" tithing.
In addition, while tithing is a good principle, there are definitely those amongst Christians who for various reasons would be unable to tithe, and those who have been blessed by God to an extent where they should be giving much more than a tenth to His work.
I'm reminded of two Bible passages which those who tithe and those who raise up tithing should remember.
And Jesus sat over against the treasury, and beheld how the people cast money into the treasury: and many that were rich cast in much. And there came a certain poor widow, and she threw in two mites, which make a farthing. And he called unto him his disciples, and saith unto them, Verily I say unto you, That this poor widow hath cast more in, than all they which have cast into the treasury: For all they did cast in of their abundance; but she of her want did cast in all that she had, even all her living. - Mark 12:41-44
Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a Pharisee, and the other a publican. The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican. I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess. And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner. I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted. - Luke 18:10-14
AThornquist
Puritan Board Doctor
I'm not convinced "tithing" is even mandated for Christians as opposed to simply giving as one is able. But all that aside, I don't believe a church should "enforce" giving. However, I believe there is room for an elder or deacon who manages the books to ask a member how his finances are if there is, for example, a past pattern of giving and then a complete drop for many months. This is what my church does, and it is first of all out of concern for the brother, to be sure he is provided for, and secondly out of encouragement to stir him up to good works of giving if he has been neglectful of this Christian duty. It is a form of accountability that is in accord with the membership vows we made, and very rarely is it even needed since the giving differences are fairly drastic for any questions to be raised.
There was one young couple that fit this mold and, when loving asked about it, realized that they were wrongly unconcerned about financially supporting the work of the ministry. Examples of this sort of accountability are so few because it is so rarely done, but the results have been nothing but positive. Some in our church give anonymously, and that is no issue either. The norm, however, is for giving to be known to the book keeper, especially for tax purposes. I suppose this practice might be uncomfortable for some people, but when finances are so rarely talked about in a church like mine, it really seems like no big deal; I've never come across someone who has had a bad experience with it in our church.
Besides, if pastoral visitations are done and other aspects of the Christian life are discussed, I see no reason why finances would be off limits. It is all a matter of how and why finances are discussed.
There was one young couple that fit this mold and, when loving asked about it, realized that they were wrongly unconcerned about financially supporting the work of the ministry. Examples of this sort of accountability are so few because it is so rarely done, but the results have been nothing but positive. Some in our church give anonymously, and that is no issue either. The norm, however, is for giving to be known to the book keeper, especially for tax purposes. I suppose this practice might be uncomfortable for some people, but when finances are so rarely talked about in a church like mine, it really seems like no big deal; I've never come across someone who has had a bad experience with it in our church.
Besides, if pastoral visitations are done and other aspects of the Christian life are discussed, I see no reason why finances would be off limits. It is all a matter of how and why finances are discussed.
If the term "tithing" is objected to, how about this question:
"How should local churches make sure their members are giving regularly?"
Should elders interview members and gather this info, check on them in any way, make them promise somehow in their church covenant, etc?
"How should local churches make sure their members are giving regularly?"
Should elders interview members and gather this info, check on them in any way, make them promise somehow in their church covenant, etc?
Mathetes
Puritan Board Freshman
AThornquist
Puritan Board Doctor
In addition to my last post, I will add that one's church should not enforce giving any more than the church enforces marital fidelity. Is it encouraged? Well, duh. If there clearly appears to be an issue, should the elders lovingly make sure that all is well? Yes. But the signs, priorities, and ramifications of various Christian duties are unique and must be responded to in such manner. I thus point to my previous post for what I believe is a decent practice that neither neglects this Christian duty altogether nor causes unnecessary concern or probing.
reformed_vanilla
Puritan Board Freshman
That's a better question, but I would say elders should not "interview and gather information" about finances, and most definitely not "make them" promise anything. If the church needs money, it should be made clear. If there is a lack of concern from churchgoers about the funding of the church, then the minister should explain the importance of giving to the church. If a church is "making" churchgoers give money, this money is tainted, through both the poor methods of the church and through the hardness of the givers' hearts.
"Ignore your pastor, and he'll go away."
Encourage giving; preach the biblical incentives for giving.
Mandating a percentage is decidedly mistaken; and monitoring/charting individual or family offerings is a very questionable procedure, in my opinion.
Encourage giving; preach the biblical incentives for giving.
Mandating a percentage is decidedly mistaken; and monitoring/charting individual or family offerings is a very questionable procedure, in my opinion.
Sviata Nich
Puritan Board Freshman
If someone sponsors a child, donates to humanitarian organizations etc...does that money count as tithing? Or is tithing giving money to the institutional church?
My thinking is that a pastor shouldn't interview his congregation about their generosity habits. It is culturally inappropriate, and with no Biblical mandate to do so, it is an area where the pastor should trust his congregation. That being said I think a pastor should obviously encourage his congregation to give generously.
An interesting article from the Presbyterian Church in India on their "tithing"...How Handfuls of Rice are Being Used to Spread the Gospel
My thinking is that a pastor shouldn't interview his congregation about their generosity habits. It is culturally inappropriate, and with no Biblical mandate to do so, it is an area where the pastor should trust his congregation. That being said I think a pastor should obviously encourage his congregation to give generously.
An interesting article from the Presbyterian Church in India on their "tithing"...How Handfuls of Rice are Being Used to Spread the Gospel
littlepeople
Puritan Board Freshman
Sounds like a deacon's job to me. Not to the level of enforcement, but certainly encouraging and nudging members to give.
Romans922
Puritan Board Professor
John,
The tithe given by Abram no where is commanded by God to do, but is done voluntarily. We actually see Abram give to Melchizedek because Mel. is representing the Lord. God has just delivered Abram, his household, and Lot's from 5 armies that had kidnapped Lot and his household. Melchizedek brings the blessing to Abram and to the Lord because of the victory the Lord won. There he functions as a priest of the most high God. Abram sees what position Mel. is in, he serves the most high God as a priest and so he gives a good amount (though not one required, it shows us a good amount we ought to give) to the Lord.
The tithe is not required until under the ceremonial law, which is then abrogated in Christ. Yet, the NT Church shows that God's people have all because God has given it, and that it is wise to bring offerings. However, we never are shown a specific amount that has to be given. After Christ death/resurrection, how much more should we give than Abram gave? We ought to do so voluntarily and cheerfully because of Christ's sacrificial work and resurrection. Yet though we may be compelled to give more, in all reality, the Lord doesn't tell us how much to give. We ought to give according to what we are compelled by the Lord to give.
So to answer the question of the OP: They shouldn't because the tithe isn't required.
The second question is similar but take out 'tithe': It should be done through preaching, when the issue comes up in the Scriptures to be applied.
Scott1
Puritanboard Commissioner
Pergamum,
There are several questions you pose here, some of them quite open-ended, too!
It does not seem you are asking about the nature of tithing or Christian giving, or about the role of elders, but about the "enforcement" mechanism for giving to support a local church?
If that's the case, I can only give anecdotal evidence, coming from one side of this question.
A church that never passes the plate during worship, not even for special events. The senior Pastors intentionally do not know what anybody is giving or not giving to the local church. There might be isolated cases of an individual elder knowing within the context of working with one person they are shepherding, but most have no idea, and do not monitor it, certainly do not "enforce" it. (How even would that be done unless they also knew their finances every month).
This approach does eliminate one stumbling block for unbelievers, and for weak believers, that church is "only about money," (untrue, and reveals self centeredness and hypocrisy of one who asserts that as reason not to give). It also eliminates one potential stumbling block for the spiritual leaders of the church so they are not tempted to be a "respecter of persons," based on how much money they give.
But it also places a high responsibility for teaching the principles of Christian giving, and for stewardship on the part of the local church, the need for service involvement by lay members, etc. (All good things, but they cannot be avoided or done with over-emphasis, etc.)
It will not work if the congregation at large does not have a basic understanding of biblical giving and are obedient to it.
The principle of tithing (it's a principle, not the Old Testament law) is a very important one. It involves first fruits giving as a testimony of God's ownership of everything one possesses.
It checks idolatry, covetousness, stealing, etc. many of the commandments and is a discipline (like the priority of Lord's Day worship) that regulates the Christian life.
It requires self-denial, planning and care by sinners who are, by nature, selfish, presumptuous and careless.
But it is not "forced," and there is no practical way to "enforce" it even were it strictly defined in the New Testament (which it is not).
There are several questions you pose here, some of them quite open-ended, too!
It does not seem you are asking about the nature of tithing or Christian giving, or about the role of elders, but about the "enforcement" mechanism for giving to support a local church?
If that's the case, I can only give anecdotal evidence, coming from one side of this question.
A church that never passes the plate during worship, not even for special events. The senior Pastors intentionally do not know what anybody is giving or not giving to the local church. There might be isolated cases of an individual elder knowing within the context of working with one person they are shepherding, but most have no idea, and do not monitor it, certainly do not "enforce" it. (How even would that be done unless they also knew their finances every month).
This approach does eliminate one stumbling block for unbelievers, and for weak believers, that church is "only about money," (untrue, and reveals self centeredness and hypocrisy of one who asserts that as reason not to give). It also eliminates one potential stumbling block for the spiritual leaders of the church so they are not tempted to be a "respecter of persons," based on how much money they give.
But it also places a high responsibility for teaching the principles of Christian giving, and for stewardship on the part of the local church, the need for service involvement by lay members, etc. (All good things, but they cannot be avoided or done with over-emphasis, etc.)
It will not work if the congregation at large does not have a basic understanding of biblical giving and are obedient to it.
The principle of tithing (it's a principle, not the Old Testament law) is a very important one. It involves first fruits giving as a testimony of God's ownership of everything one possesses.
It checks idolatry, covetousness, stealing, etc. many of the commandments and is a discipline (like the priority of Lord's Day worship) that regulates the Christian life.
It requires self-denial, planning and care by sinners who are, by nature, selfish, presumptuous and careless.
But it is not "forced," and there is no practical way to "enforce" it even were it strictly defined in the New Testament (which it is not).
Thanks Scott, yes, you are correct, I was focusing more on the enforcement of giving rather than whether or not the tithe still existed.
I know that some churches have church covenants that spell out things very specifically. Also, I have been reading up of late on heavy-shepherding versus submission to elders, and am trying to figure out just what is appropriate for churches to dictate and what areas are private.
I know that some churches have church covenants that spell out things very specifically. Also, I have been reading up of late on heavy-shepherding versus submission to elders, and am trying to figure out just what is appropriate for churches to dictate and what areas are private.
Pilgrim Standard
Puritan Board Sophomore
The Best way to encourage tithing (giving to the church) is simply to teach the congregation to Love the Church.
J. Dean
Puritan Board Junior
Yes, but is that passage in Genesis a descriptive or a prescriptive passage? Just because somebody does something in Scripture does not mean that it's commanded for all to do.
Back to the main point, even if you could enforce it (which I don't see how short of setting up a kind of Inquisitional system), wouldn't that open the potential door for abuse?
Rich Koster
Puritan Board Post-Graduate
If a person/family appears not to be giving, after a few weeks/months (depending on prior habits), I would ask them if everything was OK with them, and if they needed financial help. If they respond everything is OK and no help is needed, end of conversation. If they question why I asked, I'd tell them that it appears you weren't giving, and I thought you may be in need, because that is the Biblical reason that someone would not be. I think we should be looking out for people who are struggling. If in the process, some other attitude why comes out, then it can be gently discussed.
FenderPriest
Puritan Board Junior
I think the orientation of pastors towards members giving should be praying for them and teaching them. The reality is, most Americans don't know how to manage their money, so laying a tithing command upon them can miss the forest for the trees. Dave Ramsey has a helpful course we run at our church to help people learn about money management and getting rid of debt. A part of financial teaching included giving to the church, and people are encouraged to give, but we'd never mandate it. It is God's work to awaken consciences to what they should be giving and at how much. A pastor is not the member's Holy Spirit.
While he was writing under the context of an establishment, I think James Durham's conclusion is correct (this would be tyrannical for assessments to be made under threat of church discipline):
We find the Reverend Master [Thomas] Hooker,[A Survey of the Sum of Church Discipline, (London, 1648), p. 5] lays these two conclusions. [1.] That the church is to stint [assess a tax on] her members, and determine the quota of their charity and freewill offerings, and that of herself. [2.] That if after the deacon’s private diligence, this is not given in, he is to follow the action before the church.
Although we think defect of charity in this respect a great sin and an offense, and may be justly reproved, and the person admonished that is defective palpably in that which is proportionable to his ability; yet that such a particular stint should be made by church power, and exacted under such certification, we cannot yet find to be warrantable. Although we give the magistrate that liberty, and where he exercises it not, we acknowledge mutual condescension may do much. And we are sure, that if any such like thing should be found in the Presbyterial way, it had been charged with tyranny, and encroaching on the place of the magistrate long ere now; yet it may be (when it is well managed) no great corruption in a church. Treatise on Scandal (Naphtali Press, 1990) 68.
Although we think defect of charity in this respect a great sin and an offense, and may be justly reproved, and the person admonished that is defective palpably in that which is proportionable to his ability; yet that such a particular stint should be made by church power, and exacted under such certification, we cannot yet find to be warrantable. Although we give the magistrate that liberty, and where he exercises it not, we acknowledge mutual condescension may do much. And we are sure, that if any such like thing should be found in the Presbyterial way, it had been charged with tyranny, and encroaching on the place of the magistrate long ere now; yet it may be (when it is well managed) no great corruption in a church. Treatise on Scandal (Naphtali Press, 1990) 68.
In the RPCNA one of the membership vows includes the promise to "...give to the Lord's work as he shall prosper you." If this is not being done (leaving aside for now the question of a 10% tithe or other amount) it is a breaking of vows. This is a double sin. Should the elders not follow up on this? It seems meaningless to me if a person may make such a vow as a condition of membership and then not be held accountable to it. That is just to say that a person can say whatever they want until they're "in" and then live contrary with impunity.
Pilgrim Standard
Puritan Board Sophomore
Whenever taking vows, at the very least ones conscience holds one accountable. Moving against ones conscience is neither right nor safe, and there will be consiquences for doing so.
- Status
