Money is either a blessing or a curse. But I guess it’s more accurate to say that it’s our attitude toward money that is the real culprit here.
And the ministry is not exempt:
7 Was it a sin for me to lower myself in order to elevate you by preaching the gospel of God to you free of charge? 8 I robbed other churches by receiving support from them so as to serve you. 9 And when I was with you and needed something, I was not a burden to anyone, for the brothers and sisters who came from Macedonia supplied what I needed. I have kept myself from being a burden to you in any way, and will continue to do so. 10 As surely as the truth of Christ is in me, nobody in the regions of Achaia will stop this boasting of mine. 11 Why? Because I do not love you? God knows I do! (2 Cor. 11:7-11, TNIV, emphasis added)
Or,
Surely you remember, brothers and sisters, our toil and hardship; we worked night and day in order not to be a burden to anyone while we preached the gospel of God to you. (1 Thess. 2:9, TNIV, emphasis added)
If you really want to ruin a good ministry relationship, just let money become the focus. Paul knew this and was able to avoid the many, many monetary minefields of the ministry, either by accepting support from other churches or by working with his hands.
But why is it so easy for money to become a problem in the ministry? I’m serious. People either hold on too much to their monies and don’t want to give, or if they faithfully give their monies to their churches, the church leadership find some way to mismanage the money.
It’s time to get it right.
The problem would be much less if more ministers had a similar attitude as Paul, that is, to avoid as much as possible to be a financial burden to the church, for the sake of the Gospel and for the sake of his own soul.
J,
Precisely because Paul saw the danger of his churches interpreting their financial responsibility as a burden, so he found other means.
But that shouldn’t be is the underlying point.
Money becomes a problem because somewhere along the line there is the ability to have temptation creep in. When God’s people give generously, the “income” can get intoxicating. It is vital to keep Paul’s attitude! Yet, we get urges. In my own denomination, it has the temptation to get intoxicating. When you spend the first decades of life as a denomination being on “the wrong side of the tracks,” having some income due to growth makes one feel like, “Hey, it’s time we did things ‘with excellence’ for God.” We then take it to mean, “I’m getting a nicer car,” or something like that.
We also lose our heads. We get, in ministry as leaders, generous people donating. Who doesn’t like that? Then, that person has a “business idea” to invest in… Well, the story goes downhill from there almost every time.
The long and the short is that temptation allows money to get intoxicating.
Dan,
That’s why I mentioned “mismanage” above. Often this becomes the problem. Imagine what would happen if churches didn’t invest so much money in their facilities but in missions, both home and abroad.
It’s the temptation of mismanagement.
Shouldn’t that be, “just let the love of money become the focus”? I think Paul wrote something about that too…
If churches would let their members volunteer the work of ministry instead of outsourcing it all to “trained professionals”, perhaps less money would be required.
EE,
In my second sentence above, I sort of corrected my first by mentioning “our attitude toward money.”
But I’m with you on the “trained professionals” point. Yep!
I like Hauerwas’ balance on the role of clergy in Resident Aliens. Part of the problem is that layfolk tend to dump all the responsibility on the pastor. If the laity stepped up more, then the “professionals” would have much less of an us-them mentality.
I agree with your point but I’d like to throw in this caveat: the ambivalence, fear and hostility many conservative Christians have towards sex, should be targeted towards money. But Mammon is an more acceptable idol (god) than Eros in conservative Christian circles due to our relationship to our political/economic ideaology.
In the great triumvirate of corrupting influences (money, sex and power), the only one we really treat seriously is sex–a very easy mark indeed!
still it’s nice to be paid now and again….
Scott,
Yes, mammon is a more acceptable idol, and if I might add, power,which seems to go hand-in-hand with mammon.
Brian,
There’s still the need and place for such. I’m still not convinced that Paul’s example should be the norm.
Paul’s attitude in Corinth was determined by the attitude of the Corinthians. When he was in Ephesus, he taught full-time, etc… I am not certain the “norm” should be determined by the most corrupt church.
I think the pastor working in other capacities probably should be done in some situations. However, I believe the problem is much deeper and your statement about our “attitude toward money” in many, many instances needs to change.
We have not understood “covetousness” at all. We have not understood that it is wanting what I have not been given. Instead, we think and equate “excellence” with the kind of car we drive, as mentioned. We want to be wealthy and we layer that with coverings which sound very holy, but in the heart it is just greed.
It takes money to run any ministry in the long run. The problem is not money – it is the “want” in the heart of people, pastor or not. Much of what the Lord calls the church to do requires the generous giving by its members, and it calls for them to have a pastor who is paid enough to do what needs to be done to allow the vision to unfold. Many churches do not have vision and have no plans to allow the Lord to give one. So why would we think they will have the right attitude toward money?
Sound teaching on the Biblical attitudes of wealth would be a good series for someone to do. However, it might not be popular enough to cover the cost of doing it – here we go again.
Iris,
I think you’ll discover that I’m in full agreement with your sentiments. No objections here.
I like the view revealed in Philippians. There the whole issue is saturated in the concept of partnership/fellowship/participation: koinonia. If we have cultivated authentic community in the bonds of love we really are “all in it togehter.” Scott W.’s triumverate is deeply rooted in self-in-isolation. The compulsions of the flesh really do weaken in the context of community. Money, as well as sex and power, loose it’s allure when everything is out in the open. I’d much rather have your regard, respect, love than your money.
Kyle said:
There the whole issue is saturated in the concept of partnership/fellowship/participation: koinonia. If we have cultivated authentic community in the bonds of love we really are “all in it togehter.”
That’s it!
“If you really want to ruin a good ministry relationship, just let money become the focus.”
Excellent point and excellent discussion. Interestingly, I can trace this back to being one of the foundational problems with the loss of interest in the modern church services. With everything ‘professionaled’ out and church being run both like a business and as good entertainment, the people of the church (church is the people) have nowhere to grow into becoming more like Christ. The average Christian isn’t trying to grow in his/her gifts but is encouraged with after church socials and weekly potlucks to bring food and ‘chat’. It’s no wonder the majority of Christians do not know how to study the Word of God.
TL,
Yes, that “professional” aspect of church has done us great harm. We’re not as organic and authentic. We have become sort of scripted, in an effor to please and entertain.
But I do agree with your brief yet acute analysis.
TC
You write…
“People either hold on too much to their monies and don’t want to give,
or if they faithfully give their monies to their churches,
the church leadership find some way to mismanage the money.”
Aren’t these people faithfully giving monies to “their corporations?” NOT ‘their churches.”
Today, in order to be called “A Church”
you go to the government and ask permission. Yes?
Is that in the Bible?
You go to the IRS and fill out a form, a 501 (c) 3.
If you are granted permission from the IRS you are now a:
501 (c) 3, non profit, tax deductible, religious corporation.
Is that in the Bible?
Should we call a corporation “The Church of God?”
Don’t think so.
Did Jesus shed “His Blood” for a corporation, a business,
a denomination, an institution, or an organization.
Jesus is the head of the body, (the ekklesia, the called out one’s) the church.
Church is people, the body of Christ. Yes?
Church is NOT a corporation, a business. Yes?
So the problem is “Corporation Leadership” mismanages the money.
TC – If you have this need to give money to “The Church”
I’ll send you my address, you can give the money to me
an ekklesia, a called out one of God.
All donations to “me” the body, the church, the temple of God,
are gladly accepted.
Acts 7:48
Howbeit the most High dwelleth not in temples made with hands…
1 Cor 3:16
Know ye not that ye are the temple of God…
1Co 6:19
What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost…
As I see it now, the problem is not the money and not the church.
The problem is “the corrupt religious system”
that masquerades as “The Church.”
Peace…
Amos,
The problem is chiefly with our attitude toward money in the ministry. What we need to do is correct this and teaching our people.
Yes, we need to forget about the bureaucracy that is destroy authentic and organic church.
Gary,
When I did those posts from “Pagan Christianity,” that was one of the many criticisms made by Viola and Barna, that I actually agreed with.
So true!
I just want to know what is the difference between a curse and a blessing, viewing all of the above against money or wealth