[Lightly edited version of piece written for our monthly church magazine.]
I have been concerned for some years about the use in the church of the term ‘giving’ to refer to
our contributions to church funds. Giving is a wonderful thing to do – giving
presents to people we love, giving money to causes we find important, giving
hospitality to friends and those in need, and giving support to friends.
There’s been a lot of talk recently about the idea of the ‘gift economy’,
sharing with others without expecting a return. And the Bible is full of
encouragements to give, especially to the poor and those on the margins.
However, giving is essentially voluntary. However highly we
regard it, it’s an optional extra, on top of our other spending. If we don’t
give things, we might feel bad, and those to whom we normally give might feel
bad, but we have no sense of obligation to give.
I feel this is an unhelpful idea to think about the
contributions we make to the finances of the church. I would draw an analogy
with a household. To keep a household going requires certain costs – housing,
utilities, food, communications and so on. Those members of the household who
are able to contribute financially to these costs do so not in the form of
‘giving to the household’ but because it is necessary to do so, to keep the
household running.
I suggest that it would be helpful to think in the same way
of our financial contributions to the church being something that we do as a
result of our membership of the church, an obligation not an act of generosity.
Clearly each of us has a different ability to pay, given our income and
necessary expenses, and some of us may be at our financial limits (especially
given the current state of the economy), and nobody should feel the need to
contribute more than they can afford. And many people contribute in other ways
than money.
Ultimately we each need to think hard about whether we could increase our level
of contribution.
