I saw an article in the paper the other day about Churchgoers who felt pressured into tithing more than they could afford. Some had taken out loans to meet their tithe amount. Disgraceful and saddening.
It reminds me of when I was younger and I got involved in a group that expected a 20% tithe. This was all fine and good until I got a pay rise. Then around they came demanding a 30% share of my extra income. Whilst I thought the idea of tithing was to give an amount based on how charitable I felt, obviously the new formula was deemed fairer by the administrators. Thus, it was no surprise that when I confessed to another pay rise the tithe was set at around 40%.
At this point I decided that perhaps we could debate this amount. At the time I had no family and no home. But I had plans for both. How could I save if I gave my earnings away?
This is where the threats came in. If I ceased my tithing, I would be in big trouble. Soul destroying stuff, and hell on earth would be my fate. This was back in the 80's, and this kind of carry on was pretty typical. Yet I could see richer people in the congregation paying much less. How fair was that? My protests earned strange retribution. I was now asked to donate an additional 10%. 1986 it was. A tough year. I considered leaving the country to escape, and yet I knew I would more than likely encounter the same issues elsewhere.
Eventually, I did leave the country. I came back though and found myself in the same situation.
But enough about paying taxes, the story was about "mandatory tithing".
If the newspaper article can be believed (and they rarely can) I too would condemn such practice as reading out names of donors and how much they donated. This is certainly not the practice in a Catholic Church, where envelopes are provided to allow anonymous donations. Some people prefer to pay by automatic payment, and may put nothing in the collection plate! Others toss in a few silver coins. So what? There is obviously no cultural pressure to give beyond ones means.
Personally, I am fortunate enough to be able to donate a fair amount of money. However, only a part of that sum finds it's way to my local parish, as there are several other charities I support. There is no need to justify this to my Church. I wonder if the pressure some people feel to donate more they can afford is self-imposed? The Church asks, but that doesn't necessarily mean it demands.
Tithing is a good thing, when it is done from the spirit of charity, not a sense of obligation. It may be a duty of Christians to help others less fortunate (as it is to all people) but the motivation must be as caritas - "love in action".
Give what you can (which can be in time rather than pure money), but no so much you become in need of charity yourself.
It reminds me of when I was younger and I got involved in a group that expected a 20% tithe. This was all fine and good until I got a pay rise. Then around they came demanding a 30% share of my extra income. Whilst I thought the idea of tithing was to give an amount based on how charitable I felt, obviously the new formula was deemed fairer by the administrators. Thus, it was no surprise that when I confessed to another pay rise the tithe was set at around 40%.
At this point I decided that perhaps we could debate this amount. At the time I had no family and no home. But I had plans for both. How could I save if I gave my earnings away?
This is where the threats came in. If I ceased my tithing, I would be in big trouble. Soul destroying stuff, and hell on earth would be my fate. This was back in the 80's, and this kind of carry on was pretty typical. Yet I could see richer people in the congregation paying much less. How fair was that? My protests earned strange retribution. I was now asked to donate an additional 10%. 1986 it was. A tough year. I considered leaving the country to escape, and yet I knew I would more than likely encounter the same issues elsewhere.
Eventually, I did leave the country. I came back though and found myself in the same situation.
But enough about paying taxes, the story was about "mandatory tithing".
If the newspaper article can be believed (and they rarely can) I too would condemn such practice as reading out names of donors and how much they donated. This is certainly not the practice in a Catholic Church, where envelopes are provided to allow anonymous donations. Some people prefer to pay by automatic payment, and may put nothing in the collection plate! Others toss in a few silver coins. So what? There is obviously no cultural pressure to give beyond ones means.
Personally, I am fortunate enough to be able to donate a fair amount of money. However, only a part of that sum finds it's way to my local parish, as there are several other charities I support. There is no need to justify this to my Church. I wonder if the pressure some people feel to donate more they can afford is self-imposed? The Church asks, but that doesn't necessarily mean it demands.
Tithing is a good thing, when it is done from the spirit of charity, not a sense of obligation. It may be a duty of Christians to help others less fortunate (as it is to all people) but the motivation must be as caritas - "love in action".
Give what you can (which can be in time rather than pure money), but no so much you become in need of charity yourself.
Zen, I can assure you that this does happen. IN NZ it seems to happen mostly in the recent arrival pacifica community. These people are under pressure to send money home to support the extended family left behind, and to tithe. It doesn't leave much some weeks, and this is why you will see a lot of the pay day type loan companies operating in areas where there are large pacifica communities.
ReplyDeleteI note that at least one news report accused Brian Tamaki of preaching hell fire and brimstone as the fate for those who do not give until it hurts, and Tamaki has made no denial or demand for correction.
And, I know anecdotal evidence is no evidence, BUT I did once employ a Mormon who asked for a payrise as after tithing he didn't have enogh left for the family. Some time after he left my employ, his wife was jailed for stealing from her employer - her excuse was she needed it to support the family.
oh, and those preachers who demand tithes seem to know less of the bible than I - what was that bit about left and right hands keeping their noses out of each other's business?
ReplyDeleteThat foolish Mormon women - fancy blaming tithing when she could just as easily blame payroll taxes, rent, GST, electricity prices and so on.
ReplyDeleteWhat makes a person blame tithing when there are so many better targets?
Simple solution, renounce these toy religions and become a Catholic. No monetary membership joining fee either, and sounds like some of the new members would be eligible for charity.
The main you point raise from my pov is that we give to different causes. I'm committed to my church but I give to several other Christian groups as well and feel very committed to them. There is a tithing debate website www.tithingdebate.com which explores it in greater detail. It is the forced giving, that makes the practise almost cult-ish in some churches, ie Destiny, if it is true. Giving is to be with joy. The only reason it should be monitored is so we can claim a rebate....!!!!!
ReplyDeletejoey hill, you are obviously not of the same mind as the great Joe Hill.
ReplyDeleteWhat rebate are you claiming? Do you mean a tax deduction? Why should the community subsidise your giving, and does god approve of you giving so you can obtain a benefit? That is not charity.
Churches already get far too lenient treatment from tax.
Zen, there may be no monetary joining fee to be a catholic, but there are other costs.
ReplyDeleteAs a catholic you lose your right to choose when to have sex, and with whom.
You must give up belief in rationality and science and accept in its place dogma and myth.
Did some-one poke you in the eye with a stick? I've seen a cyclops less one-eyed than your perspective.
ReplyDeleteThere is no need to give up rationality and science - completely different issue to having faith, and very compatible.
As a Catholic, I still have my "right" to have sex with whom I want. That happens to be my wife.
As for the when, well if you don't learn to restrain yourself whilst doing the shopping in Woolworths you will find the embarrassment of being filmed on New Zealand's funniest security camera video's a valuable lesson.
And how is this a "right"? I don't see pedophiles, rapists, people with boring personalities, a small proportion of bacterial bloggers (hopefully present company excluded), and stalkers of Paris Hilton lined up at the United Nations explaining their rights to having sex with whomever they wanted being denied.
Why should the community subsidise your giving
ReplyDeleteWhy should the community tax you on money you don't have? Money that has been given to the community comes in several ways - through tax, through spending and through charity. The government has decided to tax people less (high earners still pay 6% tax on their donations as the maximum rate of claim remains 33%) on money they don't have, given it finds it's way into the community. Be brave about it.
and does god approve of you giving so you can obtain a benefit? That is not charity.
Not being taxed on money you have given away is not a benefit. It's neutral. Being taxed on it could just as easily be seen as a punishment. Charity is giving. Claiming a portion of the tax back is not being greedy. Particularly if it then enables you to donate more than you would have otherwise been able...
You are looking so hard to find fault, you come across as extremely uncharitable. Lighten up.
The work many churches do in the community, Camphylo-whatsit, is admirable. I'm sure God is extremely pleased that I can give financially to help that work here, and overseas but I doubt too many people have a tax rebate in mind when they write out a cheque. It's just a nice thing that happens every end of financial year. Long may it continue.
ReplyDeleteLove and peace.