Anti-Mustachian Churches

[Gone Fishing]

Seems like every church in town is adding a "Life Center" which generally amounts to a multi-million dollar basketball gym and/or a auditorium style sanctuary outfitted with stage lighting and concert quality sound system when the old sactuary was under utilized to begin with and there was a YMCA right down the road.  I guess conspicuous consumption in the church is nothing new, just look at the over the top cathedrals all around the world built hundreds of years ago.  I love the mustachian approach many startup churches use, meeting in school auditoriums on the weekends when they are not usually used, but alas, most of these startups only stay there long enough to scrape together the cash needed to fund their own pile of bricks...   

[Thegoblinchief]

One of the reasons I felt weird tithing when I was religious, and always criticize tithing when people are in debt - and vehemently disagree that tithing is "charity".

It's also a minor reason that helped me become atheist.

[LibrarIan]

One of the reasons I felt weird tithing when I was religious, and always criticize tithing when people are in debt - and vehemently disagree that tithing is "charity".

It's also a minor reason that helped me become atheist.

This. Many times it's hard to know where the tithes are going. Once your church starts building huge rec centers and stages though, you'll know. Churches enjoy tax-free existence comparatively and then turn around, take money from its members and buy themselves nicer things to appeal to a more massive audience who will in turn give them more money. They are nothing more than capitalist enterprises exploiting an ancient text and the good intentions of attendees. There are exceptions of course, but damn, Christian places of worship have it good in this country (USA).

[GuitarStv]

My bike is my temple.  It owns my soul.  I religiously devote time, energy, and money to it.  Using it is part of a larger strategy that makes the world a better place.  Where the fuck is my tax exemption?  Where are my charity write-offs?

[Thegoblinchief]

My bike is my temple.  It owns my soul.  I religiously devote time, energy, and money to it.  Using it is part of a larger strategy that makes the world a better place.  Where the fuck is my tax exemption?  Where are my charity write-offs?

Fuck yeah!

[hybrid]

It has been noted in studies that conservatives give more to charities than liberals. If donations to ones house of worship were teased out, I've often wondered if the same would hold true? I agree with Thegoblinchief, I don't equate giving money to a house of worship quite the same as a donation to a charity whose sole (rather than soul!) mission is focused on providing a good or service to those in need. I think of a house of worship more along the lines of a "club membership". A club that may (or may not) do traditional charity work, granted, but far less efficiently than a food bank does.

An old and dear, but now distant, friend of mine tithed for years and when he hit a rough patch in life I discovered after the fact that he lost his home to foreclosure. I am certain that he, being a man of faith, would argue that a house in the here and now means precious little in the grand scheme. I, not being a man of faith, naturally have very different feelings about it.   

[GuitarStv]

It has been noted in studies that conservatives give more to charities than liberals. If donations to ones house of worship were teased out, I've often wondered if the same would hold true? I agree with Thegoblinchief, I don't equate giving money to a house of worship quite the same as a donation to a charity whose sole (rather than soul!) mission is focused on providing a good or service to those in need. I think of a house of worship more along the lines of a "club membership". A club that may (or may not) do traditional charity work, granted, but far less efficiently than a food bank does.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/10/21/study-conservatives-and-liberals-are-equally-charitable-but-they-give-to-different-charities/

[MrsPete]

The real question is whether these things are being used. 

Our church did recently build a large building that includes a large room that is usually a basketball court . . . but if you draw the curtains around the edges and hide the baskets, it becomes a large multi-purpose room with a stage on one side.  You can open a storage closet and wheel out either bleachers or tables/chairs.  The building does include a large kitchen that makes it easy to serve large numbers, and upstairs is a large facility for the teen youth group.  It also includes several smaller rooms for smaller group meetings.  However, while it is a large, comfortable, solidly-built building, it is not overly-fancy as you imply.  The exterior is brick, which is a good long-term choice, and the interior is done with tile floors and simple woodwork.  The furnishings are good quality, but not overly expensive. 

Thing is, the place is used almost constantly.  We have something like 75 activities per week happening on the church campus:  The senior citizens have a work-out several mornings a week, and they do group meals and community service out of that building.  The women's groups meet every other week for crafty-evenings in the smaller rooms.  The youth group meets twice a week.  The kitchen is used (at a minimum) every Sunday morning for breakfast, every Wednesday night for dinner, and every weekday for the adjacent childcare facility.  The building is opened to the community for basketball (for free, and not overcrowded like our YMCA).  Also, the larger facility allows the church to bring in well-known singing groups, which everyone has enjoyed.  And obviously the building is used for special occasions -- like weddings -- and the nicer building is attracting non-members to rent, which is covering a large amount of the cost.  At Halloween and New Year's -- times when kids can find mischief to get into -- the building is used for wholesome activities, and the community is invited to take part.  The choir and the men's groups still use the old facilities in the sanctuary building, as do several other groups.  Those are just the things that occur to me off the top of my head -- the building is used! 

Yes, it's true that churches often begin by meeting in schools, etc.  I was a part of such a group as a child, and I have wonderful memories of those times.  However, while a church can certainly meet in a school auditorium on Sunday morning, it can't use the facilities for all the outreach and group activities that it should facilitate during the week -- like I said, over 75 different activities happen on our church's campus each week, and that can't happen if you're renting a school.  Also, a school building falls short in several ways:  It doesn't provide a nursery (or diapering facilities) for the small children.  It doesn't allow the Sunday School teachers to store materials in their classrooms (and this matters most to the teachers of young children, who typically have cabinets of crayons and other craft supplies at their disposal).  It doesn't allow a place for the choir to store robes, sheet music, or instruments.  It doesn't provide for places for the coffee pots and doughnuts, and a place for socializing.  It doesn't allow for hymn books to be left on the pews.  It means that the pastoral staff must arrive in the wee hours of the morning before a service to set up a makeshift podium.  A rented school building can provide a church only slightly more than an old-fashioned tent meeting. 

One more thing that matters:  Having a place of its own creates a sense of ownership and community within the group.  If you aren't part of such a group, you might underestimate the importance of that emotional bond. 

If a church is building just to build, just to impress people, just to show off, I'd say their behavior is similar to that of the traders whom Jesus ran out of the temple because they were in a place of worship for profit; however, it's not fair to assume that a church that builds a nice building is automatically on the same track. 

[hybrid]

Sounds like a very nice place MrsPete!

[MrsPete]

I don't equate giving money to a house of worship quite the same as a donation to a charity whose sole (rather than soul!) mission is focused on providing a good or service to those in need. I think of a house of worship more along the lines of a "club membership". A club that may (or may not) do traditional charity work, granted, but far less efficiently than a food bank does.

I think you'd have to look at the individual church to say yes or no to that. 

Just this summer our church has collected yard sale items and opened the building for a "free yard sale" to anyone in the community.  Twice a week it has provided lunch to school children who during the school year get "free lunch".  It has had two Saturdays during which teens and able adults have gathered together to go into the community and provide yard work and home repairs to needy people.  During one of those days the youth group focused solely on building handicapped ramps.  Under the direction of the youth leader, they spent several Wednesday nights learning to build them, and then in one Saturday they built several throughout the community.  The church also sponsored two mission trips during the summer.  Individual Sunday School classes also took on individual service projects throughout the community. 

Beyond the individual church, the governing body, the Southern Baptist convention, has put into place emergency teams to help in times of crisis.  When Katrina hit years ago, the #1 and #2 groups who came in and helped were, of course, FEMA and the Red Cross.  #3 was the North Carolina Baptist Southern Men's Association.  After that, the convention decided it was time to form emergency teams to be prepared for future emergencies.  They built moveable tractor trailer trucks that can carry kitchens and laundry facilities into emergency areas, and they trained groups to work in these highly-efficient facilities.  They trained groups of people also to help with search/rescue needs, yard work clean up, and other emergency needs.  These groups train regularly and are ready to go any time.  If you'd like to know more about this, check this link:  http://www.baptistsonmission.org/projects/type/disaster-relief.aspx

Don't assume that people are going into churches, closing the door, and saying, "Good for us.  We don't care about the rest of you." 

[Bob W]

I live near the buckle of the bible belt and often sat in church wondering what good these 300 souls could be doing each Sunday if they were not in church.  I finally figured that their combined labor could literally build a Habitat for Humanity home every week.

So our Baptist Church endeavored to build the dreaded multipurpose center, primarily to attract young folks and compete with other churches doing the same.  (It is a business after all)

A few years ago they struck a deal with the YMCA which now uses that space.  So I guess it was a good thing after all. 

There really is no need in our communities to ever build new school classroom spaces as there are enough empty Sunday School classrooms to accommodate any new students for years to come.  But sadly,  a bond issue just passed to construct new classrooms.   

So, yes it is true,  Church Elders and School Board Members love debt and fancy structures as much as the rest of the people do. 

[hybrid]

Don't assume that people are going into churches, closing the door, and saying, "Good for us.  We don't care about the rest of you."

I certainly wasn't. No need to be defensive. Suffice to say that the Red Cross, whose sole mission is charity work, has an inherent efficiency advantage over any organization that does charity work along with a great many other things.   

[rosaz]

I live near the buckle of the bible belt and often sat in church wondering what good these 300 souls could be doing each Sunday if they were not in church.  I finally figured that their combined labor could literally build a Habitat for Humanity home every week.

The same could be said of the tens of thousands of readers each taking five minutes to read MMM's latest post. I guess we all need to stop sitting around and go build some houses!

Most people don't not volunteer more because they literally couldn't squeeze in the time - they don't volunteer more because they don't care enough to cut back on their own recreational time. If a person goes to church for an hour and that motivates him to spend an hour volunteering (not saying it always does, but for many people that is the case), isn't that better than if he had those two hours to volunteer in theory, but actually just sat around watching TV?

[hybrid]

I live near the buckle of the bible belt and often sat in church wondering what good these 300 souls could be doing each Sunday if they were not in church.  I finally figured that their combined labor could literally build a Habitat for Humanity home every week.

The same could be said of the tens of thousands of readers each taking five minutes to read MMM's latest post. I guess we all need to stop sitting around and go build some houses!

Most people don't not volunteer more because they literally couldn't squeeze in the time - they don't volunteer more because they don't care enough to cut back on their own recreational time. If a person goes to church for an hour and that motivates him to spend an hour volunteering (not saying it always does, but for many people that is the case), isn't that better than if he had those two hours to volunteer in theory, but actually just sat around watching TV?

I think you have a valid point along the lines of the old potential vs. reality arguments. Potentially, everyone could do more charity work. In reality, churches do in fact get a number of people off their butts (who might not otherwise) to actually get the work done.

[LibrarIan]

I live near the buckle of the bible belt and often sat in church wondering what good these 300 souls could be doing each Sunday if they were not in church.  I finally figured that their combined labor could literally build a Habitat for Humanity home every week.

The same could be said of the tens of thousands of readers each taking five minutes to read MMM's latest post. I guess we all need to stop sitting around and go build some houses!

Most people don't not volunteer more because they literally couldn't squeeze in the time - they don't volunteer more because they don't care enough to cut back on their own recreational time. If a person goes to church for an hour and that motivates him to spend an hour volunteering (not saying it always does, but for many people that is the case), isn't that better than if he had those two hours to volunteer in theory, but actually just sat around watching TV?

I think the point Bob was trying to make with that line was that while in church, you're busy praying to a god to help those in need while you could actually be helping those in need. Sure, I could stop writing this comment and go help those in need, but I'm also not asking someone else to do it for me here. I don't rely on someone/something else to get things done. I just do it.

[MrsSmitty]

I attended a very anti-mustachian church as a kid. I remember thinking it was so weird when my mom gave them a bunch of money every week and the pastor lived in a nicer house than we could ever afford.

[hybrid]

I attended a very anti-mustachian church as a kid. I remember thinking it was so weird when my mom gave them a bunch of money every week and the pastor lived in a nicer house than we could ever afford.

I used to golf at a country club with a very nice pastor who was fairly well off. I always found that a bit odd. I suppose I should look at him in the same way as one might look at a well paid psychologist. His job was in part to help people, and he was well compensated for his efforts by those people (just like the psychologist). He has a job just like everyone else, right?

Still..... I also think of the crooked televangelist who clearly was out to fleece his flock for his personal gain. I guess the lesson here is just like anything else where you part with your money - and buyer beware of being scammed.

[RetiredAt63]

My garden is mine - and I do spend a lot of time on my knees there  ;-)

My bike is my temple.  It owns my soul.  I religiously devote time, energy, and money to it.  Using it is part of a larger strategy that makes the world a better place.  Where the fuck is my tax exemption?  Where are my charity write-offs?

[rosaz]

I think the point Bob was trying to make with that line was that while in church, you're busy praying to a god to help those in need while you could actually be helping those in need. Sure, I could stop writing this comment and go help those in need, but I'm also not asking someone else to do it for me here. I don't rely on someone/something else to get things done. I just do it.

I guess I would say it depends on the church. I'm Catholic - we're not known for being particularly modern or new-agey - but far more of the service I attend has to do with how to overcome our self-imposed obstacles to leading the good life (being close to God, forgiving our brothers, being generous and loving with our neighbors) than with asking God to solve our problems for us. But of course, every church will be different.

[soccerluvof4]

I have been surprised where I live that the one thing even since the economy dumped in 2008 that has been on the rise is the amount of new Churches being built. I am talking too about the Mega churches. I bet a half a dozen plus in a ten mile radius of me and probably closer to a dozen.

[justajane]

I'm lucky to attend a smallish church that is very transparent about their finances, and I'm realizing that this is very rare. Every year we vote on an itemized budget that includes the pastors' salaries, building expenses, and benevolences. It is down to the dollar, so while it is perhaps possible the money is going towards other things, it is unlikely.

My family doesn't tithe, and I think the church in general is coming to grips with the fact that many Gen Xers, Yers, and millennials do not have the same conviction about the tithe that our parents and grandparents did. Perhaps I'm just trying to mask my own unwillingness to give, but if I give the expected 10%, we would have no money to give to any other charities. In essence, the church would be dictating all of our charitable giving. This is problematic for me on two levels. #1. I believe in secular organizations like NPR and other local organizations that provide concrete value to my community. #2. I have a problem with a couple of the Christian organizations that my church supports. It's not enough for me to want to leave the church, but I would prefer not to give my money to these organizations. But since I know I am in the minority in my church, I never bring it up.

I think of a house of worship more along the lines of a "club membership". A club that may (or may not) do traditional charity work, granted, but far less efficiently than a food bank does.

I see your point, and sometimes I also think that church giving should not be tax deductible. But the reality is that religious communities (including the church) are stabilizing forces in society. They provide many public services, including the use of their buildings for many communal events (AA, voting, etc.). In theory (although sadly not in practice sometimes) they minister to the poor and the distraught.

Having said that, many of these megachurches make a mockery of the values of the church. The prosperity gospel is abhorrent, and I cannot for the life of me understand how someone could fork over their hard earned money to church where the pastor drove a Bentley or lived in an ostentatious house. Don't they realize that is technically the congregants' money? I don't expect pastors to take a vow of poverty (necessarily), but there's a middle ground. Our head pastor (to a congregation of around 150-200) makes around $75,000 with an additional housing, car, and insurance allowance. I'm okay with that, because he is essentially on call all the time to attend to the needs and tragedies of our congregation. And he is nearing retirement and has been doing this his whole adult life. 

[Runge]

A big issue is that nowhere in the New Testament (NT) does it say to give 10%. The 10% comes from the Old Testament (OT) law which for Christians isn't required. That's the whole point of it being call the OT (Testament is synonymous with covenant). The OT is included in the Bible to show what all lead up to Christ's coming.

Back to tithing, in the NT, it actually says to give as much as your heart's content.

2 Corinthians 9:6-7 ESV

The point is this: whoever sows sparingly will also reap sparingly, and whoever sows bountifully will also reap bountifully. Each one must give as he has decided in his heart, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.

Other Reference:
http://www.gotquestions.org/tithing-Christian.html

There's also plenty of other resources out there if you're willing to go through them.

ETA: Don't let people bully you into giving more than you're comfortable with. And you can give to other charities instead of a church. If you don't trust a church to handle your money, then don't give it to them. Give to an organization that you are confident your money will be treated with respect and spent effectively.

[LibrarIan]

A big issue is that nowhere in the New Testament (NT) does it say to give 10%. The 10% comes from the Old Testament (OT) law which for Christians isn't required. That's the whole point of it being call the OT (Testament is synonymous with covenant). The OT is included in the Bible to show what all lead up to Christ's coming.

If this is true, I wish all of Christianity would get on board with it. It's humorous to me that so many different sects fall under the banner of Christianity but they can't even agree on which books of the Bible to use as reference. I've actually heard some speakers essentially say the OT is invalidated by the NT and then go on and condemn homosexuals using the OT without missing a beat.

Anyway, my solution is not to give any money to churches and give directly to charities that I research. If they end up misusing funds, all I can say is I tried my best.

[dycker1978]

My bike is my temple.  It owns my soul.  I religiously devote time, energy, and money to it.  Using it is part of a larger strategy that makes the world a better place.  Where the fuck is my tax exemption?  Where are my charity write-offs?

+1

[dycker1978]

I attended a very anti-mustachian church as a kid. I remember thinking it was so weird when my mom gave them a bunch of money every week and the pastor lived in a nicer house than we could ever afford.

I used to golf at a country club with a very nice pastor who was fairly well off. I always found that a bit odd. I suppose I should look at him in the same way as one might look at a well paid psychologist. His job was in part to help people, and he was well compensated for his efforts by those people (just like the psychologist). He has a job just like everyone else, right?

Still..... I also think of the crooked televangelist who clearly was out to fleece his flock for his personal gain. I guess the lesson here is just like anything else where you part with your money - and buyer beware of being scammed.

What about the vatican... the church is supposed to help people get out of poverty... but yet the vatican is one of the wealthist places.  The church could do good, but unfortunatly most of them dont really

[surfhb]

Benny Hinn has a Leer Jet called Dove One.    I've been inside since my friend works for Leer.   It's very nice.  ;)

Check out this video on YouTube:

http://youtu.be/cku497rURF8

[FIPurpose]

Actually OT law mentions 3 tithes

1. The Levitical, or sacred tithe (Num. 18: 21, 24).

2. The tithe of the feasts (Deut. 14:22-27).

3. The tithe for the poor (Deut. 14:28, 29).

#3 only happens once every 3 years. So anyone arbitrarily assigning a tithe to Christianity is doing all a disservice. I don't believe that you must tithe to your church, but I personally want to give away 10% of my income each year as a discipline for myself. By 10% I only count my take home pay. Since I plan to do the same in retirement.

At the moment I like what my church does and how it spends its money. Like others , I attend a small local church of about 150, and am part of the meetings on how to spend the money. We don't have a large auditorium or anything. We have a building that the church has owned for about 55 years. (So probably cheaper than renting.), but we really only worship in it. (It's a smallish building with no kitchen or basketball court. It's an auditorium that could seat about 175 and about 6 10x15 classrooms. It would be worth some money, but it isn't in a prime neighborhood or anything like that. (Maybe a good thing, but there have been gunshots fired at the building before from a nearby drug dispute)

I believe that giving your money away even while in accumulation phase can be mustachian or at the very least stoic. It helps remind me that investment accumulation is not the mosts important thing in life. being human is.

[DoubleDown]

Huh, I haven't noticed this trend where we live. The churches I've gone to seem to be pretty modest with spending money, definitely not constructing basketball courts or anything like that. They're also very transparent with the budget, everyone gets to see where the money is going and can volunteer to serve on the committees that decide how the money is spent. I agree that I would have a problem seeing the church spend extravagantly.

Man, Benny Hinn and others like him are a travesty.

[Constance Noring]

A big issue is that nowhere in the New Testament (NT) does it say to give 10%. The 10% comes from the Old Testament (OT) law which for Christians isn't required. That's the whole point of it being call the OT (Testament is synonymous with covenant). The OT is included in the Bible to show what all lead up to Christ's coming.

This is what's known as supersessionist theology, and it's based in statements made by Paul in his letters regarding the status of Gentile converts to the Jesus movement in Judaism. And Paul does argue in several places that Gentiles should exempt from some of the more hardcore applications of the Torah if they wanted to be because they lacked the cultural grounding to really embrace them, and he would rather have an uncircumcised believer than someone turned away from the faith for its lack.

That being said, the problem with supersessionism is that its taken those statements and turned them into a pass to ignore the Old Testament scriptures if it suits us, and here's where that gets sticky. For one, at the time of Jesus's ministry, the OT was the scriptures, and it is from those works that He established His status as the Messiah. Additionally, He repeatedly stated that His purpose is the fulfillment of the Torah (not its abolishment), and refers back to it frequently to provide definitions for both sin and righteousness. After all, "Love your neighbor as yourself" is a Torah commandment.

And then there's Paul. Paul routinely pointed his (Gentile) audience back to the Torah and Jewish scriptures, because while he would rather have an uncircumcised believer than no believer at all, those believers were still be grounded in a framework that already existed. So declaring the OT null and void, or at best glossing over the parts that 'don't apply to us' shortchanges the power of the complete scripture, and keeps us from wrestling with it in all its complexity.

ETA: Don't let people bully you into giving more than you're comfortable with. And you can give to other charities instead of a church. If you don't trust a church to handle your money, then don't give it to them. Give to an organization that you are confident your money will be treated with respect and spent effectively.

All the above being said, I would completely agree with that statement, though I would add that if your church spends its money in ways you can't approve of, try to help change that, rather than just not giving at all.

[LibrarIan]

Don't forget about Matthew 5:17 from J-Dizzle himself: "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them." So this whole picking and choosing things from the OT is hilarious.

[Runge]

A big issue is that nowhere in the New Testament (NT) does it say to give 10%. The 10% comes from the Old Testament (OT) law which for Christians isn't required. That's the whole point of it being call the OT (Testament is synonymous with covenant). The OT is included in the Bible to show what all lead up to Christ's coming.

This is what's known as supersessionist theology, and it's based in statements made by Paul in his letters regarding the status of Gentile converts to the Jesus movement in Judaism. And Paul does argue in several places that Gentiles should exempt from some of the more hardcore applications of the Torah if they wanted to be because they lacked the cultural grounding to really embrace them, and he would rather have an uncircumcised believer than someone turned away from the faith for its lack.

That being said, the problem with supersessionism is that its taken those statements and turned them into a pass to ignore the Old Testament scriptures if it suits us, and here's where that gets sticky. For one, at the time of Jesus's ministry, the OT was the scriptures, and it is from those works that He established His status as the Messiah. Additionally, He repeatedly stated that His purpose is the fulfillment of the Torah (not its abolishment), and refers back to it frequently to provide definitions for both sin and righteousness. After all, "Love your neighbor as yourself" is a Torah commandment.

And then there's Paul. Paul routinely pointed his (Gentile) audience back to the Torah and Jewish scriptures, because while he would rather have an uncircumcised believer than no believer at all, those believers were still be grounded in a framework that already existed. So declaring the OT null and void, or at best glossing over the parts that 'don't apply to us' shortchanges the power of the complete scripture, and keeps us from wrestling with it in all its complexity.

ETA: Don't let people bully you into giving more than you're comfortable with. And you can give to other charities instead of a church. If you don't trust a church to handle your money, then don't give it to them. Give to an organization that you are confident your money will be treated with respect and spent effectively.

All the above being said, I would completely agree with that statement, though I would add that if your church spends its money in ways you can't approve of, try to help change that, rather than just not giving at all.

Aren't the vast majority of us considered Gentiles as well if the definition of Gentile is someone who's not Jewish? So then doesn't Paul's argument that Gentiles should be exempt from some of the more hardcore applications of the Torah also apply to us? 2000 years later we don't have the cultural grounding to embrace many of the Laws in the Torah.

I didn't take the time to fully develop my thoughts on OT vs. NT, but they do align with what you said. I never said we should ignore/abolish the OT, in fact I believe that we should also do our due diligence in learning as much as we can. It helps put the events of 2000 years ago into a much better perspective culturally, contextually, and spiritually.

[YK-Phil]

My garden is mine - and I do spend a lot of time on my knees there  ;-)

This is funny and very profound at the same time.

[kyanamerinas]

I attended a very anti-mustachian church as a kid. I remember thinking it was so weird when my mom gave them a bunch of money every week and the pastor lived in a nicer house than we could ever afford.

I used to golf at a country club with a very nice pastor who was fairly well off. I always found that a bit odd. I suppose I should look at him in the same way as one might look at a well paid psychologist. His job was in part to help people, and he was well compensated for his efforts by those people (just like the psychologist). He has a job just like everyone else, right?

please don't judge by appearances.
my father is a pastor. my mum works full time at a well-paid job. despite this, if we dare(d) have a holiday or buy a 'new' (5+ year old) car (to replace scrap-only value car), we get mutterings of 'we're clearly paying him too much'.

[FIPurpose]

I attended a very anti-mustachian church as a kid. I remember thinking it was so weird when my mom gave them a bunch of money every week and the pastor lived in a nicer house than we could ever afford.

I used to golf at a country club with a very nice pastor who was fairly well off. I always found that a bit odd. I suppose I should look at him in the same way as one might look at a well paid psychologist. His job was in part to help people, and he was well compensated for his efforts by those people (just like the psychologist). He has a job just like everyone else, right?

please don't judge by appearances.
my father is a pastor. my mum works full time at a well-paid job. despite this, if we dare(d) have a holiday or buy a 'new' (5+ year old) car (to replace scrap-only value car), we get mutterings of 'we're clearly paying him too much'.

Yep any charity work that is paid is always over scrutinized. My thought has always been that preachers should have a pay similar to a teacher of similar experience in your area. Maybe more if he has specialized experience in counseling or some other field. So we pay our preacher about 55k with about 4 years experience. Realize that preachers also have to self insure, and usually have no job benefits beyond the occasional church that has a preacher house.

[justajane]

The theological discussion of the tithe is interesting. My church's budget is solidly built around the tithe, i.e. it relies on most of its members tithing to meet the budget. This is why we have run into financial trouble the last couple of years. Earlier in 2014 we received an e-mail that we were way behind on projected giving. The church did a few Mustachian cuts. One was to cut our landline in the church building, which is rather obsolete in an age when everyone has cell phone. Our office is located in another adjoining house. Well, the only way we dug ourselves out of the hole was that someone made a large anonymous donation. Then my heart sank when I saw that the elders had decided to make a 1% increase across the entire budget for the next fiscal year. How very shortsighted and un-Mustachian! I didn't have a problem with the staff getting a raise, since they haven't had one in several years and actually took a pay cut during the Great Recession. I also think the 1% increase needed to be made to operational expenses to keep up with increases. But benevolences??? They make up a third of our budget, which in my opinion is way too much. We are a small church that supports at least a dozen missionaries and over two dozen other organizations. I was shocked that we made a budget increase for all that based on one anonymous donation.

I fear our church is traveling towards a financial crisis. Their heart might be in the right place, but it won't matter when they don't have the money to pay the bills.

Regarding donations, I do think it is incumbent on all regular attenders to give some money to the church. You are, after all, presumably getting a value out of your attendance, and it costs money to pay staff and keep a building heated and cooled.

[EricL]

Christian churches used to give a lot to the poor.  It was a big selling point and became huge when the Roman Empire bottomed out.  Saint Augustine of Hippo would pillage the church treasury (presumably filled by tithes) to help the poor.  When that ran out he'd melt the gold and silver candelabra, cups, etc in the church to make up the difference.  When that ran out he would solemnly proclaim the church had given all it could give.  (Though for humor's sake I like to think of him giving Porky the Pig's Looney Tune send off)

More humor.  A speechwriter in the Carter Administration had the same name as a famous economist, Milton Friedman.  One day a lawyer called from a major Protestant denomination.  They had several hundred million dollars in investments and the lawyer wanted the economist's advice where to invest it to preserve it from a poor economy.  The speechwriter asked "Have you tried giving it to the poor?"  This caused the lawyer to ask "Is this the real Milton Friedman?"  The speechwriter replied "Is this the real Christian church?"

[solon]

Forget food banks, job searching, rent support, transitional housing, and all the other things churches do to support the community. If a church did NONE of that stuff, it would still be a valuable asset in a community.

My pastor is a sounding-board, counselor, coach, and a friend in time of crisis. I've called on him many times for spiritual, physical, and even logistical support. And he does the same for many other people. I would have to be a super self-centered poopy head not to support a church that provided a resource like that for me.

[J Boogie]

I attended a very anti-mustachian church as a kid. I remember thinking it was so weird when my mom gave them a bunch of money every week and the pastor lived in a nicer house than we could ever afford.

I used to golf at a country club with a very nice pastor who was fairly well off. I always found that a bit odd. I suppose I should look at him in the same way as one might look at a well paid psychologist. His job was in part to help people, and he was well compensated for his efforts by those people (just like the psychologist). He has a job just like everyone else, right?

Still..... I also think of the crooked televangelist who clearly was out to fleece his flock for his personal gain. I guess the lesson here is just like anything else where you part with your money - and buyer beware of being scammed.

What about the vatican... the church is supposed to help people get out of poverty... but yet the vatican is one of the wealthist places.  The church could do good, but unfortunatly most of them dont really

Why would the Vatican being a wealthy place preclude it from helping people out of poverty? A brief glance at wikipedia could shed some light on the reality of the situation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church#Social_services

There are serious accountability issues in areas like banking and molestation coverups, and there are valid arguments as to how the Catholic Church has not been a good steward of its donations, but to cite its wealth as evidence of its lack of giving is failing to using critical thinking skills.

Its true that the Church could quite easily sell off its assets (Think Sistine Chapel, Pieta, etc)to private art collectors, and then feed the starving with those proceeds.  But the trade off has consequences.  Inevitably, there will still be starvation and poverty, and the public will never again have access to the historical buildings and artifacts of the Catholic Church.  Like Indiana Jones says, "It belongs in a museum!"

But maybe you did think that through and you don't place a high value on historical artifacts available to the public.  I don't mean to assume.  I just mean to challenge oversimplifications.

Disclosure - I am a Catholic.  I am a fan of the message of simplicity that our new Pope is preaching and I hope our systematic institutional shortcomings (to put it mildly) don't keep you from seeing the example set by countless Catholics throughout history who have lived simply serving others.  IE Dorothy Day, Oscar Romero, Maximilian Kolbe, etc.

[EricL]

Benny Hinn has a Leer Jet called Dove One.    I've been inside since my friend works for Leer.   It's very nice.  ;)

Check out this video on YouTube:

http://youtu.be/cku497rURF8

For years whenever I saw Benny Hinn in the TV Guide I always thought they were misspelling Benny Hill.

[dcheesi]

My parents' church  kept a separate building fund when they wanted a new worship hall. Of course they pushed it pretty hard it their donation requests, but technically you could still give to the church, tithe or whatever, without having to contribute to the new building at all.

[CanuckExpat]

This seemed relevant:

[paddedhat]

I attended a very anti-mustachian church as a kid. I remember thinking it was so weird when my mom gave them a bunch of money every week and the pastor lived in a nicer house than we could ever afford.

I first got serious with my wonderful wife as she was teaching at a very small, rural Catholic school. She was raised in the church, but she left the teaching position after her first year. The reason? The pay was an absolute embarrassment. She was working for a giant, east coast parish that is wealthy beyond belief, yet she was single and counting pennies, while surviving on generic macaroni and cheese and Tomato soup. The fellow lay teachers basically told her to get the hell out while she was young, and find a public school position. She vividly recalls the local priest in her living room, guilting her dad into giving money he didn't have to spare, for the "Catholic charities appeal drive", every year. As she got older, she noticed that the priest also got a new Caddy or sports car, at the end of every drive. Some years, the old blow dried, comb-over fool would actually tool around town in a new, bright red Camaro, with a few strands of hair blowing out of the T tops. For me the final straw was a conversation I had with the priest's nephew, who was a low level helper where I worked. The kid was dumb as a box of rocks, and had lost his dad recently. He was glowing one day, over the news that his uncle had just bought his mom a new house. The kid was too dumb to put it all together, so I just commented on how generous that was of his uncle, who by that point "earned" the rank of Monsignor.

[mbl]

One of the reasons I felt weird tithing when I was religious, and always criticize tithing when people are in debt - and vehemently disagree that tithing is "charity".

It's also a minor reason that helped me become atheist.

This. Many times it's hard to know where the tithes are going. Once your church starts building huge rec centers and stages though, you'll know. Churches enjoy tax-free existence comparatively and then turn around, take money from its members and buy themselves nicer things to appeal to a more massive audience who will in turn give them more money. They are nothing more than capitalist enterprises exploiting an ancient text and the good intentions of attendees. There are exceptions of course, but damn, Christian places of worship have it good in this country (USA).

Here's an exception.   I'm the finance secretary for our small rural UMC church.   In our case, I can assure you that at best, we're treading water.

Our church was built in 1968 and is actually owned by our "conference".    Just to maintain this building includes insurance, oil for heat,  small amount of propane, phone, internet(most basic package), electric, maintenance for all aspects of a brick 46 year old building and grounds(mowing, snow removal, garbage).

Next, payroll.  As we can only afford a 1/4 time pastor, we share his salary requirements, which are set by the conference, with another local church who also provides him with a parsonage which we contribute to every month as well.  We employ a PT church secretary(6 hours/wk) and must pay the organist each Sunday(~$55).  We use ADP payroll services so incur fees for that every month as well.

We do our best through chicken BBQs and various dinners through the year to supplement what is received in offerings.   Our church has many older congregants that are on fixed incomes so we must be creative and very frugal with what is given.

In addition to Sunday service and Sunday school, we offer our fellowship hall to AA every Saturday morning and have done so for well over 30 years.
The church property is on over 20 acres of forest which is also a meeting place for the local Cub and Boy Scouts to use and camp on whenever they wish.  They help to maintain the property as they are able and have assisted with many maintenance projects over the years.
We do vacation bible school and support a mission in Nicaragua(two of our members are part of the medical mission team that goes there every few years).
We volunteer in groups at the local soup kitchen in the village which does a big hot meal every Saturday for anyone who wants it. 
We donate to the local community center which serves seniors and children with after school activities and snacks as well as clothing and school supplies.
We do as much as we can and welcome anyone who walks through the doors of the church.
If anyone wants to use the church for a funeral service, the women's group offers to make and serve a luncheon after the service(no cost to the family, it is done with donations from members of the group and is always plentiful)
We have a prayer quilt ministry that makes and donates quilts to anyone who asks for one if someone is ill, or has a new baby, or just wants one.
Communion is open to anyone who wants to partake.....this is a big one from my point of view.

I would so love for you to come and visit us and see that not all churches are nefarious.
I would like to think that we are a good example of a small,  rural church.

[mbl]

Sounds like a very nice place MrsPete!

Amen sister

[solon]

Here's an exception.   I'm the finance secretary for our small rural UMC church.   In our case, I can assure you that at best, we're treading water.

Our church was built in 1968 and is actually owned by our "conference".    Just to maintain this building includes insurance, oil for heat,  small amount of propane, phone, internet(most basic package), electric, maintenance for all aspects of a brick 46 year old building and grounds(mowing, snow removal, garbage).

Next, payroll.  As we can only afford a 1/4 time pastor, we share his salary requirements, which are set by the conference, with another local church who also provides him with a parsonage which we contribute to every month as well.  We employ a PT church secretary(6 hours/wk) and must pay the organist each Sunday(~$55).  We use ADP payroll services so incur fees for that every month as well.

We do our best through chicken BBQs and various dinners through the year to supplement what is received in offerings.   Our church has many older congregants that are on fixed incomes so we must be creative and very frugal with what is given.

In addition to Sunday service and Sunday school, we offer our fellowship hall to AA every Saturday morning and have done so for well over 30 years.
The church property is on over 20 acres of forest which is also a meeting place for the local Cub and Boy Scouts to use and camp on whenever they wish.  They help to maintain the property as they are able and have assisted with many maintenance projects over the years.
We do vacation bible school and support a mission in Nicaragua(two of our members are part of the medical mission team that goes there every few years).
We volunteer in groups at the local soup kitchen in the village which does a big hot meal every Saturday for anyone who wants it. 
We donate to the local community center which serves seniors and children with after school activities and snacks as well as clothing and school supplies.
We do as much as we can and welcome anyone who walks through the doors of the church.
If anyone wants to use the church for a funeral service, the women's group offers to make and serve a luncheon after the service(no cost to the family, it is done with donations from members of the group and is always plentiful)
We have a prayer quilt ministry that makes and donates quilts to anyone who asks for one if someone is ill, or has a new baby, or just wants one.
Communion is open to anyone who wants to partake.....this is a big one from my point of view.

I would so love for you to come and visit us and see that not all churches are nefarious.
I would like to think that we are a good example of a small,  rural church.

Thank you, mbl! Not only are not all churches nefarious, most are not. I wish people didn't have such tunnel vision on this issue.

[ariapluscat]

I think it's a case where the ostenatious spendy churches get the spot light and give a bad name to the majority of churches.

And a lot of churches don't have transparent finances. I was in a congregation as a kid where they - as in the congregation - built a new building. An outside observer might think that it was an expensive project, but since the only cost was materials (and some legal things, I suppose) it was much less than might be thought. Same goes for the charity and community work that many churches do - it's not apparent unless you're looking for it.

I wonder where else you can find people with similar core values, commitment to service, and dedicated time? Maybe think of tithing as the membership dues in a fun community driven club?

[Frostee]

I wonder where else you can find people with similar core values, commitment to service, and dedicated time? Maybe think of tithing as the membership dues in a fun community driven club?

This post reminded me of a recent Forbes interview with Jon Huntsman Sr. (a billionaire who has given away 80% of his total wealth).  In the interview he says about the tithing he pays:

“My philanthropy is not borne out of my faith,” he says. “They require 10% tithing. I don’t consider that to be philanthropy and I don’t consider it to be part of my philanthropic giving. I consider it as club dues.

“People who put money in the church basket and people who go to church and pay the pastor: that isn’t real philanthropy, that’s just like you belong to a country club.  You pay your dues to belong to that church so you pay your tithing or whatever it is. I’ve never added that into my philanthropy in any way because I just think it’s a part of a person’s life.”

[Cwadda]

I used to golf at a country club with a very nice pastor who was fairly well off. I always found that a bit odd. I suppose I should look at him in the same way as one might look at a well paid psychologist. His job was in part to help people, and he was well compensated for his efforts by those people (just like the psychologist). He has a job just like everyone else, right?

Keep in mind that there are many pastors who do career switches. Worked for a long time in a field and then entered the ministry later. It's very likely that they had money beforehand. I know a pastor who was an engineering tool guy and another pastor who was a social worker for 30 years (and collects a big pension I assume). I also know a pastor who was promoted to the district head and is in charge of 90 churches. No doubt he makes a lot compared to the average pastor.

[mak1277]

My parents' church  kept a separate building fund when they wanted a new worship hall. Of course they pushed it pretty hard it their donation requests, but technically you could still give to the church, tithe or whatever, without having to contribute to the new building at all.

This is how our church works.  We also have a separate "bucket" for giving to the missionaries we support.  Our annual budget is provided to the church and we have a vote of all the members to approve it.  This is probably not practical at some of the mega churches, but for our congregation of ~100, it wouldn't be accepted any other way.

[MBot]

The "typical" congregation is under 100 people, and it may appear to be better using finances, but often there is a greater proportion going to salary. Often there is great community use and volunteer hours though as some have mentioned.

Larger churches may have larger buildings, but they tend to get used a ton by the community as well. Not all, and I know some "mega" churches that are empty during the week, but most buildings are well used.

Eg one church my sister worked for in Vancouver (at a laughably small salary) hosted/fed large community dinners every Sunday, ran lots of ESL classes, etc.

I'm an ordained minister and have worked as a pastor for a decade. I sustain myself on my ultrasound job wages because most churches are so underfunded. Only four months of being a pastor have I had a full-time salary.

That was at a really neat church that grew from 8 to 700 people quickly in a wealthy new suburb beside a small rural area. I was a paid intern (fresh out of school) at the time. There was a chunk of farmland all due eventually for conversion to houses The church purchased 100 acres of it, built the church and has volunteer farmers from the church do regular crops of wheat on it. Always it's donated to Canada Foodgrains, where it gets matched several times before assisting others. Great use of land and volunteer hours.

Although they were in a 1.3 million dollar building,  over half the cost was financed by a family that sold their cottage to fund the project.

It held 350 people at a time (2 services)  on a Sunday, had lots of community events, summer camps, etc happen and was used all the time.

It probably looked Anti-Mustachian from the outside, but it's a lot more efficient to have 700 people funding 4 staff, and serve the community by operating a large building,  than to have 100 people funding 2 staff and keeping a small building afloat. The larger a congregation, the lower the percentage of giving tends to be as well. 

There's tons of variables of course, but I suppose my point is that if you're looking for "maximum value of serving the community outside church services and pastoral care" the large buildings can be quite efficient.

There's also the model of churches like Connexus and The Meeting House where they use other space to hold their services (like movie theatres) and just have admin expenses. The tradeoff is that you need to have volunteers up at 3 am every week for that, and that gets tiring very fast. Some churches can sustain that.


There are also hybrid models - lots of churches keep their original building and plant a "satellite" in a bar or theatre. The church I work for does that.  I oversee the service that happens Sunday night at a bar space we rent out (it's otherwise unused on Sunday nights)