1) What is the biblical principle of giving?
We begin with a look at the passage of 2 Cor. 9:6-15. Here Paul lays out what the demand of God is as given to us in His inerrant word. I think even a cursory reading of this passage would reasonably lead one to come to the conclusion that God has never insisted that we act as misers with the bountiful wealth He has given us. But that would be at best the negative understanding of the positive command. And more than just forbidding us from hoarding our wealth and possessions God is indeed giving a positive command.
Paul begins by addressing the normal thought process of one who is giving of what they have with the analogy of sowing seed. John Calvin says, “[…] in sowing, the seed is cast forth by the hand, is scattered upon the ground on this side and that, is [covered], and at length rots, and thus it seems as good as lost. The case is similar as to alms giving. What goes from you to some other quarter seems as if it were diminishing of what you have.” See, people are afraid that if they give what they have then it will be lost forever and if lost forever then they will lose their nice house, their expensive cars, their ability to take vacations, or whatever the luxury may be. This mindset shows a great lack of faith being placed in the Lord to provide for you and to care for you even though you have accumulated all you have from His hand in the first place. It is as if we think the Lord was good to me for this season but he will not remain so and thus I must hoard my possessions to make sure that I can maintain this lifestyle throughout my life. Perhaps we would be wise to remember the Parable of the Rich Fool found in Luke 12:13-21.
But rather than leave us with that analogy alone Paul uses it to tell us that there is both a blessing and a warning to be taken from the analogy. He says, “He which soweth sparingly shall reap also sparingly; and he which soweth bountifully shall reap also bountifully.” Rather than Paul latching on to our fears and confirming them he utterly dismisses them and urges us to give anyway. He says that if we hoard what we have then we will also get very little from the Lord, but if we give bountifully we will get much from the Lord. I know there are false churches out there that use this logic to convince people that if they will just give what they are being asked to give then they too will be rich, “look it says so right here in the word of God!” But since when is our great reward from the Lord exclusively concerned with material wealth? It may indeed be that the Lord blesses you with great wealth as a result, but spiritual wealth is more than likely the chief consideration here. Calvin goes on to say, “[…] the season of harvest will come, when the fruit will be gathered. For as the Lord reckons everything that is laid out upon the poor as given to Himself, so He afterwards requites it with large interest. (Prov.
Simon Kistemaker dives into the actual meaning of the words in 9:6 and says, “The second half of the proverbial saying literally reads: ‘he who sows on the basis of blessings, on the basis of blessings he will also reap.’ That is, he who gives by praising God will in turn reap a harvest for which he thanks the Lord. The generous giver responds with thanks and praises to God for the numerous material and spiritual blessings he receives.” God gives to us that we may give back to Him and to His children and we do so as an act of praise to Him for all He has given us. Through such purity of thought and desire the cycle continues through repeated blessings, giving, and praise for the many gifts the Lord has given us in our lives.
Now that leads us into the main point I want us to consider which is found in 9:7. Notice the idea we are left with in 9:6 is that we are praising God willfully as a result of all of the things that He has given us. Yes we look forward to the reward but the motivation lies more in caring for His children and praising Him than in what we receive in return. Paul continues that theme in this verse and clarifies in no uncertain terms that each of us are to give as he purposes in his heart. Well, what does that mean? Does that mean that we can determine how much to hoard and how much to give? Does that mean that we make a grand show of giving abundantly while holding back much? Obviously the answer is no. Calvin says it well, “[…] liberality is esteemed by God not so much from the sum, as from the disposition. [Paul] was desirous, it is true, to induce them to give largely… but he had no wish to extort anything from them against their will. Hence he exhorts them to give willingly, whatever they might be prepared to give. He places purpose of the heart in contrast with regret and constraint.”
I think with Calvin’s last point in mind perhaps we should remember the significance of a pure heart in giving by looking back to Ananias and Sapphira in Acts 5:1-10. See they made a pretense of giving all they had like the other Christians were doing at the time. They even lied and claimed they had actually done so. But the reality was that in their hearts they were not giving from a pure motivation but out of obligation and fueled by regret, constraint, and reluctance they lied about what they had done and about what they were giving. I don’t imagine that we will see Christians dropping dead at our feet over this issue, but certainly that isn’t because they aren’t just as guilty as Ananias and his wife were. Christians give very privately in the tithing trays and can claim whatever they want. Many will speak openly about having given the Church and given fellow Christians every dime they have. Then you hear them joyfully proclaiming about the new season tickets they secured, about the new car they just bought, the new house, TV, upgraded appliances, or extravagant vacation they took and you are left wondering where the definition of “all” got mixed up. But in their ill-motivation they failed to see what Ananias and Sapphira failed to recognize just as Peter said, “While it remained was it not your own? And after it was sold, was it not in your control…? You have not lied to men but to God.” It is yours to do with as you please. Yes, you should give and give abundantly, that principle is clear; but, you should do so willingly and out of love for God and for His people. To make a pretense of giving is a grave sin against God and though it is Him whom you will have to stand before to explain your deceit let it be known that even on this earth you don’t fool those around you for very long. If you are guilty here then understand that on this principle it is the same condemnation placed upon your head as on Ananias’ head. Matthew Henry explains, “When [Ananias] brought the money [he] expected to be commended and encouraged, as others were…, [but] the Spirit of God in Peter… discerned the principle of reigning infidelity in the heart of Ananias, which was at the bottom of it…” When this is how we behave as Christians it shows corruption in our hearts and we have succumbed to sin at the very least in relation to our giving.
Undoubtedly it is this principle that is being spoken of by Paul when he declares that we should give with a willing heart, not grudgingly or of necessity. He goes on to explain that not only should we be willing but that we should be cheerful givers. Calvin explains, “[Paul] calls us back to God… for alms are a sacrifice. Now no sacrifice is pleasing to God, if it is not voluntary. For when he teaches us, that God loves a cheerful giver, he intimates that, on the other hand, the [stingy] and reluctant are loathed by Him. For He does not lord it over us, in the manner of a tyrant, but, as He acts towards us as a Father, so He requires from us the cheerful obedience of children.” This is the heart of the matter dear friends. It is not enough that we give, not even enough that we give willingly without a sense of duty; it is that at our very core we are giving it to God out of love for Him and we are definitively happy to do so. This is the Christian principle of giving and if we cannot say affirmatively in our heart that this is the principle we are practicing then please know the Bible condemns us all in our sin. We cannot behave in this manner and be at peace with it, if this where we find ourselves guilty we must immediately change.
With this as the foundational truth by which we can consider the corollary propositions let us now move on to the next topic.
2) Are we to provide for the care of our pastors?
With the common practice of hoarding money already firmly rooted in our churches I have seen repeated attempts from Christians to justify not tithing at all and specifically as it relates to the care of our pastors. I am not going to spend any time on the tithing as a Christian principle since a) that should be well understood as an expectation from the previous topic already resolved, and b) even a simple evaluation will lead any reasonable person to assume that without tithes the church cannot function. So we will spend our time here considering whether or not what we give to the church should be used to support our pastors or whether they should be required to carry second jobs in order to sustain themselves.
The answer to this question, as a principle clearly given us in the word of God, is that we are to provide for the financial needs of our pastors. That does not mean that those pastors that live in a rural area with little money and very small congregations may never find themselves in a position where it is impossible to make a living on their ministry alone simply because the church does not have enough to give. But that is the rare exception to the rule and where the church belongs to a larger denomination, Presbyterians for example, then the Presbytery can, should, and does complete his salary so that his focus may be on performing his duties exclusively.
The passages we will consider on this topic are all based on the same verse which is used in multiple places. The primary verse is Deut. 25:4 and is explained in both 1 Cor. 9:1-18 and 1 Tim. 5:17-18. The bulk of our focus will be on 1 Cor. 9 in dealing with this as it is the most extensive explanation of the topic given to us.
Let us start with 9:7. Paul gives us three examples of other careers that by default are allowed to earn their wages from their duty. The first is by the example of soldiers who earn their living by defending the nation they serve and do so at the public’s expense. The next two are examples of men that cultivate either crops or livestock and gain their sustenance from the bountiful harvest, as is their due. Taken in their metaphorical sum they are examples of what a pastor does in serving the church and especially in growing the church both in knowledge and in numbers. Calvin says, “Now, by three comparisons… taken from common life, he makes it out that it was allowable for him to live, if he chose, at the public expense of the Church, to show that he assumes nothing to himself but what human nature itself teaches us is reasonable… As natural equity points out that this is reasonable, who will be so unjust as to refuse sustenance to the pastors of the Church?” You see few, if any, would object to those given in the examples drawing their wages from their jobs; but bring this as a consideration for pastors in some circles and hardly a more insulting proposition could be given! Yet Paul doesn’t even leave room for the possibility that any other conclusion can be found. He states clearly and openly that it is his right, and the right of all pastors, to garner wages for the service they give the church. Calvin presents it in such a way that the person who objects to such a practice can only be found as unreasonable and unjust. Other commentaries leave the matter as firmly settled as does Calvin; in fact I think you would be hard pressed to find a reliable one that disagrees with his conclusion. Simon Kistemaker concludes his commentary on this verse by saying, “These three examples of the soldier, the gardener, and the shepherd pertain not only to the culture of the Apostolic age; in Scripture God’s people are often portrayed as an army, a vine, and a flock. With these three illustrations from daily life, Paul proves the unmistakable point that he deserves financial support for his labor among the Corinthians.” The demand is clear and it becomes rather impossible for anyone to argue that pastors do not have the right to earn their wages from the churches they serve.
But Paul doesn’t just use basic reason as his support for this. He tells us in 9:8-9 that it is the demand of God as given to us through His word that is the ultimate consideration for this. Certainly had he left it there we would have had sufficient reason to believe him and to place this practice in all of our churches. But then that may leave room for speculation or for others to say that the examples he had given were not the same thing and still found a cause to refuse their faithful pastors their wages. Even with the forthcoming explanation that such is a command from God Himself there are still those that rail against providing income for their pastors, imagine if the case was assumed to have been proven in 9:7 alone? Calvin explains, “[This] thing is commanded by the Lord… Now, that God Himself designed that the labors of men should be remunerated with wages, he proves from this, that He prohibits the muzzling of the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn…” Imagine a large ox strapped to an even larger stone. In order to grind the grain the men would feed the grain into the mill while the ox walked in circles and it would be crushed between the two stones. As this was happening some of the grain would fall to the ground, not all or even a large portion of it, but some would certainly fall out. The ox would eat those grains that fell out as it walked in circles. But some men greedy for gain would muzzle the ox so that even those few scraps might not be lost. Yet God had made this practice unacceptable. So unacceptable in fact that Simon Kistemaker says, “If a Jew muzzled an ox, he would run the risk of a scourging in the local synagogue.”
But why? Why was God so concerned with whether or not the ox was able to collect the scraps for food? Paul asks the same question when he says, “Is it oxen God is concerned about?” The answer is clearly no, it was not the oxen. But it was a general principle of equity and the heart of the man that would deprive the oxen of those few scraps. In showing kindness to the ox they learned to be kind and giving to their fellow man. Kistemaker explains again, “[…] if God wants the farmer to take care of his ox, does He not require man to take greater care of his fellow man?” Calvin explains as well, “Let it then be understood by you, that God is not so concerned for oxen, as to have had merely a regard to oxen in making that law, for He had mankind in view, and wished to accustom them to equity, that they might not defraud the workman of his hire… [This] extends generally to any kind of recompense for labor.”
Perhaps this should be enough for us, for it is quite clear that Paul is giving us a command from God that pastors should be paid for their work by the churches they serve. But Paul makes it unmistakable and final in
The fact that this has come under scrutiny may be in part a just reaction to the extravagant salaries of the pastors of mega-churches and the scoundrels that infect our airwaves professing false religion for their own personal gain. But since when do the people of God refuse to submit to the clear will of God because of the sin of some? I would be so bold as to say wherever that just indignation may lie there is a greater problem with the tight purse strings of the people of God and even more so with their lack of obedience to His will. Just like before you are clearly required to give for the care of your pastors and just like before it should be done willfully and joyfully to the glory of God.
3) Christians caring for other Christians.
We are fond of putting on the pretense of charity, of kindness, of pious religion in general. We love to tell people that we wish them well and pray for them, as indeed we should. But one of the great plagues facing the Church today is that this is where we leave it. That is the entirety of the grace we are willing to extend to fellow Christians in dire need of help. And that is what can be applied to some of the most charitable within our ranks. The rest don’t even seem to care at all. I can recall not that long ago a message had gone out to a group I am a part of (all Christians) to tell us that one of our brothers was in real financial trouble and had no way of escaping by himself. It was so bad for this friend that he was in danger of losing his home and was in danger of missing even the minimum necessities for life (food, heat, water, etc.). When the message went out some of the members in the group were in the middle of a fairly heated debate and in spite of this message coming before us continued the debate as if nothing had happened. When they were asked to stop debating that some focus could be put on this dear brother and his wife that needed our help they were fairly indignant and refused to stop. I can recall the sick feeling it left in my stomach, it was a shockingly grotesque show of callous indifference from one Christian to another. In the group there are many people and through repeated alerts I am confident we were able to reach all of them. But out of 400 or so people in the group only a small handful (less than a dozen) stepped up and did anything. We were blessed that a couple had the ability to give more than others and we got together just enough to free the immediate burden on this man’s shoulders. We could have done so much more, but there was debating to attend to, who has time to care for a brother in need? And this is not an isolated incident or circumstance. I have seen an instance where a Christian was without a car for 3-1/2 months and wasn’t contacted by a single person in his church (Pastor, Elders, and Diaconate included) though the family was not able to come to church throughout that entire time. Many such cases exist; as the Church has become apathetic to doctrine they have also become apathetic to the needs of other Christians. I know of many Christians that have been out of work for months and months and months and many even for years now. They sit in church every week next to managers, executives, and those who can hire people into their companies and yet nothing happens while everything they have slips away. With that in mind we will turn to the word of God for direction. The texts we will be considering here are Jas. 1:27 and Jas. 2:15-16.
I have seen Christians discussing Jas. 1:27 as if it gives us an exclusive directive for orphans and widows at the expense of all others, but that isn’t what is being discussed here. In the same way that there was a general principle applied in our last section the same thing is being accomplished here. As Walter Wessel says, “[…] orphans and widows were not provided for in ancient society, they were typical examples of those who needed help.” John Calvin further explains, “To visit in necessity is to extend a helping hand to alleviate such as are in distress. And as there are many others whom the Lord bids us to [help in time of need], in mentioning widows and orphans, He states a part for the whole. There is then no doubt that under one particular thing He recommends us to every act of love, as though he had said, ‘Let him who would be deemed religious, prove himself to be such by self-denial and by mercy and benevolence towards his neighbor.’” Here we are back to considering the heart; this is a general principle that is to be applied in all situations. The care that you should give to those in need is to be a general mark of your character, the character of all Christians. If it should cost you some new toy then so be it. The Lord has placed all of us in His church as vital cogs that are necessary for our survival and growth. Some He has placed in the Church as wealthy men in order that they may give more than others. But let us not think that because we are not rich we are freed of obligation here. Remember Christ’s reaction to the poor widow that gave her last two mites in Mk. 12:42-44. Christ didn’t quickly retrieve them and chastise her for giving all she had into the treasury, He didn’t sit back with the disciples and mock her foolish giving; no, He praised her for giving out of want while the others gave out of their abundance. Relative amounts may vary based on what we have, but give we can and give we must. It may indeed be that we get to a point that we honestly have nothing to give monetarily but that still doesn’t prevent us from helping with a meal, or by helping them clean their house, or watch their kids, or whatever the need may be. We have to be ready and willing to give of our resources and our time and of our talents to help fellow Christians in need.
Next we see the example James gives us in
It’s not that those hurting don’t need and covet your prayers, they should and do. But when that is all you are willing to give them it seems a bit shallow and heartless. Kistemaker writes, “This brother or sister in the Lord ‘belongs to the family of believers’ (Gal.
Just as before there are greater ramifications for this than simply not meeting the needs of a fellow saint. For James uses this as the lead in to show that faith without works is not faith at all, it is meaningless exercise of empty religion. Just like in all the aforementioned passages what matters here is what is in your heart. Are you giving to others out of a willing submission to the will of God and are you delighted to do so? Does it please you to help others and especially the people of God? If not then you should probably question why your heart is displeased with things that God is entirely pleased with. Please understand that your care and love for the saints is an expression, a validation, of your inward faith. And please know when you are more concerned with your own accumulation of “things” or your own well being at the expense of all others then you are acting in a manner that displeases God. For as Christ said in Matt. 25:32-46, “[…] inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.” When you do give for the care of your brothers it is as if you are caring for Christ Himself and when you deny their needs it is as if you are denying Christ Himself; it is a personal affront to Christ that you refuse His people help. Calvin sums up the whole affair nicely when he says, “[…] faith without love avails nothing, and that it is therefore wholly dead.” Fellow believers, is your faith alive and well and glorifying God or is it a dead faith that serves only your needs and your desires? God forbid it is the latter for therein is the promise of discipline from the Lord and as necessary as it is that He does so as a loving Father it is a miserable experience to go through. Give willingly with a cheerful heart as much as is possible for you to do so and may the Lord be well pleased with your care for His children.
4) The role of the Church itself in relieving the poor.
The last thing we will consider is not just the role of the individual but also the role of the Church itself in relieving the poor. Our consideration here will focus on Acts 6:1-6 which is the famous ordination of the Diaconate. It is here that we find undeniable warrant that a) the Church has an obligation to care for the needy among their ranks, and b) that this was such a vital function of the Church that the office of Deacon was instituted to handle the duties of this office.
Let us look for a moment at what function the Deacons serve within the Church. Samuel Miller says, “The very learned Suicer, A German Professor of the seventeenth century, in his Thesaurus Ecclesiasticus, makes the following statement on the subject: ‘In the apostolic Church, Deacons were those who distributed alms to the poor, and took care of them: in other words, they were the treasurers of the Church’s charity.” The entire purpose of the Diaconate is to serve the function of charity on behalf of the Church. This is their primary purpose! This isn’t even just a function of the New Testament Church; it has always existed, and even though the title may have differed the function was the same. God throughout all of time has expected not just the individuals within the Church to be charitable but the Church as a whole to be charitable. Miller says, “We know that, in every Jewish Synagogue, before the coming of Christ, there was a class of officers whose peculiar duty it was to collect and dispense the moneys contributed for the support of the poor. This seems to have been an invariable part of the Synagogue system.”
We also know that the Diaconate saw special function on the Lord’s Day where they were to administer to the needs of the poor in their churches. Zacharias Ursinus says in discussing the Heidelberg Catechism Day 38, Q. 103, “[On the Lord’s Day the Church is to show] charity and liberality to the poor, which consists in giving alms, and performing works of love to the needy, to sanctify the Sabbath this way by showing our obedience to the doctrine of Christ. […] it has always been the practice of the Church to bestow alms upon the Sabbath day, and to perform acts of charity towards those who need our help and sympathy. The opposite of this virtue shows itself in a neglect and contempt of the poor, and in giving our alms for the sake of being seen of men, which Christ condemns.”
Do we see it yet? Do we see how the initial use of the office of Deacon has been abandoned? How the relief of the poor at our churches has been handed over to the state even when it concerns a fellow brother in Christ? I would say that in far too many cases the Diaconate becomes nothing more than a lap dog for the Session and they are relegated to do whatever the Session generally doesn’t feel like doing, which is almost everything. Too many Sessions think it is their sole function “to sit” in their monthly meetings and to administer the Sacraments on the Lord’s Day and all other matters are somehow not applicable to them. Thus the Diaconate becomes mired in subservient impotence thoroughly blocked from performing the function of their office. They are unpaid maintenance men, unpaid accountants willing to count that week’s offering and run it over to the bank. But they are increasingly left barred from any actual input as to the charitable duties of the Church and the needs of her members. When was the last time we saw the Deacons spending time at the Church on the Lord’s Day available to the needy in the Church and ready and able to given them the relief they need? The Church has abandoned the biblical directive to care for each other and especially the needy within our ranks and thus the people have become just as apathetic to the needs of others just as their leaders have done for a very long time. Then, to add insult to injury, while the church is professing how broke it is they will celebrate their Radio Ministry that costs many, many thousands of dollars a year, or hire in a pianist or organist at the cost of many, many thousands a year, or constantly be seeking to build and expand the church at the cost of perpetual debt, or maybe it’s a new state of the art sound system; the list goes on and on and on. It isn’t that the Church doesn’t have the ability to care for those within her ranks; it is that they have placed a higher precedent on inconsequential things rather than caring for their people. We should all be so horribly ashamed; I hope and pray the Lord will once again wake us up from this materialistic selfish slumber we have been in for oh so long.
Summary:
The duties of the people of God are clear, in dealing with each other, in administering to our pastors, or as the Church itself: giving is part of our fundamental obligation as Christians. Where there is a dearth in giving and charity we must correct this problem and we must act upon it now, we cannot delay any longer. People are hurting needlessly; we are failing to live up to the standard God has set forth in His word to our detriment and the detriment of those around us. Support each other in charity, support each other in business, and support each other in using your collective talents for the good of others around you; let God and his people be your first consideration in all you do. If you have a choice of hoarding things for yourself, supporting the lost world around you or caring for a fellow Christian then you must learn to joyfully administer to those Christians that need your help. It does not mean that you don’t have a right to enjoy and use what you have earned, you do; but, please don’t be so presumptuous and callous as to think the Lord gave you all of your wealth as a Christian that you may live like the heathen. He has blessed you that you may in turn bless others now and always.
May the Lord bless you all abundantly and may you bless as many others as is possible with the bounty He has heaped upon your heads. Laus Deo.
Sources Cited:
1. John Calvin, Calvin Commentaries, Baker Books, vol. 20, pp 293-295; 299; 308-310
2. Simon Kistemaker, Hendriksen New Testament Commentary, Baker Academic, vol. 8, pp 311-312
3. Matthew Henry, Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible, Hendrickson Publishers, pp 1663
4. Simon Kistemaker, Hendriksen New Testament Commentary, Baker Academic, vol. 7, pp 291-292
5. John Calvin, Calvin Commentaries, Baker Books, vol. 22, pp 299-300; 309
6. Walter W. Wessel, The New Testament and Wycliffe Bible Commentary, Moody Monthly, The Iversen Associates, pp. 950
7. Simon Kistemaker, Hendriksen New Testament Commentary, Baker Academic, vol. 11, pp 88-89
8. Samuel Miller, The Ruling Elder, Crown Rights Book Co., pp 230, 242
9. Zacharias Ursinus, Commentary on the
