LIBERTY UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF DIVINITY
Assignment Title: Finance and Giving in Modern Church
Course: CHMN 699 - Internship
Student: Kristine Sage
Date: January 29, 2022
Professor: Dr. Joel Breidenbaugh
Finance and Giving
“I feel the Lord is leading 10 people here to give $10,000.” This particular line has been referenced
in public reporting. This assertion has been heard a number of times at different conferences and events
and from different personalities, including at Arise, with the dollar value decreasing in steps – it is a
recognisable technique that many feel creates pressure to give large sums of money.[33] Sadly then, a
question must be considered, if the Lord is leading in this moment, why is the same technique and
assertion made in the same way at many conferences and events, and why are the figures often the
same? It is indicative of what many feel is a manipulative way of raising money. It is all the more
problematic when used in settings with young people who do not have large amounts of financial
security.
This is one example of financial requests where those holding the microphone need to exercise a
lot more caution and honesty. It is my opinion that extreme care must be taken whenever we assert
anything akin to ‘God says’ – scripture does not treat this lightly.[34]
Public stories, and voices have expressed a concern around an excessive focus on money and the
accompanying pressure to give within Arise. If allegations are proven correct when tested by further
reviews into finance initiated by Arise, then sometimes the money has not been used in ways that
reflect Christ. This pressure around money has evidently been felt even by those with little means to
give, with some responding to this pressure and getting into financial difficulty because of what they
have given. As reflected in public responses it is especially difficult for them to then hear allegations
about how money may have been used lavishly for some in leadership. Generosity should be a hallmark
of all aspects of the Christian life, but that value should not be used to prop up excessive institutional
expenses, or to create lavish lifestyles for a few.
Tithing is often spoken of in church settings. Whilst the financial structure of ancient Israel was
complex and varied across time, we can simplify things by asserting that at its most basic, the tithe (the
first 10% of one’s annual crops etc.) within the ancient nation of Israel, was akin to a tax since the
religious system also served to fund many national needs. As with all things, this giving was seen as
acknowledging that all that we have is a gift from God. The nation’s tithe was used for several purposes;
to service the religious system, to undertake national celebrations/feasts, and to feed people in times of
need. There were also other forms of taxation, with much tax added under various kings to develop
military might, undertake building projects, and establish an empire.[35]
Some churches today look more akin to Old Testament kings with leaders placing burdens on
people to give in order to grow their kingdoms. The example of the New Testament image of a generous
community committed to mutual support and helping those in need seems to be given little attention.
Speaking of tithing as if it directly correlates to the modern church is problematic as the church
does not fulfil the same national functions as the religious system of ancient Israel, nor should it. It
creates confusion as the term tithe is directly connected to a law for ancient Israel. Giving took on a
different approach within the early church as it extended beyond Israel and into ‘Gentile’ communities
where the tithe was not nationally applicable in the same way.
The taxes we pay to the modern state, in part, fulfil some of the functions that the tithe did in
ancient Israel, thus it is misleading to speak of tithing in churches using Old Testament proof texts to
somehow convey that it is the same thing.
Following the principles that underpin giving and generosity in both the Old and New Testaments, it
is reasonable to ask people, where they are able, to help meet the financial obligations of the
community they are a part of, and where those obligations stem from wise stewardship. It is also
reasonable to encourage generosity in mutual support – helping those who need help. Generosity,
especially where it benefits those who are struggling, should be entirely encouraged as a significant part
of what it means to follow Jesus. Where the community has agreed to undertake functions that align
with formation in the way of Jesus, it is also reasonable to ask for generosity towards those ministries.
However, anything that could be construed as manipulation or coercion should be carefully scrutinised.
With this in mind, it would be prudent for churches to shift towards talking of generosity in church
environments not as tithing, but as free-will giving or something akin to this. I recognise that in making
this case, I am personally challenging a normalised use of the term ‘tithing’ across many church
traditions, including those I exist within.
Another concern publicly raised is the favourable or preferential treatment of people who
contribute significant amounts of money to the work of Arise.[36] While curating special events for ‘high
value’ donors may make sense within institutions that make up the wider charitable sector, such events
taking place at an entity that calls itself a church, must be questioned. A church necessarily operates via
a different set of values and principles than a charitable institution precisely because it is a community
of people being formed in the way of Jesus. Jesus challenged practices that showed favouritism towards
the wealthy, and in following Jesus, such practices were strongly challenged in the early Church. In his
short epistle, James boldly makes it clear that favouritism towards the wealthy falls short of the way of
Jesus.[37]
Being wealthy is not wrong, but anything that shows favour to those who can and do make big
donations creates a class system within the church that is not reflective of Christ. It causes those who
are unable to participate as top tier givers to feel of lesser value. It also feeds the celebrity culture
previously mentioned in this paper. We all come to the table of Christ as equals. We play different parts
in the body, but we are equal before Christ and one another. Our practices should reflect that. Any
donor giving large sums of money should feel very cautious about any church that treats them
favourably, for in doing so they are in effect, giving the wealthy a place of honour over and above those
with lesser financial means.[38] As we have seen, Paul, in his metaphor of the church as a body,
encouraged the exact opposite in order to equalise status and power dynamics.
Performance Culture
Analysing information in the public domain it seems that, like many churches, Arise may have
succumbed to contemporary pragmatism in establishing a worship culture that is a professional
corporatised event that is carefully curated by particular people who fit a certain image. Because of this,
worship runs the danger of being a manufactured experience reliant on professionals with the ability to
create the right environment for the ‘experience’ of worship. This is not to say that all that is called
worship in such environments is wrong, but this is an inherent risk that is worth being aware of.
People have talked of the constant presence of cameras during events, thus leading to an image
conscious engagement in ‘worship’ and a desire to appear fully engaged in a manner that reflects the
feel and energy that Arise aims for in worship. Worshippers are aware that images will be used to
promote church events. Photos to demonstrate the nature of a community aren’t wrong in this day and
age where visual mediums play a big role in helping people to understand what our communities value,
but the experiences shared show that within Arise there may be an inappropriate excess in the pursuit
of performance and brand management unfolding.
A big organisation that has regular events with high production as a core function is naturally
resource heavy – particularly human resources. This feeds a culture where people are often valued for
their ability to fill the volunteer roles required to enable these events to run professionally and culturally
‘on point.’ Rather than the part people can play in their wider communities being uplifted and
celebrated, the focus is on how people can serve the events. This is a challenge for all churches where
there is quick thinking about the roles people can fill as soon as their skills and experiences become
known.
Volunteerism is essentially good. Many of our nation’s charities, including churches, operate on the
goodwill of people who believe in what they are choosing to freely contribute their time to. Much good
is achieved in Aotearoa New Zealand because of the generous efforts of volunteers. The freewill and
generous nature of that should never be taken for granted, and those who volunteer should always feel
empowered to contribute whatever time they choose, and they should know that it is valued. Those in
power need to remain conscious of any possible abuse of that generosity. Where such abuse occurs, it
must be rectified.
In a highly performative culture that centralises what happens on the stage, there is a danger that
instead of celebrating the empowerment of all in the community, such an environment creates minor
Christian celebrities. This culture makes the stage the red carpet that is married to the green-room,
which is reserved for ‘VIPs’ who are served by those lower down the status ladder who aspire to be
them.[39]
This works against the church as a community of Christ followers being formed in the way of Jesus
because it discourages participation in what is seen to be a central element in the life of the
congregation. Except for a select few, everyone else gets to watch while every moment is curated for
them. If someone does not fit the image of ‘excellence’ and the nature of the brand being projected,
then they either won’t be invited to participate, at least not on the stage, or they will be expected to
change to conform to the desired image and perhaps gain a position that is camera friendly.
In seeking conformity to the brand and performance, some in Arise leadership have allegedly
engaged in shaming those who don’t measure up. Through public allegations it seems that too often
people have needed to dress a particular way or be of a particular body-type in order to be ‘stage
worthy.’ The use of ‘mood boards’ for those on stage is indicative of this. There have been reports of
people developing eating disorders, and others have expressed that they felt inferior because they have
not managed to fit the required image or been able to perform at the level required. There are those
who have spoken about entering counselling because of the detrimental impact this and other aspects
of their time at Arise have had on their lives. Too often people have felt isolated in their brokenness. The
public record shows people who have felt that they as individuals are the problem rather than the issue
being the cultures and systems they have existed within. A performance culture is ultimately
dehumanising.
It is often mentioned in such environments that the aim is to give God one’s best and to cultivate a
spirit of excellence for God, but ‘best’ and ‘excellence’ are too often defined by superficial and shallow
external standards. These external standards are shaped more by society’s ever shifting definition of
‘cool’ rather than by Scripture and a Jesus shaped attentiveness to authenticity and heart disposition.
As part of maintaining this performance culture within Arise, public stories point to people feeling
expected to labour beyond what could be considered a reasonable degree of work or volunteerism.
People have talked of the tiredness, exhaustion, and even burnout that has been the result of putting on
events, particularly the Sunday services. The conferences need to be highlighted here as well. It is highly
probable that the culture around annual conferences is a significant burden with people feeling pressure
around the cost and workload, and they are an area where the celebrity culture is said to be on full
display.[40]
For churches that invest untold resources, including significant amounts of voluntary time into
events and the ongoing life of the organisation there is a danger that this focus takes away from the
ability of people to connect with God’s story and express God’s goodness in their families,
neighbourhoods, schools, universities, workplaces, and friendship circles. It focuses life towards the
upholding of the organisation, turning the energy, relationships, and creativity of people towards the
church as an institution in an exclusive manner. Rather than the daily lives and interactions of many of
the faithful within the church being the focal point for where the love and service of their neighbour
happens, the organisation is seen to be the focal point for that through its programmes, events, and
other branded exercises. A notable problem with this is that external relationships often become bent
towards how they can serve the betterment of the institution – friendships come and go based on
whether someone accepts an invitation to an event or not. Largely, involvement with such churches
means that some feel that they do not have the space and energy to form and maintain relationships in
other spheres of life. In the life of Arise it also means that others who have been approached and invited
to events, have publicly expressed that they felt like the relationships only existed in service to Arise
Church and were therefore, shallow and temporary. With some churches focusing the lives of their
people on the programmes and events of the organisation, a danger exists that there is little room left
for the healthy cultivation of relationships outside of it.
There is a fundamental shift that can take place here from understanding the branded work of the
organisation as the focus for God’s work in the world, to seeing the everyday lives (the vocations) of
community members (the church) as the primary place for this. With such a shift, the emphasis moves
from members existing to serve the goals of the organisation, to anything organised by the community
existing to serve the vocational lives of its members. A deepened understanding of a good theology of
vocation would serve this well.
Another factor that often feeds a performance culture is the expectation of church leaders that
volunteers will invest the same level of intense engagement that they are. For many full-time leaders
the entirety of their lives is wrapped up in the service of the local church – it is where they sink their
best energy. That intense focus can easily be transferred to congregations, with the expectation being
that congregants will offer the same level of energy and prioritisation. The lived experiences of
congregation members however, are far broader with focuses extending beyond the church. That
volunteers are also navigating the responsibilities they have to their own jobs, families, and incomes,
can too easily be forgotten. When an appreciation of the multidimensional lives congregants are living is
lost, unrealistic expectations can form around how much time, energy, and money they should invest in
the institution and its programmes.
In this environment expectations upon volunteers can become unreasonable and leaders can feel
entitled to their sense of frustration when their expectations are not met because, in their mind, it is
about the success of their vision for the church. There is a danger that resentment in leaders towards
their congregations can grow, rather than a sense of gratitude for every person within the church
community. The results of this can sometimes be disastrous, with people being severely mistreated. Too
often the destructive ways that frustration outworks itself then gets justified by others in various ways.
‘Righteous anger’ is a phrase that sometimes appears. It can also be justified by speaking of those in
leadership as ‘driven’, and therefore such treatment of people is seen as not good, but inevitable.
References
[25] Henri J. M. Nouwen, In the Name of Jesus (The Crossroad Publishing Company, 1989).
[26] Kevin J. Vanhoozer and Owen Strachan¸ The Pastor as Public Theologian: Reclaiming a Lost Vision
(Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2015), 1.
[27] Luke 24:32
[28] Joseph McAuley, Pentecostalism Re-Imagined: Reconfiguring Pentecostalism in Twenty-First
Century New Zealand (D.Min Final Project, Fuller Theological Seminary, 2018). 66-67.
[29] Here Arise must be commended for choosing to take complaints seriously, and wanting to
listen.
[30] Scot McKnight & Laura Barringer, A Church Called Tov: Forming a Goodness Culture that Resists
Abuses of Power and Promotes Healing (Wheaton: Tyndale House, 2020).
[31] Ken Carlson and Mike Lueken, Renovation of the Church; What Happens When a Seeker Church
Discovers Spiritual Formation (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2011), 55-56.
[32] Carlson and Lueken, Renovation of the Church, 33.
[33] It is a technique that has been used in events and conferences that I have been present at. These
have not been Arise events.
[34] Deuteronomy 18:20, Ezekiel 13:9
[35] Taxation in ancient Israel shifted and changed depending on who was ruling. In scripture, when
the people desired to have a King, it was noted that the burden of taxation in money and goods, along
with forced labour (a type of tax), would greatly increase to fulfil the desires of the monarchy (1 Samuel
8:10-18). According to the biblical account David used forced labour as a way to ‘pay’ for building
projects (2 Samuel 20:24). This increased under King Solomon (1 Kings 5:13-18) and those who followed
him, where taxation and forced labour were greatly increased to meet the needs of larger building
projects (Example: 1 Kings 12:1-14), and to meet the needs of the king’s household (1 Kings 4:7-18). It is
clear that such taxes far exceeded those required in scriptural law. Under Rehoboam, the revolt against
increased labour and taxation split the kingdom of Israel into two (1 Kings 12:16-24).
[36] If true, this practice is not limited to Arise. I recognise that favourable treatment of those who
give significant sums of money happens within a number of churches.
[37] James 2:1-11
[38] Luke 14:7-14
[39] Joseph McAuley, Evolutions of Pentecostalism (D.Min paper, Movements of the Spirit in World
Christianity, Fuller Theological Seminary, 2016).
[40] For those who may defend the exhaustion and burnout in these circumstances as a
demonstration of service to God, it is worth pointing out that this has not happened because people
have served in war zones, helped in slums, done missionary work in remote places, spent time with the
homeless, served in foodbanks, or any other such cause of service toward the ‘least of these’. Rather,
the burnout has happened in service of constant high production events and meeting the requirements
of those seen as VIPs.
[41] Titus 1:6-8
[42] Titus 1:9
[43] McAuley, Pentecostalism Re-Imagined, 68.
[44] It is acknowledged that the current crisis has led to some experiencing a more open and honest
environment within Arise.
[45] John 11
[46] Luke 9:23
[47] Matthew 5:41
[48] 1 John 3:16
[49] Matthew 7:13
[50] The calendar begins with Advent and anticipation for the arrival of the Messiah. It then moves
through the life and ministry of Jesus with Christmas, Lent, Easter, Pentecost and Ordinary Time, before
concluding with Christ the King Sunday as a celebration that Christ is, and will be ultimately recognized
as, King of kings and Lord of lords.
[51] McAuley, Pentecostalism Re-Imagined, 79-81.
[52] Joan Chittister, The Liturgical Year: the Spiraling Adventure of the Spiritual Life (Nashville, TN:
Thomas Nelson Publishing, 2009), 6.
[53] McAuley, Pentecostalism Re-Imagined, 79-81.
[54] Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Church Election Sermon, July 23, 1933 at Trinity Church in
Berlin.https://concordiaandkoinonia.wordpress.com/2011/10/22/church-election-sermon-preached-by-
pr-dietrich-bonhoeffer-july-23-1933at-trinity-church-in-berlin/ Also printed in No Rusty Swords:Letters,
Lectures and Notes, 1928-1936, from the Collected Works of Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Volume 1
[55] Hebrews 12:2
[56] Vanhoozer and Strachan¸ The Pastor as Public Theologian, 17.
[57] Stanley J. Grenz and Roger E. Olsen, Who Needs Theology? An Invitation to the Study of God
(Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1996), 14.
[58] McAuley, Pentecostalism Re-Imagined, 66-67.
[59] John 20:24-28
[60] Bonhoeffer, Life Together, 28-29.
