The Parish and the Real World

At our Parish Brunch-and-Meet last Sunday, the discussion of parish finances and stewardship stirred a pot of strong feelings and beliefs. At a time when, frankly, we are not able to meet all the financial goals we have set for ourselves (including our charitable giving, compensation for pastor, and other items), does it make any sense whatsoever to even think about taking on other financial commitments (like contributing to the Chapel's upkeep)?

Applying sound and prudent business principles, one would immediately say, "Good God, NO! - Don't take on additional obligations when you haven't figured out how to meet current ones." I suspect no one would disagree with this in consideration of normal family or business finances. Except that this instinctive response, on closer examination, proves faulty. Families and businesses, in fact, quite regularly take on additional obligations. Family examples might include spending for medical expenses, or for unforeseen home repairs, or for emergency travel, or for tithing to one's church. Business examples include costs of expanding the business in a down year ("You must spend money to make money"), capitalizing on unforeseen opportunities requiring up-front investment, or bolstering an underperforming subsidiary.

In all these cases, prudent management often condones deficit spending (and I haven't even mentioned the government!). But there is still a more subtle reason for considering such commitments by a parish community.

One of the tenets of stewardship has been the principle of "sacrificial giving." What this means is that I am called upon to offer support for my community from my substance, rather than from my excess. In other words, I don't wait to see what's left over for the church; I find some prudent way to give from my substance, and this may mean that I have to tighten the belt in other ways. That is, the church becomes a primary, rather than an optional, recipient of my giving.

In a similar way, without violating prudent budgeting and financial management, it is a calling for every church community to think outside the box (pardon the tired cliche) - to go beyond the normal bounds of family or business operations when we envision commitments that are suggested for our consideration. Does the suggested commitment really have a close bearing on our authentic Christian witness, on our sense of identity as a parish? Would its neglect do damage to that authenticity? In other words, if we never make contributions to the needs of our greater community, if we never do charitable giving, hasn't this affected our claim to authenticity as a Gospel community? Would it not be better to begin to actually make such a commitment, thereby forcing ourselves to come to terms with what it requires, rather than simply to say, "We can't afford it now; maybe sometime in the future"?

Making public commitments requires a parish to take a fundamental stance. If it results in interim deficit financing, then the leadership has an obligation to contend with this so as to avoid shortfalls. It is simply not sufficient to avoid the commitments arising out of authentic mission on the grounds of financial wherewithal. Making the commitment will tend to generate the wherewithal.

Some will dismiss this reasoning as irresponsible, and others will decry its lack of "real world" awareness. But some may find value in a sort of ongoing, forced reckoning with the implications of Christian witness. At a certain point, perhaps we become more conditioned to replace "either/or" thinking with a "both/and" stance. What do you think?