How Should We Tithe?
By Bill Walker
May 31, 2011
As someone who has worked in the ministry and been to seminary, I’m
sometimes asked by churchgoing friends what I believe about tithing.
Money in the church has always been a sensitive issue. According to
Scripture, God instructs us to give. The rule of thumb from the Hebrew
Bible was a tithe, or 10 percent of one's income/harvest for the temple
or storehouse (Malachi 3:10 for instance). It seems Jesus places a new
and different emphasis on this commandment by commending the poor widow
who gave only two mites to the Jerusalem temple, which was all she had
(Mark 12 and Luke 21). Then there’s the infamous rich young ruler who is
challenged to leave not a tenth of his possessions, but everything.
Whereas the widow’s intentions are pure, Jesus calls out the idolatry in
the young man’s heart.
If Christians are called by Christ to deny ourselves, give whenever
someone asks and sacrifice unconditionally for the Kingdom of God, how
does this translate to "the offering" of today's institutional church?
Are church leaders who preach about generosity and giving being honest
in their teachings, or do they sometimes conveniently presuppose a
degree of clarity about the tithing issue that is not so self-evident?
What is the role of the congregation in holding its leadership and
itself accountable with regard to charity? How much should the church be
giving away in proportion to what it spends on its on logistical and
family needs? Finally, are individuals always expected to give a full
tithe to the church, or is it acceptable to give a percentage of this
tithe to other ministries and causes as well?
witness, Paul speaks of the Church as the body of Christ and its
function to demonstrate God’s love for the world (Colossians 1:24, 1
Corinthians 12:27, Ephesians 5:30). Luke testifies to this as well (Acts
1:8), and Jesus tells the disciples in John that they will be known as
His followers because of their love (John 13:35).
What does this love look like? It looks out for “the least of these,”
and it imitates Jesus’ obedience to the point of death. If this is the
primary order governing the faith community, surely the chief financial
commitment on both the part of the members and the ministerial staff
ought to be directed not inwardly, but toward the local and global needs
of the suffering and marginalized as much as possible.
It might be that some of the questions raised above are based on a
mistaken cultural viewpoint of the Church in the first place. The
problem is that modern churchgoers tend to conceptualize themselves as
separate from the church itself. Thus, we talk about giving to the church. This wouldn’t make very much sense if we understood ourselves instead to be part of the church. Conceived of as part of the church then—rather than us giving to the church—it is now we the church that gives to others. Thus, under this framework, it is no longer a matter of giving to the church and
other causes, but of the church together as a whole, under the guidance
of the Spirit, giving to other causes. This also breaks down the
clergy/laity divide. In other words, it is not about congregants giving
to support the ministry of pastors, but memberships taking care of
pastors while the two groups give together as a unit.
Concerning how much individuals are to give, not surprisingly, the
wisdom of C.S. Lewis is appropriate: “I do not believe one can settle
how much we ought to give. I am afraid the only safe rule is to give
[like the widow] more than we can spare.” And what do we give? Not just
money, but as Jesus requires, our whole selves. In order for this to
happen though, money is still a critical factor, and many churches would
likely have to reevaluate their outlook on what they consider to be
truly necessary in terms of costs. In seasons of plenty, this task of
self-examination is neglected. As a result, the recent economic crisis
devastated some ministries across the country more than it probably
Obviously the church requires money for basic purposes and for its
own spiritual nourishment, but the biblical mandate on the body of
believers, in the developed and dominant world especially, is
undoubtedly one for Christ-likeness (Philippians 2) and solidarity with
the poor, the orphaned, the naked and the hungry. Provided this is true,
serious reconsideration of our tithing allocation becomes essential in
the American evangelical world. Returning to the account of the widow in
Mark’s gospel, Jesus goes on to predict the destruction of the Temple
in chapter 13. This prophecy is often interpreted to promise the
overthrow of any house of worship sustained by mismanagement or robbery.
This is a fitting warning to those of us living in prosperity and
“security” relative to those facing legitimate economic, political and
In sum, undisturbed affluence and comfort is inimical to the divine
commonwealth exemplified by the early church. What made this group of
Christ-followers in Acts so cohesive? They gave up their rights, shared
with everyone in need and didn’t consider anything a possession (Acts
2). Faithful stewardship of the tithe is indispensable for discipleship
and for authentic proclamation the Gospel. After all, it’s supposed to
be good news for the poor (Luke 4:18). To the extent that the church in
much of the so-called West holds on to its social status and maintains a
safe distance from the face of the destitute other, it opposes the
values of the Kingdom Jesus preached. One of the best ways to protest
injustice and declare God’s reign is by practicing kenosis, or
self-emptying, with our money—not by spending it on church buildings,
sound equipment and ministry careerism, but by letting go of it so that
“the last will be first and the first will be last.”
Bill Walker blogs at http://billwalker.wordpress.com/.