Why I hate tithing, and what I recommend instead

You may recall that I posted a sermon a few weeks ago in which I get pretty shirty about tithing. Well, the brave folks at the Church of the Incarnation, Santa Rosa, invited me to contribute to their stewardship materials, thus putting their money where my mouth is. I hope I helped them!

Here's what I wrote.

***

I hate tithing. I don’t mean that I hate to do it; I mean that I think it’s a terrible way to determine giving. It’s so mechanical! So guilt-laden, too. But all my life, I’d heard people talk about the tithe as the Biblical basis of stewardship. It wasn’t until a few years ago that I thought, “Hey, wait a minute! People keep talking about tithing as Biblical, but I’ve never actually seen any of these texts!”

I was surprised by what I discovered. Did you know that tithing only refers to agricultural products? That’s why you hear Jesus talks about the Pharisees “tithing mint and rue and herbs of all kinds” (Luke 11:42) – they were keeping to the letter of the law down to the herbs in the kitchen garden.

But looking at the New Testament, what I see as the Biblical standard of giving is not tithing, or any sort of definitive rule. Instead, I see two traits that characterize faithful giving: generosity and mission.

Generosity: Unlike tithing, which is simply a math problem, generosity is a spiritual practice. I know many generous people who are tithers, but tithing on its own is simply about a transfer of goods or money from one entity to another. Generosity, on the other hand, is the attitude in which the tithing – or any giving – is undertaken. Tithing answers the question, “Have I done enough?” Generosity answers the question, “How can I contribute as much as possible?”

Mission: One of the things that most annoys me about tithing is that it is so disconnected to what happens to the money. But what I see over and over again in the New Testament is that giving is directed to some purpose: supporting Jesus’ ministry, helping one another in the church, caring for widows and orphans, or reaching out to the church in Jerusalem.

Mission is actually the question of generosity as it is answered by a community or organization: “How can we as a group contribute as much as possible?” When we are clear about our mission, it makes it clear why we are giving and what we are giving towards. Tithing eliminates any dialogue, expecting people to shut up and give because the Bible says so. But a call for giving based on mission opens the question of what it is we hope to do together and how can we get it done.

And so I would encourage the community of the Church of the Incarnation, Santa Rosa, to reflect on the mission of your congregation: how can we contribute? Talk about it with one another, and really come to grips with what it is you want to do together and how to accomplish that.

Then as individuals, take time to answer that same question: How can I contribute? If Incarnation has a mission that excites you that you want to support, what can you do to make that happen?

Paul, writing to the wealthy church in Corinth, challenged them to give to support the church in Jerusalem as the much poorer church in Macedonia had done. He summarized giving in a way that resonates with me, saying, “If the eagerness is there, the gift is acceptable according to what one has” (2 Corinthians 8:12).

I hope you are eager to see the great things you can do as the Church of the Incarnation, and I pray that you might be able to give generously to see that happen.

Various & Sundry: If there's a common thread, I don't see it.

I'm puttering today, which is wonderful. And the puppy is wrestling with one of the other dogs so I can sit here and blog, which is also wonderful. So let's see what's been piling up, here...

[By the way, if you're wondering where I get all this stuff, these are some of the things I tweet throughout the week.]

Since I started the week preaching about money, I thought this discussion on whether getting rich is worth it was an excellent companion piece. The answers from some very wealthy people are thoughtful, honest, and actually very tender.

Moving from money to peacemaking, the Pastor's Wife writes about how her husband, who had plans for establishing peace in  the Middle East, had a more difficult time of it when it came to pairing mismatched socks. Ironically, the one comment on this article so far is one woman's solution to not losing socks, which was rather missing the point.

I thought this plan to help WWII prisoners escape using doctored Monopoly games was mighty clever. I just wonder if any prisoners actually found all of the maps, compasses, files, and money hidden there.

Although this article is called The Science of Snobbery, what it really says to me is that we use all of our senses to draw conclusions about our experiences, and we are much more dependent upon context than we want to believe. I tell you one thing, I'm sure I'd be among those fooled if I were given a white wine with red food coloring in it. And another conclusion to draw: how and under what circumstances you present yourself makes a difference, whether or not it should.

The headline on this post was "Guy trying to call out 'Fake Geek Girl' gets destroyed."

The comments beneath the post suggest that many comic book geeks of the male persuasion are sensitive flowers who are hurt if you don't respect their geek bona fides when they don't know one obscure comic book character.

How interesting.

Lots of good obituaries this week, as always, because there are lots of interesting people out there. In particular, I liked the one I saw this morning for Spider, New York's Oldest Cabby, who died at the age of 94.

While it was unclear exactly when Mr. Footman first obtained his hack license, David Yassky, the commissioner of the New York City Taxi and Limousine Commission, said it was “only a few short years” after the modern taxi industry was born in 1937, when the city’s board of aldermen first began limiting the number of hack licenses granted in the city.

That's a whole lot of city driving.

Sermon in which I get pretty shirty about tithing

This is more or less the sermon I preached yesterday because I actually wrote this sucker out. The poor 8:00'ers got a longer version that caused all of them to politely say, "Good to see you" at the end of the service, which is how I knew it totally bombed. The later services got something much more edited, off-book, and streamlined, and seemed to really like it. This, however, is the manuscript version with just a couple of tweaks. Because I am lazy.

This week, I attended a conference called SOCAP, which is a bit hard to explain. SOCAP stands for Social Capital Markets and the conference is (to quote the website) “dedicated to increasing the flow of capital towards social good.” To put it another way, we spent a lot of time talking about money.

I went as part of a specially invited “faith cohort” and I felt a bit out of place in the midst of a bunch of people talking about social impact investing, and entrepreneurship, and the global economy, and the double bottom line, and ROI (which was the only acronym I understood when the week started of the many, many acronyms bandied about).

But one of the reasons I wanted to go to this conference is because I hate the way we in the church talk about money. We are, if you will forgive my language, really half-assed about it. I get the sense that we’re not comfortable with it so we poke it with a stick at a distance, or try to keep it separate from the “real” things that we do.

It kind of reminds me about how I feel about electricity. I’m completely dependent upon it for everything that I do, but I don’t know how to handle it. I know it’s powerful and I’m afraid to get shocked. So I avoid it as best I can, let other people handle it when I can’t, and don’t even want to learn about it because it seems too complicated and too scary.

I think there’s a way in which we in the church – not everyone, but many of us – see money as the electrical system, with the added problem that the system has been given a moral overlay. So this week was like attending a conference of electricians, people who were comfortable with the power of money, and who also respected the danger it might pose. They didn’t see money as moral or immoral in itself, but only in how it was used. As one of the founders who herself is an Episcopal priest said at the opening plenary, “Using our capital to change the world for good is part of who we are.” And, coming from the world of the church where money so often seems to be viewed as a necessary evil, it was amazing to see how these people who felt at home around money operated.

One of those people was a woman from Mercy Housing named Sr. Lillian Murphy. Mercy Housing provides low income housing throughout the United States. As the CEO, Sr. Lillian oversees a budget of approximately 200 million dollars per year, with assets worth more than $1 billion. It was such a pleasure to hear her talk because she sounded like a person who knew very well how to handle electricity. She told us “Very little good can be accomplished or evil avoided without the use of money.” And then went on to recount exactly how many millions of dollars it took for Mercy Housing to accomplish their mission, absolutely at ease with the numbers she threw around.

Sitting next to her on the panel was a banker who had a much more philosophical approach to the topic of money. He told us two things: one, that “money is the store of your values and an agent of change”; and, two, “Do you know where your money spends the night?”

So I’ve been thinking about this idea of money being the store of our values. Because I suspect this is one of the things Jesus is getting at when he tells us to give up all of our possessions. But first, I have a little rant.

One of the ways in which the church has done us a great disservice regarding money is our emphasis on tithing. Because I've got to tell you, I think tithing is antithetical to the gospel.

Tithing is simply transactional. All it requires is a little math, and if you can make the numbers work, you’re done. It requires no thought beyond a little long division. But since when has the Christian life been about “making the numbers work”? Jesus was never interested in ensuring that his followers conformed to a simple external framework. Jesus was interested in seeing people’s lives transformed, and seeing them exhibit love for one another regardless of what the law or custom said. And that is far more challenging than dividing your income by 10 and writing a check.

Here’s another thing about tithing: it assumes that you are not the church. “Give 10 percent of your money to the church,” we’ve blithely announced in stewardship campaigns year after year, not recognizing that you as the church are representing the church in 100 percent of your money, no matter who you give it to. Is that clear? You are the church. The church is not some separate entity.You represent the church through the mission of this parish and your giving towards that. And you represent the church in the money you spend and save and share and invest every day. Because you are the church. You cannot help but represent the church with your money.

And I think that's what Jesus is getting at in the gospel for today. If you are a disciple, then you don't get to set apart some of your friends and family as holy and some as not; you don't get to choose some of your possessions as set apart for God and some not; and you don't get to say that 10 percent of your money goes to good works and the rest is yours to deal with.

Which brings me back to the banker. His words challenge me, and maybe you as well: If money is the store of our values and an agent of change, what values does our money represent? What do we want it to represent? What do we want it to change? Do you know where your money spends the night?

Tithing sounds easy in comparison, doesn’t it? But there is no better time than the present than to sit down and count the cost of true discipleship. May we do so, trusting in God’s everlasting grace and mercy and confident in God's neverfailing love. Amen.

From the SOCAP conference

In the sermon above, I mention being at the SOCAP conference. I'm happy to be able to share this, which was my favorite presentation at the conference.

How animals spend their tax refunds

A few examples. There are many more.

Bats are very sensible. For the most part.

Various & Sundry: Trying hard not to get depressed about things, Grace, and bacon.

It's the final day of the Saintly Kitsch round of Lent Madness and it looks like my man Luke is on to the Final Four, the first time I've had a saint I've written up go this far. Luke had some mighty fine kitsch, which inspired me to create this image.

Cuz that's how we roll round these parts. Booyah.

Let's see what else I've rounded up this week.

OK, I'm starting with the downers of democracy: what the HELL is going on with gun advocacy that, on the one hand says guns shouldn't be regulated so that women can protect themselves from being raped while on the other hand you can't demand that men surrender firearms in domestic abuse situations? IN THE SAME WEEK? Seriously, WHAT THE HELL?! OK, here's my opinion, which I think I've noted before: this has nothing to do with rights and everything to do with market share. This is about selling guns.

Meanwhile, a new gun regulation bill will be brought up in the Senate after the Easter recess "that seeks to enhance background checks for those who purchase guns, and to curb gun trafficking and increase money for school safety." So seriously people, now is the time to contact your representatives about gun control legislation. You need the link to your represetatives? Here you go.

You can also sign this petition to have the USDA set a recommended daily intake of bacon "so that all Americans can be guided on how best to participate in this amazing, nation building food." There are 98 signatures so far; only 99,902 left to go before the government responds!

In news from governments in a parallel universe, the Ministry of Magic brings you this Public Service Announcement:

Might be helpful in our world too. h/t Anibundel

In Race Telations, the historical perspectives edition, Ta-Nehisi Coates reviews Beryl Satter's book Family Properties, which looks at the policies that surrounded the development of the American urban ghetto, focusing on Chicago. Lest you think this is just an issue for poor blacks, he notes that "In the interest of racism, the American taxpayer ended up bankrolling a massive fraud perpetrated on black communities in Chicago."

And on the same topic, one of the most compelling obituaries I read this week was of Dr. Jerome Williams who worked to desegregate St. Louis. "It began in 1963 when Dr. Williams led protest marches of hundreds of fellow physicians as well as other black professionals who were tired of the two-tiered social system in Missouri’s largest city."

His efforts came at a cost. Already limited to practice in the two black hospitals in St. Louis where the state allocated less funds per patient than at white hospitals, he was then rejected from membership in the St. Louis Medical Society because of his role in the protests.

However,

By the 1970s, Dr. Williams was named the first African American on the board of the St. Louis Symphony Orchestra, the State Healing Arts Board, and was selected as the first black president of the St. Louis Community College Board. In 1979, his daughter was the first black woman selected as a maid of honor in the Veiled Prophet Parade which was formally for whites only.

You've heard about the recalled yoga pants, right? The ones that were unfortunately more transparent than wearers bending over might wish? Well, Kevin Roose thinks the company that makes them, Lululemon, handled this recall all wrong.

Lululemon was famously founded on the ideals of Ayn Rand. You think Ayn would have apologized for some see-through Spandex? Hell no. She would have defended the integrity of those pants with her life. "An inventor is a man who asks 'Why?' of the universe and lets nothing stand between the answer and his mind," she wrote in Atlas Shrugged. 

A real Objectivist yoga company would have looked at that sentence, replaced "the answer" with "sheer-bottom yoga pants" and "his mind" with "record-breaking profits," and sold the damn things like hotcakes.

And last but certainly not least, I strongly encourage you to read this wonderful essay on The Lesson of Grace in Teaching by Francis Su, a professor of mathematics at Harvey Mudd. It doesn't matter if you're a teacher or not. You need to know this lesson of grace that he shares so beautifully:

• Your accomplishments are NOT what make you a worthy human being. 
•  You learn this lesson when someone shows you GRACE: good things you didn't earn or deserve, but you're getting them anyway.

May you have a grace-filled weekend. No need to bend over backwards.

The way we think about charity is dead wrong

I've been meaning to watch this TED talk for a while and finally got around to it today, thanks to the Episcopal Cafe. I am in total agreement that our thinking about the non-profit sector and our assignment of morality to money is detrimental to work we would like to do.

As we saw in yesterday's gospel, people get very wound up about issues of money and morality. We often miss the forest for the trees.



I hope you'll take 20 minutes to watch it. Or you can read the transcript.

Various & Sundry: The Sound of the Music of the Wolves of the White Christmas of the Dead. And some other stuff.

Hey, how about we have a normal Friday evening V&S post before the end of 2012. Won't that be fun? Let's see here.

For some lightness, let's start with Tom & Lorenzo's devastating take-down of White Christmas. There were never such devoted sisters. "Honeys, if a gay man over 35 tries to tell you that they don't know EVERY SINGLE WORD to this song, don't believe them. Trust us on this."

Meanwhile, the Baroness Schraeder regrets to inform you that her wedding to Captain Von Trapp has been canceled.

But I don’t want you to be angry at him. We are all adults here. “But Baroness,” so many of my friends have said, “you must be devastated. You yourself are fabulously wealthy, so you cannot have wanted the Captain for his money—you must have truly loved him.” It’s true. But so, I am sure, does his new fiancée, his children’s nanny. Her wardrobe is made of curtains. She’s definitely not a gold digger or anything.

Ha. That will bring us back to dough. (oh oh oh)

Speaking of dough, I thought this article on women and organizational leadership made an absolutely fascinating point: when asked why there was a disparity in leadership representation, the men blamed the system; the women blamed themselves.  It suggests a radically different approach to creating change in an organization which was, in many ways, a huge relief.

Also on the issue of gender/racial balance, the Columbia Journalism Review did officially what I have done only casually and analyzed who gets a NY Times obituary. Among other things, dead people most often went to an Ivy League school. Did you know that? State school people apparently live forever. The gender imbalance is noted in the chart below:

I loved this idea of the Virtual Food Drive from the Alameda County Community Food Bank.  

Why a Virtual Food Drive?

It's the greenest (and easiest) of all food drives

You save the Food Bank precious resources – schedulers, drivers, food sorters and fuel

Your donations allow us to purchase our most-needed items

And, they point out, they can stretch every $1 donated into $4 of food by buying in bulk. Sounds sensible.

Finally, I was very sorry to see that this was the Anglian Wolf Society, not the Anglican Wolf Society. But I think someone ought to start an Anglican Wolf Society. Then we can all have a Wolf Experience and Llama Walk, instead of needing to go to North Bedfordshire. Might be worth a trip, though.

Thoughts on Black Friday

I don't get Black Friday. I could object to it on moral grounds, I suppose, and post an easy rant on consumerism run amok.

But primarily, I don't understand what motivates people to be part of it. And it occurred to me today that perhaps the better thing to do, rather than wag my finger, is simply to ask: If you go to stores on Black Friday, why? What's the appeal? What do you get out of it?

Is it the very competitive nature of the shopping itself that appeals? Because you know you're being taken advantage of by the stores, right?

Or maybe "taken advantage of" is unfair; they're making money today. You're not beating the house at its own game.

But leaving any question of morality out of it, from a strictly monetary point of view, it doesn't make sense to shop today. There are better times to shop for bargains.

***
On the other side of the equation, I'd like to have a private chat with us moralists for a moment. Again, why? Why do we do this?

Every year we have a little chat with people about the terribleness of Black Friday. I suspect it makes us feel good about ourselves. But you could not pay me to go to one of the big box stores today, much less get up at 4 in the morning to do so.

So how moral am I, really? It's not like I'm not going to shop this holiday season. It's just that I'm mostly going to do it from the comfort of my desk, online, having others do the work of shlepping things to my door.

What do we get out of our little lectures? Do they do anything? How can we actually help?

Do we need to quit talking about it as a moral issue and talk about it as a monetary one? Or do we need to stop and listen first? Or do we need to change ourselves? I genuinely want to know, because I hate seeing this play out year after year.

e.g.: Washington Post article: Wal-Mart union protests fail to deter bargain-seeking crowds on Black Friday

Various & Sundry: Patriotic Food, as women bring home the bacon and Alan drinks his tea

Well, I'm not done with all the work I set for myself today, but I crossed a good chunk off my to-do list and I've hit a wall on the lesson I'm revising for CnC Adult, so I'm taking a break to write another blog post of odds and ends goodness before taking the dogs for a walk. Ready? Here you go:

Let's start with bacon. September 1, as I'm sure you know, is International Bacon Day and to celebrate, Archie McPhee posted this 1901 essay on the patriotic nature of American Bacon. "Without bacon, this superbly flourishing domain would in all probability be a howling wilderness at the present moment," it explains.

Let's follow this up with some patriotic ale. I'm pleased to report that, in response to an on-line petition, the White House has released the recipe for its Honey Brown Ale, reportedly the first alcohol brewed or distilled on the White House grounds. Kegger at Obama's!

And while we're talking about food and politics, I'd like to point out the article headlined Canadian Thieves Pull Off  Big Maple-Syrup Heist. Note the lead (emphasis mine):

TORONTO—Sticky-fingered thieves made off with as much as 30 million Canadian dollars (US$30.4 million) worth of maple syrup from a little-known strategic reserve in rural Quebec—leaving authorities to investigate just how much is missing and where it has gone.

Yes, my friends, if they can tap Canada's strategic maple syrup reserve, America's bacon is next! Be alert!

On a less frivolous note (not that there's anything frivolous about maple syrup), PeaceBang explores the "woeful undercompensation" of new clergy

For too long, ministers have jumped with joy at the very notion of getting a pulpit. It’s time to partner more respectfully and professionally with our churches, to negotiate ethical compensation packages and to nicely inform underpaying, over-demanding congregations that you’ll work X amount of hours or weeks for what they’re able to offer. Be clear about that hours, and keep them firm. Then get a second job at someplace local and interesting, tutoring or teaching or making coffee or selling books. The church won’t get into the cozy habit of exploiting clergy and you’ll get to hold a healthy boundary around your professional obligations to them, while staying in touch with non-parish sources of income.

Preach on, PeaceBang.

Tangentially related, I'm interested in the new book The Good Girls Revolt by Lynn Povitch, coming out next Monday, that describes the fight of the women at Newsweek over the opportunity to become writers and reporters. The New York Times has a good write up about it.

Meanwhile, Hanna Rosin, author of the new book The End of Men, also coming out next week, thoughtfully answers the question Why are boys doing so badly?

And then, to finish with a cup of tea, please settle in for seven minutes of Alan Rickman intensity. Oh, I do love this.


Or you can watch it in real time, which is 11 seconds.

What's in your wallet?

In my job at the winery, I help with the sales at the end of the morning tour. Yesterday morning, a man wanted three bottles of wine (which isn't unusual) and paid for it with a Visa (also normal). It was the kind of credit card that struck me as odd: a Liberty University-themed credit card.

In case you don't know, Liberty University is the college founded by Jerry Falwell, Training Champions for Christ since 1971. To say it is conservative is perhaps mild. (If you're looking for a terrific book (full stop), I recommend The Unlikely Disciple by Kevin Roose about his year as a student at Liberty.)

At any rate, there I am at the winery with a man paying for his wine with a Liberty University-themed credit card, which was a bit of a stunner.

Now, I'm not saying this is surprising because I expect Liberty University alums to avoid alcohol, though I do. It's more because of all the terrible things the Bible says about charging interest.

This is not a criticism of the man who bought the wine, incidentally. I just wonder why Liberty University would allow itself to have its image placed on a credit card. Apparently, university-themed credit cards are a thing--and not such a good one. According to one source, "those official school cards are almost always a poor choice because of their lousy terms and high interest rates. It seems the colleges are more interested in making money from their credit card deals than protecting their students."

I guess that's why I found that so shocking. At the same time, though, there's something clever about this. If you pull out a credit card to pay for something and are reminded of what you were taught by this university, you might at least give it some thought.

I don't know. I just thought it was odd.

World Domination Summit: Closing Story

We were about to be dismissed from the World Domination Summit. Our minds were already full to bursting from everything we'd heard and seen. Then the organizer, Chris Guillebeau, came on the stage. He said, "I want to tell you a story. It's an old story, you may already know it.

"There was a man who was about to go on a trip. But he decided before he left he should take some of his money and invest it. So he found a few people and he gave each of them some money and said, 'do something with this while I'm gone.'

"A lot of people have explained this story by talking about the character of the people who got the money and what they did with it. I'm more interested in the person who gave the money. Why did he do that? Why didn't he take it with him, or save it in a safe place? Maybe it's because he believed in the people he was giving it to."

Then he told us that there had been a little profit from the conference, and they had been trying to figure out what to do with it. And then, along came someone who wanted to support the conference through a private donation. When Guillebeau said there wouldn't be any sponsors, the anonymous donor said it wasn't about that. And they tried to figure out what to do.

You know where this is going, don't you? I sure did, sitting there in my seat, thinking, "You're going to do this, aren't you?"

Suddenly, we were in the story, and it wasn't so theoretical any more.

As the attendees at the conference left the theater on Sunday afternoon, we each received an envelope--all 1,000 of us. Inside the envelope was $100 (do the math) and a note saying, "Thanks for making #WDS2012 a fantastic experience. We'd love to see how you put these funds to good use. Start a project, surprise someone, or do something entirely different--it's up to you."

I got my envelope and started crying. Why? Because it Scared. Me. Shitless. What was I going to do with this money? How could I use it wisely and well? How could I turn it into something else, bigger and better than the original investment?

It may be better to give than to receive. I also think it's a hell of a lot easier. My first impulse was to hand that money on to somebody else, somebody who could use it. But I already have $100 to give to others. I think the more challenging thing for me is to figure out something else to do with it, something different. I just have no idea what it is. Yet.

I'll be spending much of the week blogging about my experiences at WDS. I had no idea what to expect from it. I still don't know quite how to explain it. Maybe it has something to do with the underlying assumption that each of us is a good investment. Whatever it was, it was amazing.

Much more to come.

The laborer deserves to be paid

Got an email from a clergy colleague who knew me from my former life as a sign language interpreter.  She forwarded on to me a message from another clergyperson with a Deaf congregant, wondering about resources for finding a cheap interpreter. The priest thought they couldn't afford to pay the professional expense the interpreter was asking.  I wrote back with a suggestion of where to look, but also pointed out that the amount being asked was less than I got paid as a professional interpreter 20 years ago.

Here's what stuck in my craw: the question was not, "Do you know of any resources to find ways to pay a professional interpreter a professional rate?"  It was not, "Do you know of any grants we could apply for?"  It was, "Do you know anyone who will do it for less or for free?"

This "Where can we get it cheap?" attitude devalues work and devalues people.  In this case especially it made me mad; why should the Deaf person get a cheap interpreter?  What kind of quality do you think you're going to get?  Don't you think someone should be paid for providing this service?  This church has the opportunity to provide high-quality interpreting services and employ someone in a down economy.  Instead, they want to half-ass it at minimal cost.

I know churches are strapped.  But it also gets my goat that churches' first reaction often seems to be, "Where can we get a cut-rate version?" rather than "What do we need to do to pay someone a fair amount to do a good job as we provide a ministry to others?"

Here's a thought for you: if you can't pay people for their work, then maybe you are not ready to provide this ministry.  Here's another: quit being so cheap.

Some practical advice for clergy considering a parish job

Last week, I posted some practical advice for pastoral search committees. That advice had been part of a sermon in which I confessed that I lied on the ethics portion of the General Ordination Exam--and got the highest possible score.

What I didn't mention was that the ethics question had to do with whether or not a rector should consider taking a new job.  I don't have the answer I gave any more; what I remember was that I wrote a whole lot of Christian blather about discernment and the leading of the Holy Spirit when the truth was far more practical and (I feel) better serves both the clergy and the church.

I sense that many of us use spiritual blather to mask or justify our more personal or practical reasons for making the decisions we do.  I think that's a shame that we feel we cannot give our real reasons.

Don't believe me?  There was one time when I decided that a parish was not right for me.  I told various friends what I had chosen, and one (also a priest) asked me I had really discerned, wanting to know my spiritual reasons for saying no.  I could certainly gin some up, but to this day I resent the fact that turning down a job needed to be approved by spiritual signs when what it boiled down to was, "Not interested.  Sorry."

There are some jobs I'm very sorry I didn't get, jobs to which I felt called.  But I have also turned down a few positions, and I regret none of them.  But, my goodness, the pressure I have felt to take them from people who had all sorts of oh-so-spiritual reasons why I should--oh-so-spiritual reasons that just happened to coincide with what they wanted.

So with that in mind, here is my very blunt advice on the whole job search process.

• You need to look out for yourself and your own needs.  First and foremost.  And it sounds selfish and horrible, but I don't care.  This is priority one.  Does the job offer you enough to live on?  Will you be able to take care of yourself and your family?  Will your basic needs for your health and well-being be met? Will you be able to do this job without going into debt?  (You would not believe...well, maybe you would.) Who is going to take care of you? By and large, my friends, you are going to need to take care of yourself, so make sure you have the resources to do so.  And by "resources," I mean money, housing, health insurance, friends, and time off.  Spiritual resources are not enough.

• "I'm interested!" is a good enough reason.   Forget the spiritual clap-trap.  Does the job sound fun? Interesting?  Is it in a place you'd like to live?  A place that will provide opportunities for you and your family?  Does the job description intrigue you?  Well, then, apply.

• Pity is not a good enough reason.  Just because a parish neeeeeeds a priest and you have the skills and you could heeeelp them is not a good enough reason to apply.  Do NOT be guilted into applying for a job.  Guilt, pity, and shame are no basis for a good working relationship.

• Be honest about what you can and cannot do.  I've already told the pastoral search committee that priests lie in interviews, but let me tell you: don't lie in interviews.  If they're looking for an administrator and you're no good at administration, don't say, "I'm great at administration."  Say something like, "I can do x and y, but I will need someone to help me with a and b.  Here is how I have been able to manage those tasks in other places."  If they need someone who is good at something you're not good at, you are not the person for the job.

• Negotiate at the outset.  See "looking out for your needs," above.  Do you need a day to be with your family?  Do you need to have your office painted before you move into it?  Do you need internet access?  Do you need a cap placed on the hours you work in a week?  Be clear about it--as clear as you can, given that you don't know all the circumstances.  Now is your best time to set expectations.  Stick to them.

• Get the money.  See "looking out for your needs," above.  One thing I really regret in my church career is not pushing harder on the financial side.  I don't even want to think of how many thousands of dollars I've lost because I did not say, "that is not acceptable."  One thing I'm proud of is turning down a job that paid below the set diocesan minimum (see "pity is not a good enough reason," above).  I probably would have lost one other job, or walked away from it, because they were not following their own diocesan standards for salaries, but I took it anyway.  I still regret that I did not stand my ground and say, "This needs to be different" and let the chips fall where they may.

One more thing about the money side: as long as the Church can get away with underpaying its clergy, it will do so.  And the way for that to change is for clergy not to take jobs where they are underpaid, or to do part-time work for the part-time pay you are being offered.  "Diocesan minimum" is a very nice concept, but in my experience, diocesan minimums are made to be broken.  Hold the Church accountable to its own standards.  This is not being greedy.  It is an act of courage and an act of justice--not just for yourself, but for others.  And be aware that it may cost you jobs.

•  Get it in writing.  Just do.  When you negotiate new terms, when you agree on hours, when you settle on a salary...get it in writing.

• Sometimes it's just dumb luck. I was just looking this morning this morning at the readings for May 20th, and the Acts reading is about the call of Matthias, which was basically eenie, meenie, meinie, moe.   I think we downplay the role of luck in the search process in general.   Leading of the Holy Spirit, my ass.  If you get a job you really wanted, don't get all holy-moly on us.  Maybe your resume was at the top of the pile when people were fresh and excited.  If you don't get a job, don't bow your head and ask what you did wrong.  Maybe you had the same name as the search committee chair's horrible first grade teacher.  There are people involved in this search process, and people are people.

• Remember it's just a job.  Really.  It's a job.  Yes, it's a calling, but no more or less than being a professor or a politician or a police officer.  It's. A. Job.  Treat it with the respect it deserves, but always remember that reverence belongs to God alone.

End rant.

Various & Sundry, September 30

Let's see here...What have I been stockpiling during the week? Mostly aid and development news, interestingly, but there might have been a bit of baseball news as well.

How about them Red Sox, eh? According to Nate Silver in the NY Times, the chances of the Red Sox not getting a Wild Card spot was one in 278 million. Maybe they should all play the Lottery.

 I loved this video revealing the amazing customs of the Austrians. I admit I didn't watch it all, but what I did watch was revealing. I doubt you'll ever watch a National Geographic special the same way again.
 

In a similar vein, this post on what to consider before volunteering overseas is an eye-opener.

 Also in the world of aid and development, this profile of Paul Polak was fascinating. Among other things, he developed treadle pumps that help people in remote areas get access to water. Whoo-ee, does he have some harsh things to say about traditional aid programs! Just to make sure you see it, here's the final question:

Q. What are your principles for success? 

A. In 1981, I said, “I’m going to interview 100 $1-a-day families every year, come rain or shine, and learn from them first.” Over 28 years, I’ve interviewed over 3,000 families. I spend about six hours with each one — walking with them through their fields, asking what they had for breakfast, how far their kids walk to school, what they feed their dog, what all their sources of income are. This is not rocket science. Any businessman knows this: You’ve got to talk to your customers.

Well, there's a notion!

In obituary news, I hope you all heard about Wangari Maathai, the first African woman to win the Nobel Peace Prize. She's the founder of the Green Belt Movement--an incredible person.

Wangari Maathai, who was planting a tree in the shadow of Mount Kenya when told she had won, was clear: “Wars are fought over resources. If we did a better job of managing our resources sustainably, conflicts over them would be reduced. Protecting the global environment is directly related to securing peace.”

Finally, very much in non-aid related news, let us all enjoy either for the first time or once again this clever and oh-so-satisfying advertisement.
 

 What are the odds?

You can get it on eBay

And that includes a private dinner for 4 with President Bill Clinton. I'm not kidding.

I'm very curious to see how much this goes for. Stay tuned.

Update: The dinner went for $102,450.00. Travel to Little Rock not included.

Various and Sundry, 11/13

It's been a super-busy week and I didn't get to blog as I would have liked. But other people did, and here is some of it.

I still haven't dared to watch The Walking Dead, but that doesn't stop me from admiring the winner of the 2010 Zombie Safe House Competition. I'm glad the architects are on board and thinking about these things. Lorin, I'm looking forward to your 2011 entry.

Speaking of the actual dead, there were a number of obituaries I particularly liked this week.

First up: Charles Reynolds, a magician's magician. He helped create the tricks used by the famous illusionists. “Like most boys, he was interested in magic,” his wife said. “But most of them grow out of it. He never did.”

I've got to tip my hat to Jule Sugarman, the bureaucrat who made Head Start a success. At Obit Mag, as he observes the focus on this bureaucratic success, "Grim Reader can’t help wondering whether the Obitosphere’s focus on the wonders of fast-moving institution-building wouldn’t have been different if the current ambitious Democratic president weren’t facing a Congress out to undo his still very much unbuilt signature program."

I LOVED Julia Clements, the high priestess of flower arranging who died at the age of 104. "The author Beverley Nichols once described her as 'the head of a vast salvation army in which souls are saved through the medium of flowers'." The story of how and why she started got me all teary. Pass this one on to your Altar Guild!

I was intrigued by the obituary for Peter Hilton who was a codebreaker at Bletchley Park during WWII.

During his time at Bletchley Park, Hilton was given every fourth week off to hone his cryptanalytical skills; by way of a change of mental gear, he helped Turing solve chess problems, puffed on his pipe, and once spent a sleepless night composing one of the world's longest palindromes: DOC, NOTE: I DISSENT. A FAST NEVER PREVENTS A FATNESS. I DIET ON COD.

Finally, obit-wise, I LOVED this one as much for the headline as anything: Howard Van Hyning, Percussionist and Gong Enthusiast, Dies at 74. The story of the gongs in question is quite touching, actually.

One of the things I did this week was try to reduce my wireless phone bill. I found a very easy way to reduce my 3G coverage costs, thanks to this article. If you have 3G on AT&T I highly recommend you check this out.

Finally (although there's more I could share), I recommend this blog entry about offering our prayers for those who have died in combat. Simply lovely.

Have a wonderful weekend.

Churches and charity, part 2

Yesterday, I posted the comment I put up in response to this blog in which I said basically, I wouldn't look to the church for fundraising tips; church fundraising is often abusive and plays the "God wants you to" card.

On the other hand, the author does have a point that what churches do have is a platform week after week for making the case for charity. The tricky part is, are we making a case for donations, or are we making a case for becoming generous people in everything we do?

Of course this isn't an either/or. One problem, though, is that I think the two tend to get conflated: "If you give generously to the church, then you are a generous person" kind of a thing.

And it's understandable because there is the inherent pressure in any organization to come up with the funds to keep it running; people who provide more of those funds are of course going to be perceived as more generous in a way that, say, the widow putting in her mite is not. Sometimes generosity is hard to see.

What I am wondering is if there is a way to tease out the work of fundraising from the work of training people in generosity. The way our churches are currently configured, it's very difficult. The weekly passing of collection plates and elevation of the gifts strikes me as tricky because it currently suggests that that the money we give to the church are our gifts.

What if we encouraged people week by week to include in the collection not only money but also messages expressing how they were generous that week, what gifts they gave to people in need, what other charities they supported, what they did that made a difference. People are generous in so many ways; I think it would be wonderful to create a way for us to acknowledge all the gifts the people of God give to God.

Churches and charity, part 1

A couple of days ago, I posted a quote from an article that basically says people in the U.S. can be more generous; non-profits should take a look at how churches do fundraising because religious services are really a form of marketing.

Hmmm...

OK, so my reaction is colored in part because I was laid off from a church position when the pledges from our annual appeal didn't cover my salary, so my appreciation for the church's fundraising abilities is somewhat tainted. But aside from that, this raises some questions. I'm still pondering all of this. I meant to write something today but still don't have it straight in my mind.

However, at the Anonymous Historian's urging, I will start by posting the comment I left on the article itself. Tell me if this sounds right to you:

As an Episcopal priest and someone who has worked both in non-profit development and microfinance, I thought I would respond. I'm still thinking about this, though, and know that this response is incomplete, to say the least.

I have to say, I'm not sure what a good job churches are doing at our marketing if the message you perceive we are sending has nothing to do with--you know--God. I was kind of hoping that "Love God and love your neighbor" would be our take-away. I don't think "be charitable" (in terms of money) ought to be the primary message of churches, but what's sad as I think about it is how clearly I can perceive this has been the case. Take, for example, the 700 club whose very name refers to the amount of money one contributes to belong.

One advantage I think churches have over most humanitarian organizations is that church leaders can claim, "God wants you to give money to this cause." The Bible in all its authority can be used, often in negative ways, to urge members to contribute their financial support. "God loves a cheerful giver" can be used to guilt trip (or "encourage" depending on your perspective) people not only to give money, but to be happy about it--with the implicit suggestion that God isn't pleased if you aren't happy about forking over the dough. We are told almost every year as pledges are collected that giving a tenth of one's income is the expectation God has of us.

In a lot of ways, the church has been incredibly abusive in its fundraising techniques. Just look at indulgences. Look at the popular prosperity gospel churches today.

Don't get me wrong: churchgoers are generous people and the church does train people in generosity. Lots of good organizations and worthy causes have benefited from this. Churches do a lot of good work. That said, as an insider and as a fundraiser, I think churches do a lousy job in fundraising, per se. I'm not sure that looking to churches as a good model is really how you want to go.

More when I have more.

Pre-stewardship drive discussion starter

From an...interesting article about charitable giving:

Religious services are a form of marketing. What else would you call being held captive to a rehearsed one-hour message repeated once a week, every week, week after week after week? It's a particularly productive form of marketing — rich, experiential, and communal. It's much more powerful than a website banner ad that your retina can filter out before reaching your brain, or a TV commercial you can make disappear with TIVO. You have to sit there and listen. The message is simple: Be charitable, both to your religious institution and to humanity in general. And it works.

If you don't like the word marketing, then call it solicitation, or donor cultivation, or major gift development. Any way you slice it, it's a form of fundraising.

Discuss. More thoughts later this week.