The church is seen and run as a non-profit organization more than any other approach or structure in the United States. This is because many churches choose to become a 501c3 non-profit organization to gain some governmental, business, and other organizational benefits. The organization structure has a board of directors who set the vision for the organization. While there are tax benefits to being not-for-profit, the organization still needs funding to accomplish its board-directed mission and/or vision. Organizations, then, seek sources of funding. They may do this by directly approaching individuals, putting together funding campaigns, and/or having fundraising events. Money from these campaigns and events, then, underwrite the mission and vision. To the extent that the funding does not come in, the vision does not get accomplished.
Life Bridge, following this perspective, would need to pull together a board of directors to put together a vision for the church. Once the vision is agreed upon, the church would need to get to work soliciting funding from the church and the community to live out this vision. Funding campaigns may fundraising events, educational opportunities, commitment/pledge opportunities, and celebration when the commitment and funding goals are reached. When enough funding does not come in, the church board would decide what parts of the plan need to be cut, essentially deciding which parts of the vision will not happen. Two things would need to be kept in front of everyone: money and vision. This would keep people motivated to give and give them reason to celebrate.
This is perhaps the closest structure and approach to the picture we find of the New Testament church. It is not exact, though, and we would need to carefully take some things into consideration.
First of all, the church is not led by a board of directors who vote. If the church set up the bi-laws, however, to ensure that board members are mature members of the Body of Christ (1 Timothy 3; Titus 1:6-9), that could put the right people in the room. The bi-laws would also need to indicate that the board would seek leading in its decisions from the Holy Spirit (James 1:5-8), would be in keeping with God-Inspired Scripture (2 Timothy 3:16-17), and would only move forward with decisions where there is 100% unity (Ephesians 4:2-6; Acts 15). Of course, the problem would still be that the law would require that all board members be on the same page, where God’s Spirit may lead them to different parts of Christ’s Body (1 Corinthians 12, Romans 12, Ephesians 4:7ff). Adding law to God’s Spirit always gets complicated.
Secondly, while God’s leaders, Old Covenant and New, did ask for funding to fulfill God’s vision, it was never anything less than an act of worship (Exodus 23:19; Leviticus 27:13; Numbers 18:26). Giving was always led by God (Acts 4:31-34). Fund raising, then, for God’s Church cannot be presented as anything other than an act of worship and thanksgiving to God. We need to be careful here. Doing a “good thing” is not always the same as living out God’s call (Matthew 7:21). We are always expected to live out God’s call. Asking for funding is fine. Communicating vision is also good. We need to make sure it is God’s vision, though, and Spirit-led giving.
Finally, God never gives us permission to stop living out God’s vision when there is not enough money (Matthew 28:19-20; 1 Timothy 6:6-10). In other words, money is not necessary for ministry (Matthew 23:25; 2 Peter 2:3). God’s Spirit is necessary for ministry (1 Timothy 6:11-12). Money is a tool God uses sometimes and does not use at other times. Money needs to be dropped down, somehow, to the appropriate priority. It is a tool used by God when God wants to use it. It’s a way we can worship and participate in the Body of Christ (1 Timothy 6:17-19), but not the controlling factor in God’s church. This is where the Church is different from a non-profit organization.
No comments:
Post a Comment