DE PONDERINGS by Kevin Kessler

In a book I recently read, Sacrilege by Hugh Halter, I learned that churches in America spend about 85 percent of their income on themselves leaving, of course, 15 percent for outreach or support to judicatory/denominational efforts. The author provided additional information to making his point a bit more vivid. He estimated conservatively that we have about 400,000 churches in America with an average of 70 people and a median income of about $100,000. Doing the math indicates these churches contribute approximately $6,000,000,000 toward the desperate needs of people.

I thought it would be interesting to know what percentage of the U.S. Federal Budget is used for welfare. As complicated as the federal budget is I wondered how difficult it would be to nail this down. I found on The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities website that 13 percent of the federal budget is used for Safety Net Programs. The church has a 2 percent edge on the federal government. Really nothing to brag about.

Okay, the point is not to put a guilt trip on the church. Guilt is never a good motivator. But maybe it’s helpful to consider what the results might be if the percentages were different. How much more good would be done in the world if less were kept in the church and more given to those in need?

Talking about percentages may not even be the right conversation to be engaging in. What if we changed the focus from dollars and percentages to what we are called to do with the resources we have? Our mission according to scripture is to help the widow, the poor, the sick, and the impoverished to the point that needs disappear. Acts 4:34-35 provides the basis for this understanding: “There were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned lands or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales and put it at the apostles’ feet and it was distributed to anyone as he had need.”

Author Hugh Halter suggests that it would indeed be amazing the increased amount of good deeds the church could do if it kept only 50 percent for itself. Indeed! Practical? Probably not. But it never hurts to strive for a more equitable balance, especially understanding that our call is to eliminate needs. With this understanding of call foremost on our hearts and in our minds, I’m confident we’ll be motivated to narrow the gap between what we keep and what we give to those in need. What do you think?