While many Christians give to their local church, many only give directly to specific people and causes in the name of careful stewardship. Their reasoning goes something like this: “If I give to my church, while some of it goes to its various ministries, much of it funds staff salaries, building overhead, fellowship events, and VBS crafts. To be sure, those are good things, but I want my financial generosity to help starving children, trafficked women, villages without clean water, and missionaries. It’s not that my church isn’t important. I just think my money can make a bigger difference if I give it elsewhere.”
As long as believers give generously to needy people and worthy causes, do they really need to give to their local church?
Who Funds the Church?
Of all the justifications I’ve heard for not giving to the local church, the “maximum impact” argument is the strongest I’ve come across. After all, sheltering children in Uganda does seem more urgent than helping fund your church’s weekend parenting conference.
And yet, as intuitive as this line of reasoning might seem, it’s problematic to make perceived impact the sole determinative metric for how we give.
While there are a variety of reasons believers ought to give to their local church, the NT repeatedly offers one that renders the “impact only” giving strategy unbiblical despite being well-intended.
Consider for a moment: How has God designed the church to be supported financially? Who funds its ministries and ministers?
Students of church history know that in the past, the state served as the church’s primary benefactor. Indeed, the title ‘Magisterial Reformer’ refers to Protestants like Luther and Calvin who “worked for the reconstruction of Christendom in alliance with the secular magistrates of Europe”[1]
While well-meaning Christians continue to debate about church-state relations, it’s important to recognize that the Scriptures themselves never place the responsibility of bankrolling the church at the feet of Caesar. Instead, they call the church’s members—the believers who directly benefit from its ministers and ministries—to provide the needed resources.
Not Charity, but Fairness
For Paul, giving isn’t merely a call to dig deep and show compassion. It’s often presented as an issue of fairness.
For example, while he personally forgoes financial support, he exhorts the Corinthians to provide materially for those who sow among them spiritually: “The plowman should plow in hope and the thresher thresh in hope of sharing in the crop. If we have sown spiritual things among you, is it too much if we reap material things from you? If others share this rightful claim on you, do not we even more?” (1 Cor. 9:10–12).
Similarly, in Galatians 6:6, Paul writes, “Let the one who is taught the word share all good things with the one who teaches.” Finally, Paul tells Timothy: “Let the elders who rule well be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in preaching and teaching. For the Scripture says, ‘You shall not muzzle an ox when it treads out the grain,’ and, ‘The laborer deserves his wages.” (1 Tim. 5:17–18).
For Thomas Schreiner, Paul’s logic is straightforward: “Those who proclaim the gospel have sown, so to speak, spiritual seed, and because they have done so, they should reap a material harvest—that is, they should be supported financially.”[2]
Contribute Where You Benefit
Notice that in each of the exhortations cited above, Paul consistently articulates two principles: (1) Those who give themselves to teaching the Word should be financially supported and (2) their financial support should come from those who benefit from their instruction.
Providing the “laborer’s wages” isn’t the responsibility of the state or a few wealthy church members—it’s the collective responsibility of the believers who reap spiritual fruit from those who labor among them in preaching and teaching.
Stated plainly: If you benefit, you should contribute.
Properly examining your giving strategy is not a matter of asking, “Do Paul’s instructions resonate with me?” but “Am I doing what God’s Word says? Are those who are sowing spiritually among me reaping materially from me?”
If you answer, “No, because I think my money can serve better ends by giving it elsewhere,” then not only are you disregarding apostolic instruction, but you’re also allowing your share of the burden to fall on someone else—in the name of God-honoring generosity!
Don’t Forget Commonsense
We have no problem giving money to things we value.
That’s why it’s difficult to conceive of believers who tip their server after a meal out (after 45 minutes of service) more than they gave to their church last year. After all, the church is not a mere product we consume but the blood-bought institution ordained by God to make and grow disciples of all nations.
Similarly, if you have Netflix, Amazon Prime, or Disney+, it’s because you value the benefits it offers enough to pay for it.
And yet, what does it say if we compensate Netflix because we value Stranger Things, but don’t give a penny to the church that invests in our souls?
If your local church isn’t interested in disciple making or doesn’t benefit your soul in the long term, by all means find another one (after you’re certain that church is really the problem). But to regularly gain spiritual benefit from its various ministries and to make no financial contribution is simply a failure to submit to Scripture.
Both-And
Must believers restrict their giving to the local church? Absolutely not. As a pastor, I directly support a number of worthy causes and individuals and encourage others to do the same as they have opportunity. Rather, we should make sure our relief-oriented giving serves as a supplement to—not a substitute for—local church giving. Scripture calls us to more than giving materially where we reap spiritually, but not less.
[1] Diarmaid MacCulloch, The Reformation: A History (New York: Penguin Books, 2005), 143 (Kindle Edition).
[2] Thomas R. Schreiner, 1 Corinthians: An Introduction and Commentary, TNTC (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2018), 186.