Happy Birthday Terry Virgo!

The Leaders Poole: Happy Birthday Terry Virgo!

Matthew Hosier expresses appreciation for Terry Virgo. I agree wholeheartedly with everything Matthew has written.

I would add one other quality that commands my respect.

Terry is very generous. Especially with his own money. He is, to quote something I have heard him say several times, "seriously committed to hilarious giving."

Happy birthday Terry.

If you enjoyed this post, get free updates by email or RSS.

Thomas Aquinas on the Credit Crunch

To take usury for money lent is unjust in itself, because this is to sell what does not exist, and this evidently leads to inequality, which is contrary to justice.

Thomas Aquinas,
Dominican friar and theologian (1225-1274).

source

The Church and Money - a Historical Perspective

Following an occasional series on the issue of money in the church portrayed in the new testament writings, I now take a slight historical detour to look at "Christian attitudes to finance in the first four centuries" - the title of an article by Frances Young of Birmingham University. I am grateful to Early Church for the heads up on this article.

Frances Young highlights three key themes in her essay:

1. The Ban on Lending Money with Interest

Young outlines the growth and consolidation of this teaching from its roots in the Old Testament commands (Exod 22.25; Deut 23.19; Ps 15.5; and Ezek 18.8) to its application to, first church leaders, then all Christians by the ninth century.

Although not opposed to banking as such, the early church did protest against the growing consolidation of wealth in the hands of a powerful few and the use of their economic power to lend money with interest.

2. The Use of Money to Care for the Poor

Young also provides some fascinating statistical data to illustrate the nature of the church's concern for the poor during this period. In the third century, for instance, the church in Rome is recorded as supporting 1,500 widows and other poor persons at an annual cost of between 1/2 and 1 million sesterces.

Just after 400 AD, the church in Antioch was supporting 3,000 virgins and widows, and the Church in Constantinople financed the care of 50,000 poor people.

It was during this period that some of the more well known quotations by outsiders commenting on the church's practice were noted and written down. The pagan satirist Lucian, for instance, notes of the Christians that "their original law-giver taught them that they were all brothers."

Tertullian, meanwhile, describes the varied use of the church common fund:

• feeding poor Christians
• providing for orphans both inside and outside of the church
• paying for the funeral costs of poor Christians
• supporting Christians in prison and those sent to the mines as punishment for their faith

Against this backdrop, Tertullian quotes outsiders as saying of the Christians, "Only look how they love one another!"

At a later date, the Emperor Justin expresses frustration in his attempts to revive the fortunes of the pagan cults. Forming imperial charitable institutions to rival those of the Christians, Justin writes, "It is disgraceful that all men should see our people lack aid from us, when no Jew has ever had to beg and the impious Galileans [i.e. Christians] support not only their own poor but ours as well."

3. The Support of Church Leaders

The church in Rome in the third century is reported as having 150 paid "clergy" exercising a variety of serving/leadership functions.

Many of the church's salaried workers during this period were, in fact, appointed to administer the church's communal charity funds - a development anticipated in the narrative in Acts 6 concerning the appointment of the "seven" to care for the daily distribution of food to widows in the Jerusalem church.

Conspicuous for its absence until the 4th century is any reference to the use of money to buy or maintain buildings. By the fifth century, however, as Christianity became the official religion of the empire and started to receive government allowances, the proportion of the church's finances directed towards the poor dropped to about one-fifth, the rest being spent on the clergy and the upkeep of buildings (pictured).

Where Does the Money Go in Church - Part 2

We've seen that one of the ways money was used in the New Testament church was to provide the necessities of life for oneself and one's family.

Beyond this, early on in Acts, we see money being used to help other believers in the local church. The key passages are well known and both describe life in the Jerusalem church:

All the believers were together and had everything in common. Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need. (Acts 2:44-45)


All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they shared everything they had. With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and much grace was upon them all. (Acts 4:32-33)


Both passages begin with a description of a state of mind and finish with a description of certain activities that arose from that state.

In chapter two we are told by Luke that this group of believers "devoted themselves" to four things:

1) the apostles' doctrine
2) the fellowship
3) the breaking of bread
4) prayer

This devotion then found expression in a way of life in which "all the believers had everything in common" and in which they "gave to anyone as he had need."

Evangelical commentators have sometimes got their proverbial knickers in a twist over this passage. Prompted, perhaps, in the mid-20th century by a fear of communism, many of that century's commentaries go to considerable lengths to argue that this "common life" was extraordinary, experimental and non-binding on believers in every age.

Presumably, these helpful commentators would not take such a view of being devoted to the apostles' doctrine, but would see that as an excellent example to be followed by Christians today.

Actually, devotion to the four things that the Jerusalem believers were devoted to will tend to produce similar ways of thinking in believers of all ages.

Apostolic doctrine

• Apostolic doctrine was soteriological - focused on God's act of salvation in Christ - and tended to produce worship and thanksgiving.

• Apostolic doctrine was also eschatological - focusing on the coming of the Kingdom of God and the passing away of this present evil age - and tended to loosen ties to the things of this world.

• It was also communitarian - emphasizing God's plan to bring Jew and Gentile together into one new man in Christ - and tended to produce unity and equality

• Finally, this doctrine was ethical - love being the fulfillment of the law and the greatest command - and highlighted one's moral responsibility to one's fellow man

The fellowship

In a similar, but perhaps more direct way, the church's devotion to "the fellowship" was an obvious way in which their mind set was shaped with regard to the sharing of possessions.

Fellowship, at its most basic level, means "sharing" or "common-ness" , the word (koinonea) being the root of our English words common, community and communism. These early believer were, according to Luke, "devoted" to this practical idea of sharing/participating together/being community.

Sharing their possessions was a natural outworking of this devotion.

The breaking of bread

There is not a consensus among scholars as to the precise meaning of this phrase and, in particular, the extent to which it refers to the "Lord's Supper" of bread and wine.

The phrase is used by Paul in his Corinthian correspondence with reference to the remembrance of the death of Christ through the act of eating bread and drinking wine. I have also argued elsewhere in this blog that the early church did in fact share the bread and wine in the context of an actual meal with real food present. This was certainly the case when the original meal was eaten by the Lord and the disciples the night before his arrest.

What is clear is that the phrase "the breaking of bread" does refer to eating food together and that it was a practice that the Jerusalem church was devoted to.

Prayer

So much has been written and said about prayer in the early church that I feel there is little I could add to the wealth of understanding on the subject.

Perhaps there is just one perspective that may be relevant. It is that the devotion to prayer enjoyed by these believers was present in the context of community life - in fact, perhaps the most extraordinary and beautiful community life recorded in Scripture.

Perhaps you're different, but personally I find it more natural to pray (even for long periods of time and into the night) when I am living in community with brothers and sisters who are devoted to the apostles' doctrine, devoted to the shared life and devoted to eating together often and remembering the Lord's death and resurrection.

I would go so far as to say that were you and I to be living in such a community, prayer would flood out of us. The healthy peer-pressure would be irresistible!

This began as a post about sharing possessions. It is still about that, but as an expression of devoted lives.

Christians sometimes get very nervous about sharing possessions with those in need. Sometimes it's because we don't see it as the overflow of a life devoted to sharing the truth of the gospel, sharing food, sharing the Lord's supper and sharing prayer.

Where Does the Money Go in Church?

Have you ever stopped and thought about what the early believers did with their money?

We know that the Lord had some challenging things to say about money and possessions and that he practiced what he preached. We also know that the early church tried to put this teaching into practice to some extent. The question is, where did this money go? What was it used for? Who managed the process and who benefited from it? I offer the following posts as a reasonable summary of the way that money was used in the New Testament churches. Any thoughts, responses or disagreements, please leave a comment.

1. To provide the necessities of life

Obvious, I know, but not always highlighted. It's worth noting that in some churches, teaching on "money" often takes the form of teaching on "giving", which of course is only one aspect of the subject area.

The Old Testament background makes it clear that God provided materially for his people in order that they may be clothed, fed and sheltered from the elements. The New Testament writers insist on the duty of adult believers to provide for themselves and their extended families. Relevant verses include 1 Timothy 5:8 and Titus 3:14. Paul reminds the churches he planted of his own example of working to provide his needs and implies that those in the local church who live otherwise are not following sound doctrine (2 Thes 3:6-8). The neglect of such personal and family duty was severely criticized by the Lord Jesus when he rebuked the Pharisees for their super spirituality In Matthew chapter 15:

Jesus replied, "And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition? For God said, 'Honor your father and mother' and 'Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.'But you say that if a man says to his father or mother, 'Whatever help you might otherwise have received from me is a gift devoted to God,' he is not to 'honor his father' with it. Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition. You hypocrites! Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you: " 'These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. They worship me in vain; their teachings are but rules taught by men.'"

Here's a question: when a church is holding a gift day (towards a building project, for instance), is it ethical to encourage members, explicitly or implicitly, to give away money that they have set aside for food? Or, what about money that they would otherwise have put into a saving fund for their children's education? Or a pension fund to cover the costs of their retirement? I know this happens. I also know that some believers later come to regret having acted in this way. The latter group do not always get the chance to publicly testify to God's provision in their lives. As a result, sometimes church members are only hearing some of the outcomes of acting in this way.

Is it right? And should not our teaching on money begin with these more mundane principles of provision for self and family before we start encouraging extravagant giving (a subject I will return to in a future post)?