We'll take their money with little restriction, but put limits on how they can use their talents. Why?

We'll take their money, and if they are especially gifted by God with lots of money and want to give that money to us, we'll take as much of it as they want to give.

However, the same isn't true for talent.  If they are especially gifted by God with lots of talent and they want to give us that talent, we worry about whether or not others will be offended by their talent and limit what they can give.

How can this be considered OK?

Views: 208

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

LOL, Cory I loved this post, I could see all sorts of implications here. 

 

We don't ask where the money comes from "for conscience sake", we would rather think of all 'our projects' we could do by taking all that 'filthy lucre', sorry I mean lovely dollars / sterling / euros. 

 

Now as for the talents, we suddenly remember that this is God's house and after all we must be careful to preserve the peace and godliness of God's house.

 

Hey Cory, this is tongue in cheek but hopefully it will stimulate someone to post something more serious, sorry I'm still smiling thinking about this one.

That sounds about as misguided as the minister we once had who preached that unless we had an organ and a wooden pulpit on stage we were missing God's purpose as a church.
I wonder what would have happened if these guys had been roommates in Bible College? :)

That is funny.  I've seen more churches screwed by Christian companies than not.  As a service provider myself, I have had to "fire" more churches for racking up huge bills and then defaulting on them than any other kind of company.  Granted, I've only had to fire five clients over the years, but most of them are churches who won't pay their bills.  

 

Wow.  There is a lot of truth to this.

When I was as kid, I invented an imaginary country, sort of like Narnia.  It was peaceful, and the people were essentially Christians.  It still exists in my head (just like in Lewis's or maybe some of yours!); but the other day I thought about it and realized that it had no church buildings, and that I was perfectly content to keep it that way.  Yet I really love going to and being a part of church.  Don't understand it.  Part of it is the whole material mess.  At least today, the economy is forcing us to use our church buildings as nesting places for lots of purposes that are valuable to the community.  Still, if I were to put churches in my imaginary country, they would be small enough to hear music and speech without microphones.  Can you imagine how lovely church would be without microphones and amps and digital delay?  Clear off the sound board and make the sound table into a dinner table for communion together?

Don't blame me for these thoughts.  I'm from Oregon.

I agree here, Jesus, did not ask us to build buildings. He said He would build the church not us; and He preached under a tree or on a mountain top. Love it.
No sooner did I post that, but this morning I went to church and led worship with 250 sluggin' watts of power making my voice big, and I loved it; and then we did the traditional service and I played a massive Bach prelude with honkin' reeds and mixtures on an exquisite and expensive organ, and I loved doing that, too.  It will probably take either a Bad-Guy Government shutting down our churches or a depression bankrupting us to take away our musical power toys; but the Lord saw fit to equip all (well, most) human beings with voices that sing and harmonize with one another, and if all we ever did was sing under trees and on montain tops, I would be grateful for the voice and ready to praise God with it.

Not a fair comparison actually. You are talking about accepting money vs. employing talent. One is coming in, the other is pushing outward. 

 

We put similar restrictions on Preachers and Teachers who are on staff. Since there is a message being put forth, we all feel that it's important that the message sync with our charters and statements of faith etc. If a guy came into our church and "freely" offered to teach, we would first ask about his theological positions and beliefs. Music isn't much different in that respect. 

 

However, with money, it's just money. Once we get it, we budget it and restrict the heck out of it. And if the giver isn't ok with that, we'll give it back. Further, we do care who contributes. If the giver wants to use his contributions to influence the direction of our congregation, we'll say, "no thanks". (We've all seen that monster at work at one time or another, eh?)

In all practical senses, money is worthless without talent.  In any economic model, the most valuable asset is the talent, from the people.  Why?  Because talented people are still talented even if there is no money.  

 

Additionally, money in the hands of untalented money managers is disastrous.  

 

This is about giving.  People have only themselves to give.  Sometimes that is their money, other times it is their talents.  Sometimes it is both.  And if we are honest, nobody has either without God gifting it in the first place.  

In all practical senses, money is worthless without talent.

 

But talent is useless without direction. Direction comes from being restricted in some way. It's the bit in the horse's mouth, the rudder on the boat. Whether it's money or musical talent, we have a vision for how it gets used. If it's a pastor, a sweeper, a dishwasher, a counselor, a guitar player or a gardener - it's the same thing. They offer their services and we say, "thank you for coming, here is what I'd like you to do." I don't see how it can be any other way.

 

 

we'll take as much of it as they want to give.

 

I hope it's not like that. There must be some kind of discernment on how it's used and whether or not we receive it. The same should apply to musical talent or otherwise.

 

I have the feeling that you started this from a specific situation that may have been frustrating you. Is that the case?

Some things won't change just because you changed on the inside. Some "mistakes" just keep on giving. Or to put it another way, "some decisions...you never stop paying for them." In other words, having a ton of tattoos is something that is hard to get past. A constant reminder unfortunately.

RSS

© 2021       Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service