I have been stunned to find people who tell me just how amazed they are that they are expected to pay for the church that they belong to. It makes me wonder whether or not this subject is ever addressed by some of my fellow dog-collars (DCs)!
A couple of years back, I recall an extremely lovely old lady informing me, after a presentation about giving, that she was so upset at the thought of being 'expected to pay' that she had considered not paying her pound anymore as it was a 'freewill offering' (she even quoted the Vicar of the Parish (three Vicars back) and the sermon he preached on it. If she had to be chivvied up to pay then it wasn't the sort of church she wanted to be part of. Mind you, we buried her a while back and so she has found a way of getting out of paying anyway!
Considering this issue, I read that during the sixties and (less so) the seventies, it was considered acceptable to pay a token offering as the money was there with the Commissioners. The problem is that as the monies reduced the necessity to teach tithing and giving as a principle became more essential until we now find ourselves with the situation that those who can't (won't/don't) pay may find themselves without a stipendiary clerical type and might even find themselves in a redundant church (with a redundant DC ;) ).
Very provocative, very unpopular and perhaps a little myopic as well.
Watching some of the retailers, they try to change management first and then cut their really unproductive branches but put effort into making those who remained efficient (the amount of money some church buildings and the congregations waste is frightening) and attractive to those seekers out there.
Perhaps we need to start considering the same - perhaps we have, could be an 'exciting' reality that common tenure beckons in. Performance management and the culture of 'train - up or out'. Just like being back in the City of London and the financial sector I worked in.
No comments:
Post a Comment