Tithing linked to validity of members vote for church officers and the pastor to judge if you vote should count.

[KirkPsalm]

We ( church congregation ) were voting on various church officers. Head usher, treasurer, deacon, financial guy, ect....

When it was time for the members to cast their vote, our pastor explained to everyone that he'd didn't want you to vote if your not tithing. He said something along the lines of "if you not tithing we're gonna take your ballot and throw it away, you gotta have skin in the game, that's how it works."

So, a lot of questions come to mind.
How much is "skin in the game?" 10% of your gross salary? How much is enough? If 10% is enough, how would anyone know who's actually giving 10%?

Do you have skin in the game if you give a lot of your time to various ministries, children's, young adults, life groups, ect, because you don't have a lot of money but you have some time and heart for service?

Do you thinks this is okay to have requirement of member, beyond membership, to have a meaningful vote that counts? Should you trust the judgement of the man to cull the ballot of those who deserve a vote that counts and those that don't?

It doesn't feel right to me but that doesn't matter if there's nothing wrong with it.

Please share what you think with me.

 

[Reluctant Theologian]

We ( church congregation ) were voting on various church officers. Head usher, treasurer, deacon, financial guy, ect....

When it was time for the members to cast their vote, our pastor explained to everyone that he'd didn't want you to vote if your not tithing. He said something along the lines of "if you not tithing we're gonna take your ballot and throw it away, you gotta have skin in the game, that's how it works."

So, a lot of questions come to mind.
How much is "skin in the game?" 10% of your gross salary? How much is enough? If 10% is enough, how would anyone know who's actually giving 10%?

Do you have skin in the game if you give a lot of your time to various ministries, children's, young adults, life groups, ect, because you don't have a lot of money but you have some time and heart for service?

Do you thinks this is okay to have requirement of member, beyond membership, to have a meaningful vote that counts? Should you trust the judgement of the man to cull the ballot of those who deserve a vote that counts and those that don't?

It doesn't feel right to me but that doesn't matter if there's nothing wrong with it.

Please share what you think with me.

Check what your church's constitution (if available) states on who's eligible to vote ... and if they're so specific and strict on tithing, the rules need to be explained in detail.

Personally I find this approach appalling, for a nr of reasons:
- tithing is an Israelite/Mosaic Law instruction, not for Gentile believers (but feel free to give anything you can of course to the Kingdom) - how can a church be so opinionated on tithing but e.g. not keep the Sabbath?
- it brings a capitalist mentality into the church - and do big givers (in absolute) terms get more influence? because they obviously have more 'skin in the game' ..
- it ignores those who give massively in terms of time, prayer, service, etc.

Baptists use a congregational church Governance model ('democracy' for church members). It may work, but the early church didn't operate like that .. churches didn't operate with the democratic principle. Sometimes elders were chosen from among the church, but mostly church leaders were appointed.

 

[timothyu]

- it brings a capitalist mentality into the church - and do big givers (in absolute) terms get more influence? because they obviously have more 'skin in the game'

Render unto pastor Caesar what is Caesar's, for it is for the benefit of his own kingdom..

 

[JustaPewFiller]

Check to see if there is anything in the church bylaws on this.
It may be established in the bylaws that this is how the church does it. It also may be possible the pastor is going out on his own to do this.

In most Baptist churches I have been in, the pastor hasn't known (or wanted to know) who tithes. That way he does not have to worry about how much someone tithes influencing him in any way (because he doesn't know). To me, that sounds like a good policy.

Personally, I think what the pastor is doing stinks.

 

[St_Worm2]

In most Baptist churches I have been in, the pastor hasn't known (or wanted to know) who tithes. That way he does not have to worry about how much someone tithes influencing him in any way (because he doesn't know). To me, that sounds like a good policy.

Hello JustaPewFiller, et al, the same is true for the local churches that I've been in over the years. In fact, I've never heard of a Christian church who does anything like what @KirkPsalm's church does.

Cults, on the other hand, are infamous for doing such things, and more. I remember visiting one here in town once (didn't know it was a cult, at first) and, unbelievably, was asked to bring my tax returns for the last three years with me to church the following Sunday (so that the church leadership would know if they were truly receiving at least a 10% tithe from me going forward).

Needless to say, I didn't bring my tax returns OR myself to anymore of their services.

--David

 

[AKAE777]

Sounds worldly to me.

 

[JustaPewFiller]

I have thought and prayed about this some more and something else was brought to light.

It is very true most pastors I've encountered did not want to know who tithed and who did not.

However, I have also observed pastors, deacons, overseers, etc become frustrated with the following.
Church members who are not active in any programs, who attend sporadically, who may or may not tithe, but who never fail to show up like clockwork at every church business meeting and want to seemingly argue about or dissect every item on the agenda.

The pastor may have been experiencing some of this frustration and chose a very poor way to try and voice and alleviate it.