All giving can be roughly divided into two kinds: freewill and reluctant. Reluctant giving may be divided again into two types: substitutionary and unwilling. The proliferation of schemes designed to obtain funds for church and other benevolent purposes seems to indicate that most giving is reluctant and that most givers need external stimulation.
Freewill giving is a response; reluctant giving is a result. The former is true benevolence, a subjective disposition of the mind. The latter is objective and independent of the mind. True benevolence has its source in an inner motivation; all other types of giving result from external stimuli such as the "carrot and stick" in donkey power (hold the carrot in front, use the stick behind).
Exhaustive study has been given to the subject of motivation, for it is essential to every activity. Many theories have been proposed and tested. Theory X (the reward-or-punishment approach) is boringly apparent during political campaigns. The voters are blasted with "Look what you'll get" or "See what will happen to you" if you do or do not vote for me. Theory Y takes a humanistic viewpoint, lifting a person out of the donkey class and appealing to his better qualities—his inherent tendencies and capabilities.
The question What makes people tick? requires a definitive answer for the success of any venture—church or otherwise. One marketing consultant was asked to define motivation. He replied (tongue in cheek), "We don't know anything about motivation—all we do is write books about it." He recognized that a perfect method, one that would work on everyone in every situation, has never been found.
Regardless of the apparent success of various motivation theories in the business community, there is a factor in Christian behavior that requires a different approach.
One popular self-improvement pro gram ran a radio spot that said basically: Each person is a mine with a diamond inside. Sign up for this course and we will find that diamond, cut and polish it, and voila—you'll find instant success!
But a Christian is not an old mine with a diamond inside; he is a new creature (2 Cor. 5:17). His motivation is not some thing injected, promoted, or programmed. The Christian's chief motivator should be the Holy Spirit, who takes up residence in the heart and by His quiet influence begins changing attitudes and behavior. Every other type of motivation will eventually fail, as evidenced by the fact that none has proved to be the magic potion to solve the church's financial problems.
Internal motivation as a response to the Spirit's moving has a self-perpetuating element. It will remain viable just as long as the need for expression is present. External motivation, on the other hand, is at best only temporary. In order to continue to produce favorable results, you need a plentiful supply of carrots and stout sticks.
At this point, let us consider some habitual methods of fund-raising for benevolent purposes and how they affect various types of giving. (Notice that benevolent is not the proper word to describe some giving, even though the donation may go to a benevolent use.) Four general types of giving will suffice for examples: reluctant, substitutionary, unwilling, and freewill. We will look at freewill giving last, for it is the only type that is truly acceptable to God.
Reluctant giving
This kind of giving requires some external stimulation. The usual appeal is "Give to get." In these instances, people demand something in return for their money. The ubiquitous church dinner is one example. Romantics have long advocated that the way to a man's heart is through his stomach. Fund-raisers have picked up this cue, only they bypass the heart on the way to the pocketbook. They have found, from long experience, that men and women will part with their means for the gratification of appetite when otherwise they would give nothing.
The same give-to-get approach holds true for entertainments, sales, fairs, bazaars, and recreation. Many people appear to require these activities to elicit their support of spiritual things. In reality the money they give is not a gift at all just a trade. Something paid for something received. Many well-meaning folks are self-deceived, feeling that they are giving to God, when in reality they are simply transacting business: buying and selling.
One man, in a bidding contest with a brother, found himself paying twenty dollars for a jug of cider. His shock was evident when it was pointed out that he hadn't given God anything; he had merely purchased some very expensive apple juice! But these methods of fundraising have enjoyed ecclesiastical blessing and have been paraded under the umbrella of good causes and fellowship so long that they have become almost synonymous with church support.
Another angle to this kind of motivation offers recognition in place of a material reward. Personal pride in having one's name heading the list of substantial donors, or perpetuated on a plaque, has real appeal. I was deeply disturbed when I visited a church in which every pew, every window, and even the guest register displayed the donor's name. Whenever this church was mentioned, someone would call attention to the name of the lady who contributed the large stained-glass window. Where in Scripture can one find authorization for such things?
We find no record of such activities in the building of the tabernacle in the wilderness. Imagine a brass (or gold) plaque on the branched candlesticks or the altar of incense—unthinkable on the sacred ark! And yet somehow these have found their way even onto pulpits! Is nothing considered holy? If there is a real desire to perpetuate a remembrance, let it be directed to God—not to men and women. If we attach our names or even the names of our loved ones to these objects, we never truly relinquish the gift—we still hold onto a part. As Jesus said, those who give their alms to be seen of men receive their reward from men, not from God (see Matt. 6:2-4).
Listing gambling under the heading of reluctant giving might seem inappropriate when people appear so eager to part with their money. But it is reluctant giving when its purpose is the support of the church or other benevolent projects. Gambling, in whatever form, is unchristian. It teaches participants to take advantage of their fellowman; When one wins the other loses. This is contrary to the teaching of Jesus, who said, "Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself," (Mark 12:31). But the lure of self-benefit is so strong that people will spend endless hours at the gaming tables, when they wouldn't devote a fraction of that time to the weekly prayer meeting.
Every form of gambling has a deleterious effect on the character. It is even more devastating when conducted under the auspices of the church.
I don't mean to point a finger at any one group or communion. No denomination has had a monopoly on the innocent (?) quilt raffle, which has been so popular for decades. The ladies who work so zealously making these items would probably be horrified if they realized they were contributing to a gambling operation—but that's what it is. One person wins, the others lose—and that's gambling.
Substitutionary giving
Whether substitutionary giving stems from a sense of responsibility or the guilt associated with noncooperation would be impossible to determine. But in every group there are those who always choose the easiest road. Sometimes it is easier to give money than to spend time in personal involvement; at other times labor is less costly than money. In either instance, the motive may be selfish because the contributor gives the gift that costs the least.
Possibly the value a person places on his membership should be questioned if he avoids wholehearted support or chooses to do as little as possible. The observation that a person will support anything he believes in, regardless of the cost, is applicable. The degree of enthusiastic support indicates the degree of devotion.
Unwilling giving
Of all the funds that find their way into the Lord's treasury, the most offensive to Him must be the unwilling gifts. Such funds are not gifts at all. They are more closely related to a tax or assessment. Some people who favor high-pressure fund-raising techniques must subscribe to the erroneous theory that the end justifies the means. In one confidential manual the idea was advanced that if a person can be induced to give an unusually large sum of money to his church, his interest will follow his dollars. Interesting thought: Fund-raising is essential to more dedicated Christianity!
One might not be so medieval as to hold firebrands to the feet, or drive bamboo slivers under the nails or even make use of the rack, but the motivation is force just the same. The only difference is in how it is applied. The more civilized approach involves peer pres sure, guilt, duty, or socioeconomic sanctions. One experience was enough to turn me forever against any use of force in fund-raising.
The little gray-haired man stood there, tears streaming down his face, pleading, "What can I do now?"
He said that two years ago he had belonged to a church that was engaged in a fund-raising program. "And they told me what I had to give," he said.
I tried to explain, based on my experience as a director of these pro grams, that I was sure he had mistaken a suggested amount for a demand. Still showing the irritation his experience caused, he flatly stated, "I came to the conclusion that all my church wanted from me was my money, and I stopped giving it anything—no tithe, no offerings . . . nothing!"
Then came the tears. With a voice choked with emotion he continued, "Now I realize what I have done. I've cheated God! My wife and I live on a small pension; there is no way I can pay back that money. What can I do now?"
I tried several ways to assure him that God is far more interested in a repentant heart than in any amount of money, that He says, "Though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow" (Isa. 1:18). But somehow I realized that nothing I said was lifting the feeling of guilt resting on his shoulders. I was convinced that there has to be some thing terribly wrong with any plan that has the remotest possibility of producing an effect such as this. Jesus invited, "Come unto me" (Matt. 11:28). The only motivation He endorsed was "If ye love me" (John 14:15).
Those who are responsible for the care of God's flock must realize that the end does not justify the means no matter how laudable the end may be. Neither the urgency of the need nor the merit of the objective must ever be used to motivate benevolence. Those who seek funds must have as their priority the benefit to the giver, often expressed as the need of the giver to give. Buildings, maintenance programs, and outreach endeavors are necessary and commendable, but these are material and temporary; only the effects of true benevolence on the character are eternal.
Freewill giving
The key to true benevolence is found in both the Old and New Testaments. Regarding the materials required for the building of the tabernacle, Moses was directed, "Speak unto the children of Israel, that they bring me an offering: of every man that giveth it willingly with his heart ye shall take my offering" (Ex. 25:2). God's fund-raising plan was to receive only willing gifts.
In apostolic times the church faced an unusual situation—converts were being added daily, many of whom were cut off from home and income. Surely in this emergency one could find some fundraising method in use to provide for urgent needs. But the record deals solely with those who were responsible for management and distribution. As to the donors, "neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own. . . . Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands and houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold" (Acts 4:32-34).
Later, under more normal circumstances, the church was advised by Paul, "Each man should give what he has decided in his heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion" (2 Cor. 9:7, N.I.V.).
Prior to this he had commended the churches in Macedonia for their liberality as a result of giving "themselves first to the Lord" (chap. 8:5, N.I.V.). Paul, as a former Pharisee, had seen enough rules and regulations. He taught his followers that giving must be a heart experience, not just an exercise of the pocketbook.
True benevolence (the very word indicates there is no other kind) must be internally motivated. The Christian should be impelled by the Holy Spirit—under His inspiration and control. As new creatures we receive a new heart. The old heart, part benevolent and part selfish, must pass away. Our new heart will beat in harmony with the heart of God. When we are infused by His love, benevolent acts will flow in a neverending stream of grateful response.
The result of such benevolence will be relief to the suffering, comfort to the sorrowing, hope to those who despair in other words, the good news. A person imbued with this benevolent spirit will be a blessing to everyone and will be doubly blessed in return. He will seize upon every need he becomes aware of as another opportunity to express love and gratitude to God for a love that is inexpressible.
This new heart will never require external motivation; the indwelling of the Holy Spirit will be its stimulator—its energizer. It will possess the ardor of the mountain climber, the inventor, or the explorer to whom no sacrifice is too great, no obstacle too big to be overcome by the inner motivation. Supreme love for God will overflow in love for our fellowmen through the open channel of unselfish devotion. This is the only true motive for giving.
