What Is Gleanings?

At Christianity Today, we’re constantly tracking important developments in the church and the world. Often we use our network of reporters around the world (and for that, visit our main site). But we also monitor other news outlets, bloggers, newsmakers’ social media feeds, and countless other information streams. Gleanings compiles the most urgent and interesting items we’ve found, explains why you need to know about them, and gives you the background you need to understand them. It’s our snapshot of what God is doing in the world, hour by hour.

Free Newsletters

« Focus on the Family Eliminates 202 Jobs | Main | Oral Roberts U. to Cut 100 Jobs »

November 18, 2008

Follow the Money

Budgets reveal congregational priorities--and givers are watching more closely than ever.

In light of tightening financial times, and the heightened scrutiny of household spending that follows, some churches are making it easier for congregants to follow the money. Waterfront Community Church in Schaumburg, Illinois, gives 100% of its offerings each week to local households identified by a partnering Christian agency. This practice allows a church member, in pastor Jim Semradek's words, to "see a face on the other side that you're blessing."

How does the church take care of its own operating costs? Eight sponsors cover rent and salaries, freeing it to use all of its offering in this way. The model is an attempt to restore trust in local churches and return mission to the core of their identity. Its mission-minded sponsors believe freeing Waterfront from concerns about its own expenses does just that.

Waterfront is, of course, not alone among local churches experimenting with new budgetary models as it rethinks mission.

Comments

This model assumes the church is an agency for redistributing funds to local needs. What about the influence sponsors might have on the leaders whose salaries they pay? Might that conflict with transparency?

The Tribune was not 100% correct in reporting the financial model of Waterfront. The pastors are missional. They raise their own salaries. Rent and operational expenses are covered by core families/sponsors.

I'm finding it difficult to square this with Numbers 18.

I get the numbers 18 argument, but what about Paul's argument that he had the right to support but choose not to use that right of support so that he can better reach out to people. That seems to be what is going on in this case.