Some may be interested in my latest post. This time it's a story, inspired by a sermon, and with an author's note afterward partly based on my Christadelphian experiences.
The biggest problems are who and what define the "refining" process. "Life" refines us plenty simply by being "Life." I didn't need the "refining" created by the trauma of being in a cult. Some here would pooh-pooh that idea, saying that the CDs are a relatively benign sect and their own experience was only mildly inconvenient in their life's journey. I'm sure for most of us that sentiment is true. Some of us, though, were put through the wringer, as some of the stories on this site indicate. The end effect is that you are less capable oftentimes of meeting the challenges that come later in life -- because your cult experience has damaged you.
Good stuff. What I found most objectionable was the pretense of human connection, compassion and interwovenness, which, once the sun shines clearly, is mostly a delusion. It's just like the outside world, where mostly you're an island unto yourself, no matter how hard you may try to connect with other people. And when times get hard, and your supposed support system is determined to be a mirage, then it all becomes the stuff of madness.
I know there are good people in the CDs. I know there are people who indeed try to help. In many regards, however, it's not enough, or it's too little, too late. I've seen too many people who ended up the collateral damage of the faith groups they believed would sustain them -- and then those groups didn't. When I was told I was receiving "The Right Hand of Fellowship," I believed it. And then, as the road diverged in different places, I became simply "The Other." "The Malcontent." "The Boat Rocker." "The Insatiably Needy."
I was none of those things, I just wanted the fellowship and compassion that had been advertised to me. They weren't forthcoming.
Because CD groups are usually small, there is probably more support there than in larger, mainstream churches. Or perhaps not, since their resources are fewer. When I left I went afterward to a large urban Protestant church, and then to a small, rural Protestant church of the same denomination. Aside from Sundays, no one bothered much with me. I was not included in any activities or gatherings that occurred outside the context of those churches' formal activities. On one occasion, I left and did not return for a year and a half. No one even noticed I'd been gone.
I now often regard organized religion as a business, one that has both mercantile and political motivations. I will not contribute financially to such institutions in the future, and I think the faster they decline in influence in the future, the better.
I think organised religion can definitely be a business, and in many countries one with useful tax breaks as well. I would never have thought it in my Christadelphian days with the emphasis on no paid pastors and everything voluntary and lay preaching (I've heard some Christadelphian ecclesias are much higher budget affairs, but ours wasn't one of them).
Do either of you have any thoughts (or indeed evidence) of which "organised" religions are run as businesses? Also, would you consider the Christadelphians to be "organised"?
Even wealthy Episcopalian churches in my neighborhood constantly shove their basket under your nose, telling you how much in need of your money they are.
What I was thinking of was televangelists with massive incomes and private jets. Of megachurches with deep organisational structures (for example separate roles for worship pastors, teaching pastors, youth pastors, and I assume a lot of supporting staff - plus sometimes other satellite campuses as well as the main church). And I'd also include more traditional hierarchical organisations, which I believe would include the likes of Catholics, Anglicans and Lutherans, as well as the SDAs where I went to school. I wouldn't say requesting donations automatically makes it run like a business, any more than I would of any charity (some of which will be run far more like businesses than others).
I wouldn't think Christadelphian ecclesias meet my criteria, at least not the parts of Christadelphia that I'm familiar with, and probably still wouldn't if an ecclesia had a single paid pastor. At least in principle there's the ecclesial autonomy, and those individual ecclesias aren't formally part of a national organisation with its own management staff.
Not sure about Christadelphian-associated organisations, like the CMPA (definitely meant to be run as a business - at least according to its annual statements which I read every year), and various aged care homes and schools around the world. I expect they're much more run like a business, and that's probably not a bad thing. There's still not - at least, not to the best of my knowledge - one parent organisation in charge of churches and schools and hospitals and aged care homes, like I believe there is for more traditionally hierarchical schools, and there's hopefully not naked attempts to grab money and power for individuals who make it to the top.
CDs come nowhere close to the models you're describing. The ones you're describing are just out-and-out crooks, hustlers, opportunists, like Jim and Tammy Baker, Jimmy Swaggart, etc. With CD meetings/churches being small and autonomous from one another, I suspect that kind of hucksterism would be very rare. I have, however, seen some CD charities that I found suspect. One is a food bank run in an affluent city, and I suspect it is actually a vehicle to enrich the CD running it, and to feed his own family. There are also multiple CD charities in Britain, that I've come to believe are suspect. Their efficacy isn't readily visible, nor their accounting books.
Desmond, please name those UK charities so that I can have a look at their activities. That said, many CD ecclesias in the UK are "charities", purely for the tax benefits. They even run workshops on taking advantage of this.
I published this comment, but I'm not sure it's wise publishing specific accusations (rather than general concerns about Christadelphia) here, and I'm certainly in no position to verify the truth or falseness of any such accusations.
With respect to the ecclesias registered as charities in the UK, yes, I'm aware of it. Around the time I quit there was some concern about whether that would satisfy updated Charity Commission guidelines, but my understanding was that "advancement of religion" was one valid charitable purpose (whether or not I personally think it's a good idea...), and that most ecclesias should be able to justify "advancement of religion".
Jon, the reason I asked, I have looked at the published accounts of a number of UK ecclesias, that have claimed charitable status, and not seen any indication at all that they have done anything other than use it as a means of reclaiming the tax on donations by way of gift aid, which is both legal, and acceptable under the current rules, and is much the same as other denominations do. If Desmond has specific cases though, then, as they say, sunlight is the best disinfectant.
Makes sense, I guess. I'm just not sure how much you can verify claims like "Food bank is enriching those running it and feeding their family" from published accounts. If it were actually happening, I'd still expect the accounts to look legitimate.
On first review, all scam charities appear to be "legitimate." I was specifically mentioning charities in the UK that ostensibly help the elderly, run missions in foreign countries, etc. The problem? How does one quantify the "assistance"? It can be easily obfuscated and manipulated to appear that assistance is occurring, when actually very little is occurring. You then wonder: What is really happening with these funds?
Desmond, it is well known that in the UK, charities are often run more for the benefit of those running them, than any other beneficiaries. "BBC Children in need", is one such, trading off a name, and paying it's organiser's handsomely, and there are numerous others. Even when buying one's groceries attempts are made to "nudge" you into giving as random begging messages appear on the tills wanting 25p and 25p there ....however, as Jon has alluded to, this is a site mainly looking at Christadelphianism, hence why I asked the question of you that I did. I doubt that most Christadelphians are any more or less crooked than anybody else, however, the events at the Christadelphian office in the decade leading up to 2011 did demonstrate that they are vulnerable, due to the lack of oversight and accountability, with the follow on events demonstrating that even fairly serious financial misconduct was likely to be treated as little more than a "slap on the wrist" offence, to be covered up as quickly as possible and swept under the carpet. I do however think that the Christadelphians are run as a business, or at the very least LIKE a business, but I will look at that in a different comment.
My first reaction is: I don't think it's a crime to be ineffective at meeting a charity's stated goals (and it can be somewhat subjective how well they've met them, anyway). It's more up to the donors to decide whether the charity is effective enough to be worth continuing supporting (It is of course a crime if the money collected is not used for the charitable purpose it's collected for).
And yes, most charities will have some overheads for staff and a variety of other administrative expenses. In principle, any Christadelphian charities that are completely volunteer run could have lower overheads than other charities (they might also then use the money ineffectually, but that's a different issue). Ones like CMPA, aged care homes, schools, etc. do have paid staff and thus staff costs. And yes, I'm sure that could be an opportunity to enrich individuals.
Given you mention missions, I know nothing about the CBM, but was on an ACBM committee for a number of years, and as far as I could tell the money was spent on things like preaching activities in foreign countries and support of activities by local brethren and sisters.
Looking at the ACBM webpage now, I find: "What does ACBM do? Oversee and co-ordinate the preaching and pastoral work overseas Foster the formation and spiritual development of Christadelphian ecclesias (communities) overseas Provide, where necessary, financial and welfare assistance to members Monitor and evaluate the work of its appointed fieldworkers"
I would say when I was involved that was an accurate summation of where the money went. Does it then do those things effectively? Does it achieve mission-type goals? I really don't know, though if you want to measure by baptisms there were some back then and I believe still are some now.
I'm not saying CD charities are more or less corrupt than other religious charities; I'm just saying some are visibly suspect. I have a senile CD friend of limited financial means who was making out generous checks to CD charities I'd never heard of, and I could obtain no information to determine whether or not the funds were ever actually used for the purposes stated. I suspect in many such situations, the funds end up feeding some cat lady's 50 cats. And it is worth noting that felines have the lowest CD conversion rates of all mammals, unless they're fleeing Iran.
Desmond, you stated that the Episcopalian churches "constantly shove their basket under your nose". In what way do they do this? Do they walk about the neighborhood hassling people in the street, knock their doors and beg...or what? Or perhaps you mean that they pass a collection plate/bag around their congregation, something that is entirely normal, and has been for many years in nearly all denominations including the Christadelphians. In my time with the CD's I never once saw them approach the general public for money, ever, for any reason. What did irk me was that in an ecclesia with several millionaires, they would send out appeals to other ecclesias for minor sums, for building maintenance and the like, amounts that didn't even constitute a days pay for many of the members, it just seemed "off" to me. As a member of the Anglican Church, it was similar, however they did, annually, go around the neighborhood requesting donations for the Christian Aid charity- this was many, many, years ago though, I have no idea if it is current practice. I do know that the Anglican Church receives just over 50% of it's income from plate collections, from it's own members. I also know that the stipend paid to their ministers is barely a living wage, and when you also account for the fact that although they have a home provided with the job, when they leave, or retire, they have no home, and thus must provision for this from the stipend. Christadelphians have always had a problem with a paid ministry, and champion their own method, which is to have amateurs preaching, without any actual financial commitment, whilst being free to pursue very lucrative careers, and load up their pension schemes, and they certainly don't like to be challenged over it!
They pass the basket during Sunday School sessions, then again during the regular service. They pass it at all functions except weddings and funerals. They ask for financial commitments. They ask for tithing. They ask on top of everything for "special need pledges" for new sound systems, or exterior maintenance, etc. After a while, you get "charity burnout." You just stop giving.
Ironically, when you go to the church in financial distress (and I've seen this happen), suddenly "the funds to help you just aren't available."
Do most churches collect funds honestly? Probably. But there's visibly much waste, grifting, scamming, and exploitation.
It sounds like as much as anything it's about what you expect. Nothing you describe sounds unreasonable to me. And it's all based on "You chose to attend, so you have some interest in this church".
To me, I would see a church as a place and setting and organisation for worship, and probably for community as well, but not as a mutual aid society (though yes, you can find verses which might suggest it should be).
If you choose to meet in a building that needs maintenance, for services presided over by a paid minister of some kind, it's not unreasonable to contribute to the costs of providing that space and running those services. How much should be the "right amount", I have no idea (will probably depend on the church). But if you don't get benefit, or don't find it worth it, just don't go.
So I give thousands of dollars every year, and what I get in return are pep talks about how my invisible friends in the sky love me and are protecting me? What are we? Prancing savages, with feathers in our hair, praying for rain? The churches deserve to be emptying out, and I am half gone already myself.
I don't mind contributing, but they began sending invoices (!) for pledges, with recommended donation amounts. That was going too far. They pay no taxes, and can rent out church properties and church annex spaces at substantial profit. I don't get to do that. The minister at the church in question made over 100K a year. He went every year or two to Europe on vacation, and stayed in five star hotels. I've never been to Europe, and I'm not going to happily fund such extravagance. Not after being told repeatedly "No," whenever I asked for assistance, or asked to provide input. Fund your little fiefdom by yourself, or whatever useful stooges you can scam in your sanctuary.
Pastors should make modest incomes. Not $100K a year, plus a housing allowance. Not when -- if they choose to do so -- they can sit on their arses for six days a week, whenever they like or get burned out enough to need.
Desmond, the stipend here in the UK is around $36k USD, however regardless of the business involved, I do believe that a persons salary is between that person, and the business paying it. The idea that they do nothing for 6 days of the week, is, in my personal experience, utter nonsense, certainly here in the UK. If you are giving thousands of dollars a year, but don't want to, then simply stop giving, and give what you can afford, or what you wish to. Or better still, leave the church. In many ways, the Christadelphians take something more valuable from you, and that is your time. For most people, if they run out of money, they can get work and earn some more, however, when you have run out of time then that is you finished. I was never a particularly enthusiastic Christadelphian, but even at that level the commitment was to give up the whole of Sunday, every week, the whole of one evening, and several hours per day every day, for Bible study, which regardless was never "enough", along with numerous fraternals, special studies, etc etc, throughout the year, which, if missed would meet with vocal disagreement and questioning. More dedicated members spent their entire non working time on it, dedicated rooms in their houses as "studies", filled only with Christadelphian books, barely having time for normal family activity at all. Then there is the other type, those who loved the sound of their own voice, loudly preaching the nonsense at every opportunity, whilst pursuing lucrative careers, while simultaneously deriding others who genuinely had given up such things to engage in full time, life long ministry. Note what the current push in the UK is, with their freshly converted Iranian cohort: " In terms of winning over and reassuring UK ecclesias releasing of the Sale Ecclesia’s Iranians video in October 2019 was a watershed. It opened the doors of ecclesias up and down the UK to Persian-translated classes. Suddenly, ecclesias in the prosperous south offered to find jobs and houses for Iranians with work visas to move south and join them". No need to learn English, and no need for them to integrate with the local (non-Christadelphian) community, you know, the community whose taxes and sacrifices have enabled then to obtain a safe and peaceful life, or to settle in the north of the country, no, the emphasis is to head straight for the "prosperous" south, and smother the obvious with religious claptrap.
£54,000 in funds, £4600 in payouts- presumably to their own members, perhaps spent on first class train tickets to head south? :)
Look closely and you will see that this was in part set up initially by the same person who attempted to obtain public money a decade ago to set up a Christadelphian faith school in Birmingham (UK), but was rejected at the first application as the Christadelphians were deemed incapable of offering an education to those outside of their own faith group.
The pastor in question was 27, and let me and my children sit inside all through the COVID epidemic for two years, without ever calling us. He had a paid staff of four other employees, and no one checked on us. He sat in his parsonage behind locked doors and watched TV for two years, doing Zoom meetings on Sunday. Basically, he got a two year vacation, while many of the rest of us struggled to stay sane and keep body and mind together. That was their "organized religion."
I think I largely agree with Joseph on this. You had certain expectations of the church you went to - expectations of a minimum level of service, a maximum level of cost to yourself, and a maximum level of requests for donations. Maybe they're reasonable expectations, maybe they're unreasonable, and without knowing all the circumstances it's very difficult to judge that one way or the other (and the judgement of random people on the internet not involved is irrelevant anyway...).
I assume you got something out of it, otherwise you wouldn't have been attending. What that was worth to you is something only you can know. What it costs to deliver that service is something that is largely up to the choices the organisation makes (staffing, building maintenance, events organised, ...). Maybe what it costs is more than it's worth to you, maybe it isn't. That's fine. I agree with Joseph - I don't think it's up to you to decide what salaries or other expenses should be involved. If it's not worth it to you, stop attending.
As a generalisation, pastoring is a profession associated with high levels of burn-out, in part due to the demands and expectations from congregations. I can't judge whether that applies here, but I'd also agree with Joseph that it tends to involve a lot more work than you give it credit for (almost any job can seem simpler than it is when you're not the one doing it).
Given this is non-Christadelphian and has now been discussed at length, I'm declaring it off topic.
Please do not comment as 'Anonymous'. Rather, choose 'Name/URL' and use a fake name. The URL can be left blank. This makes it easier to see who is replying to whom.
By Jon Morgan
The biggest problems are who and what define the "refining" process. "Life" refines us plenty simply by being "Life." I didn't need the "refining" created by the trauma of being in a cult. Some here would pooh-pooh that idea, saying that the CDs are a relatively benign sect and their own experience was only mildly inconvenient in their life's journey. I'm sure for most of us that sentiment is true. Some of us, though, were put through the wringer, as some of the stories on this site indicate. The end effect is that you are less capable oftentimes of meeting the challenges that come later in life -- because your cult experience has damaged you.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteGood stuff. What I found most objectionable was the pretense of human connection, compassion and interwovenness, which, once the sun shines clearly, is mostly a delusion. It's just like the outside world, where mostly you're an island unto yourself, no matter how hard you may try to connect with other people. And when times get hard, and your supposed support system is determined to be a mirage, then it all becomes the stuff of madness.
I know there are good people in the CDs. I know there are people who indeed try to help. In many regards, however, it's not enough, or it's too little, too late. I've seen too many people who ended up the collateral damage of the faith groups they believed would sustain them -- and then those groups didn't. When I was told I was receiving "The Right Hand of Fellowship," I believed it. And then, as the road diverged in different places, I became simply "The Other." "The Malcontent." "The Boat Rocker." "The Insatiably Needy."
I was none of those things, I just wanted the fellowship and compassion that had been advertised to me. They weren't forthcoming.
Because CD groups are usually small, there is probably more support there than in larger, mainstream churches. Or perhaps not, since their resources are fewer. When I left I went afterward to a large urban Protestant church, and then to a small, rural Protestant church of the same denomination. Aside from Sundays, no one bothered much with me. I was not included in any activities or gatherings that occurred outside the context of those churches' formal activities. On one occasion, I left and did not return for a year and a half. No one even noticed I'd been gone.
ReplyDeleteI now often regard organized religion as a business, one that has both mercantile and political motivations. I will not contribute financially to such institutions in the future, and I think the faster they decline in influence in the future, the better.
I think organised religion can definitely be a business, and in many countries one with useful tax breaks as well. I would never have thought it in my Christadelphian days with the emphasis on no paid pastors and everything voluntary and lay preaching (I've heard some Christadelphian ecclesias are much higher budget affairs, but ours wasn't one of them).
DeleteDo either of you have any thoughts (or indeed evidence) of which "organised" religions are run as businesses? Also, would you consider the Christadelphians to be "organised"?
ReplyDeleteMethodism. Presbyterianism. The only time they don't ask for money is at funerals, because the dead man has no money in his pockets.
DeleteEven wealthy Episcopalian churches in my neighborhood constantly shove their basket under your nose, telling you how much in need of your money they are.
DeleteI suppose the question to ask is, not how much they ask for or how frequently, but what do they do with it once they`ve got it?
DeleteWhat I was thinking of was televangelists with massive incomes and private jets. Of megachurches with deep organisational structures (for example separate roles for worship pastors, teaching pastors, youth pastors, and I assume a lot of supporting staff - plus sometimes other satellite campuses as well as the main church). And I'd also include more traditional hierarchical organisations, which I believe would include the likes of Catholics, Anglicans and Lutherans, as well as the SDAs where I went to school. I wouldn't say requesting donations automatically makes it run like a business, any more than I would of any charity (some of which will be run far more like businesses than others).
DeleteI wouldn't think Christadelphian ecclesias meet my criteria, at least not the parts of Christadelphia that I'm familiar with, and probably still wouldn't if an ecclesia had a single paid pastor. At least in principle there's the ecclesial autonomy, and those individual ecclesias aren't formally part of a national organisation with its own management staff.
Not sure about Christadelphian-associated organisations, like the CMPA (definitely meant to be run as a business - at least according to its annual statements which I read every year), and various aged care homes and schools around the world. I expect they're much more run like a business, and that's probably not a bad thing. There's still not - at least, not to the best of my knowledge - one parent organisation in charge of churches and schools and hospitals and aged care homes, like I believe there is for more traditionally hierarchical schools, and there's hopefully not naked attempts to grab money and power for individuals who make it to the top.
CDs come nowhere close to the models you're describing. The ones you're describing are just out-and-out crooks, hustlers, opportunists, like Jim and Tammy Baker, Jimmy Swaggart, etc. With CD meetings/churches being small and autonomous from one another, I suspect that kind of hucksterism would be very rare. I have, however, seen some CD charities that I found suspect. One is a food bank run in an affluent city, and I suspect it is actually a vehicle to enrich the CD running it, and to feed his own family. There are also multiple CD charities in Britain, that I've come to believe are suspect. Their efficacy isn't readily visible, nor their accounting books.
DeleteDesmond, please name those UK charities so that I can have a look at their activities. That said, many CD ecclesias in the UK are "charities", purely for the tax benefits. They even run workshops on taking advantage of this.
ReplyDeleteI published this comment, but I'm not sure it's wise publishing specific accusations (rather than general concerns about Christadelphia) here, and I'm certainly in no position to verify the truth or falseness of any such accusations.
DeleteWith respect to the ecclesias registered as charities in the UK, yes, I'm aware of it. Around the time I quit there was some concern about whether that would satisfy updated Charity Commission guidelines, but my understanding was that "advancement of religion" was one valid charitable purpose (whether or not I personally think it's a good idea...), and that most ecclesias should be able to justify "advancement of religion".
DeleteJon, the reason I asked, I have looked at the published accounts of a number of UK ecclesias, that have claimed charitable status, and not seen any indication at all that they have done anything other than use it as a means of reclaiming the tax on donations by way of gift aid, which is both legal, and acceptable under the current rules, and is much the same as other denominations do. If Desmond has specific cases though, then, as they say, sunlight is the best disinfectant.
DeleteMakes sense, I guess. I'm just not sure how much you can verify claims like "Food bank is enriching those running it and feeding their family" from published accounts. If it were actually happening, I'd still expect the accounts to look legitimate.
DeleteOn first review, all scam charities appear to be "legitimate." I was specifically mentioning charities in the UK that ostensibly help the elderly, run missions in foreign countries, etc. The problem? How does one quantify the "assistance"? It can be easily obfuscated and manipulated to appear that assistance is occurring, when actually very little is occurring. You then wonder: What is really happening with these funds?
DeleteDesmond, it is well known that in the UK, charities are often run more for the benefit of those running them, than any other beneficiaries. "BBC Children in need", is one such, trading off a name, and paying it's organiser's handsomely, and there are numerous others. Even when buying one's groceries attempts are made to "nudge" you into giving as random begging messages appear on the tills wanting 25p and 25p there ....however, as Jon has alluded to, this is a site mainly looking at Christadelphianism, hence why I asked the question of you that I did.
DeleteI doubt that most Christadelphians are any more or less crooked than anybody else, however, the events at the Christadelphian office in the decade leading up to 2011 did demonstrate that they are vulnerable, due to the lack of oversight and accountability, with the follow on events demonstrating that even fairly serious financial misconduct was likely to be treated as little more than a "slap on the wrist" offence, to be covered up as quickly as possible and swept under the carpet.
I do however think that the Christadelphians are run as a business, or at the very least LIKE a business, but I will look at that in a different comment.
My first reaction is: I don't think it's a crime to be ineffective at meeting a charity's stated goals (and it can be somewhat subjective how well they've met them, anyway). It's more up to the donors to decide whether the charity is effective enough to be worth continuing supporting
ReplyDelete(It is of course a crime if the money collected is not used for the charitable purpose it's collected for).
And yes, most charities will have some overheads for staff and a variety of other administrative expenses. In principle, any Christadelphian charities that are completely volunteer run could have lower overheads than other charities (they might also then use the money ineffectually, but that's a different issue). Ones like CMPA, aged care homes, schools, etc. do have paid staff and thus staff costs. And yes, I'm sure that could be an opportunity to enrich individuals.
Given you mention missions, I know nothing about the CBM, but was on an ACBM committee for a number of years, and as far as I could tell the money was spent on things like preaching activities in foreign countries and support of activities by local brethren and sisters.
Looking at the ACBM webpage now, I find:
"What does ACBM do?
Oversee and co-ordinate the preaching and pastoral work overseas
Foster the formation and spiritual development of Christadelphian ecclesias (communities) overseas
Provide, where necessary, financial and welfare assistance to members
Monitor and evaluate the work of its appointed fieldworkers"
I would say when I was involved that was an accurate summation of where the money went. Does it then do those things effectively? Does it achieve mission-type goals? I really don't know, though if you want to measure by baptisms there were some back then and I believe still are some now.
I'm not saying CD charities are more or less corrupt than other religious charities; I'm just saying some are visibly suspect. I have a senile CD friend of limited financial means who was making out generous checks to CD charities I'd never heard of, and I could obtain no information to determine whether or not the funds were ever actually used for the purposes stated. I suspect in many such situations, the funds end up feeding some cat lady's 50 cats. And it is worth noting that felines have the lowest CD conversion rates of all mammals, unless they're fleeing Iran.
ReplyDeleteDesmond, you stated that the Episcopalian churches "constantly shove their basket under your nose". In what way do they do this? Do they walk about the neighborhood hassling people in the street, knock their doors and beg...or what? Or perhaps you mean that they pass a collection plate/bag around their congregation, something that is entirely normal, and has been for many years in nearly all denominations including the Christadelphians.
DeleteIn my time with the CD's I never once saw them approach the general public for money, ever, for any reason. What did irk me was that in an ecclesia with several millionaires, they would send out appeals to other ecclesias for minor sums, for building maintenance and the like, amounts that didn't even constitute a days pay for many of the members, it just seemed "off" to me.
As a member of the Anglican Church, it was similar, however they did, annually, go around the neighborhood requesting donations for the Christian Aid charity- this was many, many, years ago though, I have no idea if it is current practice.
I do know that the Anglican Church receives just over 50% of it's income from plate collections, from it's own members. I also know that the stipend paid to their ministers is barely a living wage, and when you also account for the fact that although they have a home provided with the job, when they leave, or retire, they have no home, and thus must provision for this from the stipend.
Christadelphians have always had a problem with a paid ministry, and champion their own method, which is to have amateurs preaching, without any actual financial commitment, whilst being free to pursue very lucrative careers, and load up their pension schemes, and they certainly don't like to be challenged over it!
They pass the basket during Sunday School sessions, then again during the regular service. They pass it at all functions except weddings and funerals. They ask for financial commitments. They ask for tithing. They ask on top of everything for "special need pledges" for new sound systems, or exterior maintenance, etc. After a while, you get "charity burnout." You just stop giving.
ReplyDeleteIronically, when you go to the church in financial distress (and I've seen this happen), suddenly "the funds to help you just aren't available."
Do most churches collect funds honestly? Probably. But there's visibly much waste, grifting, scamming, and exploitation.
It sounds like as much as anything it's about what you expect. Nothing you describe sounds unreasonable to me. And it's all based on "You chose to attend, so you have some interest in this church".
DeleteTo me, I would see a church as a place and setting and organisation for worship, and probably for community as well, but not as a mutual aid society (though yes, you can find verses which might suggest it should be).
If you choose to meet in a building that needs maintenance, for services presided over by a paid minister of some kind, it's not unreasonable to contribute to the costs of providing that space and running those services. How much should be the "right amount", I have no idea (will probably depend on the church). But if you don't get benefit, or don't find it worth it, just don't go.
So I give thousands of dollars every year, and what I get in return are pep talks about how my invisible friends in the sky love me and are protecting me? What are we? Prancing savages, with feathers in our hair, praying for rain? The churches deserve to be emptying out, and I am half gone already myself.
DeleteI don't mind contributing, but they began sending invoices (!) for pledges, with recommended donation amounts. That was going too far. They pay no taxes, and can rent out church properties and church annex spaces at substantial profit. I don't get to do that. The minister at the church in question made over 100K a year. He went every year or two to Europe on vacation, and stayed in five star hotels. I've never been to Europe, and I'm not going to happily fund such extravagance. Not after being told repeatedly "No," whenever I asked for assistance, or asked to provide input. Fund your little fiefdom by yourself, or whatever useful stooges you can scam in your sanctuary.
ReplyDeletePastors should make modest incomes. Not $100K a year, plus a housing allowance. Not when -- if they choose to do so -- they can sit on their arses for six days a week, whenever they like or get burned out enough to need.
ReplyDeleteDesmond, the stipend here in the UK is around $36k USD, however regardless of the business involved, I do believe that a persons salary is between that person, and the business paying it. The idea that they do nothing for 6 days of the week, is, in my personal experience, utter nonsense, certainly here in the UK.
DeleteIf you are giving thousands of dollars a year, but don't want to, then simply stop giving, and give what you can afford, or what you wish to. Or better still, leave the church.
In many ways, the Christadelphians take something more valuable from you, and that is your time. For most people, if they run out of money, they can get work and earn some more, however, when you have run out of time then that is you finished.
I was never a particularly enthusiastic Christadelphian, but even at that level the commitment was to give up the whole of Sunday, every week, the whole of one evening, and several hours per day every day, for Bible study, which regardless was never "enough", along with numerous fraternals, special studies, etc etc, throughout the year, which, if missed would meet with vocal disagreement and questioning.
More dedicated members spent their entire non working time on it, dedicated rooms in their houses as "studies", filled only with Christadelphian books, barely having time for normal family activity at all.
Then there is the other type, those who loved the sound of their own voice, loudly preaching the nonsense at every opportunity, whilst pursuing lucrative careers, while simultaneously deriding others who genuinely had given up such things to engage in full time, life long ministry.
Note what the current push in the UK is, with their freshly converted Iranian cohort:
" In terms of winning over and reassuring UK ecclesias releasing of the Sale Ecclesia’s Iranians video in October 2019 was a watershed. It opened the doors of ecclesias up and down the UK to Persian-translated classes. Suddenly, ecclesias in the prosperous south offered to find jobs and houses for Iranians with work visas to move south and join them".
No need to learn English, and no need for them to integrate with the local (non-Christadelphian) community, you know, the community whose taxes and sacrifices have enabled then to obtain a safe and peaceful life, or to settle in the north of the country, no, the emphasis is to head straight for the "prosperous" south, and smother the obvious with religious claptrap.
https://cara.fund
https://register-of-charities.charitycommission.gov.uk/en/charity-search/?p_p_id=uk_gov_ccew_onereg_charitydetails_web_portlet_CharityDetailsPortlet&p_p_lifecycle=0&p_p_state=maximized&p_p_mode=view&_uk_gov_ccew_onereg_charitydetails_web_portlet_CharityDetailsPortlet_regId=1199446&_uk_gov_ccew_onereg_charitydetails_web_portlet_CharityDetailsPortlet_subId=0
£54,000 in funds, £4600 in payouts- presumably to their own members, perhaps spent on first class train tickets to head south? :)
Look closely and you will see that this was in part set up initially by the same person who attempted to obtain public money a decade ago to set up a Christadelphian faith school in Birmingham (UK), but was rejected at the first application as the Christadelphians were deemed incapable of offering an education to those outside of their own faith group.
The pastor in question was 27, and let me and my children sit inside all through the COVID epidemic for two years, without ever calling us. He had a paid staff of four other employees, and no one checked on us. He sat in his parsonage behind locked doors and watched TV for two years, doing Zoom meetings on Sunday. Basically, he got a two year vacation, while many of the rest of us struggled to stay sane and keep body and mind together. That was their "organized religion."
DeleteI think I largely agree with Joseph on this. You had certain expectations of the church you went to - expectations of a minimum level of service, a maximum level of cost to yourself, and a maximum level of requests for donations. Maybe they're reasonable expectations, maybe they're unreasonable, and without knowing all the circumstances it's very difficult to judge that one way or the other (and the judgement of random people on the internet not involved is irrelevant anyway...).
DeleteI assume you got something out of it, otherwise you wouldn't have been attending. What that was worth to you is something only you can know. What it costs to deliver that service is something that is largely up to the choices the organisation makes (staffing, building maintenance, events organised, ...). Maybe what it costs is more than it's worth to you, maybe it isn't. That's fine. I agree with Joseph - I don't think it's up to you to decide what salaries or other expenses should be involved. If it's not worth it to you, stop attending.
As a generalisation, pastoring is a profession associated with high levels of burn-out, in part due to the demands and expectations from congregations. I can't judge whether that applies here, but I'd also agree with Joseph that it tends to involve a lot more work than you give it credit for (almost any job can seem simpler than it is when you're not the one doing it).
Given this is non-Christadelphian and has now been discussed at length, I'm declaring it off topic.