(Blog post from Bailey!)
The True Transaction of Giving
A much-abbreviated theology of fundraising
STOP! First, please go read Romans 16:1-16
First of all, let me be very clear when I say I will always feel impossibly awkward and underqualified to discuss the topic of right attitudes toward fundraising and giving. One of the biggest reasons is that I am a quintessential American, and we tend to have a fear-based relationship to money that seeps into how we give and receive. Add that to our radical individualism, and well, talking about money somehow always seems hard.
What I mean by that is that we tend toward financial planning for “a rainy day.” We work and save under the possibility that we will lose something vital, like jobs, health, or relationships, and will need a financial safety net. That’s not inherently bad, but it means we think of money in terms of our worst case scenarios. Also, we idolize independence. We have a whole declaration and accompanying holiday for it. So, we admire people who exhibit that, and while we might be joyful givers, we are susceptible to perceiving success as equivalent to self-sufficiency.
And in that cultural climate, we try to foster missionaries who will have to do the opposite of being independent for the totality of their career. Suffice it to say that that is a big learning curve for me.
By contrast in terms of culture, a huge number of people groups view money almost opposite to the way I do as an American. In many places in Africa, financial planning amounts to asking all of your relatives for donations when large expenses come up. No one would dream of putting money in a bank, not when it should be shared among the family and community and generally used as intended. Is that better or worse than the American point of view? Well, it’s probably both. It’s simply different. But the point is, that everyone on the planet has different hurdles when it comes to formulating a theology of giving and fundraising, and American ideals make for some specific pitfalls.
So… what does that mean for you, and me, and us together?
Take a look at the following scenarios. All are actual situations; I have simply changed identifying details for privacy sake.
· Missionaries who received an inheritance following the death of a family member decided to take a family vacation they would not ordinarily be able to afford. Upon posting about it on social media, they experienced a loss of support because several donors thought they were spending funds unwisely.
· Church members feel hurt and disillusioned when the church planting team they sent finds it nigh on impossible to accomplish their original goals, and the team is forced to change locations and methods completely. Valid concerns are raised about the legitimacy of the new ministry direction the team has taken, but after such an investment, the church is reluctant to withdraw support.
· Missionaries only six months on the field are struck by sudden illness and are forced back to their home country with little to no hope of returning to their ministry location. The funds they raised begin to be taken up with medical expenses, and they are struggling to communicate with supporters about what they will be doing next.
The missionaries on vacation begin to feel hurt and start second-guessing everything they tell their supporters for fear of losing support. The church that sent the church-planting team becomes suspicious of investing in any new ministry and start missing opportunities for financial partnerships. The missionaries who became ill question their calling and dread checking their email for fear of having to read one more well-meaning inquiry that feels more like damnation than encouragement.
In all those cases, there is a big mix of hurt feelings, sinful actions, unavoidable tragedies, and probably some major miscommunications. Some of the problems in each scenario could have been avoided, and some were out of everyone’s hands. However, all of the attitudes of all of those individuals depend on one factor.
Who were they depending on for their return on investment?
Setting expectations with the right focus
We Americans, in our transactional view of finances can fall into the bad habit of looking solely to the other people in our giving relationships for fulfilment. I, as a missionary, can dangerously begin to work to fulfil the perceived expectations of my supporters. People who give to missionaries like me can become discouraged when those on the field fail in some way. I can start to tailor my newsletter around what I think my church wants to hear rather than around what God is doing, etc. I think you get the picture. When we depend on people as the source of fulfilment, we set ourselves and them up for failure and disappointment.
The transaction of giving is not primarily between two people. Giving is a transaction of two people with God, and each person is a beneficiary of grace, irrespective of perceived outcomes.
Having this perspective means we have exceptional freedom to set appropriate expectations and accountability while maintaining God’s glory as our highest priority rather than human goals. None of the money in God’s economy is ever wasted. God rewards givers for giving, not for the temporal successes of the ministry they are supporting.
So, we all, missionary and supporter alike, get to pursue the joy of the Lord in cheerful giving without risking idolatrous dependence on what others might think of us or be able to accomplish. Does that mean we throw reasonable expectations out the window? No, I as a missionary have obligations to my church and supporters, but those get to be healthy boundaries, not burdensome chains. I can be honest about all of my successes and struggles without fearing withdrawing support because I know God is the guarantor of my success and calling.
For the giver, there doesn’t need to be a guilty conscience when life happens and you do have to withdraw support, because you know that God is the one responsible for my care and keeping. You never have to explain to me why you give to one ministry or missionary over another, because God is calling you to walk in good works that may not include me, and that is utterly delightful and amazing.
The point is that joyful giving and receiving has to be centered around God’s glory, not man’s expectations.
So, why did I have you read the first section of Romans 16 before a blog about giving? Because that portion of Scripture is one of the best examples of the relationships churches and missionaries can and should foster with one another. Paul wrote the letter of Romans to his dear, personal friends. He owed his very life to some of them!
Those are the sorts of relationships that can and should be forged between missionaries and churches, because those relationships are the basis of the type of giving I outline above, and those relationships are the ones which sustain both sides on long, otherwise harsh and lonely journeys.
