Destiny Church in the Spotlight again
Did anyone see this article on stuff?
Mr. Tamaki is not doing himself any favours by tweeting this image. As a man already accused of taking money away from impoverished people to spend on a luxury lifestyle this is not a good look.
I just cannot fathom how he thought this would be a good thing to share with the world. Maybe he really does just like being in the news?
Of course I have an opinion on Mr. Tamaki and his church. I have an opinion on everything! But I know that my opinion could be wrong so I am really happy to hear other points of view and discuss it all.
Destiny church does create a lot of controversy around finances. My personal knowledge of the Destiny church movement is not great, what I have heard is second hand so with that caveat in mind I will share the 2 instances I have heard about in the Destiny church to do with money.
One:
Someone I know says that when they were looking at being part of the leadership team of a local destiny church, they were required to show their tax returns to prove they were tithing the correct amount as decided by the church.
I am really horrified by this. For me money is a private thing, worse than nudity. I am probably more comfortable being nude than discussing how much I earn with people outside my family. (Although I can understand that others would NOT be comfortable with my nudity!).
The fact that a church might ask to see a tax return implies to me that:
They do not trust their members word without proof
They may have control issues with very rigid rules
They have very little sense of privacy or individual freedom
Two:
Someone else said they were required to sign over the tax refund on their giving straight to the church. It was not optional, it was a requirement.
Which to my mind is nonsense. If they are required to give 10% of their income BEFORE tax, then any tax back that they government gives them is theirs!.
For anyone who doesn't do this a lot, any money you give to a registered charity is officially tax free. So if I give $9 to the SPCA, the government at the end of the year will give me around $3 back (at the highest tax rate of 33%), this is to encourage us to be generous and to help charities.
If Destiny gets 10% of income pre-tax (which I think is one of their requirements for committed members), then demanding the tax back as well means they are getting more than 10% in total. I have a problem with the logic here, not the idea of giving money to who-ever you want.
Giving in a Church
In general all churches do expect that members will give some money to help the church. This can be a matter of great controversy too. Lots of unchurched people have the impression that religions are out to take all your money, and Mr. Tamaki's image here does not help that perception....
If a church is a good church, then a lot of this money will be funneled into good works in the community and overseas. Most churches support something like food-banks, budgeting services, helping the homeless or something similar.
But some of the money will go towards: the pastors wages, administration costs, maintaining the church building, mortgage on the church building and other things. Personally I am not a fan of this. It goes to part of my reason for thinking the traditional way of doing church in NZ is flawed.
Originally in the bible (I think – I could be wrong) I believe that the church met in people’s homes, in open spaces and in large buildings owned by church members. There was no thought of buying a building just for church. No mortgage, no administration, no maintenance etc.
Now even a small church may have one or two paid administrators, a paid pastor, a paid youth or children’s pastor and who knows what else.
I think money taints things or is seen to taint things. It ruins the purity of motive that is needed for serving God. My personal thinking is that a church should have only volunteers.
That all the pastors should work part time to support themselves, with maybe a small stipend to help out. Maybe instead of having one pastor working full time, fully dependent on the church for money, there should be 3 pastors who work 25 or 30 hours a week outside of the church, who commit 10 to 15 hours each unpaid to church work. It would mean that they are 100% doing the church thing for love of God and love of people only.
Yes this is inefficient. BUT it would get more view points in church leadership, guard against the taint of seeing your church members as your wages. All pastors would keep in touch with the real working world, with their own bosses and challenges outside of church. They would be able to identify with normal non-Christian people so much better.
Imagine if Mr. Tamaki didn’t get any money from his church. If there were 3 part timers doing his role. We would trust him so much more. We would believe him when he asked for giving in the church and said it was for a crucial project for the community. We would identify with him more as a normal working person, just like us.
Destiny has done some amazing works in the community with youth and addictions from what I hear. But it is all overshadowed by this taint of money.
Well that’s my feeling anyway.
KG
PS- If you want to look at Destiny church beliefs in more depth here's the link: http://www.destinychurch.org.nz/
03-12-14 Update
PPS - Campbell live has done a piece on this if you are interested. See www.3news.co.nz
Comments