A Shift from Project-Oriented Giving to Systematic Benevolence
Let’s assume you are convinced of the pertinence of Systematic Benevolence (SB) as a giving practice, one recommended by Scripture, the Spirit of Prophecy, and rooted in the history of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. Let’s assume you strongly believe that the resources needed to accomplish God’s final mission would be more readily available if church members are not only generous, but also give systemically; not waiting for appeals, but adopting a more routinized way of giving, in response and proportion to income received. How would you guide your congregants to shift from project-oriented to systematic giving? While many members already practice SB through tithing, it is quite different for offerings. In the latter, many tend to give relatively larger amounts in response to events and appeals but only give nominal, inconsequential, or nothing regularly.
This article does not aim to establish the pertinence of SB, as others have already done so effectively. Instead, it concentrates on how to implement a change strategy to lead more congregants to adopt SB. First, the article discusses obstacles on the way to SB.
The Wall of Resistance
Several bricks make the wall of resistance to adopting SB by church members. Unfortunately, church leadership bears some responsibility for the strong attachment to the project-based approach to giving. In many instances, giving is primarily discussed in relation to specific church projects or initiatives for which the church administration wants to garner the support of members. Promotions and appeals for support are recurring, while education about giving is quasi-nonexistent. This repeated pattern reinforces the reflex among members that giving happens in response to promotions and appeals.
Change, of any type, places people off balance by disrupting the equilibrium acquired through previous habits. Hence, personal factors contribute to resistance to changing giving habits. I’ll highlight two. First, individuals who give in response to a specific project often develop a strong sense of purpose.[1] As a result, shifting from giving to an identified project to regularly giving - whether a fixed amount or preferably a percentage of one’s income – can develop a perceived loss of purpose. It is particularly true when there is little information about how systematic giving impacts God’s mission and when giving is not seen as an act of worship. This sense of loss of purpose generates inner discomfort, manifesting itself in a form of resistance to adopting SB. To address this resistance, it is crucial for advocates of SB to intentionally emphasize the connection between systematic giving, mission and worshipping God. Unlike project-based giving, the impact of SB may not be immediately obvious, so cultivating a sense of purpose among givers is essential.
Another obstacle to a shift to SB is the fear of failing. Many who are convinced of the adequacy of SB still ask the question: “How can I sustain the habit of giving systematically over time?” Believers are usually prudent about making a promise that locks them in, especially with God (Ecclesiastes 5:4, 5). Hence, many opt not to adopt SB and instead continue to give what they can in response to occasional appeals. This hesitation stems from a common misunderstanding about SB. Many do not realize that the application of SB to offerings can evolve in three possible ways: maintaining the originally decided amount, increasing it, or decreasing it. No one is locked in! Moreover, when SB is practiced by giving a percentage of income rather than giving a fixed amount, it removes the stress of maintaining a committed amount in the event of a drop in income.
The Transition to Systematic Benevolence
The proposed change strategy to facilitate the transition of members to SB revolves around three interconnected initiatives: (1) making the case for SB; (2) facilitating its implementation; and (3) sustaining the long-term practice. This approach draws from Kotter’s eight-step change management theory[2] and the biblical account of Nehemiah’s restoration of the walls of Jerusalem.
Making the Case for Systematic Benevolence
Creating a sense of urgency. The first step is to create a sense of urgency among church leaders about the need to shift gears to SB; to build the necessary motivation for them to embark on a change process. This is typically achieved through a critical examination of the current reality. Nehemiah, upon his arrival in Jerusalem, started by examining the conditions of the walls (Nehemiah 2:13–15) and then engaged in a conversation with the leaders about its lamentable conditions, starting with these words: “You see the trouble we are in” (Nehemiah 2:17, NIV). A sense of urgency is created when stakeholders recognize and acknowledge that it is high time to act.
One way to “defrost” the status quo in giving practices is to prayerfully and collectively: (1) reexamine God’s design for both local and global mission; (2) evaluate members’ financial contribution and participation rate; and (3) ask what could be achieved in these last days if members gave differently? There is always a risk of becoming complacent about giving. Some church leaders, with the passage of time, have shrunk their God-given vision and mission to match available resources, no longer seeing the need to embrace a new approach to grow members’ participation in giving.
Partnering with others. Closely associated with creating a sense of urgency for SB among the church leadership is the need to form a powerful coalition to drive the desired change (Proverbs 27:17; Ecclesiastes 4:9, 10; 1 Peter 4:10). While the conviction to lead members to adopt SB may begin with one person, such as the stewardship director or the church pastor, a critical mass of dedicated persons from the leadership team and the congregation is essential for rolling out the process. Although Nehemiah was the envoy of King Artaxerxes and had significant authority, he chose to enlist the local leaders in the project of rebuilding the walls (Nehemiah 2:17, 18).
The ideal scenario would be to have unanimous support from all church leaders, but it may not happen. A common mistake is to expect or wait for everyone on the leadership team, the elders or church board, to be enthused and to support the change. Remember that some will be convinced as you progress and generate results, and it is not of bad faith.
Stewardship leaders, while passionate, should refrain from acting alone and instead invest in building meaningful partnerships. When they operate independently, their influence is limited and they usually struggle to create the necessary conditions for the adoption of SB. Additionally, there is a high risk of change in departmental leadership. If the burden of driving the SB agenda rests on only one person, the process is likely to come to a halt when that person leaves[MM1] .
Developing the vision. It is important to draft a vision document in simple language that outlines what a local church embracing SB in tithe and offerings will look like. Nehemiah articulated a clear and specific vision about the aspired future: “Rebuild the wall of Jerusalem, and we will no longer be in disgrace” (Nehemiah 2:17, NIV). The vision document will guide the change process, serving as an instrument to measure progress, to identify deviations from plans, and remind of the ultimate goals. The SB vision document should explicitly state that the objectives are to lead members to give tithe and freewill offerings, following the principles of regularity, participation of everyone, planning, proportion based giving, and emphasizing the importance of providing education about giving (1 Corinthians 16:1, 2).
Sharing the vision. The vision should be communicated to all church members and attendees through the church’s various available platforms, including Sabbath School, divine service sermons, vespers, Adventist Youth programs, and camp meetings. When the vision is known, people in the church community will not be confused by actions and initiatives related to its implementation. Church leadership should aim to present the vision succinctly, ideally in less than five minutes.
Facilitating Implementation
Providing practical knowledge. Once church leaders and members understand and are convinced about SB, we can expect some early results. However, simply knowing about SB is not enough; there is also a need to learn how to practice it effectively. Nehemiah, after casting the vision about rebuilding the wall, devoted much of his energy to practical considerations, tasks such as distribution (chapter 3) and addressing opposition (chapter 4).
The shift from motivational speeches to practical education is often a missing element in nurturing members. Ellen G. White pleads strongly for this shift: “There must be less sermonizing and more tact to educate the people in practical religion.”[3] Among the practical skills needed for the successful adoption of SB, learning to develop a God-first personal budget should be a top priority. In some contexts, it may also be important to instruct on getting out of debt, avoiding debt, and stretching one’s income. Learning how to calculate a percentage could even be necessary in certain locations. Ultimately, each context would inform about the practical knowledge required.
In addition to providing practical skills, the approach used to transmit knowledge is crucial. Ellen G. White notes that “if less time were given to sermonizing, and more time were spent in personal ministry, greater results would be seen.”[4] While churches depend largely on collective teachings to nurture members in SB, personal interactions can be particularly effective. Many individuals and families have specific questions related to their unique circumstances that can only be addressed through one-on-one discussions.
Showcasing the early results. Sharing the outcome of change initiatives is essential for gaining traction and moving forward. After initial efforts, Nehemiah led the people to appreciate their collective achievement: “So we rebuilt the wall till all of it reached half its height, for the people worked with all their heart” (Nehemiah 4:6, NIV). Success narratives build the momentum for more success. Sharing the stories of individuals who embrace SB and its impact on mission can have a multiplying effect.
In the project-driven approach, the amount of money collected is the primary indicator of success. However, in SB participation is the key measure, specifically, how many have joined the plan. Inviting church members who have adopted SB as their giving method to share their personal journeys can become a strong motivation to others. In terms of giving practices, members relate more easily with their alter egos[5]. It is important to create a narrative that portrays SB as feasible, practical, fulfilling, and rewarding.
Additionally, people need to see how their contributions are making a difference to mission; they want to feel that they are part of something larger. Involvement in mission should be first on the agenda of churches promoting SB. Local churches should regularly share real-life stories about how lives are transformed in their communities and beyond thanks to the resources available for mission. While participation in SB is initiated by an acknowledgment of God’s provision, it is sustained when it is perceived as a facilitator of mission.
Sustaining the Long-Term Practice of SB
Consolidate improvements and produce more change. The change process demands significant energy from both leadership and church members. After experiencing initial positive results, there is a temptation to relax about implementing the agreed-upon process. When the church leadership stops being intentional about leading people to embrace SB, church members may revert to former giving practices, and new members may not be initiated in SB at all. Time and repetition are essential for change to sink deeper into the church’s organizational fabric. After reaching half the height of the wall, the Bible notes, “The strength of the laborers is giving out” (Nehemiah 4:10, NIV). There is always a risk of giving up after the great start. As a leader, Nehemiah had to groom the motivation of the people and even adapt his strategy to complete the second half of the project (Nehemiah 4:13, 14).
One way of consolidating the adoption of SB is to provide ongoing education and reminders about SB to all segments of the local church. Some demographic groups require special attention: prospective members, children and youth, and young adults stepping into professional life. Church leadership can reinforce the message by scheduling sermons specifically on SB at designated times throughout the church calendar and regularly referencing SB when preaching on other topics.
Anchor SB in the church culture. It is essential for SB to become the primary method of giving in the local congregation, rather than just one of several ways to express generosity. Church leadership plays a critical role in this process by ensuring that project-oriented giving remains exceptional within their church communities. Encouraging or allowing frequent appeals for funds for “good” initiatives can, over time, undermine the commitment to SB. Resist it. In contrast, to reinforce SB, local churches should constantly present giving as an act of worship and operate according to a comprehensive budget that relies on SB at its foundation. This budget would include both regular programs and special projects for a specified period.
Leaders are agents of change. They can play a significant role in helping church communities transition from project-oriented giving to SB. Leading this change process is a science; it requires adequate processes and persevering efforts. Consider and experience the recommended strategy. It is also an art; exercise your creativity. God provides the wisdom, strength, and inspiration needed for this journey, giving us success (Nehemiah 2:20) and fighting for us (Nehemiah 4:20).
[1] Geenen, Noreen Y. R., Mareike Hohelüchter, Valentin Langholf, and Eva Walther. “The Beneficial Effects of Prosocial Spending on Happiness: Work Hard, Make Money, and Spend It on Others?” The Journal of Positive Psychology 9, no. 3 (2014): 204–208. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2014.891154.
[2] Kotter, John P. “Leading Change: Why Transformation Efforts Fail.” IEEE Engineering Management Review 37, no. 3 (2009): 42–48.
[3] White, Ellen G. Testimonies for the Church, vol. 6 (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press Pub. Assn., 1900), 88.
[4] White, Ellen G. Pastoral Ministry (Silver Spring, MD: General Conference Ministerial Association, 1995), 225.
[5] Herzog, Patricia Snell, and Song Yang. “Social Networks and Charitable Giving: Trusting, Doing,
Asking, and Alter Primacy. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly 47, no. 2 (2017): 376–394. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764017746021.
[MM1]Not sure why this was highlighted.
