Systematic Benevolence for Mission and Sanctification
The financial system of the Adventist Church has evolved as the church expanded from a North American organization into a worldwide community. From the beginning, mission and its funding have been central to this development. What started with the self-financing effort of the founding preachers developed into a comprehensive system based on biblical principles. Alongside supporting the mission, the church adopted a giving plan that emphasizes God’s sovereignty.
A Prophetic Movement
After the disappointment of 1844, many Millerites abandoned their faith. However, a group of about 50 individuals believed that the prophecy had been fulfilled. Hiram Edson, James White, Ellen Harmon, and Joseph Bates were among them. In 1848, while praying and studying about their duty to proclaim the truth at the home of Otis Nichols in Dorchester, Massachusetts, Ellen G. White received a vision.
E. G. White shared with her husband: “I have a message for you. You must begin to print a little paper and send it out to the people.”[1] This marked the beginning of the church’s publishing work. To fund the printing press, believers were asked to contribute voluntary offerings, eventually raising $600 for the project.
Between 1856 and 1857 an economic crisis hit the country, causing a decline in contributions. In response, church members asked Pastor J. N. Andrews to conduct a Bible class in Battle Creek in April 1858 to study issues related to the financial support of preaching. A commission, consisting of pastors J. N. Andrews, Joseph B. Frisbie, James White, and J. N. Loughborough, met on January 16, 1859. Two weeks later, they presented their report to the Battle Creek Church, which was adopted on January 29, 1859.
Early Understanding of Systematic Benevolence
The commission recommended that offering contributions be made systematically and permanently. The Battle Creek Church agreement was published in the Review & Herald on February 3, 1859, and later ratified at a General Meeting held in June 1859 in Battle Creek, with representatives from various states. Delegates made slight modifications to the plan, which recommended weekly contributions between 5 to 25 cents. This offering plan became known as Systematic Benevolence.
In 1860, the concept of tithe as the minimum contribution began to surface, and James White published an article on the topic in the Review & Herald on January 6, 1863. By 1870 the concept of tithe was emphasized even more. In 1875 a letter arrived at the Review & Herald asking: “Will you please tell me what [Systematic Benevolence] really is? For instance, if I earn $1.00 a day, 10 cts. of that belongs to God. Does that 10 cts. belong to the [Systematic Benevolence]?”[2] On October 5, 1876, the principle of contributing ten percent of one’s income was formally emphasized.
By 1876 some members began to accept the concept and recommendation of giving 10% of their income as their weekly contribution to support preaching. In February D. M. Canright wrote: “God requires that a tithe, or one-tenth, of all the income of his people shall be given.”[3] During a special session of the General Conference in March of that year, the recommendation to dedicate 10% to the preaching of the gospel was reaffirmed. The General Conference officially adopted the tithing system on October 5, 1876.
Believers did not adopt this principle of tithing immediately. On December 12, 1878, the General Conference recommended that, instead of making a weekly pledge, members were to make a covenant to contribute one-tenth of their income. For nearly twenty years (1859–1878), the term Systematic Benevolence referred to a systematic plan of weekly offerings. Beginning in 1879, and eleven years later (1890), E. G. White included chapters 50 and 51 in Patriarchs and Prophets, which clarifies the biblical tithe. Chapter 50 addresses any doubt regarding tithe, and Chapter 51 explains how God’s financial design for Israel included a second 10% to help widows, orphans, and the needy. The first tithe was brought to the sanctuary, the second tithe was kept at home for these purposes. Since 1890, Systematic Benevolence has referred to the plan of giving that supported the Levitical priestly ministry.
Funding the Church and Much More
In His wisdom, God set apart the tribe of Levi and the family of Aaron to carry the ministry of receiving, studying, applying, and teaching God’s written revelation from the prophets. Their role was to ensure that the people of Israel followed God’s path. God ordained that eleven tribes would be dedicated to productive work, while the tribe of Levi would be devoted to spiritual guidance, helping Israel remain faithful. As spiritual leaders, the priests were responsible for ensuring that God’s instructions were understood and obeyed. When the priests failed in their responsibility, the people were in danger—exactly what eventually happened.
In Christ’s Objects Lessons, E. G. White wrote: “It was God’s purpose that by the revelation of His character through Israel men should be drawn unto Him. . . . But Israel did not fulfill God’s purpose.”[4] The plan of salvation prepared before the foundation included a special people to save the nations of the world in all generations, not only Israel. When God's people do not carefully follow God’s instructions, there is a danger that others will not be saved, and we will be lost.” The objective, therefore, is to save others without losing ourselves.
To achieve this objective, God made clear to Israel the purpose for which they had been established as a special people. At Sinai, the same mountain where the Ten Commandments plus 603 laws, decrees, statutes, and ordinances were given, God declared: “For I am the Lord who brings you up out of the land of Egypt, to be your God. You shall therefore be holy, for I am holy” (Leviticus 11:45, NKJV). This is the original purpose or original mission given to Israel.
The process of sanctification to which the Israelites had to voluntarily submit began by recognizing the sovereignty of God and accepting that he imposes His supremacy on the Israelites. That supremacy included: God’s purposes and values, His instructions, and His plan that included the organization of a special people, a sanctuary, a prophetic and priestly ministry, plus a decision-making method based on justice and mercy. Putting this entire plan into practice would transform the lives of the Israelites, and they would think like God, want like God, decide like God, and put God’s plan into practice.
Faced with the failure of Israel, Jesus addressed the priests and leaders: “Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken from you and given to a nation bearing the fruits of it” (Matthew 21:43, NKJV). With this statement, we must understand what was transferred from Judaism to Christianity, what was not transferred, what was partially transferred, and what was modified. While Israel was organized as a nation in the Middle East with a monotheistic Hebrew religion and a sanctuary or temple in Jerusalem, Christianity would not be another political state; it was organized under the Greek model of the ecclesia.
What was totally transferred was the original purpose that recognizes and proclaims the sovereignty of God, and also initiates and promotes the process of sanctification so that with the help of the promised Holy Spirit, the fruits that transform the lives of the children of God can be achieved. The original purpose or mission was not nullified, for God could not nullify Himself as the sole sovereign. The fulfillment of the original purpose of acknowledging God’s sovereignty and proclaiming the gospel to all nations are both sustained by the practice of the Systematic Benevolence plan.
[1] Ellen G. White, Life Sketches of Ellen G. White (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press Pub. Assn., 1915), 125.
[2] “To Correspondents,” Review & Herald, January 20, 1876, 21.
[3] D. M. Canright, “Systematic Benevolence, or the Bible Plan of Supporting the Ministry,” Review & Herald, February 17, 1876, 50.
[4] Ellen G. White, Christ’s Object Lessons (Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald Pub. Assn., 1900), 290.