Fast Offering

I know where you’re coming from. I very distinctly remember going to minister to one family that was in dire financial straits. Walking up to their door the person that went with me nudged me, pointed to a satellite dish, and said “we can’t even afford satellite TV” and we were there to help them. The family was receiving financial assistance from the church, we were there to teach the family how to budget. One of the goals of the welfare program of the church is to help people get to a place where they are self-sufficient. Eventually the BP took a hardline stance with them and cut them off because they didn’t show any signs that they were willing to make any changes. Sometimes that ultimatum can jolt people into action. In this case the family went inactive and started attending another church that did provide for all their needs. It was sad, but I can see the value in teaching people to fish rather than simply giving them a fish each day.

The challenge is to not paint all people that receive financial assistance in the same light as the people that abuse. There will always be abusers but they really are in the minority.

Since I spent some time serving as RSP and doing several food orders each week, I can tell you that welfare families eat very well (much better than I will ever eat).

I can second your observation. I also worked with food orders for a while and yes, the families eat very, very well. I remember at times I wanted a food order for myself.

When talking about the church welfare program Jesus and the 5,000 usually comes to the forefront of my thoughts. I’m sure there were people that only followed him to receive food, etc. but one thing a teacher in our unit likes to point out from the stories of the miraculous feedings is to underscore the fact that “And they did all eat, and were filled.” His point is that they weren’t nibbling on something simply to get rid of pangs and to make food stretch, they were filled. In his interpretation the 5,000 were completely sated. An interesting point and I’m not sure why I echo that, but there it is.

if *I* were bishop and a mom came to me with a request for help, I would subtract the amount of money she was paying for things that go above and beyond “essentials” and then offer help.

I hear that often and I’ve seen people get extremely offended at that notion. I don’t know whether it’s an issue of a privileged culture or society that has incorrectly converted wants into needs or if there’s something to be said about the difference creature comforts can make in keeping people’s spirits up.

Anyway – this was a rant, but a rant with a question…is your area leadership asking for more fast offerings? And what does the typical TBM pay for fast offerings each month? $20? $40?

They do from time to time but I wouldn’t say that it’s a theme that’s harped on. I have no idea what the typical TBM would pay, 99% of the time FOs are talked about there’s never a specific amount mentioned. It’s simply the cost of two meals, what you would have spent had you eaten during a fast. Spencer Kimball did say:

Sometimes we have been a bit penurious and figured that we had for breakfast one egg and that cost so many cents and then we give that to the Lord. I think that when we are affluent, as many of us are, … we ought to be very, very generous … and give, instead of the amount we saved by our two meals of fasting, perhaps much, much more—ten times more where we are in a position to do it.

But in that I see “when we are affluent” and “when we are in a position to do it” meaning generous FOs should not be a financial burden on the member. I’d hope that the “when we are affluent” is being echoed in your local leaders petitions to solicit more FO funds.

I can also tell you that many of these families have expenses that make me want to vomit…martial arts instruction for a child with low self esteem…monthly online gaming subscriptions…cruises

The duty of bishops to be the judge of whether someone is deserving of help has got to be one of the hardest roles, made harder by the fact that unlike the SP, the bishop doesn’t have the luxury of being socially disconnected from the people he may have to turn down or counsel. He has to see them and their kids every Sunday.

Shortly after I joined the Church, there was a family who had their son enrolled in an elite private school. I think the dad was EQP at that time. They got cash payments from the bishop to cover some expenses and then cleaned the building to make up for that help. A lot of people disagreed with that but I think it was done because it was a temporary bridge for them. Later I ran into the mother who was working as a cashier at Home Depot so I knew they were doing everything to get extra money but didn’t want to disrupt their child’s friendships at school (plus you don’t get your tuition refunded if you withdraw).

So my best guess is that a judgment was made that this family you are talking about has a temporary situation rather than a structural long-term problem.

As someone who does receive food orders and occasionally financial assistance from the church let me chime in. My husband and I both work and most months it’s a choice between food or bills, so we choose bills and will get food from the church. Now abuse can happen with a food order (my husband had roommates that did) and I do feel that it could be more regulated. But I think the way to do that is through education not lessening the amount. I for one can make a two week food order last one month. I do this through creative uses of the food, plus I bake which is a great advantage. For those of you saying a family on food orders eats better than you, I bet you are not restricted to pasta, rice or mashed potatoes for your carbs. Or that you can only get the same canned fruit or vegetables each month… basically don’t judge until you’ve been on one. Trust me if I could I wouldn’t be.

I am the most frugal person that I know. Over time, I have come to realize that my frugality is not a choice. It is my nature combined with my upbringing etc. I believe that if my version of frugality were imposed on others, many would see it as a life half lived. The trade off is that we always have a robust emergency fund.

For this reason I am very careful in transferring my standard of frugality to others.

I do believe that organizations have a duty to create some sort of safety net. Of course with every help there is always a risk of dependency. I just think that it is better than the extreme alternative … letting people lose everything and live or die on the street.

The official program is supposed to include budget counseling.

Not always done, but supposed to be.

The Seventh Day Adventists have a financial planner on retainer that is free to members. This seems like a win-win to me. The membership benefits in learning financial plans and principles of wealth management and the church benefits by having fewer people living paycheck to paycheck (needing assistance) and theoretically by receiving more robust donations from a more financially secure membership.

At its best it is The Gospel in action. Some people need it very much. Severe poverty is an affront to civilisation and Christianity.

Tatiana Avalon has given a sensible answer above. I need add little more.

.

Your entire response was most helpful. Thank you for understanding!

You are right…the challenge is not to paint with a broad brush. Perhaps in our area, MOST people abuse the system.

The illegals here would never want to return home where they have to work. I mean, heck – if I can move to a country where I don’t have to work and get all of my bills paid by a church that I attend once a week…I’m ready to move now! ha ha!

It is just a symptom of society in general. We just like to think in the church no one would be a free loader and take Gods money.