Summertime for a pastor is always a difficult time. We thrive on big crowds and opening up overflow rooms. Not a problem in the summer. This year we added about 150 seats to our auditorium which is absolutely necessary three seasons out of the year. Most of that time we have to run a live feed of the service to overflow and then it's not always enough. But the extra seats now just add to the feeling of emptiness in the room. I can handle it for a short while, but then I'm ready to get packed out again. What I have a more difficult time with is the lack of funds. When people vacate for summer they also take their tithes with them. Three months of tightening our fiscal belts around here will eventually cut off spiritual circulation. For example, last month we had 50 less givers than in the Spring. Ouch! So it got me thinking. What would happen if we applied for government subsidies; like GM or Chrysler for instance.
Then I began thinking. Now that DBBC is considered a large, if not mega, church we would probably be called on to redistribute our wealth. As a condition for government assistance, Uncle Sam would probably insist we share our members with less populated churches. What if they insisted that the most optimum size would be 500. We would be asked to downsize by sending 2,000 of our congregants to smaller churches so they could be stimulated. While that would hurt us a great deal, imagine what it would do to Brother Joel out in Houston, Texas. He would have to give up 22,500 members to smaller congregations. I bet it would be difficult to pay the light bill with funds left after such a mass redistribution of wealth. Or what about poor Bill Hybels at Willow Creek in Chicago. Bill would have to sacrifice 16,500 faithful followers to other congregations in and around the Windy City.
I can imagine if the government did get involved in church bailouts their would be bureaucrats galore. Someone suggested the formation of a government agency called Church Redistribution of Saints and Sinners. (CROSS) They may require pastors of churches receiving government funds to adhere to the government mandated Fairness Doctrine. The Fairness Doctrine would assure that Arminian and Calvinist doctrines be given equal time in Sunday sermons. Balance would be required when addressing issues like pro-life|pro-choice, gay|straight, and conservative|liberal interpretation of the Bible. CROSS would evaluate the church based upon important social issues like tolerance and acceptance. Any smack of standing for absolute values would incur the wrath of big brother. Churches who do not show a financial profit or numerical growth may face an end to their government subsidies or even face nationalization.
Of course receiving a bailout would mean DBBC would have to comply with OSHA standards as well. Total immersion baptisms could be considered a form of "water-boarding" and strictly forbidden. It would also be difficult to sprinkle or pour since the water would have to be inspected for the presence of organic microscopic creatures who's lives are protected under law. Deacons would have to pass physicals and complete a government certified course on safe food handling before being able to administer the Lord's Supper.
OK, so much of the above was said with "tongue in cheek, just suggesting these impositions by the federal government may brand me as a rebel. Well, if being a rebel means that I believe the government should stay out of the church's business then I'm guilty as charged. I believe, as did James Madison, "Religion flourishes in greater purity without...the aid of government." So I'll endure a paucity of monies during the lean summer months if it means keeping our independence to worship in freedom and without interference. Seems like some other forward thinking followers of Christ held to those same ideals a few hundred years ago. It worked for them and the God that blessed their determination has never changed. Hang in there pilgrims!
Pastor Ken
Comments