Paying for the Gift

An ongoing issue at our church has been the rebuilding of the organ. Left to wrack and ruin over the course of time due to the expense of maintenance, it ceased to be functional a number of years ago. A truly miraculous offer to repair it for an affordable 1/5 of the estimated cost was made by a craftsman who would do the work in his spare time. The church accepted the offer and raised the funds necessary for the work from a special project of contributions from church members and friends. That was four years ago. In the intervening time, much work has been accomplished, and we have been told that there are about 8 days worth of work that remain. Not that we are literally 8 days away from hearing the organ be played; the work will need to be scheduled around the craftsman's schedule and my own. 

Much dissatisfaction has been expressed about the length of time the project is taking. Nobody could accurately foresee how long the job would take; we've encountered a number of "surprises" when different parts of the equipment were opened. We discovered we needed a new blower, a new chimes mechanism- you get the picture. Each new need extended the work time. While the church accepted delays they could account for in this manner, we are less accepting of the idiosyncrasies of the craftsman's life. In fact, people are pretty sure they're being taken advantage of and played for fools. After all, we're PAYING him to do this work! Surely that means he is accountable to us? It definitely means that we expect to get what we want, when we want it.  Since that's not happening, we're pretty angry. So angry in fact, that we'd seriously like to consider not paying him a portion of the remaining debt. He's made us wait longer than we wanted to, so docking his pay- sort of a reverse interest charge or "late fee" makes perfect sense. On an emotional level, that's true. People are feeling cheated. They have not received the payoff from their investment in a manner they consider timely. Certainly as they look from one to another, mimesis reigns and the overall church temper rises.

The sad logic behind this process has a lot to do with a chaotic personal life, severely ill parents, and the need to make a living on the part of the craftsman. Logically, we knew going into this project that it was an avocation, not a source of living wage for him. Neither time-line nor deadline were ever agreed upon. The terms of the job were that a final fee was agreed on, to be paid out over the course of the work as supplies were needed. Unforeseen major expenses (the new blower etc.) were brought back to the church and paid for item by item. Since the instrument was totally nonfunctional to begin with, no matter how long the work took it was an investment in time that would ultimately pay off. Currently the church still holds the final payment, to be disbursed upon completion of the project. The church also holds a great deal of anger that is focused primarily on the unforeseen length of time the project is taking. Our impatience has a very particular focus: we PAID for this.

I've been listening to a lot of conversation about this, trying to understand and support the various feelings people have expressed while guiding us into some semblance of Christian response. I understand frustration, I understand confusion, I understand impatience. I can sympathize with how difficult it must be to feel that way, and then ground and redirect people in the reality of the situation. I can ask what Jesus would do in similar circumstances, knowing as we do that our craftsman has had many real demands upon his life in the past 4 years. What I cannot do is factor in the impact that money makes in this equation. I've begun to realize that our language about funding the project is telling. Instead of reminding me that they have donated or contributed to the fund for this project, people tell me bluntly that they PAID for it. If they have paid for it, then they own it. If they own it, then they are the boss of it. Nothing gets said quite that clearly, but that is how we are functioning.

In thinking back, I probably should have seen this coming. This is the same church that took up  contributions for a desktop copier. People contributed to it- not because the church needed a copier, but because THEY needed a copier. When the door to the office containing the copier was locked due to new computer equipment, they were outraged that they no longer had access for copying their personal materials. At which point it was stated, " I only contributed to the copier so that I could use it."  That was almost 10 years ago, but the unspoken agenda still rules- only exposed when crisis forces it's hand. So now we're wondering about money and gifts and the relationship between them.  If I pay for something, what does that entitle me to?  How long does the arm of my personal control reach? Do all gifts have strings attached?

 Money is a huge symbol for culture and power. Having it, not having it, deciding how we spend it- culturally speaking, these issues describe what kind of person/people we are, in our own eyes and in the eyes of others. There is a host of unwritten expectations that are attached to money. Apparently, if I purchase a gift, I have a reasonable cultural expectation of a return on that gift. At the very least, I should receive a thank-you note of some sort. I may also expect it to be used in a particular way, and to be recognized as the beneficent provider. Putting Aunt Matilda's lace doilies out when she comes to visit is an example of that. Naively, I had expected contributions to a common fund to be different. Sadly, I have been very wrong about that. Language should have given me my first clue; I had never thought of anyone "paying" for the organ to be rebuilt.  Together we had contributed or donated funds; the church as an anonymous collective would pay for the work out of those donations. I was wrong, dead wrong in fact. The plot to scapegoat the craftsman and withhold his payment testifies to that. When we pay for a gift, it is not freely given. It comes with a price tag, sometimes seen, sometimes unseen. Either way, neglecting to provide the return on another's investment carries a penalty. All of which reduces a gift to an investment, something we expect to control on our own terms.

I expect to be working on the biblical concept of gift for some time. I especially expect to be dealing with salvation and our understanding (or lack thereof!) about it. It has become clearer to me of late why it's such an uphill climb to help people release transactional and penal understandings of what Jesus was doing on that cross.  It's not only that we need to relearn our atonement theology. It's the warp and woof of culture in which we struggle to embrace something other than the party line that hampers us.  When I was confronted with the anger of the church toward our craftsman, I was disillusioned. How could we, as a church, make a logical case for our punitive response being "right"? Considering Jesus teachings seemed like the thing to do, but I was told in no uncertain terms, "Don't ask what Jesus would do. I'm sure he's just as fed up as I am!"  Clearly, the dissonance between the Truth and our desires was not even apparent to us. The idea that a gift is freely given, without strings, without a desire for a return on the investment, is almost impossible for us to consider. It's much easier to work out a system of exchange wherein we know the score and can control our destiny- and that of others.

As always, it comes back to love and our difficulty understanding and responding to it. Our mimetic cultural heritage blinds us more often than we realize, and we trip over what we think we know.  Contrary to our expectations, we don't pay for gifts. We seldom even really give them, so tangled are they in the ties that bind us. Perhaps the one true gift in our lives is the love of God in Jesus. I'm banking on the Holy Spirit to help us see that with ever greater clarity as we work through our issues with the organ. We perceived God's hand at work in the initial offer; God willing, we'll find it again as the project comes to a close. That would be the biggest gift of all; to be able to realize that it wasn't us and our money that made it happen. Then it  would truly be a labor of love in which we all participated.

Thy kingdom come....

nancy hitt

Comments

[John Mann]

Nancy,

You have written a very spot-on blog in regard to the culture of the American Church. What a lot of issues you raise. Wow. I have copied your piece to study in order to provide a well-thought out response. Thank you.

[John Mann]

Nancy,
After more thinking on it - Thanks for a provocative essay on church culture. Here are some thoughts on the subject – in terms of the nature of life and ministry you touch on some critical points. An interesting question you raise is, “what would Jesus do?” I wonder if in terms of his relationship with the church today it might be more aptly phrased, “what would be done to Jesus?”
You raise an important issue in the church – giving. Money is the central idolatry of our time. The gift to the organ repair fund is attached with the same strings that we apply to mission. We want good value for our money, i.e. services rendered for the fees we pay. The same strings attach to our work as ministers. We are called to serve Christ, but so many folks see us as the hired help.
Our way of giving is a reflection of our view of God. If we view God as a generous giver, truly, then we will respond in kind. If in God’s realm, ‘there’s more where that came from,’ then our sense of generosity will reflect that. If we believe God is a stingy giver, then so too will we be.
Your blog struck a nerve with me personally. I could take what you wrote and transpose it over so many scenarios from previous experience as a pastor in the American church. In terms of how you end it, ‘Thy kingdom come ...’ what do you think might happen if you preached as sermon that was essentially the text of this blog?

[nancy hitt]

Thank you so much John! I appreciate your thoughtful response, and I intend to find out how this will preach. The critical episode in the saga occurred on a Sunday as I was leaving for vacation, so I've not yet had the opportunity to pursue it in a sermon. Our stewardship focus comes in the fall, so I expect to land on it with both feet in a sermon that will draw from this. I'm still mulling it over, and I find your remarks about giving and our perception of God to be helpful. I'm working on figuring out how to address it without chastising people for their desire to retaliate against the organ builder...not because guidance is not called for, but because I don't want it to devolve into a me vs. them on this issue kind of thing. By the time our stewardship Sunday arrives, I hope to be able to make the connections between cultural influence and our theology and gift/love in such a way that the connection with this issue is only one among many and not something that feels like finger-pointing. I've considered blogging about "control from the grave"- something folks try to do when they leave bequests to the church that require a policy and procedure manual to administer them. We're so unaware of what a true gift is that we literally dont recognize it when we see it and haven't a clue how to do it. A personal strategy is to never give or loan something until I'm certain I really don't want it. I've been told that doing that means that I'm not really giving a meaningful gift, since if I don't want it, it doesn't "cost" me anything. (Money again!) I find that personally de-investing in something, whether its a sum of money or an object or a service, requires a great deal of attention and energy. Sometimes, I'd say the cost is high. It isn't that I don't care, it's that I've made a decision to take my investment out of whatever the gift is so that it can really belong to the other person. I don't want to do a mini-blog here, but I do have one last question. Is it really different over there in the UK? I've been thinking about retiring to New Mexico, but if they speak my language in the UK....

[John Mann]

Nancy,

Is it really different in the UK? That's a good question. I probably need to respond to that in blog-length. See tomorrow's edition.

[PamBG]

I'm an American ministering in the British Midlands. Differently from John, I've been resident here in the UK for twenty years and have only just become a minister. One of my four churches is in a deprived area and I very much recognise John's experience - as well as Nancy's from my years in a middle-class US church! I suspect that there are middle-class congregations in the UK where the same dynamics apply.

I have a zillon thoughts on Nancy's post and can't really sort them out coherently.

What I 'get' from reading your story, Nancy, is a feeling of huge disappointment on the part of the congregation. And the feeling the money could either 'repair' the disappointment or 'deliver justice'.

I don't know if you think that's what's happening, but that's the feeling I get from what you wrote. Both of these things - money as the easer of disappointments and money as the 'currency' of justice - are very embedded in our Western culture, so it's hardly surprising. Certainly it's idolatrous. (And which of us has not engaged in this idolatry?)

[nancy hitt]

Hey Pam! Thanks for adding your voice to the conversation. I think you're absolutely right about money as our American easer of pain and promoter of justice- and just typing that line brings me pain! I've been trying to envision a life without money and without barter or exchange of any kind. If everyone had free access to all that they needed and could simply help themselves to it as they desired...what would we do with ourselves? I'm afraid we lack the imagination to "go boldly where no one has gone before" to quote the writers of Star Trek....and I think what might be at stake, at least in part, is a fear that we'd truly be responsible for ourselves before each other and God. If our life weren't consumed by "making a living" we'd have no excuse for not creating, for not loving- etc. I know this is a bit far-fetched (Star Trek was Sci-Fi after all) but it helps me to realize how deeply mired in our cultural idolatries we are. I think on some level we realize this, but like any other sort of addiction, we are loathe to give it up! At the risk of glorifying deprivation and reducing the need to respond to one another, I think that not having any excess money may sometimes be an advantage. However, I can't figure out how to keep the advantage and still have the (econmically) oppressed go free. Even if we had surrendered our attachment to all other oppressions, I think money would still bind us. To a certain extent, I think our other divisions (race, religion, sexuality etc.)are just screening tools for how we will alot money. At the very least, I'm working on the concept of doing the MOST one can in every situation instead of using that internalized sense of "what anyone else would do or expect of you" to respond to the challenges of life. It presents some interesting challenges- puts us right back into a biblical context where the folks who heard and followed Jesus were the poor, not the wealthy. Hmmmm....