The American Spectator : Tithing That Works

Text Size

Tithing That Works

By Jay D. Homnick on 2.18.11 @ 6:06AM

As opposed to philanthropic giving that doesn't.

Before commenting on this highly sensitive subject, please let me share a story I heard from one of the parties involved. Here in Miami there is a particular church which is geared towards Chinese immigrants. Some were Christians in China afraid to practice in public, and they are grateful for the opportunity to do so in the United States. Others were inspired to join after arriving in these shores. I get the feeling -- although no one wants to say so openly -- that some of them go just to socialize.

Howbeit, the policy of the community is for members to tithe their incomes to charity. Originally everyone complied. Some years ago, a group of entry-level workers, waiters and dishwashers, just off the boat, living on minimal income, made a quiet rebellion. Instead of giving the tithe, they gave one dollar from each paycheck. When they start making some real money, they promised, they would pay their full share.

About a decade later, a fascinating phenomenon prevailed. Of the people who had been working those same entry level jobs at the time of the rebellion, the same bus boys and delivery boys and bellhops, there were now two distinct clusters. The ones who tithed despite their limited means all advanced to lucrative careers and a high standard of living. The dollar dolers were all still passing the same buck, stuck doing the laundry and delivering Chinese food, scraping by on low incomes which refused to budge.

This should give you some idea of my passion for donating money to worthy causes. I give less than 10 percent to charity right now because 35 percent of my disposable income is still going to Jewish schools for my children's education. Otherwise, I try to be meticulous in meeting that threshold, moving the tithe into a separate charity account so it doesn't accidentally stick to my pocket.

Earlier this week, Warren Buffett was awarded the Medal of Freedom at the White House. The rationale for the honor was his work in convincing the richest people to leave 50 percent or more of their holdings to charity, a campaign called The Giving Pledge. In theory this sounds like a lovely idea, and in practice it sometimes comes close to that level. But more often the flaws in this notion overwhelm its virtues and the money is squandered -- at best wasted, at worst utilized for evil purpose.

Sounds shocking and perhaps counterintuitive, but it is absolutely true.

The main problem is that it is better for society at large for money to be in the hands of billionaires than for it to be in the hands of charities. Billionaires know how to make more money with their money, how to create projects to benefit mankind with their money and how to create employment opportunities with their money.

To take $40 billion from Warren Buffett and to give one billion kids in Africa $40 each will bring an awful lot of short-term joy to those little guys but it builds nothing lasting, nothing to generate fuel for the engine of progress. That is even if every dollar makes it to the intended recipients. By the same token, if you go to Toys-r-Us and buy $40 billion worth of toys to distribute, you will trigger an explosion of new jobs and new financial opportunities in several countries. You could theoretically have people benefiting a hundred years from now as a result of that toy purchase, while the $40-a-kid campaign will melt the power of the $40 billion into nothingness within days.

To the extent that billionaires will deplete the most powerful locus of human progress, namely their own minds and talents, to confer an illusory and ephemeral benefit upon the least capable people, it is against the best interests of mankind. That sounds harsh but it is true.

The Talmud teaches that shortly after the destruction of the Second Temple, the leading rabbis of the age pronounced a rule that even one who is dropping money liberally in charitable directions should limit his contributions to 20 percent of total assets. In the context of that time period in Israel, with the country in ruins, it is fascinating that their biggest concern was to cap contributions to the needy.

Clearly they saw that soft-hearted Jews who could not bear to see the terrible plight of their brethren were ready to clean themselves out so every beggar could have a loaf of bread. To do that would have set back the recovery from the devastation by many years. The long-term chance of bouncing back depends heavily on financially capable people having capital at their disposal.

There are a number of other problems today with dumping large sums of money into foundations. They are generally managed by trendy leftists who think killing babies through Planned Parenthood is more valuable than giving scholarships to young people to better themselves. All in all, I would rather see a man give 20 percent with close supervision to achieve maximum effect.

This subject is very close to my heart and I have to make a supreme effort to stop myself from ranting on for a few more pages. I personally ran a wonderful program, in memory of my late mother, which provided funds to tutor children from poor families who were lagging in particular subjects. The school designated the beneficiaries. Money was never given to the parents; it went from the funds to the tutors. We preset the tutoring fee at about 75% of market, so the tutors were contributing a little themselves.

The program was wildly effective but we ran out of funds, and so many of these so-called educational foundations put up so many barriers that we would have needed a full-time employee just to apply for the grants. I saw clearly how smart money could help real people, but most of the wealthy philanthropists were too distracted to guide their money with the perspicacity they show in other arenas.

In short, the type of thinking demonstrated in this campaign is on a par with the thinking that money should be funneled from corporate profits into government redistribution.

About the Author

Jay D. Homnick, commentator and humorist, is a frequent contributor to The American Spectator. He also writes for Human Events. Here he performs his original composition, "Buy You (Bayou) a Drink".

Letter to the Editor View all comments (26) | Leave a comment

Appleby| 2.18.11 @ 6:31AM

Never underestimate the happiness that personal charity can give -- to you as well as to the individuals you help. And dont forget that charity begins at home -- dont spend all your cash in foreign lands while your sister and her children are freezing in the dark.

Ryan| 2.18.11 @ 8:24AM

I think that this uncovers a bit of the thinking of the left - that they DON'T consider the whole aspect of economic growth that a ton of money can give.

I wish I remember the name, but one of the more wealthy lefty senators lamented the fact that he was getting something in the area of millions in tax breaks, and would have preferred that money be spread around.

He never stopped to consider that such money, invested in a factory or in a business or something, would be productive and give lives better than it would give handouts.

That being said, it shouldn't be a disincentive for us to give. 10% is a pretty good number to start at.

And keep in mind, that it's all God's anyway.

Ken (Old Texican)| 2.18.11 @ 8:38AM

Mr. Homnick
Thank you for that thinking.
One Jewish fellow talked about "faith the size of a mustard seed"
Most people don't know how tiny a mustard seed really is...nor do they know the huge ratio of one mustard seed to the final volume of mustard it produces.

Tina B| 2.18.11 @ 9:10AM

Yesterday a sweet young public middle school science teacher was explaining to me that when her husband graduates next year, as a Civil Engineer, she wanted to stay home and take care of her two little boys. And maybe have another baby.

We began to talk about God and our many blessings. I was so happy to hear her tell of God's provisons in the past year. She said that she and her hubby tithe no matter what, and, amazingly enough, have all that they need on very little income. Always just enough money to make it. So she trusted that if they continued to follow God's way, she could trust in His faithfulness. I loved it.

She and I are not typical of public school educators, I know this. But fear not, there are a few of us in the classroom, and we pray for our kids, and follow Our Lord at work as well as at home, with our time, our talents and our treasure.

Ken (Old Texican)| 2.18.11 @ 10:42AM

Tina, please pass the word thank you to the many dedicated teachers you must know.
Second, lynch the administrators .

The Bishop| 2.18.11 @ 12:37PM

Amen, brother Ken. Preach it.

pepbac| 2.18.11 @ 10:44AM

Tithing depends on somebody it is a fact it does work and one believes and do it faithfully in respect of the almighty things go well, many people lose blessing because they they do it for people to see. Tithing is a command from God.

directtohomeappliances.com directtohomeappliances

Ryan| 2.18.11 @ 11:58AM

Actually, it's an OT command that has a certain amount of "revision" in the NT. Tithing was given and was used to run the theocracy of the time.

The NT model is "giving to everyone as they had need" and a certain amount of sharing and Christians making sure each other was taken care of.

jolizoom| 2.18.11 @ 8:13PM

The OT standard was 10%. The NT standard is not specified, but my pastor used an anecdote to explain it: "Let's say I hired a babysitter for $20 for the evening, and I did this a couple of times a month during the year. The next year I hired her again, and I asked her how much she wanted to be paid. Her response was, 'Whatever you think is appropriate.' Would it make sense for me to pay her LESS THAN I paid her the previous year, under the same circumstances?"

We have tithed for about 6 years, even dipping into our savings in the last 2 years to be able to continue tithing. It's true, God honors those who tithe. My husband's salary was reduced somewhat 2 years ago, but his job was always stable and as of this month, his salary was restored. In an era of layoffs and paycuts, God has protected us from financial harm. Not bad for living in Taxifornia.

Donald J. Morrissey| 2.18.11 @ 11:13AM

Warren Buffet bought a Medal of Freedom for $40 billion? The American people give to charity and charitable works at the rate of $6 billion per week. So, Buffet takes up the slack for less than 7 weeks of what American do, year in and year out.
I'm not impressed.

David W| 2.18.11 @ 11:37AM

It almost sounds like the suggestion is instead of giving money to poor and downtrodden in a low income neighborhood use the money to open a Subway Sandwich Shop or a grocery store. Instead of the money quickly disappearing after the purchase of two bags of groceries (or worse) there are jobs that can give some hope and experience for bigger things. And with the creation of the first two stores maybe someone else will dare to take the chance and open a bakery or a cleaners or a day care center. and instead of wasting $40,000 giving cash away create something that provides life (or I guess the liberals could open more Planned Parenthood Centers and fulfill their dream - no more poor or blacks or hispanics taking up precious carbon footprint).

Joe D.| 2.18.11 @ 12:38PM

Excellent article and right on target.

Kay| 2.18.11 @ 3:14PM

A much-needed discussion and thought-provoking comments. I agree with the subtle difference in emphasis between the Old and New Kingdoms Ryan points out; however, it is largely agreed upon in mainline Protestant churches to give at least 10%, with the thought that God loves a cheerful giver, so give more is the heart issue. Having said that, I agree it is difficult to always meet 10% when raising a family and providing private education (I won't render to Caesar what is God's!). I do think it is clear in the NT that God wants our sacrifice of praise and not of material things and yet, we must have the hand of charity, to our brothers and sisters of the faith first, and then to the poor. What I believe is very significant from this article is the fact that since the church has been in decline, both in numbers and giving, we have seen an ever-more encroaching government who dangles the charitable carrot for the strings attached: this is NOT the role of government; it is the responsibility of families to their own, and the church to the poor. Once we begin to see what profound ramifications this has had for the good of our society (working with your hands, not being idle to collect government handouts), we may be able to direct government away from these futile attempts to cause men to stand up. It is transparently clear as we see legislatures fleeing for the hills that people are beginning to understand that government is not the answer, it is the problem, and when we can stop supporting those to keep their hefty government pensions (breaking unions that shouldn't exist because these are public servants) we shouldn't be so burdened as not to give our 10%; until then, we should strive to do so in faith, even with that of a mustard seed, and trust that God's promises are true. That trust counts in everything we do in faith as we live according to His ways.

WRJonas| 2.18.11 @ 4:55PM

My wife and I select our charitable giving with an eye toward what the receiving organization does with the gift. Too many churches have been seduced into supporting illegal immigration, green /environmental causes, leftist political campaigning etc. because of the feel good publicity it generates.
That in itself is disappointing but it usually ends up denying funds to those who really need help.
The inclination of leftists to take credit for the spending of other peoples money is well known and it is rooted deeply in the Democratic Party.

jolizoom| 2.18.11 @ 8:17PM

If you're attending one of those churches, you probably need to seek a new church family. I'm not an advocate of "church-shopping", but if the church is supporting these things, it is a sickness within the leadership that you probably can't fix.

RT| 2.18.11 @ 5:08PM

If you want to have your needs met, tithe. If you want to come up short at the end of each month, don't.

scott| 2.18.11 @ 7:02PM

As someone who works for a Buffett concern this has been a subject of contention amongst the knowledgeable employees. Noone was bothered on wage freezes and healthcare costs going up, seeing this as the price of the recession and the ability to keep our jobs. When this tidbit about wasting capital on foundations, there was just a little bit of complaining cropping up.

W| 2.18.11 @ 7:57PM

Buffet got the medal because he supported obama and obama's tax programs, and opposed repealing the federal estate tax.

Deacon Jim Stagg| 2.18.11 @ 8:33PM

Wonderful article! Thank you for your insight!

claudia monteverdi| 2.18.11 @ 10:24PM

what a joy, and what an original concept, at least for me. So Less (giving) is more! Love it! One thing for sure, that cheapskate one buck giving delivery boy from Hop Ching Cantonese ain't never gonna see a big tip from me again, no way!
Now, to thepoint, siunce you and I are the only ones who know who shud be getting help, I suggest we appoint a committe of hundreds of concerned citizens to demand of buffet and gates and a few congressmen to give all their dough to us..we take no salry, just expenses and travel and lodging and suitable attire and manicures..OK by you?
Today was a black day for America..First O'bama idiotically and callously makes the WIsconsin Situation into a national (and very unpopular ) issue..lifting this fine governor guy to olympian levels in the eyes of the nation and taunting the other sissy new Republian Governors of states in that region to emulate him or be thought sell-out wimps--sodumb of the pres--but not nearly as dumb or anti-american as the manner in which he bounces off cuddlng up to the Muslim Brotherhood to embracing Hezbollah at the U.N. today. Miss Rice's ugly comments cud as well been uttered by The Greand Mufti of Jerusalem or Osama Ben whatshis face--and......where, where WTF id Senator Schumer and Levin during the prelude and now in the disgusting aftermath in which the United States publcly and vehemntly denounce her prominent close ally and praised the killers...
I am out of breath , so you all, please tithe to the "Claudia's Out of Breath Fund" major credit cards all accepted, also good salamis and hunks of gorgonzola dolce.....Thank you...as to you my Jay, you are beyond any description, long past good, you are the Edgar Allen Poe of the cybersphere----in awe,
Claudia
ps--try hard to ignore my spelling, i do my feeble best

Liberal Reader| 2.19.11 @ 2:15AM

Amazing. When conservatives seek to destroy social programs designed to help society's most vulnerable people, they assure us that the charitable spirit of Americans -- particularly rich ones, whose taxes are being cut proportionally -- will do a better job of caring for the needy.

Now it turns out that charity isn't so great either. Non-profit organizations, after all, don't know how to handle money as good as their donors -- or they'd be rich enough to be donors themselves!

As usual, conservatives come up with a plan so simple a child can understand it.

Social services designed to help the poorest people in society should be cut in favor of tax cuts that enrich society's wealthiest.

Charitable giving simply transfers wealth from billionaires that were clever enough to become billionaires to do-gooders who are foolish enough to devote their lives to helping others.

If these are Christian values, give me Satanism.

skip| 2.19.11 @ 7:27PM

Holy Crap you are unintelligent and dishonest, then again anyone can tell that just by seeing your name.

Every study on the subject has shown that conservatives and republicans give exponentially more of their own wealth than liberals and democrats give of their own wealth.

You aren't even intelligent or honest enough to know what charity means. Charity is giving of one's own wealth, not confiscating other's wealth against their wishes.

And, genius, it is unconstitutional to use any taxes in any charitable way. The author of the Constitution, James Madison, even said so.

But what really takes the cake is that you are not intelligent or honest enough to understand Christian values.

Christ taught, and challenged each and everyone, to be charitable by giving from their own wealth.

Christ did not teach, and did not challenge anyone, to force their neighbor against their will to provide for any other.

Christ taught that forcing neighbors against their will to give up their own wealth is stealing your neighbor's wealth, a sin so detestable God included it as one of the Ten Commandments.

You are so unintelligent and dishonest you don't understand anyone foolish enough to force others against their will to provide for others are acting despicable, not noble, before God.

You are so unintelligent and dishonest you are jeopardizing your chance for an eternity in heaven by piously spreading lies.

The Lord God Almighty bless you and keep you and have mercy on your soul.

Ken (Old Texican)| 2.19.11 @ 9:03AM

Liberal reader,
You communists, (pardon the shorthand), just have it ass-backwards you wrote:
""Social services designed to help the poorest people in society should be cut in favor of tax cuts that enrich society's wealthiest.""
Hey dumbunny, "tax cuts" don't "enrich" anyone.
Nope!
Only Hard smart work can "enrich" folks.

See the only problem is, your hard work is dumb. You just keep whining for more and more, but you work hard at robbing us.

jcrpa| 2.19.11 @ 6:15PM

from someone who works in non-profit world, this article is dead on. too much money flowing from wealth producers to non-performers who often squander the funds. bewhare to whom you give!