The People Who Give

More than ten years ago now, in a diaconate meeting, our accounts clerk held up a list of names, and said, "These are the people who give." Some of us were shocked. Giving was supposed to be anonymous. The implication, though, was that we should cater primarily to the people who give. This in fact happened, after my departure -- and the Church went into steep decline, though not of course for this reason alone. By accounts that I received, the Church may have lost 80% of the congregation -- including those who gave. Why did the people who "didn't give" matter so much? There could be various reasons, but I would think that they include these:

• The people who "didn't give" created a different spirit

• They crowded the pews, and created a "buzz"

• They increased diversity in various ways (age, status, culture, and so on)

• They broadened our understanding of spiritual needs

• They broadened our understanding of physical needs

• Their presence meant that we emphasised "equal" giving

• And all of this was simply something that had God's blessing upon it

OBSERVATION: Paradoxically, it is when one has a (proportionately) sound income from the poor, that one has a sound income as a whole. The mathematical mind might count it up and say that the giving of the poor is nothing. However, the giving of the poor is worth far more than it seems. In my experience, it is a marker of financial security for the Church (or not). One might wonder here, how I come to link decline with catering to the poor (or not). Among other things, the poor told me that they came to be ignored.