, i v ( 2^6 7TST msc. Copy's Debt to (Sob % JOHN Y. AITCHISON i n P P f5 [75 ff T5 T3 HIT HOLT A FOREWORD This address is published by request to meet what is believed to be a distinct need at the present time. Not only is there a deep feeling that the emphasis ought to be placed at the defi- nite point where we have sought to focus it, but there is a demand for a somewhat brief and yet comprehensive treatment of this subject for gen- eral circulation among our churches at a nom- inal price. The Author. prices Single Copy, Postpaid. Par Hundred, Postpaid 5 Cents . S3. 50 LOVE’S DEBT TO GOD At the close of the service several had come forward to meet the speakers of the evening. The writer happened to be one of the latter, for he had spoken along the line of “Christian Stew- ardship.” The chairman of the Board of Trustees of one of the leading churches of the state said : “When you get home, I want you to write me and tell me how to go about it to put those prin- ciples in practice in this church. You are too busy here for us to talk about it to-night; but remember, I want to know how to get our church to adopt this plan of Christian Giving, and if you forget it, I will write you about it.” I remembered I had corresponded with this man and the manner in which he addressed me showed that he was in earnest about the matter. “One of the hopeful signs of the times,” I have said to myself again and again since that night. But I also remember there were those present who heard the address who were decidedly op- posed to the idea advanced that the law of tith- ing which was in force in Old Testament times is still binding upon the church. There are not a few who have become very comfortable in the idea that we are “not under law but under grace.” They say, “The tithing system has been displaced ‘under grace’ and the church is now to give as she feels impelled by love.” Let us submit the question at once. Is there any one who will be so bold as to assert that the law of God regard- ing the tithe, so clearly declared, as is generally admitted, in the Old Testament, has been dis- placed by the grace of the Gospel, and that in its place God has purposed there should be substi- tuted the present hap-hazard, hit-or-miss, give- when-you-feel-like-it, lawless, loveless method of supporting the cause which is dearest to the heart of the Son of God ? Can it be that there are those who are willing to argue seriously to the effect that in place of the wise and just law of God in force in the former dispensation, by obedience to which the Lord could have what was needed for the support of His kingdom among men, we are privileged to substitute, and that with the pur- pose and desire of our God, the present system of church finances, which are a source of dis- couragement and trouble to the pastor, of worry and annoyance to the board of trustees, of im- patience, embarrassment and often aggravation to the members of the church and congregation in general? If there are such, you will pardon me for saying in the most emphatic manner that I believe the church of Christ has so far de- parted from the will of God with reference to our financial obligations that we have brought great reproach upon the cause of Christ. We have allowed the world to see how selfish and self-centered we could become, turned our churches into begging institutions, and permitted our missionary work to be shamefully neglected BECAUSE WE HAVE NOT BEEN DOING OUR DUTY IN BRINGING THE TITHES INTO THE STORE HOUSE. And we have excused ourselves for it all under the pretext that we are not under “law” but “under love and grace.” May the Lord forgive us for ever hav- ing laid claim to very much of either grace or love in the administration of our money for the support of the Gospel. It ought, in all fairness, to be stated at this point that the real responsibility for this shame- ful neglect can scarcely be laid at the door of the members of our churches. The pastors, whose duty it is “to declare the whole counsel of God,” are more at fault : and there is no doubt that much of the responsibility should be lifted from their shoulders and placed upon our Theological Seminaries whose duty it is to train men for a faithful Gospel ministry. That there is a decided indifference in our Divinity schools is evident, not merely from the untrained ministers who graduate from them each year, but from the fol- lowing facts as well: In 1902 a prominent lay- man sent to the 152 Evangelical Theological Seminaries in the Lmited States and Canada a letter addressed to the president or leading offi- cial, offering to send free to each student in his institution a package of such literature as he published on “Honoring God with our Sub- stance.” Only 27 accepted the offer. The re- mainder were either unwilling or indifferent. A second letter was sent to the institutions that did not respond to the first, addressed this time to the “Professor of Practical Theology'.” Twenty-two responded, with no reply as yet from 103 schools. A third letter was sent to the 103 institutions, addressed “To that student most interested in the subject of ‘Honoring God with our Substance.’ ” Ten replied, leaving 93 out of 105 of the Evan- gelical Theological Seminaries of the LTfited States and Canada “either indifferent, or unwill- ing to permit their students to accept and read. without expense, the same literature on the sub- ject of Tithing that active pastors have ordered in quantities aggregating many million during the last 27 years for circulation among their people.” Can we allow such indifference to continue? No matter who has been responsible for the con- ditions of the past, it is our duty as Theological Seminiaries, as pastors, as laymen, to face this question squarely and in the light of the teach- ings of the Word of God. Let us investigate and see what we who are “under grace” and profess to love the Lord owe to him whom we worship and honor as Savior and King. And in order to the better understanding of the question we shall begin with the law of God as declared in the Old Testament and trace the history of this question of Christian Stewardship down to our own day. The first mention of the tithe — giving one-tenth of our income to sustain the Lord’s cause — is when Abraham, 500 years before Moses, gave tithes to Melchisedec. (Gen. 14:20 and Heb. 7:2.) The second mention of the tithe is where Jacob, 400 years before Moses, after having that most precious vision of God, vowed, “And of all that thou shalt give me I will surely give the tenth unto thee.” (Gen. 28:22). Where did Abraham and Jacob get the idea of giving the tenth to the Lord? If the law of God had not yet been declared so as to make it the common duty of the people, no one can deny that these two men had come so near to their Lord that they felt it their duty to give their tithes to him. And if Abraham could pay his tithe to Melchi- sedec whether compelled by law or impelled by love and the spirit of worship, shall we do less for our Christ who is “made an high priest for- ever after the order of Melchisedec?” The next mention of the tithe is found in Lev. 27 :30-32. “And all the tithe of the land, whether of the seed of the land or of the fruit of the tree, is the Lord’s ; it is holy unto the Lord. And if a man will at all redeem aught of his tithes he shall add thereto to the fifth part thereof. And concerning the tithe of the herd or of the flock, even of whatsoever passeth under the rod, the tenth shall be holy unto the Lord.” Let us pause right here to make sure we under- stand this law. Under the law the tithe DID NOT BELONG TO THE INDIVIDUAL. He had no right to it. “All the tithe of the land is the Lord’s; IT IS HOLT UNTO THE LORD.” The same was true of seed, fruit and herd ; and “whatsoever passeth under the rod, THE TENTH SHALL BE HOLY UNTO THE LORD.” That this law prevailed and was still in force as late as 400 years before Christ is evidenced by the accusations made by the prophet Malachi when he accused those who withheld the tithe from the Lord of “robbing God.” “Will a man rob God? Yet ye have robbed me. But ye say, wherein have we robbed thee? In tithes and in offerings. Ye are cursed with a curse; for ye have robbed me, even this whole nation.” (Mai. 3:8-9). What was the attitude of Christ toward the tithe? Did he change the law? Did he say His Father did not have need of so much money, henceforth, and that the “tithe system was part of the ceremonial law of Moses and that it ex- pired with the M'osiac dispensation?” No. But he did say, “Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s ; and unto God the things which are God’s.” (Matt. 22:21). And he was looking at a piece of money when he said it. Many have interpreted this passage as if he were looking at a soul. Christ did tell the Pharisees that they ought to tithe. It was concerning the tithe that he said to them (Luke 11:42) “These things ought ye to have done.” But someone says that he was speaking to the Pharisees, not to us. “Very well ; do you mean to take the position that what Christ said to other people has no meaning for you ? Then what have you ? He has never spoken one word directly to you. All the marvels of his grace and love have come to us through other people.” The question is frequently asked, “If Christ intended us to tithe, why did he not say so? Why did he leave the matter uncertain?” There are several answers that should be made to this question, for it is a reasonable one. 1. We must remember that Christ was living in a day when the law of tithing was well understood and practiced. From his remark to the Phar- isees it is evident that the emphasis needed to be placed on other issues at that time. Conditions have changed since then, however, and we need to place new emphasis on the law that was well understood and rigidly observed then. In Christ’s day the people were obeying the tithing law so well that special emphasis was not needed. 2. The free-will offerings of the early disciples and the communistic basis which was voluntarily adopted for a time by the early church furnish abundant proof that an elaborate setting forth of a law so well understood was not necessary. 3. Under these circumstances the utterances of Christ and the apostles are sufficient to show us the principles which the few plain statements that are made were founded upon. That the tithe system was not a temporary in- stitution to be discontinued with the ceremonial laws of Moses is clear from the following facts : 1. It was observed by Abraham and Jacob hundreds of years before the “ceremonial laws of Moses were instituted.” We find the follow- ing statement in Smith’s Bible Dictionary under the article on tithes : “Numerous instances of the use of tithes are found both in profane and in Biblical history, prior to or independently of the appointment of the Levitical tithes under the Law. 2. Then we find that the tithe did not cease with the passing away of the ceremonial law. This is evidenced by the fact that the Pharisees were tithers in Christ’s day and that he de- clared “these things ought ye to have done.” 3. In the history of the church in the first centuries we have abundant evidence that the tithe had not been discontinued. Clement (30- 100 A. D.) and Justin Martyr (110-165 A. D.) were very clear in their teachings concerning the offerings that were due to God. Irenaeus (120-202 A. D.) speaks of “the obligation of Christians to render tithes unto God.” Neander declares : “The duty was also embodied in the Apostolic canons, a compilation of laws in force among the Christian churches about the close of the second century.” The tithe was declared as a Christian duty by Origen (185-254), by Cyprian (200-258), by Jerome (345-420), by Ambrose (340-397) who said, “God has reserved the tenth part to Himself, and therefore it is not lawful for a man to retain what God has re- served for himself.” Augustine (354-430) de- clared, “Our ancestors used to abound in wealth of every kind for this very reason that they used to give tithes, and pay the tax to Caesar.” And he goes on to say that because they have “been unwilling to share the tithe with God now the whole is taken away.” He urges the giving of the tenth and used these two strong expressions : “The Scribes and Pharisees gave tithes, for whom Christ had not yet shed his blood.” “But yet I cannot keep back what he who died for us said whilst he was alive, ‘Ex>- cept your righteousness shall exceed the right- eousness of the Scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.’ ” *“The tithe was enjoined by the Council of Tours in A. D., 567, by that of Macon in 585, of Rouen in 650, of Nantes in 660, and of Metz in 756. For centuries it was the prevailing cus- tom throughout all Christendom. Bingham in his ‘Christian Antiquities' says: ‘This was the unanimous judgment of the Fathers, and the voice of the church uncontradicted for more than a thousand years, or until the usages of the church were alienated and perverted by the papal hierarchy during the dark ages.” 4. It is a well recognized principle of law that when once a law has been in force, and the conditions which called it forth still exist, the law is binding until it is repealed. History shows that the law of tithing, while merged into the ceremonial law, has never been repealed and the need for its enforcement has never been greater than at the present time. So we must conclude that the law of tithing has been given to us by God ; that it is not a temporary pro- vision, and THAT IT IS JUST AS BINDING UPON THE CHURCH OF CHRIST TO- DAY AS IT HAS EVER BEEN. Let us face the issue squarely. We owe the Lord something. Shall we pay it? But some one says, “I have debts to pay and must meet them first.” Yes, your creditors have a prior claim to strangers on your income, but the Lord has the first claim. And it is a reasonable claim. It is strange we should ever have thought of it in any other light. When we ride on the street car there is something due. When we live in a house the rent is due. Wherever we own property the taxes are due. And we cannot live honorable lives if we avoid these obligations. Do we owe God nothing for all the advantages of his grace and care? Let the man who is willing to answer that question in the nega- tive go to live in the land where the law of God is not known and where the blessings of the gos- pel have never been felt. The plain fact of the matter is that for us to withhold from God that which is due him is robbery in the twentieth *1 quote here from “The Business Aspect of Christian Stewardship,” by L. B. Hartman, D. £>., which I take pleasure in commending. I wish every Christian in the land would read it — certainly no pastor can afford to overlook such a helpful presentation of this subject. It is published in cloth for 25 cents and in paper cover at 10 cents. century after Christ just as certainly as it was in the fourth century before him. There is just this difference, however. For us Christian peo- ple to be talking about giving to the Lord “un- der grace’’ rather than “under law,” and that under far more prosperous times and with a Christ to worship and love who is incomparably greater than the Jews had, for us to give the mere pittance we do — far less than the Jews’ tenth — is nothing short of hypocrisy under the cloak of Christianity. We may not like to face such a charge but we surely have not the aud- acity to talk about being prompted by love when we are withholding from God the tithe which both law and love have a right to claim. One of the most tender and touching incidents re- corded in the Bible is the story of Abraham of- fering up his son Isaac as a burnt offering to the Lord. We have here such a high concep- tion of the Lord’s claim upon his servant Abra- ham that many are free with their criticisms and say, “The Lord had no right to make such a de- mand of Abraham.” Did he not? Abraham did not complain and why should we? Faith in God meant everything to Abraham. He was willing to give God whatever was required of him. And Abraham “took the knife to slay his son. And the angel of the Lord called unto him out of heaven, and said, Abraham, Abra- ham; and he said, Here am I. And he said,. Lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do= thou anvthing unto him: FOR NOW I KNOW THAT ‘THOU FEAREST GOD, SEEING THOU HAST NOT WITHHELD THY SON, THY ONLY SON FROM ME.” The time has come when God wants the proof from his church that we love him. “Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, and prove me now herewith, saith the Lord of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven and pour you out a blessing that there shall not be room enough to receive it.” The blessing of God is being withheld from many individuals and from many churches to- day because of the shameful manner in which we are treating the Lord in financial affairs. We have lost respect for ourselves and the world has lost confidence in the church. How could it be otherwise when we do not recognize our debt to the Lord and treat his cause the same as we do that of the common beggar upon the street? We apologize and entreat for money to carry on the Lord’s work as if we were afraid we would hurt some one’s feelings if we pressed the matter too much. What right have we as stewards of God to treat his cause in such a half-hearted and shameful manner? Thomas Kane was correct when he said, “I do not be- lieve that ministers have any right to permit any man to think that he is a Christian or safe for heaven if his so-called religion finds expression only in talking and praying. Neither have they any right to refrain from warning all such pro- fessing Christians that the so-called giving at the rate of two or three cents a month to the causes nearest to Christ’s heart, home and for- eign missions, is either conscious or unconscious hypocrisy.” When Mr. Kane penned these words he was not far from the thought of the Master who said, “If, therefore, ye have not been faithful in the unrighteous mammon, who will commit to your trust the true riches? And if ye have not been faithful in that which is another man’s who shall give you that which is your own?” (Luke 16:11-12.) “And all the tithe of the land, whether of the seed of the land or of the fruit of the tree, is the Lord’s ; IT IS HOLY UNTO THE LORD.” (Lev. 27: 30). What, then, about love, if giving unto the Lord is a matter of Law? Has love no place? Certainly it has. But its place is not to fall be- low the law. It is never the desire or place of love to repeal the law but to obey it, and that in the proper spirit. Love furnishes the only true motive for obedience. “The love of Christ constraineth us.” (II Cor. 5:14). The Mas- ter said : “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets. I am not come to de- stroy, but to fulfill.” (Matt. 5:17). Love changes and purifies the motive but never seeks freedom from the obligation. It can never be the spirit of love which prompts a child of God to seek to be free from the obligations of the tithe, in the face of the crying needs of the King- dom of God in the world. One who tries to claim that we are no longer under obligation to keep the laws of God shows that he does not understand the first principles of the kingdom of heaven. God’s laws are not arbitrary, sense- less fiats of his will. They are all given to meet some definite demand in the life and progress of humanity. And none of Cod's laws can be violated without untold disaster coming upon the race. History has proved this statement again and again as seen in the ruin of the na- tions that have disregarded God’s law concern- ing the Sabbath day. And were it not that we are so bent on keeping our money at any cost we would never offer such a senseless excuse to the Lord for disobeying the law and falling so far short of our duty, as we do when we say, "we are not living under law but under grace.” ‘‘What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?” (Rom. 6:1-2). We recognize this principle readily enough in other matters. Here is a man who has been a drunkard. He is converted and joins our church. He is under grace. But because he is under grace do we say he is free to do as he pleases? No, when he gets drunk again and again and the church and its pleadings all are spurned by him, no one says, “Let him alone, he is no longer under law but under grace, and he has a right to do as he pleases.” On the contrary the church concludes he has never had a change of heart and withdraws the hand of fellowship from him. What an absurd and senseless ex- cuse this is for our robbing God and withhold- ing from his treasury the funds that belong to him for the work of his kingdom, with the at- tempt to justify ourselves for it by saying we are “living under grace.” Let us call things by their right name, for we are dealing with tbe Lord and not man. And he whom we wor- ship as King and Savior deserves better treat- ment at our hands. Let us admit freely that we are under the domination of self when we fall below the requirements of the law of God concerning the tithe. When a man marries a woman whom he loves and who loves him, are they freed from the law ? The most pernicious teachings of the world, that curse society and damn the home as an institution — the home that God has made so sacred — are the teachings of those who claim that law is superceded and free love regulates the marriage relationship. I care not how much a man loves his wife, he can never love her enough to free himself from the obligations of law. And God pity the woman who has a man for a husband who says, “Wife, my love for you is so pure that I am free from the law and hence am at liberty to treat you just according to the fancies of my own sweet will. If I want to spend my money at the saloon and let you and the children do for yourselves, you must excuse me, for I love you so.” It is a travesty upon love. And so is the miserable, stingy, self- centered treatment the church of Christ is giv- ing to the Lord of Hosts to whom belongs the tithe; for remember, ”IT IS HOLY UNTO THE LORD.” “If any man provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.” (I Tim. 5:8). But how about the man who is generous enough in providing for his family and their needs, but is stingy in providing for the household of faith to which he belongs? All the talking we may do about “living under grace” so long as we continue in our unholy dis- obedience to the law of God is beneath our man- hood and womanhood as children of God and is nothing short of an insult to the Lord whom we profess to love. The Son of God who gave his life for us said: “If ye love me, keep my commandments. Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. Ye are my friends if ye do whatsoever I com- mand you.” It is a great deal easier for many to talk about laying down their lives than it is to “Bring all the tithes into the storehouse.” Doubtless some will think this is plain, blunt speaking. It is, and was so intended. But the spirit prompting the writer was not fear lest some one who was not doing his duty should be offended but rather lest in putting these truths in too mild a fashion the rightful claims of God upon us would not be recognized. The attempt is an utter failure if the conscience of the read- er has not been stirred and some definite im- pression left upon his mind that this message has been given with the conviction of “Thus saith the Lord.” Let us recognize that we who love the Lord owe him something. He who makes his claim upon us is worthy. His cause is in need of the tithe of his church to- day. What a glorious work of grace would fol- low if the tithe were brought into the store- house of our Lord in these days ! Surely our love is not a matter of mere sentiment and idle talk. Love’s proof will be evident when love pays her debt to God. Anticipated Questions Answered 1. Does not the Bible teach that all that we have belongs to God? Yes, but not in the sense in which the tithe belongs to him. We have avoided this ques- tion in the previous discussion because there is need of a definite message which will stir the church to see her duty regarding the tithe. Many are free to admit that “all belongs to God” and keep it for themselves. Whereas, the man who withholds the tithe, withholds that which is not his but, “IS HOLY UNTO THE LORD.” 2. If the Jews gave a tenth under the old dispen- sation, ought we not to give more? Yes, and so did the Jews, who never reckoned their alms-giving as a part of their tithe. Yet it was considered a sacred duty for the Jews to give alms. Their alms-giving never came out of the Lord’s one-tenth but from their own nine-tenths. There is unquestionably a danger in some cases, as of old, of people bragging that they “give tithes of all they possess.” Experience has taught me, however, that the great majority of those who once begin to tithe do not stop there. In the ma- jority of cases tithing is started as an act of consecra- tion to the Lord and is accompanied with a real spirit- ual blessing such as God has promised. Hence as a rule it becomes, in the life of the tither, the starting point and not the end of liberality toward the Lord’s treasury. For this reason we cannot afford, for the sake of setting forth the definite claims of God, to allow ourselves to get too many side issues in the way. For the one man who stops at tithing to-day there are at least a thousand who have never begun it. Let us direct our message for a time to the thousand and not defeat the whole message by setting up the one man. It would be a happy thing in the minds of many if we should succeed in sidetracking the main issue for the sake of a few. 3. Is it not true that rules and fixed proportions check liberality? No, it is entirely false to make such a claim. Nothing need be said in answer to this objection more than to cite Old Testament liberality in comparison with the lack of revenue in the church to-day. It did not check liberality in the early days of Christianity. You never knew of a tithing church closing its doors. But we frequently hear of churches unable to support preaching services or give to mis- sions that would be wealthy if they had the tithe from their members. Are we to conclude that the Lord is responsible for the different way of managing churches in these modern money-making times, and that it is his good pleasure that these churches should die and the Gospel not be preached in thousands of communi- ties? If it is the Lord’s fault, he is a poor financier for one who claims^ “The silver is mine, and the gold is mine.” But seeing it is not his fault, what a dis- grace it is upon his church ! 4. Do you think the Lord would have poor people tithe their income? Yes. As a matter of fact, sta- tistics show they are more ready to do it than the rich. The very best thing that could happen to every poor man’s home in the land would be for him and his whole family to tithe their income. This is how it works. A washer-woman whose husband was a heavy drinker began to tithe. Husband objected. She replied, “you give nine-tenths to the saloon and surely I can give my one-tenth to the Lord.” As time passed the name of God meant more than ever before in that home. The husband was converted and it became a Christian home. You do your part and trust in the Lord to do the rest. 5. How can we get our church to adopt the tithing system? Ah, that is a hard question to answer. The only way I know to bring it about is for you to begin, and in a wise and earnest manner do all in your power to help others see their duty. We cannot force the issue. Love must lead us to this victory for the Mas- ter. But can we not have in every church, in YOUR church, a growing band of Christian people who will begin to “Honor the Lord with their substance, and with the first-fruits of all their increase?” The writer knows of no other way in which to answer the ques- tion, “How can we get our church to adopt the Scrip- tural plan of making offerings to the Lord?” Those who see their duty and are constrained by love to do it must help in every manner possible to bring others to see what the Lord expects of his people. Pastors must proclaim the doctrine faithfully from the pulpit. Laymen must talk it in the prayer meeting, the Sunday school and among their friends. In many cases it will be necessary for laymen to urge the pastor to preach on this sadly neglected subject. May we not as pas- tors and laymen unite in asking that in all our denom- inational gatherings, our associational meetings, our young people’s rallies, our state and national conven- tions, more time and prominence be given to the con- sideration of God's rightful claim upon that part of our income which, “IS HOLY UNTO THE LORD?”