In my first two addresses I have tried to lay out two different stories that compete for our allegiance.

In my first address, I tried to outline the culture story, the money story, the "more is better" story, the story of radical individualism and rampant consumerism and consumption. I tried to recognize the positive results of that story: increased standards of living, wealth creation for charities including the church, etc., and its negative results in our social health as measured by such indices as crime rates, divorce rates, single parent families, child neglect and poverty, etc., and its harmful effects on individuals caught in the compulsive rat race for more things.

In my second address, I tried to lay out the Gospel Story - the sign of which is our baptism. The motto of that story is "enough is best." It is a story of profound gratitude for the all that God has given us, a story of community, of sharing, of giving and self disciplined restraint in the accumulation of things. And my central thesis is that the real test of our stewardship is which story is the prominent one in our lives, which story is the governing one in the way we handle our money.

I believe we need to acknowledge, indeed, to confess before God, that the culture story is gaining increasing allegiance in our individual lives and in Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). I believe we need to acknowledge that it is in its attitude toward money that the church is most likely to conform to the ways of the world rather than to transcend them. In this address I want to give some evidence of that and to suggest some reasons for it and hint at some ways for responding to it.

The Church's Failure to Address Consumerism

In the first place, I believe we need to confess our failure to address the whole issue of rampant consumerism, always wanting more, the culture story. As you know, Christian stewardship is not only about what we give to the church and other charities, but how we handle all our money, how we use that portion of our income and wealth we don't give to others.

In a remarkable speech to the February 2002 meeting of National Celebration of Confessing Churches, Dr. Mark Achtemeier, professor at the University of Dubuque Theological Seminary, and a strong supporter of the prohibition to ordain active gays and lesbians, said the following: (I quote at some length)

"Brothers and sisters, I am not going to sugarcoat or sentimentalize the situation we face today. As I look around the Presbyterian Church, I see a supposedly Christian institution where abominations litter the landscape. Everywhere we turn, there are open and flagrant violations of the clear teaching of both Old and New Testaments, flaunted before the church with brazenness utterly devoid of any sense of repentance.

I refer of course to rampant consumerism and callous disregard for the poor. We live in a world where some 4,000 children die every day because they lack access to the medical vaccines we take for granted in the West ... Millions of our fellow human beings lack the most basic necessities for proper health and nutrition. And we Presbyterians fill our driveways with luxury cars and our houses with expensive gadgets.

I have two cars back home. And I know perfectly well that in my community there are struggling people, working poor for whom the lack of reliable personal transportation is a major obstacle in their day-to-day existence. The New Testament says, "Whoever has two coats must share with anyone who has none; and whoever has food must do likewise." (Luke 3:10). Do you suppose that applies to automobiles too?

Jesus calls us to a love that puts the needs of our neighbors on a par with the needs of the self. Do our churches ever challenge us about our use of possessions in that light? Sometimes we hear a few words about tithing when it comes time to raise the budget. But do we ever hear anything that would raise questions about the kind of cars we drive, or the houses we live in, or the uses we make of our so-called disposable income?

And the tough thing is, for all my pious talk up here I cannot tell you that I am going to go home after this conference and give away one of my cars. It would be just too inconvenient ... I just can't do it. I can't even want to give away that second car, much less look at all the other uses I make of my money. Serious repentance about possessions is just not within my grasp at this point. It's a good thing those 4,000 children are far, far away.

Here's a question: If genuine repentance seems so terribly out of reach in the face of my attachment to a second car, where would I be if I were a gay person, and the demand were to go home after this conference and let go, not of an inanimate piece of machinery, but of the intimacy that bound me to a beloved partner with whom I have built a life? What would it be like to hear that? ... Does it make sense to single out gays and lesbians as the only ones who have to struggle to live in accordance with Christ's teaching here? ... When was the last time you heard a challenge coming to heterosexuals from the church that was anywhere near as serious or exacting as the challenge the church has delivered to homosexuals? ...

Brothers and sisters, listen to me very carefully. There is absolutely no coherent way to argue from the Bible that this particular struggle with sexual orientation is an abomination, but those other heterosexual problems, or this whole business of possessions and love of neighbor — well, those are optional matters open to negotiation."

I am not here to argue for the ordination of gays and lesbians. That issue has been settled by our church, and I hope settled for some time. But Mark Achtemeier is right: we are so quick to condemn the sins of our gay brothers and sisters, but so slow to condemn the rampant consumerism and alwayswanting-more-attitude that is my sin and too much lodged in my heart and perhaps yours too. In the same list of sins in the first chapter of Romans in which Paul refers to what some consider homosexuality, he also lists greed, which the dictionary defines as an "inordinate desire for more," - and envy and faithlessness and heartlessness - my sins and perhaps yours too.

I know those issues are hard to address, partly because we are all guilty to one degree or another, and they make us uncomfortable and squirm. I also know that there are no easy answers to the issues I raise. But faithfulness to Christ means for me that I live in an uncomfortable tension about those issues, a tension created by the Gospel story and my baptism. And that tension, that "dis-ease," always tempts me to forget the Gospel story and ignore those parts of the Bible I don't like, that make me so uncomfortable, but faithfulness to Christ for me means I have to live with that tension and make hard decisions within it. And the only way I can hang in there, the only way I am free to live and struggle with that tension is by remembering another part of that Gospel Story, the grace of God and the forgiveness of our sins. Thanks be to God!

The Church's Failure to Give

The second piece of evidence the culture story is winning the battle for the soul of the church is our failure to give generously of our money to the cause of Christ. Yes, Christian stewardship includes the use of all our possessions, how we manage all that God has given us, but it certainly includes how much of our income and wealth we give to the cause of Christ around the world.

Make no mistake about it, we are a very wealthy church. Two years ago, we Presbyterians passed the Episcopal Church in per household income. We are now the wealthiest denomination in terms of per household income in the country. Our average household income is now more than $60,000 per year. To whom much is given will much be required.

Yes, the giving of individuals in our church has continued to climb, staying slightly ahead of inflation. In 1969, the average gift per member in the two former Presbyterian denominations was about $125 per year. Adjusted for inflation, that would equal about $600 in 1999. Actual giving in 2002 was $875 per member, so we are doing better than just keeping up with inflation.

But we are not keeping up with rising levels of income. Research has shown that the giving rate of Presbyterians to their church as percent of income was right at 3.3 percent in the depth of the depression in the early 30s. It remained in the 2.5 percent range into the 70s, but since then has fallen faster and faster, so that it now is just over 2 percent of income. Can you believe it: our standard of living has increased probably 200-300 percent since the depression in the early 30s, but the percentage of our income we give to the church has seriously decreased. This matches the experience of most church-based and other charitable funds. And even today, the percentage of income given away at higher levels of income is less than that given by lower income families. In other words, the wealthy give a lower percentage of their income to charity than those in the middle and lower income categories.

As you know, if you read our church's publications, a few years ago we had to lay off 66 people at our Louisville headquarters as part of a $4 million cutback to balance the 2003 budget. And now we are trying to cut back the 2004 mission budget by another $5 million. It's the result of fewer bequests and annuities, a decline in investment income, a declining membership, more money staying at the local congregational and presbytery level and several other factors. It means, of course, that our Worldwide Ministries program is being reduced, together with most other programs. My own presbytery, Charlotte, gave only $180,000 in General Assembly Mission support in 2002 which was half of what they had budgeted to give. I think that is a tragedy and an indictment on all of us.

I know that other mainline denominations are also experiencing such reductions. According to a recent issue of The Christian Century, the Lutheran Church, Missouri Synod has reduced its national staff by 48 people, with more than half of them from its missionary force, and trimmed its budget by $10 million. The United Methodist Church is reducing its missionary force by 53 people as part of a $7.5 million reduction. The Episcopal Church is trimming $10 million from its budget. And the list goes on.

I know times are hard: the stock market has tanked and may well remain down; more people are unemployed; the economy is sluggish at best, and health care costs have escalated. People are worried about the impact of an impending war on the economy, and people are worried about their own economic future. I remember reading somewhere a quote that has stuck with me for many years: "It is in the crucible of scarcity that what we are and what we believe are most clearly revealed." I believe that's true. Of course, few if any of us in the Presbyterian church can claim real scarcity living in America. But there are folks who feel it much more today than back in the 90s when the market was going out of sight and the economy was humming along.

Now, why has our giving to the church as measured by percentage of income been diminishing? Contrary to what you may imagine, research shows that "feelings of alienation from denominational leadership or from denominational moral teachings are not important" factors in influencing levels of giving. I have always assumed that when people are upset with their church, when they feel alienated from their denominational leadership, or turned off by social positions of the church, their level of giving declines. Of course, that is true for some, but research indicates that such is not the case for most people.

So why, then, has our giving as a percentage of income declined? Of course, there are many reasons, but let me mention a few:

1. Our failure to communicate the Gospel Story and the mission of the Church in an engaging way.

In the first place, I wonder whether part of the reason for that decline in percentage of income being given to the church is because we have failed to effectively communicate the Gospel Story in an engaging and winsome way. We have simply failed to impress upon our people that we are stewards of what God has given us. We have failed to remind our people that "to whom much is given, much is required;" we have failed to help people experience the joy of giving; we have failed to move them with God's great gift to us in Jesus Christ and to give because He first gave to us. We have failed to show them that giving is one very tangible way to express our gratitude to God for all God has given to us, and to demonstrate our primary allegiance to the Gospel Story over the Culture Story and our new identity as baptized children of God. Preachers simply haven't communicated the fullness of the Gospel Story. Our people hear the Culture Story of "more" every day from every side; we need to do a better job of communicating the Gospel Story in an engaging way.

Shortly after our son, Mark, became an attorney, he said to me that he never needed the church more than he needed it now. I asked him why. He said that it was the only time in his week that reminded him that "life does not consist in the abundance of things," that life was more than making more money and buying more things. It is the only time when he was reminded of the Gospel Story, the story he knows is the true one, that stands over against the Culture Story that he hears over and over again every day. Yes, we only have one hour a week to remind people of the Gospel Story, while television has 24 hours a day to tell the Culture Story. It's an incredible challenge, the odds are against us, but we need to do a better job, the best we can do, to communicate the Gospel Story in an engaging way. After all, ours is the best story, the only true one.

But we have also failed to challenge our people to give to the church's mission. Sylvia and John Ronsvalle, researchers in stewardship trends, recently said that giving to mission outside the congregation hit an all time low in 2000. That suggests, according to them, that "churches are not transforming people but rather servicing them. People are concerned about keeping the lights on and the staff paid at their churches, both of which are valid needs. But those activities ought to be the platform from which to reach out to a hurting world as Christians practice their religion." I agree. And I am inclined to believe that the most critical component in levels of giving is the degree of passion and excitement we have for our mission, and I wonder whether we have lost our passion. Many of us pastors shaped our ecclesiology (our understanding of the church) around the model of the "servant church," around mission, around the church reaching out to those in greatest need: the hungry, the homeless, those who hurt, those who hunger for the gospel of God's love in Christ. We believed, as one theologian put it, that "the church exists by mission as fire exists by burning." Without a mission to the crying needs of the world God loves, there is no church. For many of us in local parishes, the mission budget, the benevolence budget received our focus and priority. We fought to increase it every year.

But what has happened? Data indicates that in our denomination, per person giving to mission declined from .8 percent of per member income to .6 percent of income in the past 25 years. How do you explain that but as a tragic failure to inspire people to give to our mission. And of course, the same time mission funding is decreasing, the needs of people in our society and around the world are increasing. Some have told me that we don't support our denomination's mission programs anymore because other agencies and para-church groups are doing it. But that falsely assumes that now all the desperate needs are being met. Of course, that's absurd. Children are dying around the world at record numbers. Hunger and poverty are growing in many parts of the world. One out of six children in our country live below the poverty line; we have more child-poverty in the United States than any industrial country in the world, three times the average. The crying needs of the world have escalated at the same time our commitment and giving to missions has declined. I think that's tragic.

In the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) 91 percent of a congregation's income stays at the local church. Basic Mission Support to the General Assembly is down over 10 percent since 1993 and continues to drop. Does that mean that our congregations have bought into the Culture Story - more for us, but less for others, less for mission? Of course, there is important mission to do in your own communities, but there are many things we can do better at home and around the world by doing them together. A few years ago, researchers reported that "if the pattern of the past 24 years continues uninterrupted, congregations may be directing none of member giving beyond their own operations in 2048." If that happens, the church will cease to be the church.

Every moderator has the privilege of traveling around the church and seeing all it is doing in our country and around the world, and it is truly inspiring! I wish each of you could be moderator of the General Assembly for a year. One of my greatest regrets as a pastor is that I did not keep my congregation informed about all the great things our denomination is doing around the world. How many of your people know that we support about 370 long-term missionaries in 75 countries around the world, that we are related to 417 educational institutions, that we have given over 2,000 scholarships to leaders of our partner churches for their education, that we are related to 118 hospitals and clinics in 36 countries and treated over 3 million people last year; that in a recent year we gave over $3.3 million for disaster relief in 25 states and 40 countries, that we gave almost $3 million to relieve hunger, that we Presbyterians build more Habitat for Humanity houses than any other denomination per capita? Put that kind of information in your bulletins every week, reminding people of all we are doing for the sake of Jesus Christ. It's good stewardship education.

It frankly concerns me when I hear pastors giving more priority to their own salary increases than to the mission of the church. It concerns me that some well-established congregations pay their pastor more than they give to benevolences. To be sure, many pastors need to be paid more, but I also believe some pastors are paid too much. I have always advocated not only a minimum salary for pastors, but also a maximum established by presbyteries. It would be a powerful witness that we pastors have not been seduced by the Culture Story, that we are counter-cultural, that we are resident aliens, marching to the beat of a different drummer than the culture around us.

Yes, part of the reason giving as a percentage of income has declined is our failure to communicate the Gospel Story and the mission of the church in a compelling and engaging manner.

2. Failure to Preach and Talk about Money

The second reason why the Culture Story is winning, why giving to the church is declining as a percentage of income is because we pastors have failed to preach and talk about money. Bob Lynn, Director of the Lilly Endowment claims that ministers today are more reluctant to talk about money than virtually anything else, including sex!

Perhaps we pastors need to begin by getting in touch with our own attitudes about money, identifying our own fears and vulnerabilities and discomforts that inhibit us. I wonder whether our reticence to talk about money is partly due to our secret awareness that in this area - far more than most - we too fall short of what God calls us to be and to do. And thus, we'd rather not think or talk about it.

And yet, our members need help in dealing with this critical aspect of their lives. As you know, it is one of the most prevalent causes of marital conflict and divorce. People worry about money more than virtually anything else, a sign they have bought into the Culture Story. Their attitudes about money and their use of it have deep spiritual implications, and yet we pastors often remain silent. All sorts of resources are available. I recently read Laura Dunham's book, Graceful Living: Your Faith, Values, and Money in Changing Times - a good practical guide to help individuals and congregations come to grips with these issues.

Besides, if we are faithful to the Bible, we must preach and speak about it. As you well know, Jesus had more to say about money and material possessions than virtually anything else. It is the second most addressed subject in the entire Bible. Money mattered to Jesus, to Paul and to the prophets, and it ought to matter to the church. But many preachers avoid it like the plague, or preach one or two soft, innocuous sermons on stewardship each year. I believe such silence reflects our failure to be faithful to the Bible and the urgent needs of our people.

Research clearly shows that those churches that keep challenging people with the Biblical standard of the tithe have much higher levels of giving than those who neglect it. But when was the last time you heard (or preached) a sermon on tithing? Is it more difficult for people to tithe today than it was 70 years ago during the depression or in Biblical times?

Furthermore, I believe most pastors need to give a much greater priority to stewardship education and promotion; not just during stewardship season, but throughout the year. We need to tell our people about the great mission of our church and all the great things we are doing together around the world. Too often, all our people hear is what's wrong with the church and hear very little about the many positive things we are doing. Research has pointed out that communication is an important aspect of effective stewardship.

3. The Church's Failure to Ask for Money

In the third place, I believe one of the principal reasons for our decline in giving as a percentage of income is that we simply have not asked for money. It bothers me when I hear of churches, usually small ones, where the pastor never challenges his or her people to give generously to the church, even during stewardship season. It also bothers me when pastors "fence off" their congregations from any outside appeals - like the $40 million Mission Initiative we are now embarking upon. Other groups, universities and colleges, arts councils, hospitals, public radio and television stations, and whole gamut of others, are asking our members for money; why don't pastors allow seminaries and denominational appeals to be made?

Someone once said that the best advice he had ever received regarding stewardship was this: "The secret to increased funding is the "AFI" method — Ask for It!" And I think he is right. It is obvious that there is much greater competition for the charitable dollar today due to the proliferation of non-profit organizations, and I believe that competition will only increase in the future. Your mailbox is filled with appeals and so is mine, and if we fail to ask our people to share their resources with the church, we will fail in our responsibilities as leaders of the church.

Some of you have heard me share the story of the time when I learned that asking people for money was part of my job as pastor of Covenant Church in Charlotte. A very wealthy man, Jimmy Harris, was on the search committee that called me to Covenant. Shortly after I arrived, I was asked to invite him to a dinner for a presentation of a financial campaign not directly related to the church. I hesitated since I was so new in town, but finally agreed and he accepted my invitation. On the way home from the dinner, I asked him, as I had been encouraged to do, if he would consider a leadership gift in six figures. He thanked me for the evening and the next week I received his check and a nice note. A few months later, another group asked me to ask him to another campaign dinner and a leadership gift. Again, I hesitated, but finally agreed. On the way home that evening after the dinner, I shared with him my sense of being so very uncomfortable about asking him for another leadership gift shortly after he had been so generous with the first campaign. I will never forget that moment: He put his arm on my shoulder and said, "Doug, never feel uncomfortable asking me or anyone else to contribute money for a worthy cause. That is part of your job as our pastor!" Yes, I believe that is part of our job, and I also believe some people are just waiting to be asked.

As a seminary president, I spent a lot of time asking people for money. I was often asked, "Don't you get tired of asking people for money?" My response was, "no, I don't, because I deeply believe that what we are doing at Columbia is one of the most important things in the world - training future leaders for the church. And I believe I am giving people one of the greatest joys in the world in asking them to support something so important." Don Shriver, President Emeritus of Union Seminary in New York, wrote: "Remember when you ask for money, you are offering donors a privilege. You are offering them a chance to become part of something bigger than themselves, something more than their money can buy." I am convinced he is right. If you believe that the mission of the church is the most important thing in the world, then ask them to support it. I believe you are doing them a favor; you are offering them a privilege; you are giving them the opportunity to experience a joy that all the stuff we buy in the Culture Story cannot even begin to touch.