Church Rejects Donation from Lottery Winner

[sola_scriptura]

Gambling is not a grave sin – but it is something that afflicts many people and has destroyed many lives. Therefore, it is something that can interfere with our relationship with God.

 

[vocatio]

I remember when the Texas Lotto first started a Campus Minister tried to tell me that buying a ticket would make us guilty of causing our brother to stumble. He recited the verse and I took him too it to explain how that was taken out of context and really didn’t apply to something like buying lotto tickets. Not that I wanted to buy one. In fact, I was afraid to buy one at first because of the guilt those people put us through… The same was with drinking.

When I graduated he gave me a commentary on the book of daniel. After returning to the real Church I’ve hung onto it to show just how twisted non-Catholic Christians can get outside Church Teaching.

Ironically within the first couple of years a sister bought a lotto ticke and won $67 million… Wow! I wonder if they got customized habits after that. Thought I’d throw that in there since so many people erroniously believe the Church is so rich and living it up. I still hesitate to buy lotto tickets. In fact, I changed my Knights of Columbus Council to one that doesn’t have BINGO. I hate bingo and really have issues with gambling because there is nothing really healthy about getting something for nothing. God said we would work by the sweat of our brow. I prefer making money with hard work. That’s all.

 

[Veritas41]

I would do the same thing if I were the pastor –

 

[jkarp]

No it doesn’t only work if I think gambling is equivalent to murder and illegal drug dealing. It is what the other religion thinks and they believe gambling is a grave sin. I can’t help that you personally think tobacco use is wronger than gambling. It is what the other religion thinks. The Pastor had every right and he actually had an obligation to not take the money.

Just to clarify: you mean that the pastor’s decision should be based entirely upon his belief, to do otherwise would demonstrate a lack of integrity on his part and thus make him a hypocrite?

 

[sola_scriptura]

Gambling is wrong, like alcohol, if abused. People with a propensity toward compulsion should obviously not gamble.

I know the Catholics might disagree with the Pastors rather harsh stance (don’t you guys do the bingo thing – for old ladies)? If memory serves me isn’t it called pot luck?

 

[vocatio]

Gambling is wrong, like alcohol, if abused. People with a propensity toward compulsion should obviously not gamble.

I know the Catholics might disagree with the Pastors rather harsh stance (don’t you guys do the bingo thing – for old ladies)? If memory serves me isn’t it called pot luck?

No you guys do pot luck… that’s a whole different kind of gambling… they ought to change the name to “WYSIWYG”…[pronounced “wizzy-wig”] for What you see is what you get… Pot Luck is what we used to do in our Protestant faith after church services it’s where everyone brings a dish of food from home… So Good Luck. Thus “Pot Luck”.

I hate bingo too. A council I belonged to runs a BINGO place and I’m offended by it’s presence. They also sell beer and wine along with cokes too.

 

[Matariel]

"ORANGE PARK, FL – After Robert Powell hit the Florida Lottery jackpot last month and took home more than $6 million, he thought of his church.

And he offered to drop his tithe, around $600,000, in the collection plate of First Baptist Orange Park.

But the church and Pastor David Tarkington politely declined and told Powell they will not accept the lottery winnings."

firstcoastnews.com/news/topstories/news-article.aspx?storyid=116301&catid=15&GID=WMAmGCQI3vz6rtbfKlq97+DNDNHLKYU0cLrO+wQNI6Q=&provider=email

That’s so stupid! Gambling isn’t morally wrong in and of itself; how pharisaical of him. He wasn’t taking a high road, he was basically saying to that guy who won the lottery, “I’m holier than thou, so you can take that unholy mammon and shove it!” Just like Baptist’s illogical restriction on alcohol. Um… let’s see… last time I checked Jesus turned water into wine.

Besides, for all he knows, some of his other congregants might be slipping won lottery money into the offering basket. What a Pharisee.

 

[sola_scriptura]

No you guys do pot luck… that’s a whole different kind of gambling… they ought to change the name to “WYSIWYG”…[pronounced “wizzy-wig”] for What you see is what you get… Pot Luck is what we used to do in our Protestant faith after church services it’s where everyone brings a dish of food from home… So Good Luck. Thus “Pot Luck”.

I hate bingo too. A council I belonged to runs a BINGO place and I’m offended by it’s presence. They also sell beer and wine along with cokes too.

Okay I guess the terminology was a fupa but I was only joking around about it anyway. I’m not really so sure if getting ultra-dogmatic about this stuff is useful. However, I do see your point. I guess churches probably shouldn’t encourage alcohol use or gambling – however, we shouldn’t become embroiled in who is the hardest core holy roller church either (which IMO is a path toward the idea of works based righteousness). So I suppose it’s a balance.

 

[tGette]

This is great because this is something I have been thinking of recently!

I would first like to agree with the statements being made that the pastor had a moral obligation to refuse the donation. If it is their teaching that something such as gambling is wrong then it would be wrong of them to receive money made from gambling.

What I want to know is, then what is the right thing to do with the money?

Giving it back would allow it to be used for a prize again and possibly someone else will use it for something other than tithing. There is really no way for every person who has ever gambled to receive their money back.

Truth is, there is money floating around this world which has been passed through the hands of evil and we might have it in our wallets/purses this very second.

This is such a tricky subject to discuss because there are so many factors that play in.

We must remember that the money existed before the lottery.

Though the example of receiving money from someone making it from abortions is a good thought provoker. Would it be a good thing to give the money to help pro-life movements? Should the money be denied and let someone who supports abortion keep and use it?

This is a tough discussion because it all depends on our views on the sinful nature of gambling.

I am really in danger of getting off on a tangent…so I will stop!

 

[Sabda]

Hmmm, I wouldn’t be surprised if the pastor really get’s an earful from his congregation. There are quite a few Baptist out there that don’t have an issue with gambling. Call me a sceptic but I really have to wonder about the pastor’s movements based on this little tid bit from the article.

First Baptist Orange Park Pastor David Tarkington would not say exactly why the church refused the money, saying only he didn’t want to talk about members’ gifts.

If gambling truly was the issue than what’s the problem with simply admitting it?

 

[sola_scriptura]

This is great because this is something I have been thinking of recently!

I would first like to agree with the statements being made that the pastor had a moral obligation to refuse the donation. If it is their teaching that something such as gambling is wrong then it would be wrong of them to receive money made from gambling.

What I want to know is, then what is the right thing to do with the money?

Giving it back would allow it to be used for a prize again and possibly someone else will use it for something other than tithing. There is really no way for every person who has ever gambled to receive their money back.

Truth is, there is money floating around this world which has been passed through the hands of evil and we might have it in our wallets/purses this very second.

This is such a tricky subject to discuss because there are so many factors that play in.

We must remember that the money existed before the lottery.

Though the example of receiving money from someone making it from abortions is a good thought provoker. Would it be a good thing to give the money to help pro-life movements? Should the money be denied and let someone who supports abortion keep and use it?

This is a tough discussion because it all depends on our views on the sinful nature of gambling.

I am really in danger of getting off on a tangent…so I will stop!

I don’t see anything tough about this issue. Paul called the idea that the gentiles shouldn’t eat foods once offered to pagan gods as ludicrous. He understood that when we do anything, possess anything, or eat anything in faith and thanksgiving it doesn’t matter whether a non-believer or even a criminal once touched it. If this were the case then how could we have confidence that anything we touch or consume is, call it, kosher?

Such an idea would produce constant superstition among Christians and would give the devil an opportunity to divide us from God each time we handle or touch anything. We will think was this thing touched by an evil person? Oh my I could have sinned. Is it a mortal sin or just a venial sin? Will God forgive me? Am I now impure?

This would shatter our confidence with virtually everything we do. This idea should be rejected outright by all believing Christians.

This is not to say it’s improper to boycott things or refuse to partake in unjust enrichment wrought from wrongdoing, when we know where it came from. For example accepting money from a family member who is a wealthy criminal is unjust enrichment if you know the money is dirty. This is a different case, however, then worrying about touching things we earned or purchased in good faith. This should be simple common sense and a matter readily discerned by our consciences.

 

[tGette]

I don’t see anything tough about this issue. Paul called the idea that the gentiles shouldn’t eat foods once offered to pagan gods as ludicrous. He understood that when we do anything, possess anything, or eat anything in faith and thanksgiving it doesn’t matter whether a non-believer or even a criminal once touched it. If this were the case then how could we have confidence that anything we touch or consume is, call it, kosher?

Such an idea would produce constant superstition among Christians and would give the devil an opportunity to divide us from God each time we handle or touch anything. We will think was this thing touched by an evil person? Oh my I could have sinned. Is it a mortal sin or just a venial sin? Will God forgive me? Am I now impure?

This would shatter our confidence with virtually everything we do. This idea should be rejected outright by all believing Christians.

My point was that this is the thinking it could lead others to do.

My point was what you verified exactly. Is that, we could go to the extreme and say that everything has been passed through the hands of evil. So where do we draw the line for this?

I agree with you 100%…I was just saying I can see how this becomes a tricky scenario for others.

That is why I asked what we are to do then if we cannot accept lottery money. Since it has been tainted (hypothetically), then if it is not acceptable for religious use then it should not be acceptable for any use. Should it be destroyed?

I was trying to convey they weird cycle it could put someone in because it would not mean that the money is not longer good for any purpose. So…should we say that even if it is destroyed that its evil is still present?

Am I making sense?

EDIT:
I agree with what you say about a family member’s crime money, but then what should be done with that money? Is it wrong to be used for anything? Is it wrong to give it to charity? Should it be destroyed? Returned? (Is it even possible to figure out all who were swindled out of their money?)
I guess this is why I feel like it could lead some to find this a tough situation.

 

[sola_scriptura]

Hmmm, I wouldn’t be surprised if the pastor really get’s an earful from his congregation. There are quite a few Baptist out there that don’t have an issue with gambling. Call me a sceptic but I really have to wonder about the pastor’s movements based on this little tid bit from the article.

If gambling truly was the issue than what’s the problem with simply admitting it?

I just don’t find any of this to be a big deal. The Pastor is certainly within his right to keep the matter in confidence (he is a Pastor after all, which means he’s bound to keep private communications between him and an individual member of his congregation private). I don’t know how this story became public (if the Pastor made it public then perhaps it might call for an explanation – moreover, I would find it very problematic if it was the Pastor who made this story public).

Frankly this is a close call & it’s hard to opine on this with any degree of certainty? If it were drug money then I doubt anyone would have faulted the Pastor, but some guy spent a buck on a lottery ticket and got lucky? Heck, I wished I had that luck

However, I do not gamble. Mostly because it’s not fun to me, but also because I’m too cheap.

 

[Matariel]

That’s so stupid! Gambling isn’t morally wrong in and of itself; how pharisaical of him. He wasn’t taking a high road, he was basically saying to that guy who won the lottery, “I’m holier than thou, so you can take that unholy mammon and shove it!” Just like Baptist’s illogical restriction on alcohol. Um… let’s see… last time I checked Jesus turned water into wine.

Besides, for all he knows, some of his other congregants might be slipping won lottery money into the offering basket. What a Pharisee.

 

[sola_scriptura]

My point was that this is the thinking it could lead others to do.

My point was what you verified exactly. Is that, we could go to the extreme and say that everything has been passed through the hands of evil. So where do we draw the line for this?

I agree with you 100%…I was just saying I can see how this becomes a tricky scenario for others.

That is why I asked what we are to do then if we cannot accept lottery money. Since it has been tainted (hypothetically), then if it is not acceptable for religious use then it should not be acceptable for any use. Should it be destroyed?

I was trying to convey they weird cycle it could put someone in because it would not mean that the money is not longer good for any purpose. So…should we say that even if it is destroyed that its evil is still present?

Am I making sense?

EDIT:
I agree with what you say about a family member’s crime money, but then what should be done with that money? Is it wrong to be used for anything? Is it wrong to give it to charity? Should it be destroyed? Returned? (Is it even possible to figure out all who were swindled out of their money?)
I guess this is why I feel like it could lead some to find this a tough situation.

Indeed … I sort of misconstrued you previous post, but I’m with you 100%.

Regarding the family member, glad I’ve never been in such a situation

If you know he or she swindled the money or stole it, indeed it should be returned. If it was drug money perhaps donate it to a drug rehab or something like that. However, these extreme examples have nothing in common with the case of the Pastor and our lucky lottery winner.

I’m tempted to say it was rather pharisaic of the Pastor; but I’ll hold off because frankly it’s a tough question. Maybe the Pastor had a family member who destroyed their life because of gambling, who knows?

I won’t stand in judgment of that Pastor accept to say it seems a bit legalistic depending on his motives. Remember Priests and Pastors are not perfect.

 

[vocatio]

Okay I guess the terminology was a fupa but I was only joking around about it anyway. I’m not really so sure if getting ultra-dogmatic about this stuff is useful. However, I do see your point. I guess churches probably shouldn’t encourage alcohol use or gambling – however, we shouldn’t become embroiled in who is the hardest core holy roller church either (which IMO is a path toward the idea of works based righteousness). So I suppose it’s a balance.

feauxpaux? I’m not a great speller. Anyway, I thought you understood my joking around too. Pot Lucks always scare me. You ever watched the kids digging in the food with their hands?

Unfortunately, my previouis faith was so staunch that they even denied being a denomination much less Protestant. Many of them believe we’re all doomed to the fiery pits of hell. Not all…but probably the majority…including our family I speak of once in a while. We have a family full of Elders, Deacons and Preachers from that church.

 

[Matariel]

feauxpaux? I’m not a great speller. Anyway, I thought you understood my joking around too. Pot Lucks always scare me. You ever watched the kids digging in the food with their hands?

Unfortunately, my previouis faith was so staunch that they even denied being a denomination much less Protestant. Many of them believe we’re all doomed to the fiery pits of hell. Not all…but probably the majority…including our family I speak of once in a while. We have a family full of Elders, Deacons and Preachers from that church.

I think it’s spelled “faux pas”.

Just out of curiosity, what was that sect called? It seems eerily familiar. Or was it independent?

 

[vocatio]

I think it’s spelled “faux pas”.

Just out of curiosity, what was that sect called? It seems eerily familiar. Or was it independent?

Church of Christ… It’s funny how they got the name right. That’s what interested me in them at first. They also have weekly communion.

 

[Matariel]

Church of Christ… It’s funny how they got the name right. That’s what interested me in them at first. They also have weekly communion.

Oh, I was under the impression that Church of Christ was a liberal denomination, not of the fire-and-brimstone hell-fire variety. But there is more than one “Church of Christ” denomination, isn’t there?

By the way, I know this has hardly anything to do with the OP about the lottery winner, but has anyone read the short story entitled, The Lottery?

 

[sola_scriptura]

feauxpaux? I’m not a great speller. Anyway, I thought you understood my joking around too. Pot Lucks always scare me. You ever watched the kids digging in the food with their hands?

Unfortunately, my previouis faith was so staunch that they even denied being a denomination much less Protestant. Many of them believe we’re all doomed to the fiery pits of hell. Not all…but probably the majority…including our family I speak of once in a while. We have a family full of Elders, Deacons and Preachers from that church.

Evangelical to Catholic — that’s a wide gulf. I went from Methodist to Presbyterian (both mainstream denominations – not many young earth creationist types ). I wound up becoming reformed because as I grew in my understanding of soteriology Calvinism just made more sense.

What attracted you to the RCC?