Tithing: Protestant compared to Catholic

[Catholic_farmer]

Protestant churches also have a huge say in how the church is run. They are very democratic. They ‘hire’ their pastor, after selecting him or her based on interviews and questionnaires. The pastor is expected to have similar views to the voting members of the congregation. If he or she doesn’t, they will wait until a pastor comes along that does. They speak of God’s will a lot during the process, but they actually make the decision as to who they allow to run their church. New pastors really don’t want to make waves when they arrive because they are hired, rather than appointed by a higher authority, such as the bishop.

Perhaps this gives them a feeling of ownership. However, the major disadvantage is that if a voting body makes the major decisions regarding how the church is run, and only selects pastors that agree with their points of view, how do they know when they go astray of God’s will and God’s law?

 

[Bob_Crowley]

Protestant churches also have a huge say in how the church is run. They are very democratic. They ‘hire’ their pastor, after selecting him or her based on interviews and questionnaires. The pastor is expected to have similar views to the voting members of the congregation. If he or she doesn’t, they will wait until a pastor comes along that does. They speak of God’s will a lot during the process, but they actually make the decision as to who they allow to run their church. New pastors really don’t want to make waves when they arrive because they are hired, rather than appointed by a higher authority, such as the bishop.

Perhaps this gives them a feeling of ownership. However, the major disadvantage is that if a voting body makes the major decisions regarding how the church is run, and only selects pastors that agree with their points of view, how do they know when they go astray of God’s will and God’s law?

They’re not all run in that manner. Baptists certainly “hire” their pastors from what I’ve seen. It can be quite a time consuming process.

I think Presbyterian pastors are appointed by the Assembly members (team of pastors within a certain region). I assume Anglican pastors are appointed by their bishop. So there are different methods within the Protestant fold.

There are pros and cons for every method, and none is perfect, because those who do the appointing and the appointees are not perfect either, including the Catholic Church.

 

[Catholic_farmer]

Both Lutheran churches we attended waited two years and one and half years waiting for a pastor with the right “mindset”. The whole process seemed very odd to me. Especially being willing to turn down so many candidates suggested by the synod. I do think it really gave the congregation a sense of ownership and that feeling may have led to more financial investment. More investment is a good thing, however, I couldn’t suggest that without showing the possible negative aspects.

I personally prefer that way the Catholic Church appoints priests (and Anglican?). I think there is much more room for spiritual growth when various ideas are brought into a parish. I also think the fact that so many Catholic priests come from other countries is very healthy for parishes. Catholic churches tend to have much more diversity than their Protestant counterparts. It’s one of those great reminders of how the Church is universal and we are all one Body of Christ.

I didn’t realize that some Protestants don’t do it that way. My apologies.

 

[TxGodfollower]

Both Lutheran churches we attended waited two years and one and half years waiting for a pastor with the right “mindset”. The whole process seemed very odd to me. Especially being willing to turn down so many candidates suggested by the synod. I do think it really gave the congregation a sense of ownership and that feeling may have led to more financial investment. More investment is a good thing, however, I couldn’t suggest that without showing the possible negative aspects.

I personally prefer that way the Catholic Church appoints priests (and Anglican?). I think there is much more room for spiritual growth when various ideas are brought into a parish. I also think the fact that so many Catholic priests come from other countries is very healthy for parishes. Catholic churches tend to have much more diversity than their Protestant counterparts. It’s one of those great reminders of how the Church is universal and we are all one Body of Christ.

I didn’t realize that some Protestants don’t do it that way. My apologies.

For diversity, I think that is really a church by church things. I have seen Catholic and Protestant churches that were 95%+ one race, and I have seen some where its very diverse.

 

[ProVobis]

It appears the OP is comparing collection plate giving.

However, there are other ways of contributing (to the diocese or parish)

Bequests
Cemetery plots
Special events (Concerts, etc.)
Fund raisers (Bake sales, Rummage sales, etc.)
In-Kind gifts (Labor and materials, Pro Bono Lawyers, Accountants)
Appreciated stock or Personal property (coins, jewelry, etc.) that has value

Dioceses have other ways of financing as well, in order to keep its cash flow intact.

Let me know if I’ve overlooked something.

 

[TxGodfollower]

It appears the OP is comparing collection plate giving.

However, there are other ways of contributing (to the diocese or parish)

Bequests
Cemetery plots
Special events (Concerts, etc.)
Fund raisers (Bake sales, Rummage sales, etc.)
In-Kind gifts (Labor and materials, Pro Bono Lawyers, Accountants)
Appreciated stock or Personal property (coins, jewelry, etc.) that has value

Dioceses have other ways of financing as well, in order to keep its cash flow intact.

Let me know if I’ve overlooked something.

ProVobis, the article and research was about giving in general, so most of those would have been looked at.

My reason for the thread is this. Giving and generosity is a big deal to God, I think we would all agree. God calls us to give, cheerfully as we are able. There are some Protestants churches that probably a little heavy handed with giving/tithing, but I am sure there are some Catholic Priests who teach similarly; so that would more or less cancel out. So,it doesn’t make sense to me: if you have two large groups of people (Protestants and Catholics) both made up of various racial and socio-economic backgrounds and coming from various ages and family situations; when they have (in regards to giving and generosity) essentially the same teaching/ statistically, they should have give on average the same % of income. And yet, one group gives about 2x as much as the other.

Bob pointed out where the distinction lies and now it makes sense.

 

[KathleenGee]

The Catholic Church is very broad as we have all kinds of people and you really have to look at each diocese.

The golden rule is that we are not to be forced, but the Lord is always calling us to share and give what we can. He did not put burdens on us.

I like very much seeing Catholic parishes sharing their donations with the various secular social organizations in their areas, not squandering it on themselves…and it seems every parish I have been in or visited, it is always short on meeting its annual budget.

Yet the Lord sustains us.

That is the key…Today being St. Francis’ feast day and the Gospel reading for today to be as little children, the point is not to be cute like little children, but it better we live in total trust …not of God’s providence per se, but that we are totally dependent on God’s love.

 

[rcwitness]

I apalogize off the bat for not fully reading the OP’s article or all posts here

But I wanted to ask about something, i’m not sure has been brought up. How does anyone know what the average income is among these church givers?

I’d be interested to know what the average income is among Protestant members and Catholic members. This would have to be globally assesed.

Does the information in the article come from only one region?

 

[daddyd]

It’s a part of the Mosaic covenant; do you do all mandated by God in the Mosaic covenant? I hope not, for then you aren’t under the new covenant. In the New Covenant, we are the temple, we are the priests, and God owns 100% of us and all we have and all we are. Paul is clear; free-will cheerful giving, and to present ourselves as living sacrifices. James is also pretty clear in his declaration and decision of what to tell the Gentiles; notice the tithe is not amongst the list.

You are right it is part of the Mosaic covenant.
Numbers 18:24But the tithes of the children of Israel, which they offer as an heave offering unto the Lord, I have given to the Levites to inherit: therefore I have said unto them, Among the children of Israel they shall have no inheritance.
Tithing was used as the means of support for the Levites or priests of the sanctuary. God thought that the ministering of the sanctuary was to important and that the Levites should not have to be encumbered with making a living along with the care of the sanctuary. So the tithes went to them. They however were not given land in the promised land. They were given a town to live in. This is still the idea behind tithes. That it should go to the support of the ministers of the Gospel.
However,
Gen.14:20 And blessed be the most high God, which hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand. And he gave him tithes of all.
Tithing was a part of God’s plan long before Moses. Abraham gave tithe to Melchesedec and there is no evidence that the practice was discontinued in the new testament
Matthew 23:23
Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.

And you illustrate my other point; look at your words. The word used is “tithes” plural. Tithe, singular means one tenth, tithes, plural means multiple tenths. In short, pastors do not even teach the OT tithe system properly because the Israelites gave much much more than a singular tenth.

Tithing means that you give one tenth of your increase for the week. Over a years time that would be tithes.

Anyone who teaches the tithe is mandatory or a duty or whatever word you want to use is not following scripture, but rather trying to put new wine into old wineskins. Do a study of every use of the the word “tithe” and “tithes” in the whole Bible. Note who did, how often, when, what they gave, and why. Also note if it was at God’s behest, or on their own. If you would like to freely give 10% as lead to by God, no problem, but there is not a carrot and stick attached as under the Mosaic law, and if you want to follow the Mosaic law, you need to make sure you are paying tithes and not just tithe… as well as firstfruits and all the other offerings required.

Jesus seems to think otherwise.
Luke 11:42
But woe unto you, Pharisees! for ye tithe mint and rue and all manner of herbs, and pass over judgment and the love of God: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.

 

[Kliska]

You are right it is part of the Mosaic covenant.

Right, and that is not the New Covenant that we are under.

Gen.14:20 And blessed be the most high God, which hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand. And he gave him tithes of all.
Tithing was a part of God’s plan long before Moses. Abraham gave tithe to Melchesedec

Abraham gave a free-will tithe; one-time tithe of the spoils of war.

Matthew 23:23
Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.

Jesus here is again pointing out it was under the Mosaic law; He was talking to the Jewish people and they should have been tithing indeed.

Tithing means that you give one tenth of your increase for the week. Over a years time that would be tithes.

No, that’s not what it means from the Mosaic standpoint. There were several tithes (plural) that the Israelites were responsible for. It adds up to around 22%, not 10%. Further, the tithe was meant to be on food-stuffs, if they converted it to money, they actually had to pay something like 20% more. If a herd of sheep numbered only 9, then no tithe was paid, as tithe was counted as every 10th animal that passed under the rod. In short, the OT tithes are not for today; we don’t have our farmers taking every tenth cow to the church for the pastor to eat, or the firstfruits of corn and soybeans.

Jesus seems to think otherwise.
Luke 11:42
But woe unto you, Pharisees! for ye tithe mint and rue and all manner of herbs, and pass over judgment and the love of God: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.

They were Jewish, and under the Mosaic law, indeed they should have done it (as Jesus also fulfilled every bit of required Mosaic law). But, we aren’t Israelites under the law. What Paul tells us is that we should give free-will gifts, and give them cheerfully. We do indeed need to support those that teach us, but it isn’t to be under the Mosaic Law; we are not a part of that. Also, collections should indeed be taken up for those in need, again, a free-will cheerful giving.

 

[daddyd]

Right, and that is not the New Covenant that we are under.

So, what do you think is the difference between this old covenant that we are no longer under and the new covenant that we are under?

Abraham gave a free-will tithe; one-time tithe of the spoils of war.

Why?

Jesus here is again pointing out it was under the Mosaic law; He was talking to the Jewish people and they should have been tithing indeed.

Are you saying that whenever Jesus is talking to Jews He is not talking to us?

No, that’s not what it means from the Mosaic standpoint. There were several tithes (plural) that the Israelites were responsible for. It adds up to around 22%, not 10%. Further, the tithe was meant to be on food-stuffs, if they converted it to money, they actually had to pay something like 20% more. If a herd of sheep numbered only 9, then no tithe was paid, as tithe was counted as every 10th animal that passed under the rod. In short, the OT tithes are not for today; we don’t have our farmers taking every tenth cow to the church for the pastor to eat, or the firstfruits of corn and soybeans.

Could you cite chapter and verse for this? I’d like to study up on it.

They were Jewish, and under the Mosaic law, indeed they should have done it (as Jesus also fulfilled every bit of required Mosaic law). But, we aren’t Israelites under the law. What Paul tells us is that we should give free-will gifts, and give them cheerfully. We do indeed need to support those that teach us, but it isn’t to be under the Mosaic Law; we are not a part of that. Also, collections should indeed be taken up for those in need, again, a free-will cheerful giving.

So in Jeremiah 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:

32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord:

33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.

34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.

The new covenant is only with the house of Israel? The Jews?

 

[Kliska]

So, what do you think is the difference between this old covenant that we are no longer under and the new covenant that we are under?

The difference between the letter and the spirit, and I don’t think it, I know it from scripture. The new covenant is apart from the old, it is truly a new thing (see Romans). Further, the Mosaic law was specifically for the people of Israel, as the chosen people. It was set up, partially, so the Levites could see to the temple, because God dwelt there, and there were daily sacrifices to see to, as well as to the house of God. The Levite tribe did not get the same land as the rest of the tribes, they had no way of providing for themselves.

Some old covenant laws pointed directly to new covenant fulfillment; so, the sacrifice of animals points to the once for all sacrifice of Jesus. The tithes, firstfruits, etc… point to a 100% ownership by God. Again, everything we are is God’s, everything we have is God’s and as Christians we have to be ready any moment to give with God’s stuff whatever He wants us to do. If He leads you to tithe a tenth, tithe a tenth, there’s nothing wrong with that as long as it is free-will and done cheerfully. As for the priesthood and the temple; now that’s us.

Why?

Why did Abraham give a one-time tithe of the spoils of war? It was a cultural custom in the area at the time of Abraham.

Are you saying that whenever Jesus is talking to Jews He is not talking to us?

Sometimes He is, sometimes He’s not. It depends on the context and the content. When He is attacking the lack of following the law, or following the law with no love, He’s directly talking to them because they are the group that agreed to the Mosaic Covenant. Gentiles were not under that.

Could you cite chapter and verse for this? I’d like to study up on it.

The best thing to do is to do a study on all the tithes and offerings and sacrifices in the OT, and write them down as you go, you can find the info Leviticus and Deuteronomy. Also notice with the giving that there were pilgrimages to Jerusalem in there as well, which is when you see that if an Israelite lived too far away from Jerusalem to bring their harvest and animals to the temple, they could exchange those particular things for money. Also note it didn’t including any other income or hunting or gathering, etc… I’ll also PM you a link that has the scriptures to look at all laid out as well. Though, again, you should also study it on your own so that you can see the scriptures in context for yourself.

So in Jeremiah 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:

32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord:

33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.

34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.

The new covenant is only with the house of Israel? The Jews?

There will be a time coming where the covenant with Israel specifically will be renewed, when Jesus will dwell bodily on earth. The feast days will be in effect again. Right now we are in the church age, the age of grace. We don’t hold to the Israelite feast days, pilgrimages, etc… because this covenant in His blood is wholly different and apart from the Old Testament covenant. In short, we, as Gentile believers never “signed the dotted line” of the Old Covenant, nor our ancestors. This is why the council at Jerusalem had to put out a decree of what the Gentile converts to Christianity should follow, and we have James sending out a list; it did not contain the tithe. When Paul talks of giving, he never refers to the tithe in the OT, and he does indeed use other passages and OT teachings, just not the tithe.

 

[KathleenGee]

It is true that Gentiles are freed from the Law.

And Christ said His yoke was easy, His burden light and this is the actual perspective the Church follows in proposing disciplines. Of course, it all depends on what kind of disciplines one is referring to.

About Jesus returning…as a Catholic, He is already here in our tabernacle…the fulfillment of the Ark of the Covenant. I am in a parish where we have a most devout pastor and he took the Blessed Sacrament out of this closed side room and returned Him to the center of the altar where when you come into the church building, you are truly entering into His house. The sanctuary candle is there, lit, next to the tabernacle to let you know the Lord is present.

As far as the Lord coming back here, no He will not. The Lord will never come here to rule.

Instead He will give us a new heaven and new earth.

It is the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass that is the key which opens the understanding to the book of Revelations.

Good can only come when we are free…one of the gifts of living the new life of Jesus Christ.

 

[TxGodfollower]

No, that’s not what it means from the Mosaic standpoint. There were several tithes (plural) that the Israelites were responsible for. It adds up to around 22%, not 10%. Further, the tithe was meant to be on food-stuffs, if they converted it to money, they actually had to pay something like 20% more. If a herd of sheep numbered only 9, then no tithe was paid, as tithe was counted as every 10th animal that passed under the rod. In short, the OT tithes are not for today; we don’t have our farmers taking every tenth cow to the church for the pastor to eat, or the firstfruits of corn and soybeans.

The OT Mosaic Law had 3 tithes. The first tithe is what most people think of, 10% for the temple/Levities. The next 10% appears to be to financing the feast day trips to Jerusalem. The third tithe is every 3 years to establish a pot of money for the widow and fatherless.

I don’t know if they did it additively (so 20% every year, and 30% every 3rd year) or in layers (19% each year (10% for God and 9% for the feast funds {90% of income x 10%}) and 27.1% every 3rd year (plus another 10% off of the remaining 81% of income).

 

[daddyd]

The difference between the letter and the spirit, and I don’t think it, I know it from scripture. The new covenant is apart from the old, it is truly a new thing (see Romans).

The ten commandments are part of the Mosaic law right? Are you saying that we no longer have to keep the ten commandments?

Further, the Mosaic law was specifically for the people of Israel, as the chosen people. It was set up, partially, so the Levites could see to the temple, because God dwelt there, and there were daily sacrifices to see to, as well as to the house of God. The Levite tribe did not get the same land as the rest of the tribes, they had no way of providing for themselves.

This is all very true.

Some old covenant laws pointed directly to new covenant fulfillment; so, the sacrifice of animals points to the once for all sacrifice of Jesus. The tithes, firstfruits, etc… point to a 100% ownership by God. Again, everything we are is God’s, everything we have is God’s and as Christians we have to be ready any moment to give with God’s stuff whatever He wants us to do. If He leads you to tithe a tenth, tithe a tenth, there’s nothing wrong with that as long as it is free-will and done cheerfully. As for the priesthood and the temple; now that’s us.

The laws concerning the sanctuary and the rights surrounding it all point directly to Jesus. Man got himself into a real pickle when he sinned. Now the only thing that he was worthy of was death, Rom. 6:23, but God had this plan and the first time we see this plan is when God Himself provides a covering for His now naked children. He provides the skin from the first animal that ever died on this planet. Gen3:21 Unto Adam also and to his wife did the Lord God make coats of skins, and clothed them.
This of coarse is symbolic of the only thing that cold save them and that is the righteousness of Christ. Tithes were the means by which God took care of the Levites.

Why did Abraham give a one-time tithe of the spoils of war? It was a cultural custom in the area at the time of Abraham.

The culture surrounding Abraham was heathen. Melchezadec was the high priest of Salem(later to be known as Jerusalem). Are you saying that he followed heathen customs when he brought tithe to him?

Sometimes He is, sometimes He’s not. It depends on the context and the content. When He is attacking the lack of following the law, or following the law with no love, He’s directly talking to them because they are the group that agreed to the Mosaic Covenant. Gentiles were not under that.

So, Christians today do not have to keep the ten commandments because we have not agreed to the Mosaic covenant? What does Jesus then mean when He says Jn. 14:15If you love me you will keep my commandments?

There will be a time coming where the covenant with Israel specifically will be renewed, when Jesus will dwell bodily on earth. The feast days will be in effect again.

Really, You mean on the day of atonement the Jews will again offer the Lord’s goat or lamb on the altar of burnt offering? Since that was a euphemistic sacrifice of Christ on the cross would this not be a supreme slap in our Savior’s face?

Right now we are in the church age, the age of grace. We don’t hold to the Israelite feast days, pilgrimages, etc… because this covenant in His blood is wholly different and apart from the Old Testament covenant. In short, we, as Gentile believers never “signed the dotted line” of the Old Covenant, nor our ancestors. This is why the council at Jerusalem had to put out a decree of what the Gentile converts to Christianity should follow, and we have James sending out a list; it did not contain the tithe. When Paul talks of giving, he never refers to the tithe in the OT, and he does indeed use other passages and OT teachings, just not the tithe.

So, who are God’s chosen people now today? Paul seems to have the answer in
Romans9:4 Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises;

5 Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.

6 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:

7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.

8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.
Ethnic Jews are not the chosen people. They never were the children of the promise are. What promise?
Genesis 12 King James Version (KJV)

12 Now the Lord had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father’s house, unto a land that I will shew thee:

2 And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing:

3 And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.

“in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.” That blessing is of coarse Our Savior Jesus Christ. So all the families of the earth are blessed in Christ. We become spiritual Jews and circumcision is of the heart. The Jews of the OT were told to return tithes for the upkeep of the Levites(priests). In fact they were told that they rob God if they don’t. It was a good system instituted by God and if followed will work today.

 

[Kliska]

The ten commandments are part of the Mosaic law right? Are you saying that we no longer have to keep the ten commandments?

We are out from under the penalty of the law, period. We are to follow the Spirit of the Law, not the letter. What that actually means is that we are held to higher standards than the Israelites in certain respects. So, a tithe now becomes giving; a free-will, cheerfully given chunk of change as guided by God since we are to present ourselves as living sacrifices, and that means 100%. As another example; Jesus up the bar of murder. We shall not murder… and now Jesus tells us that even our anger is on the level of murder. Everything for a new covenant believer hinges on the Spirit and His fruit, not ours. That’s why tithing becomes free-will giving as guided by God. If He guides you to tithe 10%, great.

Tithes were the means by which God took care of the Levites.

Yes, right, and why? Because they literally had no land. That’s why the tithe was food, the product of the land. That was one of the tithes, there were also tithes for the poor, and tithes that were taken to Jerusalem and consumed. Levites also tithed.

The culture surrounding Abraham was heathen. Melchezadec was the high priest of Salem(later to be known as Jerusalem). Are you saying that he followed heathen customs when he brought tithe to him?

Customs are everywhere, and not all of then are sinful. Notice it never says God commanded Abraham to tithe, he did it on his own, and it was a one-time tithe of the spoils of war. Tithing is not a purely Jewish or Christian belief, it was around and documented in many cultures, it was indeed an ancient near east custom.

So, Christians today do not have to keep the ten commandments because we have not agreed to the Mosaic covenant? What does Jesus then mean when He says Jn. 14:15If you love me you will keep my commandments?

The letter of 1 John also tells you the commandments as well as Jesus Himself. They are 1) Love the Lord, 2) Love thy neighbor as yourself. If you do those two things, they represent the spirit of the whole OT set of laws. If you love your neighbor you don’t even have to be told not to murder him, you’ll refrain automatically… and more, you’ll help him actively. Jesus made the silver rule “Don’t do unto others what you don’t want done unto you” and one-upped it to the golden rule, “Do unto others what you want done unto you.”

So, who are God’s chosen people now today?

In Christ there is neither Jew nor Gentile. Right now, He’s dealing with us (the church).

The Jews of the OT were told to return tithes for the upkeep of the Levites(priests). In fact they were told that they rob God if they don’t. It was a good system instituted by God and if followed will work today.

It’s not a question of what “works” it is a question of what is called for believers to do, and if there is a promise attached that we can “claim.” As I’ve already pointed out, the Levites were only one small bit of the tithing system, and as I’ve already said, we are to pay the ones that teach us (Paul is clear on that), and we are to be generous and give cheerfully (Paul is clear on that as well), James was clear what was required of Gentile believers as far as the law was concerned, tithing wasn’t mentioned, and Paul never referred to it to get believers to give. Just because the tithe isn’t mandatory doesn’t mean we don’t take care of our churches, the widows and orphans, etc… quite the opposite.

 

[KathleenGee]

With Jesus, what we have is the Covenant of the Blood, given us at the Last Supper.

The Last Supper in the institution of the priesthood and the Eucharist.

Essentially, to love God with all of one’ strength, and to love one’s neighbor fulfills the Law. We must always grow in refining our conscience. We follow the 10 commandments, but the big key to being more perfect in the Lord is to be detached from things and to follow Him, His yoke light, His burden easy.

Remember what He said about the Pharisees who put burdens on people but would not lift them? There is flexibility in the life of Christ, and moderation is another key.

 

[Darryl_B]

Reading back over this post, I see primarily “protestant” against “christian”. I think anything a Catholic (True Church) “Christian” says is probably going to be overlooked, ignored, and on you go, protestant against protestant on a Catholic forum?

 

[McCartney]

The OT Mosaic Law had 3 tithes. The first tithe is what most people think of, 10% for the temple/Levities. The next 10% appears to be to financing the feast day trips to Jerusalem. The third tithe is every 3 years to establish a pot of money for the widow and fatherless.

I don’t know if they did it additively (so 20% every year, and 30% every 3rd year) or in layers (19% each year (10% for God and 9% for the feast funds {90% of income x 10%}) and 27.1% every 3rd year (plus another 10% off of the remaining 81% of income).

Was that before taxes or after taxes. LOL

 

[Kliska]

Reading back over this post, I see primarily “protestant” against “christian”. I think anything a Catholic (True Church) “Christian” says is probably going to be overlooked, ignored, and on you go, protestant against protestant on a Catholic forum?

This is actually the “Non-Catholic” subforum. Further, I quoted the CCC about tithing, so that’s been covered. If you look at the CCC on tithing, and read what I’m saying, they line up, so the RC doctrine is actually being covered. My view on eschatology is different than the RCC’s view, but on tithing we quite agree.