From a biblical standpoint, one may well question whether we ever should have introduced “the quota system” into our churches. According to the Bible our giving is to be voluntary, cheerful and without compulsion (II Cor. 9:7). Determining set amounts for certain causes for every family in the church, and obligating the paying of such, would seem to undermine an important biblical principle. I would not be ready to label such a practice as sin, but one may surely call into question its biblical legitimacy. For a church to adopt a budget and then say: This is how much money we believe we need, and, divided by the number of families we have, this is what it would amount to per family, is one thing. That is perfectly legitimate and gives members an idea of what is needed and a guideline to follow. But to insist that every congregation must pay x-number of dollars for a number of specified causes, and calling the church to account if it fails to do this (as is presently the case) is certainly beyond biblical warrant and undermines the Bible’s principles for giving. One can understand the reservations by an immigrant pastor (who came from the Netherlands to the CRC in the ‘50s) about what he calls “the envelope system.” There is something about that “system” that jars biblical sensitivities.

So what I’m saying is that even at best the quota system leaves something to be desired, and it certainly is not the only or best way to finance the church’s programs. However, the matter becomes much more serious when we lose our confessional unity as church, when we are no longer agreed as to what is really Reformed, and when we are being asked to fund causes and agencies which even undermine our confessional integrity. Then the quota system faces us with a real “crisis of conscience.” Why should one be forced to pay quotas for causes concerning which he has serious reservations? And the reverse side of that question is: In consequence of this, why am I unable to contribute (some or more) to worthy causes which have my full endorsement? And these are not spurious questions. They are questions asked in all seriousness and with genuine integrity. And there is really only one (biblically informed) answer to that question: You are not required to give to causes which you genuinely believe undermine our Reformed character as church, and you are free to give to causes which uphold and promote the same. Every one who is really honest will have to agree with that. God alone is Lord of the conscience, says the Westminster Confession, and we are responsible to Him first of all. Here The Banner editor is right: We should use all means of persuasion to solicit support for causes that the church deems worthy. In the final analysis, though, we cannot force people to pay, and we may not deny them the right to follow their conscience.

I believe it’s time to have a hard look at the system, and if need be, to overhaul it. That way we will get rid of the dilemma in which many people now find themselves. If the system is not changed, more and more members will be compelled by conscience to ignore the system or break the rules. And who can blame them?