Recycling an old piece, as the issue's cropped up - hope it spurs forward-thinking conversation, if not forward-moving action.

Rev. Kong Hee's pay cheque is automatically deducted 10% by City Harvest (in addition to the usual CPF and tax deductions) before it's banked in. He told us this one Sunday. I sometimes wish our employers could do the same.

I've always found it difficult dropping the 10% into the offering bag. I wish the church would tell me exactly how that amount was used. I think people like me prefer to know that my cash has been devoted to a specific use, rather than have it 'spread over' the entire church's accounts. I want my hard-earned money to make a strong impact, failing which tithing feels dry, passionless and (almost) pointless. Guilty as charged.

This is why I usually either a) put the money in the 'second offering' which is usually for a stated need or b) put the money in an envelope and write something like Education Fund, Mission Fund and so on (there was a Pastors' Retirement Fund launched a few years back which, sadly, couldn't last more than half a year).

Is this narcissistic spirituality (to use Dr. Ng Kam Weng's stinging phrase during the NECF-EMO chat)? Undeniably there are elements of it. I know, yes yes you got me, that we should obey God and not try to 'manufacture' complications involving some of the most cherished church traditions/practices. I understand that if not for my own subjective selfish preferences, I wouldn't even be thinking about this issue. Just be grateful for the figures showing up on the ATM screen every end of the month, take out a tenth of it, believe that God will use it and drop it into the oversized sift-looking bag as the usher brings it to you.

But aren't there other ways of giving your tenth? I mean, assuming I'm cool with the God-ordainedness of the pattern of Christian tithing, aren't there other ways of 'doing it'? Is tithing synonymous with 'putting money into the offering bag'? (Note: I think this entire post is only relevant for those who long to give in more active and meaningful ways but have problems just holding on to 90% of their funds - God bless you if this doesn't reflect your situation)

How about:

- looking out for anonymous underprivileged or tragedy-struck individuals (lots of them in the papers) and sending them your tenth

- apportioning your tenth (or a fraction of the tenth) for friends you know who would be ABSOLUTELY blessed by an anonymous gift (e.g. a few folded hundred-dollar bills in a coloured envelope perhaps bearing the note, "From a friend, Jesus")

- giving to charities or welfare orgs, maybe on a 'rotating basis' i.e. Jan this orphanage, Feb that drug rehab center, Mar that old folks' home, etc. The specific things we could give are endless in variety and infinite in "surprise quality" (e.g. a broadband subscription, the latest Harry Potter books, guitars, restaurant vouchers, thinking classes, leadership camps, etc.)

- saving the tithes so more expensive gifts can be given (e.g. a brand new piano? a couple of new computers? a pool? a renovated section of the venue? an eco-tour?)

- giving for a (usually) neglected cause or people-group like ecology, the illiterate and prisoners. Perhaps the tithes can be channelled towards awareness campaigns, mini-projects in church (tree-planting, lifestyle-change commitments i.e. "I shall drive less for the next year", "I shall reduce my use  of air-conditioning", "I shall read at least 3 books on environmental issues this quarter", alternative energy uses, etc.), language classes, and so on.

I think the above are valid options, as they help recover the longing, attention and self-determination in us as givers, not to mention the participatory and experiential elements to Christian giving (not too difficult for the first urban churches who knew that many mouths and bodies depended on their generosity). And as the focus remains on the under-privileged among us, I feel this is more than enough, and most commendable, a parallel with the tithing tradition.

Note also the 'decentralising' aspect. The tithes no longer become the domain of the church, but of Christians. But no it's not about power or control - it's responsibility and conscientiousness in an active manner, for all.

By openly adopting the above flexibility and rearrangements, I think Christian giving can have a greater impact to the needy (sniper approaches are generally always better than shotgun tactics, no?) and more meaning to the giver. After all, the tenth still goes to God (I'm not going to be 'innovative' about that...).

But wouldn't such a proposal lead to individual churches suffering a reduction of funds? This is a logical outcome. Yet I think it's an opportunity for church leadership to work on getting members to be more proactive, creative and determined in their giving.

I don't see how God's house(s), servant(s), shepherd(s) can suffer too badly when the whole flock gets more passionate about the use of the tithe.

Note: You can compare the above with the "old Alwyn" on tithes. No real contradiction. But the "evolution" scares even me (grin).