Chuck Bentley: “For a church to be in such dire straights this early in the crisis as to require a portion of the $350 billion program raises questions about how well its leadership is communicating with their congregation and whether repaying the loan/grant inside the two-year window would even be possible.” - Faithwire
- About
- Forum
- Account
Discussion
NewCautiously Not Optimistic
I, too, would be cautious about a church taking a government loan. My humble opinion: the church should never need/take government money to operate. If God’s people don’t/can’t support God’s church, then we need to rethink how we’re doing church.
Chuck is right: if a church needs to immediately take out loans to support the church after 1 month on lockdown, there are underlying financial issues at the church.
NewThe government is at fault here
They told all these businesses to shut down and ordered churches to not meet. So, the government is making up for it so to speak. As long as there are no strings attached, which there do not seem to be from the sources I read, I think it is not just acceptable, but reasonable to take the help if you need it.
New"The amount of loan..."
As the Exec. Director and representative of Urban Transformation Ministries (UTM) http://utmgr.org, yesterday I applied for the loan based on the advice of one of UTM board members who is the CEO of an area bank in West Michigan. We applied for it because the Covid19 crisis and Government response have messed with my schedule in meeting with different Foundations where we obtain grants from (about 25% of our funding). Here is the link where the quote above came from. https://www.choiceone.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/PPP-FAQ.pdf
As long as you use the loan towards payroll (at least 75%) and Mortgage/utilities and etc…, the loan is forgiven. This was a no-brainer for us.
NewBart Barber
Bart Barber had a really good take on this as well the other day at his blog.
"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells
New"no strings attached"
Smiling as I contemplate the reality that with government, there are always strings attached. Now certainly government types won’t always admit as much, but reality is “he who pays the piper calls the tune.”
Wrong to take the money? Decide for yourself whether the risk is worth it, I guess. But all in all, don’t forget that the government tends to wriggle its way in. Plus, we’ll all be paying all of this back in our taxes at some point in the future.
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.
NewSmiling as I contemplate the
UTM has had several opportunities to pursue government grants and chose not to pursue them because of actual strings attached, especially when it comes to religious liberty issues. The sticking point is usually hiring of LGBTQ folks and/or “proselytizing.” There is nothing in the loan that addresses those issues. The Forgivable loan is through the Bank, not directly through the Government. It is temporary. The only strings attached are that you use at least 75% towards payroll (the rest towards the mortgage, utilities, and etc..) and you don’t lay off your workers.
It is true that it eventually comes back to us taxpayers, but the legislation has already been passed and the loans are going to be distributed fairly soon. I’d rather have part of my taxpayer money go towards small businesses and faith-based Christian organizations and evangelical churches that proclaim the gospel than have it go towards small businesses combined with only the liberal, progressive churches and ministries that have no gospel who have no qualms taking advantage of an indirect government subsidy.
NewChristian .orgs vs. Christian Churches
I have no problem if a Christian charitable organization wants to use this provision. I don’t think it’s wise for a church to do so. Better to reevaluate how you’re doing church than to ask government for a hand out.
For example, my church currently has a mortgage on an addition. We are making extra payments on this loan to pay it off early. If finances get tight, I’d rather reduce the extra principle we’re paying on the loan than ask the government for a handout. We also have 3 months of expenses saved in case of emergencies. I’d rather use that during this time instead of asking the government for a handout and keeping the 3 months of savings.
NewNormal is out the window here
Two months ago there was a rock’em sock’em economy. Then the governments out of concern for the virus told tens of millions of people they can’t work. Now, even good tithers have nothing to give! So, I don’t get the hesitation. This is NOT a hand out, or “charity.” It is replacement for the funds they prevented you from getting.
NewT Howard wrote:
Good for you. Glad you have that cushion. Now don’t judge other churches that don’t have that option.
NewBert Perry wrote:
You mean the big givers run the church?
NewExactly
Yup, and then you’ve got the question of whether it’s safer for big private donors to do so, or the government. You have hazards with both, but my general take is that private donors are far less hazardous than government donors.
Now hopefully the promise holds and the government will not insist on a greater say in church government. However, history suggests this is at best a dangerous assumption.
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.
NewBert
That’s right Bert. Remember the old adage… “just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they aren’t out to get you!”
NewFICA Credits
With the requirement to shelter in place we have all of the staff working from home. A couple of the provisions in the FFCRA allow for FICA credits for salary continuation for a couple of reasons appropriate to on non-pastoral, (no housing allowance) staff. Within the provision, we can pay two-weeks salary for those who can not work from home and receive credits for future FICA expenses. Also, with the revised FMLA we can pay staff who are unable to work because of closed schools and daycare 2/3 of their salary and receive FICA credit for future payments. These are much different in my opinion the loans and something to consider.
NewAnother adage
I’m thinking more Santayana’s “those who fail to heed history are doomed to repeat it.” That, and “If it seems too good to be true, it probably is.”
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.
NewBert
If government is that untrustworthy and that eager to destroy churches, they can take you out anytime they want to! They don’t need an excuse. They’ll just make one up.