The Dorean Principle by Conley Owens Chapter 1: The Command of Christ (Part 1)

About the Author:

• Conley Owens is a software engineer by day but hopes one day to do the work of a pastor full-time.
• He is the husband of one wife and the father of ten children.
• He has been a member of Silicon Vallley Reformed Baptist Church since 2010, and a pastor since 2019.

Introduction: We are part of a system where vast amounts of wealth circulate in the name of Christ.

• Christian book sales alone generate hundreds of millions of dollars.
• Parachurch ministries, like Cru, bring in revenue exceeding $600 million annually.
• Seminaries charge tuition that can top $60,000, leaving pastors burdened with loans for years.
• Even smaller expenses, like navigating worship music licenses, demand significant time and resources from church leaders.
• While financial support is necessary for ministry work, we must ask: when does the pursuit of money cross the line?

[Owens] – “The goal of this brief book is to establish “the do­re­an principle,” a biblical precept that distinguishes ethical ministry fundraising from unethical ministry fundraising. The do­re­an principle characterizes godly financial activity in the name of the gospel as acts of colabor in contradistinction to acts of reciprocity. Ministry should be supported, not sold.”

The Command of Christ – Reciprocity vs. Co-labor  

Note: When reflecting on the financial support of ministers, many are drawn to the phrase from Luke 10:7: “the laborer is worthy of his wages.”

• This passage often comes to mind for those familiar with the Bible, likely because it directly emphasizes the value of compensating those who dedicate themselves to ministry work.

1. It is undeniably catchy. In fact, this adage was already a traditional proverb by the time that Christ first uttered it.

2. It formed the basis for Paul’s understanding of the same topic (1 Tim. 5:18). The apostle’s ethic is little more than an extensive application of Christ’s command.

3. It represents the first clear teaching on the matter, offered at the dawn of Christian ministry.

• However, if you take a look at the passage, you will discover that Luke places this instruction alongside the sending out of the seventy disciples,⁠ some time after the sending out of the twelve disciples.
• Matthew records this for us, albeit in a phrase that garners less popular recognition: “the laborer deserves his food.” (Matthew 10:8-10)
• “Food” in Matthew 10:10 coincides with “wages” in Luke 10:7.
• It makes little practical difference if a traveling disciple receives a denarius or a denarius’s worth of bread; both count as compensation for the work done.
• From this extended imperative in Matthew 10, we can develop an understanding of Christ’s teaching on the relationship between money and ministry.

The Question of Payment

Note: A closer examination of the passage reveals an apparent tension: while it states that disciples are to “give without pay,” it also asserts that “the laborer deserves his food.”

• This raises the question of whether the laborer should receive wages or not, presenting a potential conflict in interpretation.

Options:

Option 1: Jesus forbids the disciples from taking a miserly approach to their work but permits receiving payment. The phrase “freely give” may seem to indicate encouragement toward offering ministry bountifully rather than a prohibition against compensation. However, translations that say “give without pay” are not mistaken. The Greek word used here, do­re­an, indicates the giving of something apart from any remuneration. In a context explicitly concerning money, this is the same word Paul uses to describe his gratuitous (freely offered) preaching (2 Cor. 11:7).

Option 2: Jesus forbids the disciples from receiving pay but permits them to regard themselves as worthy of it. This option attempts to maintain the honor of ministry while denying its honorariums. On the contrary, in Luke 10:7, Jesus says that because laborers deserve wages, they should receive from the one they stay with. Furthermore, the apostle Paul understands this verse to command the support of ministers (1 Tim. 5:17).

Option 3: Jesus forbids the disciples from requiring pay but permits them to receive pay. That is, the disciples are fit for remuneration only when they are willing to minister without it. While this may be an attractive solution, it stands at odds with the actual words of the verse. If the disciples may receive payment, why does Jesus tell them to give without pay?

Option 4: Jesus forbids the disciples from requesting pay but permits them to receive pay. This proposed solution suffers from the same problems as the preceding option. Moreover, if the disciples may not request payment, why does Jesus tell them to seek out people who will receive and support them (Matt. 10:11–14; Luke 10:5–8)?

Option 5: Jesus forbids the disciples from accepting money but permits them to receive food and lodging. First, this proposal creates an arbitrary distinction in capital, as though no interchange exists between gold and groceries. Someone who receives one could easily exchange it for the other. Additionally, the solution fails to address the explicit reference to money in Mat­thew 10:9. The disciples are to rely on others for their financial needs. In fact, by all accounts, the apostle Paul regards this passage as promoting monetary support (1 Tim. 5:17–18).

Option 6: Jesus forbids the disciples from receiving payment in exchange for miracles but permits them to receive payment in exchange for preaching. This option wrongly suggests that the disciples might work wonders apart from any proclamation of the gospel. The disciples are to give freely because they have received freely. They have not received miraculous healings but the good news of the kingdom of God.

Option 7: Jesus forbids the disciples from receiving excess profit but permits them to receive that which meets their needs. Such a mediating approach fails to satisfy either pole of inquiry. Regarding the command not to

receive pay, it allows compensation. Regarding the statement that a minister is worthy of his wages, it implicitly denies he deserves anything more than bare sustenance.

Option 8: Jesus forbids the disciples from acquiring greedily but permits them to receive with pure motives. While similar to the previous option, this proposal offers an ethic of motivation rather than an ethic of moderation. That is, rather than regulating the disciples’ external activities, it regulates the desires of their heart. However, nothing in the text substantiates this resolution.

The Source of Payment

Note: Matthew 10:8–10 emphasizes not the amount or method of receiving, but the source.

• Disciples are instructed to rely on God for provision, not on those they minister to.
• The term “laborer,” used to describe someone worthy of payment, connects back to Christ’s earlier call for laborers to enter the harvest, reinforcing their dependence on God’s provision. (Matt. 9:37-38; cf. Luke 10:2)

[Owens] – “The employer of the laborers pays their wages. In this metaphor, the employer is “the Lord of the harvest,” not the grain. Translating this image to reality, God is the employer, not the recipients of the gospel message. While we may be tempted to identify those individuals who provide for the disciples as the employers or clients who pay the wages, they are rather God’s instruments in this kingdom economy. The Lord of the harvest commissions his laborers, orchestrating their supply from the grain of the field.”

Reciprocity and Co-labor

Note: In a purely horizontal exchange, a man finds himself obligated to a minister. In a contribution representing a vertical payment from God, some oth­er obligation secures the arrangement.

Ministerial reciprocity = Support (material or otherwise) given to a minister out of a sense of direct obligation for his ministry of the gospel.

• The term reciprocity describes a contribution offered out of a direct obligation—i.e., one that is not mediated by God

Ministerial co­labor = Support  (material or otherwise) given by man to a minister out of a sense of obligation to God, to honor or aid in the proclamation of the gospel.

• Unlike the direct sense of obligation involved in reciprocity, co­labor acknowledges a mediated obligation, the giver considering himself indebted directly to the Lord, and through that obligation finding himself duty-bound to give to a minister.

[Owens] – “Jesus forbids ministerial reciprocity in Mat­thew 10:8 when he commands his disciples to “give without pay.” On the oth­er hand, he permits and even promotes ministerial co­labor in Mat­thew 10:9–10 when he instructs the disciples not to bring their own provisions because “the laborer deserves his food.””