The “rule” mentality has been a potent force in shaping American teachings about giving over the last two centuries. And for good reasons. Many of our forebears have yearned for guidance and for rules that would embody a moral discipline of giving. They also enjoyed the unexpected sense of autonomy that comes when one can cheerfully say “No” or “Yes” (in accordance with their plans and systems) to the importuning of fund-raisers. 

But the “Thou shalt” approach to giving has also attracted criticism in every generation since the early nineteenth century. One of its ablest critics was Catherine Beecher, educator and writer about the problems of middle class American women. Beecher was uncomfortable with the conventional Protestant formula for inspiring people to give. The so-called Biblical rules seemed largely irrelevant to the actual choices available to her female readers. How many women in mid-nineteenth century America made the major decisions about whether their families adopted the disciplines of “tithing” or “proportionate giving?”

In effect, Catherine Beecher was raising a host of larger questions. Can any of these rules fit all circumstances? Aren’t our experiences of giving sometimes responses to distinctive, if not unique challenges? Don’t even the most zealous followers of rules sometimes alter them in light of changing circumstances? Perhaps that is why, as she suggested, “There have been such indistinct notions, and so many different standards of duty, on this subject [giving], that it is rare for two persons to think exactly alike, in regard to the measure of duty.”

A contemporary illustration of why “it is rare for two persons to think exactly alike” is the one “measure of duty” that one might think would encourage a common standard – tithing. Presumably a tithe means ten percent of one’s income. But is that ten percent of income before or after paying federal and state income taxes? Is one bound to give all ten percent to the synagogue/church or can the tithe include payments for all “charitable” deductions? What about the “modern tithe” – five percent to the church/synagogue and five percent to the United Way? And the questions have just begun.

Catherine Beecher’s most astute insight touches upon a hidden problem that deserves further exploration in our conversations. Does the preoccupation with rule-keeping encourage a secret pride in our own rectitude and disdain of others who follow other standards or indeed none at all? “[T]here is one species of charity which needs especial consideration. It is that, which leads a person to refrain from judging of the means and the relative charities of other persons. . .. Each person is bound to inquire and judge for himself, as to his own duty or deficiencies; but as both the resources, and the amount of actual charities of other men are beyond our ken, it is as indecorous, as it is uncharitable, to set in judgment on their decisions.”