Marvin Sapp...Open The Doors

1 Cor. 14:40 ~ Let all things be done decently and in order.

Well family, I must say that I am not surprised...

But first...This is not the place to drag Bishop Marvin Sapp or criticize oneness doctrine. Truth is, since his time with Commissioned, I have enjoyed this man's singing and much of his ministry. I have prayed for him as well as other group members and even had good conversation with him. He is certainly, in my opinion, a Servant of Christ, and not an enemy of the cross. 

What I am not surprised at is that the "old church" and "old church ways" have once again, finally seen the light of day and been placed front and center for this generation and new, more woke critics to see. 

What do I mean? 

In the Black Pentecostal church, which is a descendent of the Black Baptist and Methodist church both historically and otherwise, certain practices and beliefs have nearly always existed. Once such belief, is that the "offering" or the collection of money, is a sacred part of the service. While that is not bad, in and of itself, because all things rendered to God are sacred within their proper context, the methods used to collect these "offerings" have gone from ZIG to ZAG and are all over the board. The problem is that many of the techniques used to solicit monetary gifts are unbiblical, manipulative and unwarranted. 

Context Of Controversy?

Well, in 2024 at the PAW (Pentecostal Assemblies Of The World) convention, after ministering, Bishop Sapp was recorded seeking to raise $40,000 to help the church meet the program budget. Now, that may not be bad IF that was all that happened. What had happened wuz....Dr. Sapp vehemently instructed the staff to "close the doors" leading to the impression that everyone in the building was to be held until the offering and a certain amount of money had been raised.  

Now, we must confront the fact that doors been closed before during offering in the Black church in particular. So that was not an issue. The issue was that he, like many his predecessor, instructed that the doors be closed to prohibit entry into the sanctuary, and more importantly and controversially, as stated, to restrict or limit exit from the sanctuary during the offering.

The Fallout 

Well...loot your 7-11...(Please DON'T take that literally)

When the video was seen, the DOORS came off, and didn't open in Bishop Sapp's favor once the replay and rebroadcast started circulating on social media. Nobody cared or even asked what he preached, and even fewer people cared what he sang or how he sang it...All folk cared about was this Bishop, appearing to hold the congregation hostage for $40,000...

The Response:

Internet chatter and memes regarding his actions and holding the church hostage as of this

writing is running rampant all over the internet, and Bishop Sapp, connected to the internet and very active on Social media, has sought to set the record straight and use the opportunity to distance himself from perceived wrong doing and explain the reason he did and said what he did.

This was one of his responses among many others:

"Some have taken issue with a particular moment when I instructed the ushers, rather firmly, to close the doors during the offering. To those unfamiliar with the church context or who may not regularly attend worship gatherings this has been misinterpreted as holding people hostage as well as offensive. That was never my intent.

The truth is, when finances are being received in any worship gathering, it is one of the most vulnerable and exposed times for both the finance and security teams. Movement during this sacred exchange can be distracting and, at times, even risky. My directive was not about control it was about creating a safe, focused, and reverent environment for those choosing to give, and for those handling the resources."

Hold the door handle...While Dr. Sapp's "intent" may have been harmless, his practice was anything but harmless. As he stated, it was offensive to many, and I might add, shameful to others and not representative of Christ. But we can't leave this topic without stepping back and taking a look at the bigger picture and asking the following question:

Could Dr. Sapp Possibly Be A Victim?

I pose to you that Dr. Sapp, like many who have associated with and been a part of the modern Black church, may be a victim of "old church" practice. 

Now wait a minute...many of you say, it was just flat out manipulation...and while that is a possibility, remember, people have feet and legs and can walk at any time, so at the very least this is some sort of "cooperative" relationship between the "fleecee" and "fleecer."

Notice, for those who have seen the video, none of his cohorts were at issue with what he did and or what he said. Nobody! Noone stood up and said, "leave the doors alone". 

Why? Because many of the ministers in the Black church, regardless of denomination, believe that what he did and said was acceptable...Some quickly responded to defend him and even encourage him to continue. None of his most ardent supporters view this as a sort of kidnap or ransom. They have no clue that imposing restrictions on free beings and telling them not to move or that they can't leave when there is no personal danger, is, in essence, a  "kidnap" and at the very least an imposition on personal freedom. 

In other words, some don't see a thing wrong with creating an environment where people are told to stay put, participate and participate (give) more if asked, because the rationale is that "you owe God"...I pose that attitude and application is a direct hold over from the "old church", which formerly provided guidance and support to all aspects of their member's lives, but in modern day has advanced into plain old manipulation...Yes, I said, and agree with a form of COOPERATION from those victimized ie: the congregation. 

Them on the take, have nerve enough to make the demand, and them giving, have docility enough to sit there and follow instructions regardless of the pain. 

The Black Pentecostal church in particularly has tied offering to worship and within the context of the church, for many years, some ministers have associated the ability to be blessed by the Lord with the ability to give monetarily. While linking the amount of what one can give to being blessed by God can be a ridiculous notion, it is all too common that people are told that if they give more, they will be blessed more, and the old Oral Roberts saying, "The greater the need, the greater the seed". 

The Lock Down 

In reality, locking the church up during giving, is not so much about safety, security or even pleasing God, as much as it is about making sure that people with the money don't leave without giving what is asked for and that they hear what is needed so that they can contribute so that the service can move on. 

In the video, Dr. Sapp asked for 1,000 people on social media to contribute $20 and for 1,000 people in the live audience of 4,000 to give $20, headed out by those in ministry giving no less than $100...Yes, that would have met the $40,000 request and then some...but, as stated, the "CLOSE THE DOORS" was the issue and in every response to the issue and criticism, Dr. Sapp is totally oblivious to the problem. 

More On The Black Church & Offering

The Black church leadership has a long history of making sure the monetary offering is adequate. There are many in ministry who believe they are "anointed by God" to raise offerings. Some specialize in "offerings" as if "monetary offerings" was its own category in biblical studies...well, maybe it is...but y'u-know what I mean.

I propose that this is a bad hold-over of the "old church". Dr. Sapp learned this from some of his predecessors, or at the very least witnessed many of them doing this, as I also have, over the years.

The Tactics Of An Offering 

Don't get me started about the tactics of raising an offering in the Grand Ole Church...We know, superlatively, how to raise and lift an offering...from the give to get, to the give to rebuke, we have witnessed it all. In many instances what is asked for isn't an ask, it is a demand and even an expectation. 

At this time of year within COGIC circles, funds have been gathered from every Minster, Elder, Pastor, Supt., Bishop, Missionary and on down the line in the form of a "National Report" which will be delivered to the national church by each Jurisdictional Bishop in what is called the April Call Meeting. This report is not an "offering" but something that leaders consider to be a "due" associated with certain credentials in the church. When properly recorded this "report" opens the door to the only rule making assembly within the church, the General Assembly which convenes in November during the Holy Convocation. 

Interestingly, even after giving this "report", if one attends the meeting, they will be expected to deliver more money in each service, and in many services the starting amount is $100, and if one has any title it may be $300 to $500 or more...In these cases, doors don't need to be locked,,,folk just need to give...the question is, is that giving, or is it coercion? The problem is that although many don't like the practice, they will defend it.  

The Word & Emotional Giving

One of the techniques that has developed over the years, is collecting the offering after the message, or associating monetary giving with spiritual blessing and wellbeing. While many televangelists have done this quite successfully for many years, traditionally, until the mega-conference gatherings of the late 90's and early 2000'nds, in most churches the collection was done prior to the message. However, it seems that after mega-church conferences began, led by many Charismatic, and Word Of Faith ministers, the offering was sometimes thrown on the altar, or at the preacher as he was ministering, supposedly in effort to evoke God's presence and divine will and destiny upon the life of the giver. 

In the old Baptist church, people used to throw wallets and purses and money at the preacher while he preached and after they, the audience, started feeling good and in the spirit because of the message. Some people even threatened the preacher to keep on preaching or meet physical harm...

In modern times, it seems like everyone is in on associating a spiritual move and preaching to money and monetary gifts. We remember Dr. Leroy "Money Cometh" Thompson and Creflo "clockin' doodle-dumb" Dollar(s), walking and running over the money laid on the steps to the pulpit promising that the givers would be anointed and their bills and debts canceled. If you don't remember here is the video:

Although Thompson and Dollar are probably not the nexus of  this practice and other practices associated with the collection, they haven't helped correct the issue because it favors them to associate monetary giving with being blessed so that they can rake in more money and have more people give. 

Emotional giving is not necessarily "good" giving, and it is not necessarily bad giving either. People should be aware of what they are doing and not so emotionally charged in the process. Folk have given rent money, car payments, mortgages, diaper cash and more while emotionally charged at the time of giving. Some have had to come back after the service and beg for their money back.  

While I only raise offerings in my church, personally, I DO NOT raise offerings in association with the preached word or in "appreciation" to God because of the preached word, as is common in many circles. Most certainly I DO NOT lock folk in the sanctuary until the offering is collected. The highest , most sacred part of the service is the WORD itself...interestingly, very seldom does anyone lock people up or shut them in to hear the message. So why the offering? Because that's where we get what we need to operate, pay bills or to pay the preacher for the ministry. I say simply detach it all from emotion.

Personally, I refuse to take an appointment in which I have to raise my own offering to receive an honorarium. I also refuse to raise an "after offering" or raise money after ministry has been delivered so that emotion can be separated from any monetary gift. Neither of these positions make me "special" by they do not make me favored among my colleagues for sure.

I simply feel that budgetary concerns should be addressed before a minister arrives or before their involvement. I know that is ANATHEMA in the Grand Ole Church and among some of the more austere ministries, but we should be good stewards of God's resources and respectful to the people of God and in my opinion, getting folk emotionally charged and asking for money, or seeking funds associated with spiritual or even physical blessing, is not the best stewardship and more importantly, not Biblical.

Big Money

At the height of her ministry, Juanita Bynum, by her own account, would draw $250,000 and up in general offerings simply because her name was on the program. Her presence would more than make any budget and ministries all over the country were more than glad to USE her....excuse me...have her, on their programs. 

While this is not wholesale, in many churches and church settings, ministerial leaders are expected to preach, raise the offering, ask for more money, and give money...not $20's but many times, as Dr. Sapp indicated, multiple $100's at a time. In conventions and other gatherings that have multiple services, individuals who attend are expected to "give" in each service. Just attending some meetings with multiple services could result in the "donation" of hundreds and even thousands of dollars.

Locking folk in, calling their name and other tactics are apropos at times and imposed upon the people as the people are required to "follow" and do as they are told "in the name of the Lord"...In times past, although there was manipulation, there were also them that cared for the people and lived common lives with the people, not above the people. Leaders didn't live in luxury while attendees struggled. The struggle was common in many situations and the judgement of the Pastor and leader was well respected and the though was that, if the leaders are asking, then God must be speaking. Unfortunately, that trust and relationship has severely eroded over the years, due to usury and lavish lifestyles of some in leadership, especially them most vocal.  

Like many, Dr. Sapp is a victim of this "system" and what appears to be a normal and ordinary method of operation. It is bad behavior that has been "normalized" by expectation of many alleged church leaders who don't view the relationship between themselves and membership as sacred and who view that people and their money are simply a means to an end.  

Final Thought

In this case, Dr. Sapp is not excused or innocent simply because he had a bad example, became a bad example or did not consider the seriousness of his acts and actions. Like many explaining it all away, Dr. Sapp had little consideration for what he was actually doing while collecting this monetary offering. 

While much can be said about the mode and method of New Testament giving and monetary service, which I have done HERE the fact remains that the church should examine her practices to make sure they honor fellow man and are Biblically centered. I do not believe these axioms can be separated. If we are to love our neighbor as ourselves, then we should seek to be as harmless and reverentially kind as possible in the service of others. 

"Close the doors" DID NOT show a reverence for relationship. It displayed, an arrogance and air of superiority and a need for subjugating and relegating individuals to being simply a means to an end. 

While Dr. Sapp and many of his colleagues don't see it quite as plain as I am alluding to here, the detail and thought of shepherding, leadership and accountability must be the focus and practices that are not supported by Biblical mandates must be realigned to suit practices that are Biblical, and that do not bring a shame to the church and doctrine of Christ. 

Blessed!