Our Commitment to Transparency
We believe in complete openness about our mission, methods, and biblical foundation. Here's everything you need to know about how we operate.
Biblical Rationale
Our approach to barrier-free giving is deeply rooted in Scripture. Here's the theological foundation that guides everything we do.
Executive Summary
Our Thesis
Stablish Giving Fund exists to remove practical barriers so that every act of generosity reaches its intended recipient. This model—(1) honoring donor intent, (2) stewarding funds transparently, and (3) strengthening local churches—fits squarely within New-Testament patterns of giving that are cheerful (2 Cor 9:7), accountable (2 Cor 8:19–21), church-strengthening (Acts 4:32–35), and sometimes designated across congregations and regions (1 Cor 16:1–3; Rom 15:25–27).
The Tension We Address
Scripture also commends local leaders' stewardship (Acts 4:35; Heb 13:17) and warns against consumer-directed giving and self-interested control. This document surfaces those tensions and proposes guardrails so the model remains biblically faithful.
Definitions & Scope
Barrier-free giving
Donors can support their church/ministry even when technical or administrative rails are missing; gifts are held in trust and delivered promptly.
Designated giving
Donors identify the recipient (e.g., their home church, a ministry, relief, missions). New-Testament precedents include collections earmarked for the saints in Jerusalem (1 Cor 16; 2 Cor 8–9; Rom 15).
Local-church centrality
The local congregation, led by qualified elders, is a primary locus of Christian life and stewardship (1 Tim 3; 5:17; Heb 13:17). Our model serves churches; it does not replace or govern them.
Biblical Foundations
A. Cheerful, Voluntary Giving (Heart, not compulsion)
"Each one must give as he has decided in his heart, not reluctantly or under compulsion…" — 2 Corinthians 9:7
Implication: Systems should reduce compulsion and friction, not create new ones. Ensuring donors can complete their intended gift (even when a church isn't yet "set up") aligns with the Spirit of grace-motivated generosity.
B. Church-Strengthening Distribution (Acts)
Acts 2:44–45; 4:32–35 — Believers shared; proceeds were laid at the apostles' feet, then distributed to any as had need.
Acts 6:1–6 — Administrative structures (proto-deacons) were appointed to ensure fair, efficient distribution.
Implication: The NT blesses administrative solutions that ensure gifts reach real needs. Stablish Giving Fund functions as a modern, accountable "distribution help"—not as a replacement for elders.
C. Designated, Inter-Church Giving (Pauline Collections)
1 Cor 16:1–3; 2 Cor 8–9; Rom 15:25–27 — Paul coordinates earmarked offerings from multiple churches to Jerusalem believers.
Phil 4:15–18 — The Philippians specifically support Paul's gospel work; he calls their gift "a fragrant offering."
Acts 11:29–30 — The church in Antioch sends relief to Judea via trusted messengers.
Implication: It is biblically normal to designate gifts for ministries beyond one's local congregation and to use intermediaries/messengers to deliver them with integrity and transparency.
D. Accountability & Transparency
2 Cor 8:19–21 — Paul insists on widely trusted companions and careful handling of funds: "We aim at what is honorable… in the Lord's sight and man's."
Implication: Documented controls, independent oversight, and public reporting are not optional extras but apostolic best practice.
E. Support for Those Who Labor
1 Tim 5:17–18; Luke 10:7; 1 Cor 9:7–14 — Those who labor in word and service may be reasonably supported.
Implication: Reasonable administrative costs (wages for honest labor) are legitimate; Scripture forbids shameful gain (1 Pet 5:2) but not fair compensation.
Addressing Common Objections
Objection 1: "Acts shows gifts centralized under elders; donor-directed giving undermines local authority."
Concern: Elders steward priorities best; designated giving fragments the church.
Response:
- Both models appear in the NT. Acts shows central stewardship in Jerusalem, and Paul organizes designated, inter-church relief.
- Stablish Giving Fund does not direct how a church spends funds; it only delivers the donor's gift, then defers to elders' stewardship.
- Guardrail: We commend "first-fruits" support of one's home church while enabling offerings beyond it (Acts 11; 2 Cor 8–9).
Objection 2: "Donor choice fuels consumerism."
Concern: People fund what excites them, not what's most needed.
Response:
- Paul asked believers to decide in their hearts and then to give generously, not under compulsion (2 Cor 9). Agency is biblical; so is pastoral guidance.
- Guardrails: Teaching, elder counsel, and transparent needs help shape wise giving. Our role is delivery with integrity, not taste-shaping.
Objection 3: "Intermediaries invite waste and abuse."
Concern: Middle layers can create opacity/fees.
Response:
- Paul used trusted couriers and published accountability (2 Cor 8:19–21).
- Guardrails: Independent board, separate books, audits, clear fee policy aimed at cost recovery, not profit; publish annual reports.
Objection 4: "Fees siphon resources from mission."
Concern: Processing/admin costs divert funds.
Response:
- Scripture affirms fair wages for necessary ministry work (1 Tim 5:18), while condemning greed (1 Pet 5:2).
- Guardrails: Plain-English fee transparency, "market-reasonable" rates, donor-preferred low-cost rails, and ongoing optimization to keep more dollars landing at the church.
Objection 5: "This replaces the local church."
Response:
- Stablish Giving Fund is para-church infrastructure, a messenger that gets gifts where believers intend. It neither governs churches nor dictates their budgets.
- The aim is church strengthening: ensuring gifts arrive, nudging faster connection to the church's own rails, then getting out of the way.
Our Positive Theological Case
Honors Cheerful Agency (2 Cor 9:7). Donors decide in their heart; we remove friction so their freely chosen gift reaches its destination.
Follows Apostolic Accountability (2 Cor 8:19–21). Independent governance, documented controls, and public reporting mirror Paul's "honorable before God and people" standard.
Expresses the Unity of the Church (Eph 4:4–6). By enabling support across congregations/ministries, we reflect interdependence rather than isolation.
Resembles Diaconal Administration (Acts 6). Practical, fair distribution structures serve the ministry of the Word by preventing avoidable breakdowns.
Strengthens Local Leadership, Not Replaces It. Elders still steward received funds. We deliver; they disciple and deploy.
Guardrails to Keep Our Model Biblically Faithful
Local-Church Priority
Encourage believers to prioritize consistent support of their home church while giving beyond it as led (1 Tim 5:17; Gal 6:6; Acts 11).
No Coercion, Ever
No "paywall for generosity." Gifts to a church that isn't connected are still delivered; connection only improves speed/cost.
Reasonable, Transparent Costs
Publish fee schedules and annual reports; explain why costs exist and how you minimize them (1 Tim 5:18 / 1 Pet 5:2).
Independent Oversight
Majority-independent board; conflict-of-interest policy; leaders recuse where appropriate (2 Cor 8:21).
Integrity of Recipient Eligibility
Basic validation that recipients are bona fide churches/ministries; refuse disbursement where doing so would violate Christian conscience or law.
Data & Privacy Stewardship
Handle giver and church data as a trust (Prov 11:13; 1 Cor 4:2).
Theological Advisory
Maintain a small council of pastors/elders across traditions to review policies impacting church life.
How This Respects Church Leadership
Before Delivery
Stablish verifies recipient details; elders are not bypassed—funds are sent to the church's official channels.
After Delivery
Elders remain fully responsible for stewardship, teaching, and accountability inside their flock (Heb 13:17).
When a Church Onboards
Direct rails return administrative control to the local church; Stablish's intermediary role recedes.
FAQ for Pastors & Critics
Q1: Are you diverting tithes?
A: We never tell people where to give. We remove roadblocks so they can give where they already intended. We also encourage steady, primary support of one's home church.
Q2: Why not just wait until every church is onboarded?
A: Needs are present now. The Acts/Paul patterns show the church did not delay relief—they built processes to move gifts faithfully.
Q3: Why any fees at all?
A: Payments, security, verification, compliance, and staffing cost money. Scripture affirms fair support for necessary labor while warning against greed. We keep costs market-reasonable, transparent, and optimized.
Q4: Does donor-direction undermine elder priorities?
A: Elders steward after funds arrive. We ensure arrival; we don't instruct use.
Q5: Isn't this "para-church"?
A: Yes—infrastructure in service to the church, similar to trusted messengers and collections in the NT.
Our Public Statement
• We believe generosity should be cheerful and unhindered (2 Cor 9:7).
• We commit to steward designated gifts with integrity, honoring donor intent and strengthening the local church (1 Cor 16; Rom 15).
• We practice transparent, audited processes so that our service is honorable in the Lord's sight and in the sight of people (2 Cor 8:19–21).
• We affirm the primacy of the local church and its elders in shepherding God's people (Heb 13:17), even as we facilitate inter-church support like the New-Testament collections (Acts 11; 2 Cor 8–9).
• We reject coercion and greed (1 Pet 5:2). Our costs are disclosed, reasonable, and oriented toward maximizing ministry impact.
• We exist so that no act of generosity meets a dead end and every gift strengthens the Body of Christ (Acts 4:34–35).
Key Scripture References
Cheerful, voluntary giving
2 Cor 9:6–8
Accountable handling of funds
2 Cor 8:16–21
Inter-church collections
1 Cor 16:1–3; Rom 15:25–27; 2 Cor 8–9; Acts 11:29–30
Local elder stewardship
1 Tim 5:17–18; Heb 13:17
Administrative service
Acts 6:1–6
Unity of the Body
Eph 4:1–6; 1 Cor 12
Support for gospel workers
Phil 4:15–18; 1 Cor 9:7–14; Luke 10:7
Warnings against shameful gain
1 Pet 5:2
Questions About Our Biblical Foundation?
We welcome dialogue with pastors, theologians, and church leaders about our approach. Our goal is to serve the church faithfully and biblically.
Contact Our Team🏛️ Independent Governance
Stablish Giving Fund is an independent 501(c)(3) nonprofit corporation. It is legally and operationally distinct from Stablish Solutions, Inc., the for-profit company that provides technology infrastructure.
The nonprofit is governed by its own Board of Directors, which includes the President, Treasurer, and Secretary. The Board has full authority over the nonprofit's mission, disbursement of funds, and stewardship of donor intent.
🤝 Partnership Without Control
Stablish Giving Fund partners with Stablish Solutions, Inc. to provide secure technology and processing rails that make generosity possible at scale. However:
Stablish Solutions has no voting rights in Stablish Giving Fund.
Employees, officers, or shareholders of Stablish Solutions cannot direct or control nonprofit decisions.
Any individual with ties to Stablish Solutions must recuse themselves from nonprofit decisions that could present a conflict of interest.
This ensures Stablish Giving Fund operates exclusively for its charitable purpose and never for the private benefit of the for-profit entity.
⚖️ Checks and Balances
President
Provides leadership in line with the nonprofit's mission and reports to the Board.
Treasurer
Oversees financial integrity and ensures transparent accounting.
Secretary
Maintains records, filings, and compliance.
All major decisions (funds distribution, governance changes, use of resources) are made by Board vote, ensuring accountability and preventing unilateral control.
🔍 Commitment to Transparency
Stablish Giving Fund commits to:
Publishing annual reports and audited financial statements.
Maintaining independent accounting separate from Stablish Solutions.
Upholding policies that protect donor intent, church integrity, and public trust.
Questions About Our Governance?
We're committed to operating with complete transparency and accountability. Contact us for more details about our governance structure.
Contact Our Board