Refuting “The Dorean Principle”

Greed’s Solution is Not More Rules

I recently read the book the Dorean Principle by Conley Owens, a book which attempts to address the rampant commercialism of Christianity.

The book takes it’s title from the Greek word used in Matthew 10:8 (δωρεάν, “dorean”) which means to give without payment. The premise is that when Jesus sends the 72 disciples throughout Judea, he was creating a standard for future church in their dealings with money.

Here’s the full text being referred to:

These twelve Jesus sent out after instructing them: “Do not go in the way of the Gentiles, and do not enter any city of the Samaritans;

but rather go to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

“And as you go, preach, saying, ‘The kingdom of heaven is at hand.’

“Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers, cast out demons. Freely (δωρεάν) you received, freely (δωρεάν) give.

“Do not acquire gold, or silver, or copper for your money belts,

or a bag for your journey, or even two coats, or sandals, or a staff; for the worker is worthy of his support.

“And whatever city or village you enter, inquire who is worthy in it, and stay at his house until you leave that city.

“As you enter the house, give it your greeting.

“If the house is worthy, give it your blessing of peace. But if it is not worthy, take back your blessing of peace.

“Whoever does not receive you, nor heed your words, as you go out of that house or that city, shake the dust off your feet.

“Truly I say to you, it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of judgment than for that city.

Matthew 10:5–15 (NASB95)

My immediate question with regarding this is, why turn one aspect of the passage into a principle? Why not, ‘preachers can’t have wallets’? Why not ‘no bag for your ministry trips’? Why not a ‘wipe-your-feet-off-when-a-place-rejects-the-gospel principle’?

There were many aspects of this passage which appears to be a bigger theme in the New Testament (“don’t store up treasures on earth,” anyone?), but taking the principle of ‘Dorean’ and making it into a kind of rule to follow appears to violate the context of what is occurring in this passage. The context is: Jesus is commanding a specific group of people (72) to do a specific thing (go an preach the gospel to Jewish cities without any provisions). We don’t have a reason to make this a rule for people not on a specific mission, by Jesus, within a specific context. Otherwise, if we want to make some rules, lets use the whole passage, not just ‘dorean.’

But on to the main argument. The author of the book does not say all transactions are sinful in the context of the church. He looks at many passages about Paul taking money for his missions, and the New Testament theology of supporting a minister.

The author simply thinks in order for a minister to receive a transaction, it needs to be in the service of mission (which he labels “co-labor”), and as a result of the congregant giving to God, not the minister. Otherwise this would be fee-for-service, or reciprocity. What’s wrong with that logic, you might ask? Only in the details.

For starters, on a practical level, nothing changes between “co-labor” and a direct fee-for-service from congregant to minister. This is a God’s-eye-view perspective of whether the congregant is “giving to God” vs “fee-for-service.” Not only that, but in all honesty, it’s not only money that the Christian is called to “give to God.” The New Testament calls Christians to give not money, but self to God (money only being a small portion of the whole self)! The whole Christian life is giving to God. Again this doesn’t change anything practically though, money is changing hands on a horizontal place (congregant to minister).

In other words, turn this into a principle:

So therefore, any one of you who does not renounce all that he has cannot be my disciple.

Luke 14:33 (ESV):

Secondly, the congregant DOES have an obligation to give direct to the minister. A fee-for-service attitude is not entirely unbiblical. Paul states he has a “right” to collect pay from those he ministers to, even if he did not always use that right (1 Corinthians 9:18). By implication, those who minister by way of writing Christian books have the right to the royalty agreed upon by the publisher, even if, as Conley, they don’t make use of that right. There is nothing evil in that transaction, the fee promotes the further publishing of Christian content.

The real issue trying to be fixed by the Dorean Principle is greed in the house of God. I am in full agreement with the book’s author Conley Owens in his evaluation that this is a serious problem. I think the “Christian” subculture of music, book publishing, and fee-for-everything is at an all-time high and to their shame. But that does not mean turning Dorean into a rule is the solution. When did the law (in the sense of “thou shalt not”) ever change the human heart? The law is meant to restrain evil, but the root cause must be dealt with by losing the love of money itself. That only comes with a genuine change of heart in regeneration. What you have in the moneymaking industries that exist on the back of Christianity is an unregenerate idea of Christianity, more American than it is Biblical. They need conversion because they have bigger (eternal judgment) problems than only that they want money.

What I think a better way forward are Jeremiads regarding the greed and corruption passing for Christian rather than an outright condemnation on being paid for producing Christian content, or ministering the gospel. We need to preach as though most of Christianity is not Christian. That has always been the New Testament’s position (Matthew 7:13, 2 Tim 3:5). Conley has several egregious examples of profiteering in the name of Christ, and these are well deserving of the shame he casts of them. Repent, indeed, for the kingdom is at hand.

Lastly, I appreciate that Conley kept to the principle of the book itself and released it for free on the internet. I appreciate that he encourages more authors to publish in Creative Commons and Public Domain licenses because more content in the public domain supports the Bible’s emphasis on the poor being preeminent in the church in God’s eyes. It allows those with no means to access the best Christian truth, just at the best books in church history are most all available for free in the public domain.

I read The Dorean Principle here.