Is tithing required?
Short answer
The tithe — a tenth of income — is commanded in the law of Israel and demanded in Malachi 3:10, but no New Testament text imposes it on the church: Paul speaks of giving by inward decision. Protestant churches differ among themselves on whether it binds, and the Catholic Church asks for support without fixing a percentage.
- Written by
- Maria Luisa Navarro Schmitt
- Reviewed by
- Raphael Navarro Schmitt
- Published on
- Reading time
- 5 min read
It helps to start with what the tithe was, because the version in circulation today looks little like the one in the text. In the law of Israel it is not a cash contribution handed over at a service: it is a tenth of the harvest and the flock, meant to support the Levites — the tribe that received no land — and, in part, eaten by the family itself at a meal before God. Every third year, the tithe was stored in the towns for the Levite, the foreigner, the orphan and the widow.
The passage most quoted from pulpits is the one in Malachi, and its context is an accusation: the prophet is speaking to a people who were handing over the worst of the flock and withholding what was owed to the temple. The invitation to test God appears there, addressed to that situation. Anyone quoting the verse today is making an application, and it is legitimate to discuss how far that application reaches — but it is an application, not a promise addressed by name to the reader.
In the New Testament the word tithe appears rarely and never as a command to the church. Jesus mentions it while rebuking the Pharisees for tithing herbs and neglecting judgment, mercy and faith — and, in the same sentence, says they were not to leave off either the one or the other. Hebrews discusses Abraham’s tithe to Melchizedek inside an argument about priesthood, not about community finances.
What Paul’s letters put in its place is a different criterion, and a harder one to administer: each person gives by an inward decision of their own, without sadness and without obligation, and the measure suggested is proportional to what has been received. In Acts, the church at Jerusalem appears going far beyond ten per cent, selling property so that nobody was in need. Neither model is presented as an obligatory percentage.
One practical observation, because it tends to be missing from this discussion: none of the readings below excuses a Christian from materially supporting the community they belong to. The divergence is about the form and about the number, not about whether the duty exists.
What the passages say
30All the tithes of the land, whether from the grain, or from the fruits of trees, are for the Lord and are sanctified to him.
The legal definition: a tenth of what the land and the trees produce is consecrated. It is agricultural and it is about production, which explains why transposing it to a salary requires an interpretive decision the text does not make on its own.
22Each year, you shall separate the tithes out of all your crops which spring forth from the earth.
23And you shall eat these in the sight of the Lord your God, in the place which he will choose, so that his name may be invoked there: the tenth part of your grain and wine and oil, and the firstborn from the herds and your sheep. So may you learn to fear the Lord your God at all times.
The detail that almost never gets mentioned: part of the tithe was eaten by the family itself, at a meal before God, in the place he would choose. The destination of the Israelite tithe was more varied than modern practice suggests.
10Bring all the tithes into the storehouse, and let there be food in my house. And test me about this, says the Lord, as to whether I will not open to you the floodgates of heaven, and pour out to you a blessing, all the way to abundance.
The central passage of any sermon on the subject. Addressed to a people accused of withholding what was owed to the temple, it carries an explicit invitation to test the promise — and it is the only place in Scripture where God proposes anything of the kind.
23Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, you hypocrites! For you collect tithes on mint and dill and cumin, but you have abandoned the weightier things of the law: judgment and mercy and faith. These you ought to have done, while not omitting the others.
The only mention of tithing by Jesus, and it rebukes those who tithed with precision and failed at judgment, mercy and faith. The close of the verse is the disputed point: he says they ought not to omit either.
4Next, consider how great this man is, since the Patriarch Abraham even gave tithes to him from the principal things.
5And indeed, those who are from the sons of Levi, having received the priesthood, hold a commandment to take tithes from the people in accord with the law, that is, from their brothers, even though they also went forth from the loins of Abraham.
6But this man, whose lineage is not enumerated with them, received tithes from Abraham, and he blessed even the one who held the promises.
The argument that the tithe predates the law, since Abraham hands a tenth to Melchizedek. The passage is building a case about priesthood, not about contributions — which does not invalidate the historical datum it records.
6But I say this: Whoever sows sparingly will also reap sparingly. And whoever sows with blessings shall also reap from blessings:
7each one giving, just as he has determined in his heart, neither out of sadness, nor out of obligation. For God loves a cheerful giver.
The most explicit New Testament instruction about how to give, and it carries no figure. It speaks of a decision of the heart, rules out sadness and obligation, and uses the image of sowing to describe proportion.
34And neither was anyone among them in need. For as many as were owners of fields or houses, selling these, were bringing the proceeds of the things that they were selling,
35and were placing it before the feet of the Apostles. Then it was divided to each one, just as he had need.
The practice of the first community, which goes well beyond a percentage: property sold and distribution according to each person’s need. It works as a counterweight to both sides — it is not ten per cent, but neither is generosity optional.