Skip to main content

If you're using a church management system (ChMS), check first whether it offers online/recurring/text giving. That's what my church does. If the fees are competitive, then doing it through your ChMS means no duplicate data entry of each donation. Giving history is logged automatically and some systems allow members to log in to do donation-related things (e.g. view giving history, adjust recurring gifts) as well as other functions (e.g. adjust their directory info, communication preferences).

If you're not using a ChMS, then there are standalone options like Tithe.ly (which, it seems, has recently expanded to include ChMS features). Other suggestions for Vikki?

As you evaluate options, keep in mind that the pricing for Zoom is per HOST, and the login may not be shared within the church. Their website says "A Host is someone who schedules, starts and controls the settings in a meeting." And, from their legal terms of service, "A Host subscription may not be shared or used by anyone other than the individual assigned to be a Host." So unless you're going to have one person at every meeting, you'd be looking at multiple licenses.

Another option is meet.google.com. It's free. I use Meet. But I also get invited to a lot of Zoom meetings. There are some differences (Google it and you'll find articles comparing the two). Maybe Zoom's reliability is a wee bit better (in my experience) but they both do the job just fine IMHO. And they both have dial-in options for those without a computer.

[UPDATE: It looks like Google Meet might be just for churches that use G Suite. I can't quite tell if it's available outside of G Suite (and don't have a non-GSuite account to test with). Perhaps someone can try and report back.]

Wow, there's a lot of good stuff in there that I hadn't even thought about. Like singing being a risky activity! Makes sense, though.

Someone just drew my attention to this article, also from Alberta, that offers a sobering caution from a church that followed protocols at a church event. Even so, of the 41 who attended 24 were infected and 2 died. So sad.

'I would do anything for a do-over': Calgary church hopes others learn from their tragic COVID-19 experience (from CTV News)

Thanks for sharing that helpful perspective, Ken. For many like you, at-home is the way they normally experience worship. So important for us to remember that!

I've really enjoyed my church's new way of at-home worship, and have found it to be enriching in different ways. Sure, I look forward to worshipping in person again. But I certainly don't feel the need to push the envelope or take any unnecessary risks to do it soon.

I can imagine a lot of issues with that approach, and real potential for hurt relationships and harm to health. Do we pass the offering plate? Do we invite the kids up for the blessing? Will nursery be offered? What happens if someone is wanting to keep distance and someone else sits right behind them and sings down their neck? What if one person is wearing a mask and keeping distance and another church member comes right up to them to chat without a mask? Do we have coffee time after the service, and will the servers take any precautions? Etc.

Even assuming all members are trying to stay fully informed, it may be from different sources and some of it might conflict. The church in the article linked above agreed upon significant precautions, and still ended up with more than half the people attending their event getting the virus and two church members dying.

Communal worship is, well, communal. And like any community, we rely on many social norms that we typically take for granted. Right now, those norms are upended. Before opening for worship, it seems wise for church leaders to help establish what the new norms will be and communicate those so people know what to expect and can decide, for themselves, whether to participate. That's the topic of this thread.

Hi. Are you using a church management system (ChMS)? If so, I'd first look at what electronic donation systems integrate with it, and how their fees compare. The big advantage is then it's all tied together, no duplicate entry, etc (see my comment in this other thread).

If you aren't using a ChMS, then you might want to consider that first, or at the same time. Or at least consider a solution that you know can integrate to some of the main ChMS tools at whatever point you decide you need one. Hope this helps!

We want to hear from you.

Connect to The Network and add your own question, blog, resource, or job.

Add Your Post