A church recently collected ₦960,000 for a member who was gravely ill. His hospital expenses amounted to ₦210,000, a sum that he and his family were unable to pay.
During a service, the pastor proclaimed, "Our brother is in the hospital and requires ₦210,000. Let us extend our support to him."
Members began to contribute generously, and by the conclusion of the service, the total donations reached ₦960,000.
Subsequently, the pastor tallied the contributions, provided ₦210,000 to the sick man’s brother for the hospital payment, and deposited the remaining ₦750,000 into the church's account.
The issue arose when the family expressed their dissatisfaction.
They contended that all the funds should have been allocated to their brother, rather than just the hospital expenses, as the donations were made out of compassion to assist him with his recovery, medications, and daily necessities.
The pastor, on the other hand, maintained that he only solicited ₦210,000, and once that goal was achieved, any surplus funds were the property of the church.
The current state of this situation is...
What are your thoughts on this matter?
Who do you believe is justified in this scenario?
