Why Open Source Software is like Church Coffee Beans

A Church article with View Comments posted 29 January 2008.
Tags: , , ,

This article is #2 in the 8 part series Freedom Software and the Church

No organization in the United States has a stronger incentive for using open source software than the Church.

“The Church is always asking for money!” – Everyone.

In a way, that’s right; the church is always in need of money. Money for ministry, outreach, and evangelism. Money for books and materials. Money to pay salaries and maintain facilities. Money to pay for seminary education (I had to slide that one in!). And so on. Sure, there are preachers who extort money from their parishioners, flying around in private jets and all that, but every church I’ve ever been in has a budget to meet. Those budgets are met with contributions offered to God, and church staffs have a responsibility to manage that money wisely.

Church budgets are zero-sum. Money spent on administrative overhead (e.g. computers and software) can’t be spent on education, mission, and ministry. The most compelling argument for open source software in churches, therefore, is that open source is Free.

But, churches are non-profit institutions. Instead of paying hundreds of dollars for Microsoft Office, you might get a Microsoft Charity License for $50. Many vendors are now providing this service for non-profit organizations. This drives the cost of software acquisition down, and proprietary software begins to look attractive again. Oh, how the waters are muddied!

I’m not going to lie: it’s hard to argue against cheap MS Office. But when you examine the total cost of ownership of both proprietary and open source software, you also have to consider the hidden costs. Maintaining up-to-date records of all of your software licenses, ensuring that your church’s license keys aren’t borrowed and used for other purposes, etc. can drive up the cost of proprietary software dramatically. Nevertheless, it may still seem less expensive to choose proprietary software.

So if church budgets are tightly constrained, and managing money wisely is a matter of responsibility to God, then why pay more for software? The same reason people buy Fair Trade Coffee. Not only does it taste better, but by buying fair trade coffee you support sustainable agriculture and economic justice.

Churches (in particular) have already embraced the responsibility of paying slightly more for a better quality product that is better aligned with their goal of justice for the world. Open source software is better quality and more consonant with Christian principles than proprietary software. If the principles of open source are more fair and just, the church ought to give it priority over proprietary software, even if it costs us slightly more to implement.

I plan to write further on the relationship between Christian doctrine and open source software. In the meantime, thank you to the many readers and commenters of my first article in this series.

More articles in the series Freedom Software and the Church:

You might also enjoy:

  1. Three steps to Open Source in the Church
  2. The Christian Ethos of Freedom Software
  3. “Freedom Software” versus “Free Software”
  4. Starting Point for Freedom Software in the Church
  5. Freedom Software vs. Freedomware?

  • I don't think that the cost of open source software can even be the main "selling" point. It misses the point entirely.

    Lots of proprietary software is available at no cost. Take Internet Explorer for example.

    What should make free (as in freedom) software appealing to Christian audiences is exactly what you suggest towards the end of your post - freedom. No matter how much proprietary software costs, it will never respect a person's freedom the way that free software does. The psychosocial harm of non-free software (sharing with your neighbour is against the law) contrasted with the social good which is the focus of free software (sharing with your neighbour is encourage) is what's at the core of the appeal to a Church audience, I think.

    Though, I certainly need to give this more thought. I'm interested to see how you further the relationship.

    ps I think the term 'free software' makes a lot more sense than 'open source' in this light... open source is just the method of software development, and there's no reason a religious organization should really be biased towards one method of development over another. Free software, on the other hand, focuses on the freedoms that are respected, which I think is more relevant from a religious perspective.
blog comments powered by Disqus