Marvin Sapp, the well-known gospel singer and bishop, has found himself in the middle of a controversy after a video from the 109th Pentecostal Assemblies of the World (PAW) Convention in Baltimore, Maryland, resurfaced and started making waves.
The clip shows Sapp standing in front of a crowd of about 1,000 people, taking charge of an offering collection in a way that many online critics have found unsettling. He instructed the ushers to close the doors of the venue, preventing attendees from leaving, and then made a direct appeal for donations. His goal? To raise $40,000 on the spot, with each person contributing at least $20 as a “seed.”
Pastor Marvin Sapp Has Not Been Arrested and Has Never Been to Jail, Despite Trending Google Queries
During his address, Sapp emphasized the idea that “giving is worship,” reinforcing the spiritual significance of financial contributions. He passionately encouraged the congregation to participate, making it clear that he expected everyone to contribute. While fundraising in churches is nothing new, the way this moment played out didn’t sit well with many people. Social media quickly erupted with backlash, with critics accusing Sapp of using manipulation and coercion rather than voluntary generosity. Some people felt that shutting the doors to encourage donations created a high-pressure environment that blurred the lines between encouragement and force.
As the criticism spread across various platforms, Sapp took to Facebook to address the concerns and explain his perspective. He defended his actions by stating that his intention was never to force or pressure anyone but to create a “safe, focused, and reverent environment” during the offering. He referenced a passage from the Bible—1 Chronicles 29—which describes King David rallying the people of Israel to give generously for the construction of the temple. According to Sapp, this was a biblical precedent for leaders encouraging their congregations to support a collective financial goal.
Sapp further elaborated on the necessity of such fundraising efforts, particularly in large religious conferences and church settings. He pointed out that events like the PAW Convention operate on strict budgets and require financial support to function. As a bishop and leader, part of his role is to ensure that these financial needs are met, and he views stewardship—both personal and collective—as an essential aspect of ministry. He was adamant that this was not about manipulation but about fulfilling the obligations that come with hosting major religious gatherings.
Despite his explanation, the backlash hasn’t entirely subsided. The conversation has since expanded beyond Sapp himself, sparking a broader debate about how churches handle financial appeals. While some people defend Sapp’s approach, arguing that tithes and offerings are standard parts of Christian worship, others feel that the line between encouragement and pressure needs to be drawn more clearly. Many critics believe that religious leaders should be careful not to create situations where congregants feel trapped into giving, whether intentionally or not.
This incident has also raised questions about the transparency of church finances, especially in high-profile ministries and large-scale religious events. People want to know where their money is going and how it’s being used. While many churches are upfront about their budgets and financial needs, others have faced scrutiny for opaque spending and extravagant lifestyles. Sapp, for his part, has built a career not only as a gospel artist but as a respected pastor and bishop. However, the optics of this particular fundraising effort have undoubtedly put him in a tough spot.
The viral nature of this controversy shows how quickly public perception can shift, especially in the era of social media. A single video clip can spark a firestorm of opinions, and the court of public opinion often moves faster than the facts. In Sapp’s case, the discussion has gone beyond just this one moment in Baltimore—it has become a reflection of larger concerns about money, faith, and leadership in religious spaces. Whether his explanation will be enough to quiet the criticism remains to be seen, but one thing is clear: when it comes to church fundraising, the conversation is far from over.
