As promised, I'm going to revisit some of my recent topics, respond to/include comments and add some additional ideas and thoughts to the mix. Feedback and comments are always great, even when you don't agree with me. In fact, those are the comments that keep me thinking.
The Church and the Poor
What I believe needs to happen within churches in America is a renewed vision of what it means to serve, and be served by, the poor. I wrote earlier that I think the local church, not parachurch organizations, should be the focal point. What I meant by this was not that parachurch organizations should cease to exist, but that they shouldn't be the primary way in which individual Christians give money to in order to 'be involved'. Organizations like World Relief, World Vision, Samaritans Purse and others do great work and are filling a void in the Church, but I don't believe that they should be the primary avenue for Christians to be involved with. The local church, which understands, or should, local needs the best should be where individual Christians give their money and serve through. Ariah mentioned wanting to see more people doing personal, local ministry, like sharing food and clothing with those in need in their neighborhood. YES! This, I believe, is the place to start. Instead of using a corporation model of top-down parachurch, local church and individual, we should be starting with the individual, building to the local church and then on to parachurch organizations.
This is what I think it should look like:
Christians should know their neighbors and neighborhoods. We should be in touch with the people and needs around us and help meet them daily. Let's revitalize the hospitality that was known of the early church and invite people into our homes for drink, food and a good time. Local churches, then, should do the same, meeting the bigger needs through slightly larger means. Soup kitchens/meals, counseling, referrals to professional programs/agencies that might be able to help, etc. Monies from Christians should be funneled here, to the local church. Parachurch organizations should then exist to help connect local churches to one another, not to do the work themselves. When a church in Way-far-awaysville cannot meet their local needs themselves they can network to another church in Not-even-closeville to get the extra assistance they need. This way people from the church in Not-even-closeville can travel to Way-far-awaysville and assist them directly, not just funnel money through the parachurch organization. This parachurch organization can then help not only network, but train people all over through what has been learned in other places. The parachurch organization should be a support, not a direct line of service. Direct lines of service should come from individuals, not corporations.
This would take a HUGE change in the way we do things and make us question and work through a lot of cultural norms and values, but I think it is closer to where Jesus would have us.
Liberation Theology
Speaking of where Jesus would have us, I believe it is primarily with the poor. Why? Because the Bible talks about caring for the poor and oppressed more than any other topic. God's actions throughout the Bible and words to his people are primarily about loving God and caring for one another, particularly those who are poor an oppressed. Some would say that liberation theology would tend towards the violent overthrow of democracy in favor of authoritarianism. I would say that while this has happened in history, what concerns me more is the Church's tendency to use violence to convert the 'infidel masses' and subdue territory in the name of God. Violence has followed the Church everywhere, many times stemming from her. However, liberation theology doesn't call for the violent overthrow of governments, it calls for solidarity with and service to the poor. (Yes, some liberation theologians are going to call for violent overtakes, but some theologians in ANY circle are going to call for ridiculous extreme things). Liberation theology says that God is specially concerned with the poor, in a similar way that Jesus said he came for the sick, not the healthy. People surrounded by poverty are more open to assistance than the rich man in a mansion with a Ferrari and everything he wants. Sure, God calls that man as well and is with him, but God is with those who are downtrodden here on earth in a special way.
Looking forward to the comments. Facebook, here is the blog link.
peace,
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Devin, some excellent inspiring thoughts.
I believe that changes in the local church, like you mentioned, will only come when individuals or families are convicted themselves to open up their homes and lives first and foremost to the poor. Showing up to a soup kitchen at a local church is wonderful. Donating clothes that you no longer wear is a great thing as well. But are these things really inspiring us to walk and live as Jesus did? Are our lives really helping others, or are we putting in our time so we can feel "warm fuzzies" and say we were impacting the lives of the poor?
My thoughts derive from frustrations that I feel mostly towards Christians and the conversations that I've had with many church members about my family's decision to be involved in foster care.
My husband Justin and I have been fostering for only 6 months now and have had the opportunity to take in two wonderful little boys- Josiah (who was left in our care since birth and is now 6 months old) and Lesley ( a 20 month old who was taken away for abuse who was with us for 8 weeks this summer.) We as a family have felt so passionate about fostering children in our own area, and don't understand why more Christians do not feel the need to be involved in this system where there is such a need for loving homes for abused and neglected children. I have learned that through fostering, ministering to kids is only a very small part of HUGE plan that God has enabled us to be a part of. There are case workers, lawyers, people that transport the kids to visitation, parents, teachers, and families of these kids that we get to minister to! For everyone that comes in our door, we get to talk about how much God has blessed us. We write letters and send pictures to the parents and family members SHOWING them what God's love looks like. And everyday when I wake up, I know that my day isn't going to be about me- it's going to be about "the least of these."
Unfortunately, most Christians that I talk to all have the same thing to say about fostering: "I've always wanted to do it, but I don't think I could handle it when the child was taken away." Oh how my heart breaks for them when I see how much of a blessing they are missing out on when they care more about their own feelings than the feelings of others! And I think, how much closer can we get to knowing the heart of God than when we ourselves have to lose a son?
All this to say that, yes, we need to practice more hospitality in our homes. We need to get comfortable with being uncomfortable when it comes to serving others. And I wish the local church would inspire us more to leave our comfort zones and not just pass the plate to give to people we will never individually impact.
-Megan (Robin's sister) ;o)
nice. i would add that it would be great if people started by going to churches that are actually in their neighborhood, instead of driving 40 minutes every Sunday morning to get there. then you can be really active in your neighborhood and ministry, and what you described was a unity so that we can still be connected with the church in "way far aways-ville" and also in our communities as well.
Right on, Mel. Right on. I can't tell you how frustrating it is to talk to SO many seminary students who feel the need to drive an hour to church on Sundays "to be in a church that fits them." More often than not, my response to this sort of mentality is "what a load of crap." This response is not always warranted, because I know plenty of people who are heavily involved in their church and the community where their church is located, even though they live 45 minutes away. These people, however, are a miniscule minority. The vast majority give into the mentality that "I must find a church that meets my needs and lets me serve how I want to serve."
This mentality is fed by the American church model, a model that has 1) isolated church into little blocks of time on Sunday mornings, and 2) told Christians that you know you are serving the Lord when it comes easily and you feel comfortable. Like Devin mentioned, making the local church the focal point would require huge changes that may fly in the face of cultural norms. The American church model, as it presently exists, is one of those norms that needs changing.
The practical side of me, however, pauses when I read Devin's beautiful idealism. Can these changes take place from the ground-up, as sort of a grass-roots movement? Or can these changes only take place if something systemic changes that allows for a non-American (and non-consumerist) way of life to generate funds and resources? I'm not sure, but it needs to be thought through and prayed over carefully and diligently.
Great thoughts, all.
2 things: 1st a confession, I went to church that was about 35 minutes away from where I live today. Go ahead and burn me with the rest of the Pharisees. I succumbed to overwhelming nature of finding a church and didn't make the effort today, so we visited Joel's home church. However, I think God wanted us there to hear what was going on and have some key conversations which followed up on what we've been talking about. 2nd, Check out my penance, in blog form...I really want to hear if you guys have any thoughts!!
There are a lot of problems with the argument that the spread of liberalism is just as bad or even worse than the consequences of something Liberation theology, which I think most scholars would agree is inextricably linked to Communism and Socialism.
One point is that none of us were alive the last time the church to anything violent at all, especially in the name of conversion of "infidels." When's the last time the church did ANYTHING to convert infidels, violent or otherwise. Isn't that the broader point of your whole blog? Yes, the Crusades, western colonialization, and slavery had some terrible consequences and resulted in a lot of death, but the most recent of those sins was the 19th century. Time for an updated criticism.
Second, the total number of deaths attributed to communism in THIS century vastly, exponentially outnumbers anything the Holy Wars, the Spanish Inquisition, Native Americans, and Slavery combined. The "Black Book of Communism" (written by several scholars) puts the number at 94 million, including deaths related to genocide, executions, and man-made famine.
Jesus is all about solidarity with the poor. I doubt very much that he wants his followers to pursue any form of solidarity that leads to exponentially more poor people and death.
This blog post and the subsequent comments sparked a lot of fun thoughts. I started writing, and then realized it was an entire blog post in itself. And since I don't really want to start a blog, I did a cliff notes version. When the cliff notes version reached a page, I decided that it's clearly been too long since I've been in school, and I need to be respectful of the readers time and patience.
So there's really only one point I'm going make, and here it is:
Eric, your comment was like picking up an intellectual chainsaw when the operation called for a scalpel. Jeez Lousie...
Haha, I'll take that as a compliment, though I couldn't disagree more strongly that the line between God's will and evil on the issue of economic systems is so fine.
Post a Comment