A secularist recently complained that Christians haven’t ended poverty after two thousand years and that maybe it’s time we give the federal government a crack at it. I think he’s forgotten about the inefficiency of the federal “War on Poverty” that LBJ established in 1964, but I also have to admit that the church at-large does a terrible job of helping the poor, apart from a bit of short-term assistance or symbolic sympathy.
This topic has been much on our lips in my household for the past few weeks. My wife has been reading Francis Chan’s Crazy Love, which calls for radical communalism in faith communities, and I heard David Platt’s series of Union University chapel messages (in a list at http://www.uu.edu/audio/ ) about the seductiveness of materialism. Chan and Platt are coming from two different hermeneutical models, but their common point is the same: the U. S. church isn’t doing as much as it should.
Through the centuries, some leaders have declared that all Christians should become poor themselves in order to best help those who are in poverty. As Dallas Willard has observed, however, in “The Spirit of the Disciplines,” “Being poor is one of the poorest ways to help the poor.” Willard seems to believe that most persons who have the ability to make money but who become willfully poor are, perhaps, sinning because they have rejected their God-given opportunity to help not once but rather in an on-going way. The clear message of the totality of Scripture (and not just a few cherry-picked passages) is that all Christians, especially those who have means, are to help poor persons for the sake of the Gospel. Making a choice to “become” poor is, in fact, a luxury; most poor persons do not have such a choice.
In some ways, I think that trying to solve “poverty” is the epitome of absurdity. Poverty is a byproduct of the Fall (whether it is related to drought, political turmoil, chemical dependency, or illness and bad luck). As such, no matter how hard we may work at ending it, it will persist on this side of heaven. Even Christ Himself said, “You will always have the poor among you” (John 12:8). Why, then, should we even try to do anything about it? Isn’t it absurd to try to fix what is irreparable?
As I’ve been pondering this issue, though, I keep coming back to a rather famous quotation from Elie Wiesel; lamenting the dehumanization of the Jews by the Nazis, he implied that we do the same thing in our discussions of the Holocaust. Six million Jews were not killed by the Germans, Wiesel observed, rather “one Jew was killed by one German six million times.” I think that we could alter that with great effect in considering our calling to help poor persons: “Poverty will not be solved by Christians; rather, one poor person or family should be helped by one Christian or Christian fellowship at a time.”
What I mean is that we can have all of the grand visions for benevolence that we can conceive of, but until we stop seeing “poverty” or “the poor” as faceless nouns and begin seeing “poor” as an adjective applied to individual persons who bear the imago dei, we will never be effective in our outreach.
David Platt noted in one of his messages that we need to stop trying to help poor persons out of a sense of guilt but rather help them out of a sense of the Gospel. All of our efforts in this world are doomed to failure; only what is done for the glory of God will last. Like so many things, the wisdom of God is the foolishness of men. It is absurd, in human terms, to keep trying to eliminate poverty. It is wisdom and in fact true religion that honors Christ, to visit widows and orphans in their affliction and to serve poor persons in their time of need. It should be one of our primary endeavors as the people of God.
November 10th, 2009 | 4:04 pm | #1
Francis Chan will take out the trash, dude. He out-Pipers Piper.
November 10th, 2009 | 4:15 pm | #2
Just for the record:
I don’t like the way he says it, but Michael Horton makes the point that many of us measure the church by what it has done for me lately, and what’s happening now.
Rather we should measure the church by what Christ has done for us, and, in learning from the ungrateful servant and also from the Thessalonians, find a way to be generous because of what great things He has done.
BTW, I think the problem with the church is not a lack of generousity — we are wildly generous, perhaps the most generous generation ever in absolute dollars. The problem is that out definition of “generous” is “in absolute dollars” and not in “things I gave up for the sake of the Gospel and someone else”. Our generousity is sadly actuarial rather than personal — which is (I think) the point of your post, Gene.
it’s a great post.
November 10th, 2009 | 4:35 pm | #3
I highly recommend When Helping Hurts: How to Alleviate Poverty Without Hurting the Poor…and Yourself.
http://www.whenhelpinghurts.org/
There’s much more to say about Christians and alleviating poverty than can be covered in a blog comment, but one analogy comes to mind:
We will always have indwelling sin with us, but that does not make a war on sin to be absurd or foolish. It means we have to wage that war with wisdom, proper resources, a long-term perspective, and a personal commitment.
November 10th, 2009 | 4:36 pm | #4
The implication of Jesus’ words in John 12:8 are not that efforts to bless the poor are futile, but rather that his followers would have ample opportunity to do good to the poor after Jesus earthly ministry was complete. It was appropriate at that time to “waste” the expensive perfume on Jesus in anticipation of his burial. Selling the perfume and giving the proceeds to the poor could wait, because they would always be there.
This turns the “futility” argument on its head. We agree that we cannot solve poverty, but that doesn’t mean that we don’t do anything. Instead, it means we will always have work to do, until Jesus returns to establish his kingdom.
November 10th, 2009 | 5:06 pm | #5
Trying to solving or end poverty is like trying to solve or end crime, or wickedness, or greed, or lust. The “war against poverty” is a bad slogan, like the “war against drugs” or “war against terror”. You don’t conquer abstract ideas or behaviors. You conquer individuals. If all poverty ended tonight, I guarantee you that more people would become poor tomorrow. Even the Bible recognizes this, because the Bible is a realistic text that deals with practical reality and not pie-in-the-sky utopian dreams.
November 10th, 2009 | 5:27 pm | #6
Bruce, you are absolutely right about what Christ was saying in that passage. The opportunity to minister will never go away in this world, and it’s one of our primary . I have a feeling (and this goes to Anthony’s comment too) that this is one of the lessons of the Old Testament in the years of jubilee: poverty will always rear its ugly head even if we have periodic redistributions of wealth back to a set benchmark. No matter where we are in that arc of prosperity / poverty, we are to give with an open-hand and plan for what we do with our blessings / resources.
November 11th, 2009 | 10:57 am | #7
Solving poverty is not Christianity’s goal; that’s more Karl Marx’s line.
November 11th, 2009 | 2:01 pm | #8
>>but I also have to admit that the church at-large does a terrible job of helping the poor<<
I have heard scores of Christians say this for many years now. No one ever provides any evidence for it. Is there any statistical evidence that the church does a terrible job at helping the poor? Or is it anectdotal – based on what? A need for a scapegoat? Let me float this out there. I would bet that a lot of the help done by the church-at-large is done anonymously, wouldn't you agree? Christians (although there are exceptions, of course) aren't as likely as secular/political groups to toot their horn about their generosity. If my local church gives $2,000 for flood relief or something, they aren't going to share that with the local newspapers. A secular group or charitable institute will have no qualms about that.
All I'm saying is, where is the statistical evidence that the does a terrible job at helping the poor. Unless you know all about the finances of every church in America I just don't see how you can make that statement.
Then again, maybe I'm naive…:)
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact