I hope we acknowledge wealth when responding to poverty. While poverty is a complex issue, the church should acknowledge that the improper use of wealth is at least partly responsible. This is problematic. Confronting materially wealthy people may not be a great response. The idea of relational poverty presented by Teresa of Calcutta demonstrates that hoarding wealth may be symptomatic of a larger problem.[1] It may be more productive to minister to the wealthy, which includes teaching about proper uses of wealth, rather than condemning them.
Obviously, we
should not limit our ministry to only wealthy people. Ministry for the poor is necessary and contextual. Ministry is not as simple as telling people
to “get a job.” Psychological poverty
demonstrates that mental health issues may be present as a person becomes
increasingly marginalized. Social
poverty notes that the connections necessary to find productive employment may
be unavailable. Inadequate distribution
of materials means that employment might not be available at all, or, when it
is, may not be fairly remunerated.[2]
When addressing
poverty we cannot allow ourselves to get stuck in one system forever and amen. The church needs to allow for an evolving
response to poverty. Situations
change. While scripture does not include
a single means of responding to poverty, it does teach that some sort of
response necessary. Scripture teaches
that possessions have the potential of shaping how we relate with God. It also teaches that poverty is often the result
of someone sinning against neighbour or God.
Therefore, a response to poverty is evidence of a person’s faith. Further, failure to respond to poverty should
be dealt with like any other sin – through repentance.[3] Responding to poverty is imitation of
Jesus. Scripture shows that Jesus stood
along with the poor. Despite not providing
a specific method of how to share with people in need, scripture does tell
people to do so. Scripture shows that
poverty is bad without demonstrating that affluence is good. In light of this, the church must
respond. This is particularly urgent in
areas of the church with the most wealth.
The church’s
response to poverty should take sin seriously.
Wealth is not necessarily evil, but sin does prevent wealth from being
good. Taking sin seriously allows the
church to see that ownership is not sinful when the possessions are shared to
help others live. In this sense, wealth
is a servant. People are stewards to
care for creation, so the church must realize that all property ultimately
belongs to God. Therefore, anyone who
has excess property is responsible to God for sharing it. Almsgiving is a method of sharing.
The church’s
response to poverty should not stop with giving alms. We need to combine almsgiving with our
advocacy for social justice, and vice versa. Almsgiving effectively meets immediate needs,
but does not prevent these needs from forming. Transformative justice is an important
co-response, because it reflects the church’s acknowledgment of the harmfulness
of sin and the powerfulness of God. A
significant element of the church’s response to poverty within the context of
transformative justice will be serving in the role of prophet. The church’s response to poverty, then, must
include wisdom. A prophet must avoid
becoming deeply ingrained in a cultural system, while also being closely
connected with the culture so that he or she can deliver a relevant message. As a prophet, the church should also consider
what is the most effective means of interacting with the government. The church should understand the government
as a God-ordained agent. This means that
the church’s response to poverty may include helping the government to fulfil
its role rather than always condemning it.
It is impossible
to worship YHWH without responding to poverty.
Responding to poverty shows God that we obey His rule and believe it
worthy of respect, demonstrates that we do not want money as an idol, allows
the Sabbath to fulfill to remind people of God’s role in our earning of the
resources we have, and demonstrates direct service to Christ by serving those
He identifies with. The church’s
response to poverty is also going to be in the context of evangelism. Responding to poverty will replace the god of
money with YHWH. Evangelism presents
Jesus as Lord. When people accept Jesus
as Lord, repentance will follow and will result in transforming unjust personal
practices and structural systems.
Evangelism will also demonstrate what the fulfilled Kingdom will be
like. One of its characteristics is an
absence of poverty.
---
Short Note:
Please refer
again to my bibliography. These folks shaped my thoughts in obvious
ways that are noted and likely in subtle ways that I don’t realize and can’t identify. While all of the books and articles are
useful, I would especially like to point you to Dewi Hughes’ Power and Poverty and Justo L.
Gonzalez’s Faith and Wealth.
---
Not Quite So
Short a Note:
Over the last
couple of months, I proposed a series of ideas to consider when deciding how to
respond to poverty. My response to these
proposals is to ask some new questions.
- Which response to poverty is best for a particular context?
- What is our end goal in responding to poverty?
- Does our response encapsulate both the physical and spiritual needs of the person or group?
- Does our response acknowledge that sin is part of the cause of the poverty to which we are responding?
- Does
our response include an understanding of what the biblical command of justice
is?
No comments:
Post a Comment