Front Porch Republic

A friend recommended a blog, Front Porch Republic, that is full of interesting articles. One of the themes replayed throughout several articles is that our current economic situation is based on flawed virtues. Our society values consumption over thrift, economy, and conservation. Although this doesn't directly relate to poverty, I think some of these ideas form the base for why Christianity is so reluctant to grapple with worldwide poverty. We have become such a consumer-based society that even the church has become focused on consumption, rather than giving to the poor. A small excerpt from a Front Porch Republic article to whet your appetite for more:

"If the health of our economy is predicated on the denial of certain virtues, something is seriously amiss. If the ideal of perpetual economic growth requires a perpetually frenzied consumerism, it is time to consider a different indicator of economic health. President Obama’s stimulus package is clearly based on this false ideal of perpetual economic growth. This ideal is embraced by the leaders of both political parties, even as the Republicans reject the specific means to that end. As the slurry of dollars begins to wash over us, many Americans are looking for a new direction. A return to the virtues of self-control and thrift would signal something really radical. So would a return to the idea of sustainability, a return to the belief that conserving for future generations is our first duty, and a recognition that putting aside idols is the first step to wisdom."

Mark T. Mitchel, http://www.frontporchrepublic.com/?p=1294

The Second Commandment

"We shall find that we are more frequently influenced by the desire of getting rid of the importunities of a disgusting object than by the pleasure of relieving it. We wish that it had not fallen our way, rather than rejoice in the opportunity given us of assisting a fellow creature."
-Thomas Robert Malthus, An Essay on the Principle of Population, as reprinted in The Fear of Beggars: Stewardship and Poverty in Christian Ethics, by Kelly S. Johnson

How easy it is to see a homeless person and walk away quickly so that we can forget the sight and avoid having to interact with them. If we as Christians had no obligation to show love to others that might be an appropriate response. However, the God-given command to love our neighbors creates a moral obligation on us that demands that we do more than worry about self-preservation or mental happiness.

There are at least two passages of Scripture that indicate that turning away from beggars and the poor is not an appropriate response for us as Christians to have. Jesus tells us in Matthew 22:39 and Mark 12: 31 that we must love our neighbors as ourselves. This commandment is second only to a commandment to love God, and every other commandment comes out of these two. See Matthew 22: 35-40, Mark 12:28-31. As long as the poor and homeless are our neighbors, then we as Christians are obligated to show them love.

The question that must be answered then is: Are the poor and homeless our neighbors? Most of us would readily agree that under Scriptural principles, the poor and homeless should be considered our neighbors. Our basis for this answer is the parable of the Good Samaritan found in Luke 10. Scripture even indicates for us that the parable is intended to help us understand what Jesus means when He says we are to love our "neighbors." In this passage, He has been speaking with a lawyer who was trying to test Him. The lawyer repeats Jesus' position that the two greatest commandments are to love God and love our neighbors, and then "desiring to justify himself" he asks who is his neighbor. It is in direct answer to this question that Jesus' tells the parable.

We all know the answer that Jesus gives: even strangers that we meet along the road are our neighbors, even if that stranger would despise us under other circumstances. See John Darby's Synopsis of the New Testament, http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/DarbysSynopsisofNewTestament/dby.cgi?book=lu&chapter=010, and Matthew Henry's Completel Commentary on the Whole Bible, http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/MatthewHenryComplete/mhc-com.cgi?book=lu&chapter=010.

We all know that we should show love to the poor and homeless rather than turning away as quickly as possible. Yet how often, we act like the lawyer in this case, desiring to justify our actions, use excuses to turn away, trying to forget what we have seen as quickly as possible.

Beggars in Austin

I started reading a book entitled The Fear of Beggars by Kelly S. Johnson while I was visiting Austin, Texas for a week. The timing was incredible, because Austin has beggars on every street corner. The small town that I'm from doesn't have an obvious problem with beggars or homeless people, so I am usually fairly oblivious to the plight of those without a home or support. However, in Austin I encountered people asking for money, food or just hovering on a street corner looking miserable everywhere I went. Through that sudden change of environment and the insight of Kelly Johnson, I was able to examine my response to the poverty around me.



Honestly, I wasn't pleased with what I discovered about myself. My heart is full of fear of beggars - fear that they will be violent, fear that if I do give money that the money will be used to feed an addiction, fear that if I give food that the money they would have had to spend on food will be used to feed an addiction, fear that if I give to one beggar thirty more will appear, and even a fear of the general dirtiness of someone who has been living on the street.



Am I alone in having this response? I don't think so. Few people I have observed ever appear to enjoy interacting with beggars, much less rushing out to meet the nearest street dweller. Usually we all walk past with eyes averted, straining to look so absorbed in a conversation so that maybe we won't be bothered, won't be stopped - because of that fear that once we're stopped there is no resisting some unsatisfactory outcome.



This brings us to the question of is this response good. I have to admit that at this point, I have no answers. Even with the desire to show love to all of God's people, figuring out the right way to show love to homeless people is hard. As a female, I have concerns about physical safety that are hard to ignore. Even without those concerns, no easy answer appears. Should we give money? Should we give food? Should we help them find a shelter? Should we offer a ride? Should we simply give a tract and say "God loves you"? Ultimately, there are no easy answers to these questions. Recognizing that we are afraid of beggars and homeless people is at least a place to start though.

Domesticating the Sacred

"We have domesticated the sacred by stripping it of authoritative wisdom and by looking to it only to make us happy....Religious leaders want the churches to play a heroic role in our society - challenging people to make deep commitments, inspiring them to great deeds of service, encouraging them to be concerned for the poor, and liberating us from the excesses of greed and materialism. In reality, religious faith prompts few people in any of these directions....The way in which our faith influences our economic behavior is to an important degree a function of the economic system itself, and more broadly, a reflection of the cultural norms that govern Middle America. Thus, religious commitment often makes only a marginal difference to the economic behavior of individual believers."

-Robert Wuthnow, God and Mammon in America, p. 6-7.



How sad that the church should be viewed in such a light and yet how accurate that description is. Before anyone jumps up to defend the American church, let's think carefully about several examples of a deeply committed life to see if many modern churchgoers that you and I know are following in that pattern:



The early church sold property owned by individuals to pay for the needs of everyone. Acts 2:44-45; 4:32, 34-37. Among the early church there was no destitute poverty as the church helped each member as a need arose. Simon J. Kistemaker, New Testament Commentary: Exposition of the Acts of the Apostles, p. 112. The early church did not claim ownership of possessions individually, but instead viewed property as belonging to the church. Kistemaker, p. 173. This sharing of property was voluntary and done from a desire to follow biblical commands to help the poor. Kistemaker, p. 173. The book of Acts even gives a specific example of Barnabus selling a plot of land and giving the money to the Apostles to use as they saw fit. Acts 4:36-37.



Mother Teresa began a life of service at the age of 18. At the age of 36 she left her home in a convent and went to live in slums in India to care for the poor. She started a mission called Missionaries of Charity to help people rejected by society because of disease, poverty and deformity. Throughout the time she worked she had two heart attacks, pneumonia, a broken collar bone, malaria, and other heart problems. She died at the age of 87, having given a lifetime of service to the poor.



Brother Lawrence lived in a monastery as a lay brother. He spent his lifetime working in the kitchen of the monastery and repairing sandals, yet he wrote letters that were compiled into a profound work entitled The Practice of the Presence of God.

The Church v. Individual Christians

Some people that I have spoken with say that a call for reform among churches is unneeded as most denominations affirm a commitment to ending poverty. The people often point to programs like the Southern Baptist's Annie Armstrong Easter Offerings and Lottie Moon Christmas offerings, that are geared towards foreign missions, as examples of the commitment of individual churches to the poor. I do not doubt that collectively Christianity does have a strong commitment to aiding the poor. In fact, the more research I have done on this topic, the more I have discovered just how much churches, Christian denominations and other religious organizations act against poverty. However, my main concern is that while religious institutions are concerned with helping fight against poverty, individual Christians are not.

Others may object to the claim that individual Christians generally are not concerned with the poor. The donations of time and money given to the Salvation Army, local churches, soup kitchens and similar organizations provides evidence that some individuals are acting on their Christian duty to aid those in need. However, donations at Christmas, Easter and in the wake of a natural disaster still leave something out of the picture. Christians are not called to make special love gifts every few months to help the poor. They are called to have a lifestyle of service. SUV's, six foot wide flat screen televisions, designer clothing, $150 tennis shoes, and million dollar houses do not seem to lend themselve to a lifestyle of service. (Please understand - I am not saying these things are bad or that people who own these types of things cannot serve others. My criticism is of the mindset that these things are necessary to be comfortable and of the mindset that comfort ought to be one of our goals.)

The question we must ask ourselves is: "Does my faith in God affect what I buy? Does it affect how I spend money? Does it affect my priorities in life? Does it affect my economic behavior more than advertisements and American culture?" Most of us, if we answered honestly, would have to say that usually our consumer choices are driven by materialistic desire and not by a commitment to God. We may give lip service to the fact that we have prayed about buying a big ticket item, however often times we don't even realize that many items we view as essential are in fact luxuries. Our American society has taught us that new furniture, beautiful cars and tailored clothing are needed in order to conside our lives successful and happy. How odd that Scripture makes no such suggestions for achieving personal happiness.

Although we all may agree that God cares for the poor and Christians should demonstrate God's love to the poor, we are sadly in need of some consideration of how that should affect us everyday. This is not a call for us to dispose of all of our material goods. But it is a call for us to reexamine the importance we attach to our material goods and to see the subtle ways that our society has convinced us that we need so much to be content.






(Admission - I am clearly as guilty of having a mindset of materialism as anyone else. Please do not let my hypocrisy stand in the way of recognizing truth. My hope is that my awakening recognition of my own double-standard in life will help me to move away from that hypocrisy.)

This is a random article that I ran across that I thought was interesting. Figured I'd share it.


The Bible or Bob Geldof? Britain can't decide
Ruth Gledhill, Religion Correspondent of The Times
March 3, 2008

In a poll into public perceptions of the Bible, researchers found that 27 per cent of those questioned mistook a verse from the Book of Proverbs for a speech by the activist and former pop star. A further 20 per cent thought the verse came from a report by former United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan.....

Paul Woolley, director of Theos said: "There are clearly some important challenges to the Christian community contained within these findings. The fact that people confuse the Bible and a speech by Bob Geldof is intriguing, but the fact that 42 per cent of people disagree that the Bible champions the cause of the poor and marginalised demonstrates a significant degree of biblical illiteracy and the need for the Christian community to model the emphases of its sacred text more clearly."

Read the rest of the article at:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article3476777.ece

Other authors and their take on poverty and religion

This is an excerpt from a book that poses some very intriguing questions. I have not yet read the whole book, merely an excerpt so I am not necessarily recommending it. I will also state for the record that my view of Salvation (and probably my view of several different theological issues) varies greatly from Mr. Wuthnow's view. However, the book seems like it is worth the effort to investigate to find out some of the issues affecting the Church's passion for the poor.


What Religious People Think About the Poor
by Robert Wuthnow

In any case, it's clear that religious commitment, at least certain kinds of it, does encourage people to think more about their responsibility to the poor. If two-thirds of all church members -- and three-fourths of all the people who attend religious services every week -- think a fair amount about their responsibility to the poor, this represents a lot of people. The fact that at least half of regular churchgoers have heard a sermon on stewardship in the past year, and that nearly this many are involved in a fellowship group or Sunday school class, is all the more significant, for such involvement appears to stimulate thinking about the poor.

If this is the case, then an outsider to American society might well be surprised by the realities of everyday life. Knowing that religious leaders have often pressed for social action on behalf of the poor, this outsider might be surprised to find that there was virtually none. Knowing that religious people have mobilized in huge numbers to protest in front of abortion clinics, and that large religious movements have emerged to fight pornography and to turn back court rulings against school prayer, she would undoubtedly be surprised to learn that religious movements oriented toward passing legislation to help the poor have foundered for want of public support.

Read the rest of the article at:
http://www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=492