Weekend Reading: What in Christ's Name Should We do about the World?

On Monday, I am going to tie in some of the discussion about what Christians should do about Africa to some other thoughts I have been working on regarding the church, the kingdom and mission. I mean it to be an extension of my current ruminations on the church as "Heaven Here Now".

In the meantime, let me offer a letter, some links and a series of articles on short term missions as "Weekend Reading".

First the letter.  I wrote to a friend who has been involved pretty deeply in the discussions about the ONE Campaign, G8 and the larger discussion about Africa. He asked me to read this. I asked him to read this. At the same time, I read this and this.  My friend asked me to clarify some of my view on a Christian response to Africa, ONE and the G8 gatherings.  The truth be told I am not as clear on all of ins and outs as many others.  But this is what I wrote...

Dear _____

I am not an economist, obviously, but the perspective that I am trying to encourage on my blog is that of Christian involvement in the African crisis.  For me that means encouraging things like ONE and makepovertyhistory.org when I see that our partners like World Vision are also involved and encouraging Christians to speak to governments about both their responsibilities and limitations.

I also want the Church to recognize that the crises of the world are the responsibility and opportunity for the church to become more directly involved, more personally aware and more sacrificially invested in developing the kinds of relationships and partnerships that will be empowering to the Africans.

In essence, I want to work for as wholistic and realistic a set of solutions as possible.  And while that may mean that the government leaders need to do something about debt relief, trade reform and increasing aid for things like vaccinations, most of the genuine transformation of the nation is more likely going to come as groups of Christians empower Africans to solve their own problems.   

I also think that it will probably take the "sword" of nations (ala Rom 13) combined with the good news offered by the body of Christ to touch the hearts and change the ways of the "rich Africans" (and rich Americans and other westerners, frankly) to bring change.

When I see a Malawian child, I am honored to have experienced partners like World Vision and local Malawians lead the way in teaching us how to respond.

As a pastor, I want to encourage more and more Christian economists, aid workers, government leaders (and rock stars, too) to live out thier vocations by bringing genuine solutions to these areas of need.  I will also keep trying to encourage the church to look beyond our own personal needs and keep ask what we should do in response.

To that end, I will pray and encourage Christians to work with and hold accountable government leaders and teach our children through our VBS of God's concern for the poor.

Tod

Now the Links. This is a very interesting and worthwhile approach to both understanding and doing something about poverty. See ipaid.org.  Here is some reading about what it's like to live on one dollar a day. (HT: Kenny Tomlin)

Finally, the articles. CT has a fascinating and challenging set of articles on some studies that have questioned the long-term benefits of short-term missions.  For those like me who would like the solution to the world's needs to be "government-free" these articles remind me to be more strategic, intentional and sober about the church's involvement in places of need.

I am also updating my reading lists on the blog. If anyone wants to read along with me and make comments, feel free.

Comments

[apostle john]

Enjoyed finding your blog! Great reading.

[Tim C]

I absolutely agree with Tod's statements about individual Christians and Christian Churches being the ones who should take the lead in combating African poverty and illness, as well as caring for the poor in every country.

But in the subtext and sometimes in the text of the articles criticizing the One campaign, there seems to be the idea that calling on Government to be responsible for debt relief or aid is somehow inappropriate...as the article linked to from Wednesday's post put it "The Bible never asks individuals and churches to appeal to government to help those in need..."

I think that assumption is worth being hashed out more but before I do, let me preface it with what I do think is wisdom on the subject:

"When a social problem emerges, the first question should NOT be what can the government do? The first question should be 'What institutions have primary responsibilities for and are best able to correct this problem?

[He previous listed the institutions of family, church and religious groups, business, and then government]

Many times there will be overlapping responsibilities. In those cases it is crucial that several institutions support each other's roles. Frequently non-governmental institutions will be more effective at less cost. We must reject liberals automatic preference for governmental solutions...Libertarianism however, is not the answer...Government must play a role in alleviating poverty, but not the only role, and in many cases, not the primary role..." - Ron Sider

And it seemed to me, that although without question the Bible is loud and clear about God's people and their role in caring for the poor, it also does have several examples of God moving individual believers to call on governments to better care for the poor as well:

"This is what the LORD says: 'Go down to the palace of the king of Judah and proclaim this message there... 'Does it make you a king to have more and more cedar? Did not your father have food and drink? He did what was right and just, so all went well with him. He defended the cause of the poor and needy, and so all went well. Is that not what it means to know me?' declares the LORD."
- Jeremiah 22

Granted, this was a word to the theocracy of Israel...but
God called Daniel to say a very similar rebuke -- this time to the head of the Babylonian government:

"Therefore, O king, let my advice be acceptable to you; break off your sins by being
righteous, and your iniquities by showing mercy to the poor. Perhaps there may be a lengthening of your prosperity."

Daniel 4:27

Another example of an individual being called to rebuke a non-Jewish King over his care for the poor comes at the end of Proverbs, where King Lemuel recounts the words that God said to him -- via his Mom of all people.

(From what I've read almost nobody knows who King Lemuel was, except that there was no Jewish King by that name...some Rabbi's have tried to peg him as Solomon writing under a pseudonym, but more generally I've seen him referenced as a foreign king and one commentary pointed out the Aramaic spellings in his writing that support that, and would be hard to imagine Solomon using...)

"The words of King Lemuel. An oracle that his mother taught him:

'No, my son! No, son of my womb!...It is not for kings, O Lemuel, it is not for kings to drink wine...or else they will drink and forget what has been decreed, and will pervert the rights of all the afflicted...

Speak out for those who cannot speak,for the rights of all the destitute. Speak out, judge righteously, defend the rights of the poor and needy.'

-- Proverbs 31

And just to throw one more quote into what is an increasingly overlong posting --

I dug up Calvin's thoughts on the role of civil government in the Institutes, and how Calvin criticized those who viewed civil government only as a "necessary evil," and how Calvin affirmed that one part of the role of Government as "God's Servant to do you good" (Rom 13) and how one of it's proper roles is in "giving aid and protection to the oppressed."

Again, I list this not to argue that Christians shirk their responsiblities to the poor and just "leave it to the government." To me that would be as wrong as it would be to allow governments to shirk their responsiblity for the role they can play to help the poor as well...

Here this is from Calvin:

"For some, on hearing that liberty is promised in the gospel, a liberty which acknowledges no king and no magistrate among men, but looks to Christ alone, think that they can receive no benefit from their liberty so long as they see any power placed over them.

Accordingly, they think that nothing will be safe until the whole world is changed into a new form, when there will be neither courts, nor laws, nor magistrates, nor anything of the kind to interfere, as they suppose, with their liberty...

Still the distinction does not go so far as to justify us in supposing that the whole scheme of civil government is matter of pollution, with which Christian men have nothing to do.

Fanatics, indeed, delighting in unbridled license, insist and vociferate that, after we are dead by Christ to the elements of this world, and being translated into the kingdom of God sit among the celestials, it is unworthy of us, and far beneath our dignity, to be occupied with those profane and impure cares which relate to matters alien from a Christian man.

But as we lately taught that that kind of government is distinct from the spiritual and internal kingdom of Christ, so we ought to know that they are not adverse to each other...

But if it is the will of God that while we aspire to true piety we are pilgrims upon the earth, and if such pilgrimage stands in need of such aids [of civil government], those who take them away from man rob him of his humanity....

[On the role of civil government]

In a word, if they remember that they are the vicegerents of God, it behoves them to watch with all care, diligence, and industry, that they may in themselves exhibit a kind of image of the Divine Providence, guardianship, goodness, benevolence, and justice. We say, therefore, that they are the ordained guardians and vindicators of public innocence, modesty, honour, and tranquillity, so that it should be their only study to provide for the
common peace and safety...

But as rulers cannot do this unless they protect the good against the injuries of the bad, and give aid and protection to the oppressed, they are armed with power to curb manifest evil-doers and criminals, by whose misconduct the public tranquillity is disturbed or harassed...

The first duty of subjects towards their rulers, is to entertain the most honourable views of their office, recognising it as a delegated jurisdiction from God, and on that account
receiving and reverencing them as the ministers and ambassadors of God. For you will find some who show themselves very obedient to magistrates...and yet the opinion which those persons have of magistrates is, that they are a kind of necessary evils.

But Peter requires something more of us when he says, "Honour the king" (1 Pet. 2:17)...
For, under the term honour, the former includes a sincere and candid esteem..."

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/institutes.iv.iv.xxi.html

[Keith]

Tod
Thanks again for your input on this. I respect you not only for your insight, grace, and balance, but also the humility that says "I am not as clear on all of ins and outs as many others."

I look forward to reading more from you.

[Tod]

Tim:
Fine post. Thanks for your hard work on this one. It strengthens the dialogue to have such good biblical and theological thinking.

Tod

[Tim C]

Thanks Tod for the kind words...

Hope to help a good conversation about such important issues happen...happy to be a part...

Tim