There is a guy who comments every now and then on our pastors blog. I look forward to reading what he has to say because of his gentleness and wisdom. The following is a comment he recently made which I thought was especially good. I think the comment can stand alone but if your interested in the original post her it is.
Bart said:
It seems sad to me that the discussion about the church’s response to the poor and needy has become a source of debate. The manner in which positions are presented are at times presented is frequently denigrating to the other side.
Upon reflection I believe that the problem in this debate is not unlike the problem I see in many others. For a debate to be resolved we must first begin by establishing rules for resolution, or by establishing an agreed upon standard of measure which shall be utilized to judge the positions put forth.
One could say that scripture defines the rules, yet each side seems to find no shortage of verses to support their argument. What then can be done? I believe that what is necessary is to make sure that we begin not just with scripture, but with the purpose of all scripture. If we start with that which is most essential and then build upon that foundation, perhaps we can reach a better understanding.
Brian was touching on this issue in his messages on missional living. The primary purpose for all things is the Glory of God. The primary means by which God is glorified in this world is through His merciful redemption of sinful man. The primary means by which we glorify God is through the proclamation of His glory in this plan of redemption, and the living of redeemed lives. This is consistent with the great mission given to the church, to make disciples of all men.
So when we discuss any activity or action of the church, we must do so by evaluating its impact in achieving the primary purpose of the church, the glorification of God by the propagation of the gospel message.
As we do so we will quickly discover that there is a difference between the mission of the church and things which are means by which the mission is achieved. As we prioritize our behaviors and as we establish mandates for action, it must be with an understanding of the differentiation.
There are activities that are indisputably consistent with the church’s mission and therefore never called into question (Bible teaching, loving one another, evangelism). There are then a number of things that are a means for accomplishing the mission, but do not in and of themselves constitute the mission. Examples of such things include youth trips, church socials, and (I believe) aid to the poor and needy outside of the church. These latter activities are usually, but not always, consistent with the church’s mission. They therefore should not be put forth as being the primary mission of the church.
If we think about the discussion and the articles reviewed we can see that this is the core of the dispute. There are a number of people who believe that helping the poor and needy in the community and the world should be listed as part of the primary mission of the church. A look at the activities cited in the various articles puts this in perspective. These activities included, oil changes for poor women, bicycle repair, and tutoring and mentoring. An honest person would admit that although these may be tools and means by which doors may be opened to the gospel, they do not in and of themselves achieve the propagation of the church’s mission. In fact, unless intentional steps are taken, these actions have a significant probability of failing the mission.
It is for this reason I believe that many are so uneasy about the emphasis on “mercy ministry”.
Before anyone says that I oppose mercy ministry, let me reiterate that it is one of many tools that are used to achieve God’s glory through Gospel proclamation.
Let me illustrate. If a church desires to reach single mom’s for Christ, it may start by saying, “Is there a need in the single mom community which we as a church can meet, that if met will open a door for the gospel message?” The answer may be, “Let’s have an oil changing day!” I think this is an excellent example of missional living acted out in serving the community.
The only difference in my approach is that when the oil-changing day was over a church with an appropriate sense of mission would evaluate whether or not doors for the gospel were indeed opened. If not, a new approach would be taken. Why? Because serving single moms is not the end goal. Reaching them with the gospel is. It is this distinction between mission and means that must be considered.
This is important, because as I stated once in a previous post, there will always be more needs in our community and our world than we can meet. It is possible that we could get so caught up trying to meet these needs that we would lose sight of our true objective. It is this danger which I believe drives the concern in those less enthusiastic about mercy ministry.
We are a part if a generation that has put a low priority on personal holiness, prayer, and study of Scripture. The overwhelming majority of purported believers has never shared their faith and would be paralyzed with fear if called upon to do so. Yet all of these things are a part of the primary mission of the church! As we as a church do these things, we will be led by the Spirit to reach out to others in amazing ways. We will be serving our community and our culture, but we will be doing so in a way that results in a greater knowledge of the gospel, and thus the glory of God.
If we do not pray, do not deal with the sin in our lives, are not true disciples with a knowledge of scripture, and do not strive to share our faith, no amount of community service will make up for our failure.
