Everyone can’t be like Shane Claiborne. Thank God!
Yes. I’m familiar with all the biblical warnings about wealth. It’s the root of all kinds of evil and keeps rich men from heaven. But what’s with our new infatuation with poverty?
Perhaps it’s just me, but evangelicals seem to have replaced a preoccupation with modernism for a preoccupation with monasticism; whereas we once used to idolize prosperity, now we idolize poverty. Our hero is no longer the Christian businessman who has “stepped up,” but the Christian businessman who has “stepped down.”
Just this morning, pastor friend Mike Hannah, wrote this on his Facebook status:
I see this pattern at conferences and church events, where the speaker, or staff member is introduced as someone who was “a rising star at a fortune 500 company, but left their promising career and six figure salary for (insert current ministry role).” I’m not sure why this narrative seems to be repeated in Christian circles. I’m sure it belies some underlying perspective or value, but I can’t put my finger on it yet.
There’s more to Mike’s thoughts (which you can see HERE), nor was he necessarily making the same point I am here. Nevertheless, this paragraph highlights an important sea-change in the American church.
Nowadays, the preferred testimonial is about “the rich man” becoming “poor” for the sake of the Kingdom, not “the poor man” becoming “rich” with the help of the Kingdom.
In my mind, both are equally skewed.
I recently heard an interview with Laura Arrillaga-Andreessen, author of Giving 2.0. She noted that the United States is the international leader in kindness, both on a corporate and individual level. Americans are more likely to volunteer time, donate money, contribute to causes, and help strangers than any other people on the planet. We are the wealthiest nation, and it shows in our giving.
So is our prosperity a good or a bad thing?
Yes, we need the Shane Claibornes of the world. But if we all became him… who would support us?
Mike, you may already know this, but a lot of this mindset is getting about because of pastor/leader David Platt, who despite his very good Gospel-driven motivations, tends to issue …
1. “Platt”itudes.
2. “Platt”onic assumptions.
Now you know I could not resist that.
But! seriously. He’s not the only one (Francis Chan also tends this way, alas!) who tends to flesh out the Gospel in only one way, with one particular type of calling — the “forsake business/prosperity in favor of church or missionary work” notion, as if God has only one way for people to glorify Him, in the overt ministry of the Church, and not also our jobs.
Yes, it’s great to give up your stuff, if that’s what you truly believe God wants you to do. But God has plenty to say about using your possessions redemptively as well. Either way, He owns all of it. The system is rigged!
I like your examples, I was thinking of Chan when I read this as well.
Some people are called to this type of ministry but I think that is fewer than the trend we see.
I really don’t know much about either man in this regard, Stephen. I’ll look into them a bit more. Thanks!
… Which brings me the opportunity to say that I find much of what these leaders do praiseworthy. God is using them in great ways to further His Kingdom. Still, like any other Christian (and Christian leader), they have their issues. (I don’t want human leaders to stop having issues, on this Old Earth; we already have enough problems forgetting the One Who has no issues whatsoever!)
If you choose to pursue this topic, though, some links (a few are mine):
Getting to the Root of Radical: A Review and Response by author/pastor Kevin DeYoung at The Gospel Coalition.
‘Radical’ throws hard answers, yet neglects other truths on my church’s blog. (If I had this book review to do over, with more that has gone on since — more authors with more imbalanced teaching on this issue — I would be more cautious by the review’s end.)
More ‘Radical’ thoughts: selling all you have? on YeHaveHeard.
If Platt’s Radical was radical by Anthony Bradley at World Magazine. (Poignant excerpt: “Platt encourages Christians to cap their lifestyles and give aid to causes and organizations that are gospel-centered, church-focused, and specific. Creating wealth in poor countries, however, demands economic and political reform as well. Giving aid while not applying the gospel to social structures will not help the poor holistically. A more radical approach encourages Christians to work at all levels of sustainable economic development because evil exists in those sectors as well. Short-term visions are not radical.”)
Book Review: Radical Together at Nine Marks Ministries (Best quote in this overall-friendly review, under the “concerns” that take up half the review: “Platt sometimes speaks as if the Great Commission is God’s only purpose for us, and only things done toward that end have any real value. Yet the Scriptures teach that God is glorified by, and has a plan for, skills that aren’t ‘directly’ applied to the Great Commission. “)
Skewing always comes when you focus on one extreme to the expense of the other. Abraham was financially rich. Joseph was financially poor. Does Abraham’s wealth mean he wasn’t as righteous as Joseph? (The answer’s no.) Does Joseph’s poverty mean he was more righteous than Abraham? (Again, no.)
Wasn’t it just a few years ago that the Prayer of Jabez was the fad? The gospel of prosperity is a big seller. So now it’s the gospel of poverty? So, what, are so many people out of work and living on shoestrings that we want to hear that God wants us to be poor?
Dang, the Christian life is about more than possessions. Paul had it down with his statement “I know what it is to be in need, and I know what it is to have plenty. I have learned the secret of being content in any and every situation, whether well fed or hungry, whether living in plenty or in want.”
I have a friend who’s been spouting monasticism, though, and I wondered where in the world he was coming from.
I think a big problem, Mike, is that for the last few decades Americans have been sold the message that dispersing wealth is good but creating wealth is suspicious.
We have the intellectual tools to create wealth. Charity redistributes wealth with zero to little net gain. Business creation (successful ones and sometimes even failed businesses) create a net gain of wealth and higher standards of living.
If the church is in the business of reducing poverty, shouldn’t we look more towards wealth creation instead of wealth redistribution?
That would only make sense, but Satan is in the business of deceiving. I agree that for years we have been conditioned to think success is “bad” and I think it will take an equal amount of years to undo this way of thinking, prayer of Godly people is required to help shift our focus back to Biblical foundations and away from worldly trends.
Even our own president talks about redistributing wealth and I don’t think he means just within our own country but around the world. He has apologized to countries for America not doing more when in reality we have helped countless countries more than what is required. If our own president seems ashamed of America’s success, why should it’s citizens have a different view? People are falling prey to the deception that wealth means greed.
People misconstrue what the Bible says about wealth and the pursuit of money. The Bible states that the LOVE of money is evil, not money itself, or people who have a tendency to idolize money, which goes against the 10 Commandments. I want to be prosperous so I can bless others, primarily, and also do the things in life that I’ve always wanted to do, like travel. It would actually be a sin for me to help others if I can’t pay my own light bill and I don’t have any food. Lastly, some people are called to a ministry of poverty, but for those of us who are not, I think we should do more than our tithes to build the Kingdom up, while having some fun in the process.
TiAnna,
A very balanced and Biblical approach, wish more people had similar philosophies.
How can we as Christians give if we don’t have the money to take care of ourselves?
I agree that some are called to give up their wealth, perhaps God knows it is an idol for them, but not everyone is called to that. Like the rich young ruler, sometimes God just wants us to give up whatever it is holding us back from serving him.
I think the trend we are seeing has more to do with our current cultural perceptions than a calling from God (though some truly are called to give up their whatever, it’s not for us to judge or know the hearts of men, but I do think there is more here than Gods hand working).
I have MANY thoughts on this topic, I love politics and history and both play a role in answering this question.
For many years now society has slowly been conditioned to think success/money is bad and it is now penetrating our churches. Look at the OWS movement…many are protesting success. There are those out of work, demanding jobs, yet protesting large corporations who hire hundreds of workers. It’s sad and it’s ironic. Some are protesting Apple and Steve Jobs/people like him, all the while using the technology they provide.
We are becoming a hypocritical society that is focused on materialism, that is why I think the church is trying to distance itself from the world and the perception that money/materialism can be a blessing from God. Is it because they want to reach the masses or because they have fallen into the deception that success is bad? Are they worried about being judged or do they judge themselves because society has conditioned them to think that way?
I know doctors in my own church who worry about being judge as rich, they are almost ashamed of their hard work and feel they have to justify themselves, never mind many of them do charity work.
There is so much I could go into, but I doubt many of you want to go that deep into current events/history and politics, for those who do, you can check out my blog. I blog on Christian topics as well as Current Events/Politics. My most current post is on OWS and a man behind the scenes who the media is portraying as sympathetic when he is really a wolf in sheep’s clothing. http://tcavey.blogspot.com/2011/11/soros-and-occupy-wallstreet-what-media.html
I’m glad someone said it. We Christians seem to have our cause fads. It’s poverty. It’s almost cool to be poor anymore. Now it’s human trafficking. More people, I’ve noticed, are more willing to give to “cool” causes than to friend someone in church or give time to a stranger in church. That’s just my observation. Feel free to disagree. :o)
Oh, and you can also note how Hipster Kewl it is to work for Non-Profits. If you are younger than 34, chances are you are in that demo who thinks that a corporate job is a cubicle hell but working at a Non-Profit is crunchy granola goodness from start to finish.
It drives me utterly bonkers, the number of friends I have who tout their NP work with sanctimony and gracelessness, nover once considering that without donors who make their money from corporate jobs most of those trendoid NP jobs would vanish.
I hear ya Katherine! I know many people who think they are “better” because they work for NP, why can’t we all understand that it takes all walks of folks with all sorts of jobs to keep our world running? No one is better than someone else because they are rich or as the trend is going, poor.
Only God knows our hearts and what each person needs or is called to do.
TC, your post makes me think of another realisiation I’ve had.
I’ve noticed a rise of those businessmen stepping away from the rat-race since the recession.
I find it a bit amusing that so many people are “called to sacrifice” when the gravy train runs out of coal and not before.
Good point Katherine.
Only issue I have with y’alls comments is this: Claiborne doesn’t teach that money is inherently evil. I’d say the rich young ruler example is this:
Money isn’t what matters but when called give it up. I don’t think our goal as Christians is to get rich, I can’t reconcile richness with Christianity
Jonas, I’m a little unclear on your statement, can you clarify?
I agree that the rich young ruler was called to give up what he held dear, we all have our sacred cows that can stand in our way of serving Christ. The moral of the story was to be willing to give up anything that we put before Christ.
I don’t know about goals in life, yes some people do get into certain careers for the money as well as liking certain things (doctors, engineers, and so on), I don’t think that is wrong as long as our hearts are focused on Christ.
How can we take care of the poor, feed the hungry and fund missions if there are not people out there who are “rich” and donate to the kingdom of God? I think I am confused on your statement.
Jonas, I haven’t heard Claiborne teach that money is bad either, nor do I believe “our goal as Christians is to get rich.”
Hallelujah someone has the courage to bring this up. I’m of the same mind as many here: having a lot of money is not bad…the corrupted heart of someone who has a lot of money is bad. I’ve been dealing with this on a very personal level. My wife and I have been married for a year and a half, and we have a three month old. We’re not destitute but we sure could use a higher paycheck, so should I say, well, our family will be anti-materialistic and live the way Jesus lived and be content with what God has given us here and now. Or, do I listen to the other part of me who says, you know, I’d really like for my wife and daughter to have nice things and nice clothes. My wife loves graphic design and I would absolutely love to bring home a brand new iMac with the latest edition of photoshop, but wait, isn’t that being materialistic? I know, it’s okay to have ambition but just not to worship it but as Mike has said, high profile folks’ messages and lives tend to show two polar opposites that one must choose from rather than blend.
I think it’s okay to want nice things and to want to give to our loved ones, the problem I see is when we become discontent with what we have and therefore don’t appreciate the gifts God has blessed us with.
Also the problem, like you said, is when our hearts become corrupt. Matt 6:33 is my motto, when I am confused I ask myself if what I am questioning deters me from putting God first.
I love Shane Claiborne!
I think that stepping down and poverty can be necessary as a sacrifice if you need to let go of an attachment to wealth or control. It can teach very well and very quickly how to rely solely on God.
But ideally we want to have people in all economic positions, using whatever resources they have in the service of God. As you say, renunciates have to be supported by someone. In India they have a whole system for this; charity from householders to renunciates and holy men is built into their culture. Regulations for householders and those with economic means are included so that they don’t get corrupted by having wealth… and one of those regulations is giving charity to the renounced orders of life. So it works out nicely, in theory.
Ahhkay sorry about that.
Money is not inherently evil. It is a heart issue. I just think, hope this is more clear, that if God calls you to give it up you have to be willing and ready to. Sorry, I misunderstood some of y’alls comments.
Yes, I agree with you on that, Jonas. No problem.
Interesting. I didn’t realize this was a new trend. Although, I myself have embarked upon a path of learning to believe God may want to provide for me in ways beyond my imagination, and that not believing He could do so is actually an affront to Him. I’ve been putting Him in a box, almost afraid of prosperity in strange way, as if I’m not good enough, smart enough, holy enough, deserving enough for His blessings. I think we Christians can get stuck in the “boo hoo, I’m such a lowly sinner” place when actually we should be focused on the antidote to the sinful nature and the unlimited possibilities that He opens up in our lives.
Strikes me as faux-spirituality and the illusion of sacrifice, a modern American equivalent of medieval self-flagellation.
Sometimes sacrifice is involved, but God calls us to obedience, first and foremost. And He was pretty clear about which He preferred.
This is a timely topic, MIke. My husband and I were so hurt by “churches and big churches” that we began to admire the “lowly traveling minister” however, we have remodeled our thinking a bit.
Becoming poor does not equal being humble. In Matthew 19:16-24, a rich man asks Jesus how can he be good and Jesus responds:”If you want to enter life, obey the commandments.” However the man asks “which ones?” So Jesus gives him a brief list of them. Then the man says he has kept all of them so what next Jesus says plainly, “If you want to be perfect, go and sell your possessions”
I think we all may have missed the point in this conversation. The main factor is that we all can be good if we keep the commandments but if we can’t let go of Attachments which may hinder us from the will of God then we will certainly stumble. A poor Christian can probably bring forth encouragement and a Word of hope, however what about those who have resources and businesses to help fund mission trips and feed the needy? It takes money for that.
A good book to read is Now I Walk on Death Row(Bethany HOuse) by Dale Recinella.
Thanks!
Patrick, the obedience I see in Scripture is never “faux”. Ideally, to me at least, Claiborne’s communtiy is what I’d want. But it’s not for all.
Erica, I don’t think it is we can all be good if we obey the commandments. It seems more of: 1. You are attached and money is his god. 2. Thus following god is hindered by self.
Ultimately I think the issue is this: Christianity has a moving epicenter. It moves to a “poor” section of the world, currently, unofficially its the southern hemisphere. Whenever this epicenter becomes comfortable or rich iit moves. The US was an epicenter for awhile but we’ve been caught in this comfortable, rich, money soaked culture. Doesn’t mean money is bad just that under moments of uncomfortably (I spelled that wrong sooorry) Christianity thrives. The Church in America is apathetic it seems and I think people like Claiborne, Campolo and such are urging the Church to get off its butt and follow what Jesus says, especially seeking justice for the poor and opressed.
I don’t know if this is a correct observation it just seems that there is more here than the rich young ruler.
Finally, embracing a more monastic lifestyle is not for everyone. Some people are called to embrace fame for God’s glory and the redemption of that sub-culture (see: Tim Tebow…loves football but is using this fame as a stepping off point for the gospel).
Hope this reply makes sense.
Jonas
Jonas, you lost me at the first sentence. I said ‘faux-spirituality’, not faux-obedience. (Even then, Paul wrote about the vanity of obedience without love. But that’s another topic…)
Obeying God opens a window on to His reality. Substituting “sacrifice” for that is religious drama. That’s not to say some of these people aren’t called to step away from big-money pursuits, but I suspect this is a pendulum swing away from the rampant materialism of the Prosperity Gospel.
Now I’d wager the Scripture about Moses walking away from the riches of Egypt gets trotted out a lot, but Poverty isn’t God’s ideal of spiritual maturity. God does indeed increase and multiply. Our responsibility is to have right affections and priorities in the face of those blessings, and use our resources wisely in light of His value system.
That ‘poor’ people are more aware of their need for God doesn’t correlate to material blessing being inherently evil. As some have correctly pointed out, it’s the LOVE of money that’s the root problem. That we fall into that snare shows our weakness; that we overreact and denounce it as wicked reveals our immaturity.
One of the primary problems is that we gravitate to extremes. It’s always either-or. One extreme begats another. In the news today are the excesses (and bankruptcy) of the “Crystal Cathedral.” There’s a lot of prosperity preachers out there (use the Bible to get rich!).
Many Christians get stuck in their local church bubble. Never once do they stop and think about the Christians in the churches they pass. It’s like they are the only ones in the world. Rarely do they ask, “Does giving to God mean only giving to my church, or should I reach out to the community? Or make sure my church does? Shouldn’t every church be stocked with food?”
We are afraid to admonish Christians for excess or for not doing enough. Sometimes we create roadblocks that don’t exist and don’t stop to think. I once suggested to some Christians that maybe the money they were spending on a megaproject could be better used building many churches or helping poor. “Stop pushing the Liberal Social Gospel!” Really? Helping the poor is a liberal cause? Reactionary. Too much time in one bubble or another.
Then there are those who turn any wealth into an evil. Claiborne claims Jesus was homeless. No, he was never without a place to stay. Nor was he poor. But he did not need a giant church to worship in where you only know the people in your pew. At least the gothic cathedrals were built as a labor of love to God by generations of craftsman.
Then there is fad faith, like Jabez. Say this magic spell… How about the Prayer of Jesus instead of some obscure man? [See Hank Haanegraaff’s book on this, much superior to Jabez.]
We need emotion and passion. But we also need reason and clear thinking. Back away from the edge or burst your bubble.