"If I leave behind 10 pounds, you and all mankind bear witness against me that I lived and died a thief and a robber."
John Wesley
I'm re-reading Ministries of Mercy: The Call of the Jericho Road by Tim Keller. It's challenging me again as it did the first time I read it 4 or 5 years ago. Keller asks if it's possible for comfortable American Christians to do the ministry of mercy without radically altering our lifestyle. And should Christians live a "simple lifestyle" in order to give more away?
Ronald Sider answers a resounding yes and advocates a "graduated tithe" in his book Rich Christians in an Age of Hunger. This is where the percentage given increases as income increases, and all income above a certain point is given away. Also, "Sider urges families to live communally, to buy no clothes for two to three years, and to radically lower their lifestyle so that they can give 20-50 percent of their income to the Lord and to the needy." (p. 68) Is this too radical? Keller appeals to prominent evangelicals from the 18th century to demonstrate that the teaching of a "simple lifestyle" is not a radical, new fad.
The pastor and hymnwriter John Newton advised choosing a standard of living which is "barely decent" and that "we are to spend a penny on the poor for every penny we spend on ourselves." (p. 69) Jonathan Edwards chided those who adopted a standard of living (i.e. "just enough for myself and my family") based on the expectations of their social class. He saw that the amount thought "just enough" will invariably be calculated to maintain the lifestyle an individual or family has grown accustomed to. Edwards believed that if an individual's giving didn't burden one, or cut into one's lifestyle, then they weren't giving enough. (p. 74)
Perhaps the best example is John Wesley. Keller cites a sermon Wesley preached on Matthew 6:19-21 in which he "flatly states that any Christian who has more than the 'plain necessaries of life lives in an open, habitual denial of the Lord; he has gained riches and hell-fire.'" (p. 71) I'm guessing this kind of preaching wouldn't go over well today, even in churches that count Wesley as their doctrinal forebear and hero. Wesley lived what he preached. At the height of his fame he earned as much as 1,400 pounds a year from the sale of his sermons and books, yet his spending remained modest in the extreme throughout his life, and when he died "his estate consisted of a coat and two silver teaspoons." (p. 69)
These examples aren't confined to those well-known figures. "Rather, it was common teaching in the evangelical churches of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries." (p. 69) Wesley and his contemporaries might well count it a symptom of deep worldliness that the majority of Western Christians today are as preoccupied as the world with ever-larger well-appointed homes, new cars, leisure activities, and retirement portfolios. More typical of today's thinking is a Christian finance writer quoted by Keller who writes, "God's simple requirement is that we give ten percent of our income; once we have paid that, we know that no more is demanded." By that rule the man who earns a million dollars is free to spend $900,000 on himself. But how does that jive with the teachings of Jesus on money and possessions, as well as the many apostolic admonitions and warnings? Not well, Keller believes. He calls it "a form of Phariseeism." (p. 75) I see it as an example of ignoring the weightier matters of the law -- justice, mercy and faith.
I'm the first to admit I have far to go in this area. Keller suggests three principles to guide our giving that I believe are Biblical and worth pondering.
First, we must give so that we feel the burden of the needy ourselves.
Secondly, we may only keep whatever wealth we need for our calling and ministry opportunities.
Thirdly, we must not be generous in such a way that we or our families become liabilities to others.
"Bear one another's burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ." Galatians 6:2
3 comments:
Hey Steve,
Good thought. One of the problems that seems to raise up with regard to this is what it means for the finer things of life which, while most of us will not have them or enjoy them as our own, we recognize their value and are grateful when we are blessed by them. Perhaps this falls into the calling or ministry category established in the piece.
But when I stay in a home that is well built and furnished far beyond simple necessity I am blessed by the beauty, etc. I have come to think that the Sider approach (and he has moderated over the years -- using his rich christians books can be a dated approach) can be its own Phariseeism. Life is not bad and living well is not bad, even in a world of hunger. This is a philosophical position I know, not something that would feel good were I across the table from a poor starving child. and yet Jesus said, "The poor are always with us." I actually think that statement fits with what I am trying to say. The life that we are saved to is not to be one of opulence, granted, but it is still a life.
all that said, it has to be true that the lives of greatest sacrifice are the ones that inspire the most and are surely the best. I've just been on my own journey which might not be too far removed from the ol' rich dad/poor dad discussion of the famous book, from which I land saying, "Yes, sacrifice matters but God spared nothing in the way He made life and approaching it with a misguided frugality can have its real demerits as well as merits."
Make any sense?
Makes a lot of sense. There is a balance to be worked out. The main point I wanted to make in this short post (too short to capture everything there is to be said about the subject) is how the earlier, more radical Sider sounds so much like those Christian heroes we claim to admire and follow. Perhaps Wesley, et al were too legalistic, but I'm sure they would see most of us as being oriented far more toward keeping than giving than Scripture and historic Christian practice warrants.
That being said -- the gospel and a robust doctrine of common grace certainly points us in the direction of enjoying the good gifts of our Father and avoiding legalism of various stripes. As always thanks for the interaction. I loved your post on parenting!
Excellant thoughts!! I'd like to read that Keller book.
Post a Comment