Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes
This entry may sound like it is from a soap box and some of it could be, but frankly a good bit of it is just me asking questions that might bug people. I really enjoy that sometimes. This happens to be one of those times.
Today I was walking through Sam’s Club minding my own business when I looked up to see an interesting statement on the back of the shirt worn by the man in front of me. It said:
Come as you are
Leave Different
I stopped and pondered this. We often say “Come as you are” but it seems like we don’t have many expectations about what happens after that. Just come. It almost seems as though we no longer expect any behavior change. Sure we acknowledge that Jesus wants our heart and we assume that once he truly has our heart that our behavior will follow, but we don’t talk about it any more. Perhaps we don’t want to scare anyone. It's not like anyone should change to be like me, nor anyone like me. After all, I am still working on not being like myself. But we never seem to suggest that our behavior is all that important anymore. We don’t much act like we care about anyone else's either.
For instance, even here on this blog I have talked favorably about third world debt forgiveness and the possible merits of “ONE.” However, is something like that enough? Do we think that our modern incarnation of Jubilee will be sufficient to fix major problems or just postpone them? Even Jubilee came around every seven years. Is it blasphemy to point out that under that system things returned to the way they had been in just seven years? Would the year of Jubilee have been necessary if the problems were fixed or might a preventative approach have had more staying power?
Don’t misunderstand me. I know that God is always willing to forgive me when I continually fail him, but if this is a constant recurrence does it not sound as though I may have become a vampire Christian- wanting Christ only for his blood but not willing to actually pursue a new way of life? Rather I should be sharing how Christ’s love has changed my life and how it can, in turn, change the lives of others. Further, consider the implications of this argument on topics like helping the homeless or other poor.
I despise the chasm between the wealthy and the poor. I not only hate the numbers but perhaps even more I hate the sentiment. The very notion that people will turn their backs on the legitimate needs of others is reprehensible. Sadly though, this sentiment is a thread that runs through all classes, not only the rich. Certainly, there are wealthy people who refuse to peer down from their ivory towers and consider others in need. But there are also members of the middle class who are clawing their collective way into those ivory towers rather than finding contentment and re-channelling those efforts to the benefit of others. Not only that, there are many among the poor who refuse to utilize their gifts and blessings and choose instead to live off assistance thereby denying aid to others who might truly need it.
Frankly, the notion of wealth redistribution is flawed both logically and in assuming the worst of people at each end of the spectrum. It assumes that we must force charity on those at the top of the income ladder and it assumes that all at the bottom are only worthy of a hand-out and not a hand.
Even if these factors were not in place, it is flawed because it is using the world’s most inefficient machine to do the task. For every dollar squeezed through the government machine, less than a dime makes it out the other end after all of the bureaucracy and money diverted to pork and campaign matching and on and on. Not exactly the definition of stewardship. Still, since the days of FDR over $5 trillion (yes, that trillion- with a “t”) has been fed into programs for the poor. If that had gone to a hand up instead of a hand out how could there possibly be any poor people left? Obviously, whatever we have been doing is not working. Maybe we should try some accountability. What if we actually helped out a single mother with children rather than supporting the sedentary lifestyle of a chronic system abuser? What if we actually provided rewarding employment assistance for someone who is disabled rather than for another bureaucrat? What if, instead of funding the elections of career politicians, we make careers possible for people seeking jobs from small businesses? What if?
The fact is it is much easier to toss someone a dime from a distance than it is to help them learn how to earn a dollar. We do not risk getting dirty or getting bogged down in relationships. Nor do we risk the frustration of expecting people to actually change their lives for the better. And isn’t that much cleaner and less disruptive of our own plans?
An old joke says that a woman marries a man expecting him to change and he doesn’t whereas a man marries a woman expecting that she won’t change and she does. Maybe that’s why we have collectively ignored the concept of change. Perhaps it’s just easier. I have heard a popular speaker in the emergent movement say that Jesus is about being- not behaving or becoming. Really? That's a much easier response than I was expecting. Still, I am glad that Christ has not given up on the idea. I still have some changing to do and precious little chance of getting it done. Christ extends his grace to cover that gap, but knowing that nobody else really has any expectations takes a lot of the pressure off.
Today I was walking through Sam’s Club minding my own business when I looked up to see an interesting statement on the back of the shirt worn by the man in front of me. It said:
Come as you are
Leave Different
I stopped and pondered this. We often say “Come as you are” but it seems like we don’t have many expectations about what happens after that. Just come. It almost seems as though we no longer expect any behavior change. Sure we acknowledge that Jesus wants our heart and we assume that once he truly has our heart that our behavior will follow, but we don’t talk about it any more. Perhaps we don’t want to scare anyone. It's not like anyone should change to be like me, nor anyone like me. After all, I am still working on not being like myself. But we never seem to suggest that our behavior is all that important anymore. We don’t much act like we care about anyone else's either.
For instance, even here on this blog I have talked favorably about third world debt forgiveness and the possible merits of “ONE.” However, is something like that enough? Do we think that our modern incarnation of Jubilee will be sufficient to fix major problems or just postpone them? Even Jubilee came around every seven years. Is it blasphemy to point out that under that system things returned to the way they had been in just seven years? Would the year of Jubilee have been necessary if the problems were fixed or might a preventative approach have had more staying power?
Don’t misunderstand me. I know that God is always willing to forgive me when I continually fail him, but if this is a constant recurrence does it not sound as though I may have become a vampire Christian- wanting Christ only for his blood but not willing to actually pursue a new way of life? Rather I should be sharing how Christ’s love has changed my life and how it can, in turn, change the lives of others. Further, consider the implications of this argument on topics like helping the homeless or other poor.
I despise the chasm between the wealthy and the poor. I not only hate the numbers but perhaps even more I hate the sentiment. The very notion that people will turn their backs on the legitimate needs of others is reprehensible. Sadly though, this sentiment is a thread that runs through all classes, not only the rich. Certainly, there are wealthy people who refuse to peer down from their ivory towers and consider others in need. But there are also members of the middle class who are clawing their collective way into those ivory towers rather than finding contentment and re-channelling those efforts to the benefit of others. Not only that, there are many among the poor who refuse to utilize their gifts and blessings and choose instead to live off assistance thereby denying aid to others who might truly need it.
Frankly, the notion of wealth redistribution is flawed both logically and in assuming the worst of people at each end of the spectrum. It assumes that we must force charity on those at the top of the income ladder and it assumes that all at the bottom are only worthy of a hand-out and not a hand.
Even if these factors were not in place, it is flawed because it is using the world’s most inefficient machine to do the task. For every dollar squeezed through the government machine, less than a dime makes it out the other end after all of the bureaucracy and money diverted to pork and campaign matching and on and on. Not exactly the definition of stewardship. Still, since the days of FDR over $5 trillion (yes, that trillion- with a “t”) has been fed into programs for the poor. If that had gone to a hand up instead of a hand out how could there possibly be any poor people left? Obviously, whatever we have been doing is not working. Maybe we should try some accountability. What if we actually helped out a single mother with children rather than supporting the sedentary lifestyle of a chronic system abuser? What if we actually provided rewarding employment assistance for someone who is disabled rather than for another bureaucrat? What if, instead of funding the elections of career politicians, we make careers possible for people seeking jobs from small businesses? What if?
The fact is it is much easier to toss someone a dime from a distance than it is to help them learn how to earn a dollar. We do not risk getting dirty or getting bogged down in relationships. Nor do we risk the frustration of expecting people to actually change their lives for the better. And isn’t that much cleaner and less disruptive of our own plans?
An old joke says that a woman marries a man expecting him to change and he doesn’t whereas a man marries a woman expecting that she won’t change and she does. Maybe that’s why we have collectively ignored the concept of change. Perhaps it’s just easier. I have heard a popular speaker in the emergent movement say that Jesus is about being- not behaving or becoming. Really? That's a much easier response than I was expecting. Still, I am glad that Christ has not given up on the idea. I still have some changing to do and precious little chance of getting it done. Christ extends his grace to cover that gap, but knowing that nobody else really has any expectations takes a lot of the pressure off.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home