In a recent post below (the power of programs?) I suggested that the church needs to return to its faith in preaching. Dan Kelly’s post seems to suggest that I’m anti-programs, which I’m certainly not. In fact, much of my job is running programs in my church! My concern is that the church and the church leadership (i.e. pastors), spend a lot of time looking for new programs when their role is one of teaching and preaching. That teaching and preaching though must result in action, to Dan’s point. The church, to define my terms, includes all the members of a given body (visible), or even all believers (invisible), but it certainly includes more than the church leadership. When I say that pastors should not create programs, I’m not suggesting that those in the pew should not either. In fact, I’m counting on them to act in response to the pastor’s preaching. The pastor preaches the Word of God and the Spirit applies that Word to the heart of the person in the pew, and such person goes out and starts a program to help the poor. What we need is the leadership in the pulpit that Dan Kelly calls for. That’s exactly what I would expect of good preaching. Here’s the gospel, here’s the gospel applied. Now, through the power of the gospel, strive to live that out

The American church seems to have become a spiritual version of the smartphone. Need directions? We have an app for that. Need a recipe? We have an app for that. Need to know how long you’ll have to wait for a table at your favorite restaurant? We have an app for that, too. Only in the church we do not have apps, we have programs. Rocky marriage? We have a program for that. Rebellious Teens? Yep, program for that. Poor people in society? We have a program for that. Is there a problem we don’t have a program for, we’ll start one (and maybe hire a pastor to run it!).

Yet for nearly two thousand years the chief activity of the church has not been programs but preaching. Somehow, in the last few decades, we have lost sight of the power of preaching and put our faith in programs, as though preaching is insufficient to bring about change. Instead of Piper’s Supremacy of Christ in Preaching, we act as though it is the Supremacy of Christ in Programs. How did Calvin aid the Holy Spirit in the transformation of Geneva? Programs? No, Preaching! Consider the big names in evangelicalism today (Chandler, Driscoll, Piper, Keller, MacAurthur, Carson, Duncan, Ryken) known for programs? No! Preaching! And yet, we still assume Chappell wrote a book entitled Christ-Centered Programs rather than Christ-Centered Preaching!

Which brings us back to the role of the church in dealing with the poor. The solution which everyone is striving for is that perfect program, that ace-in-the-hole which the church can use to help the poor. In the face of such a search, solutions of presence, prayer, personalization, and so on seem insufficient and trite. But the saddest part is that the answer to the poor has been staring us in the face all along, not in the form of a program, but the power of Preaching!

For two millennia, preaching has the been the answer to the church’s challenges and the world’s problems. Today, though we search for programs. The irony in all of this is that programs have started over the church’s history, but as a result of preaching! The church preaches compassion on the poor and the people respond to that preaching in action, in programs! Thus, if the church really wants to help the poor, really wants to address the economic problems of the inner cities, the church needs to stop looking for programs and preach the Word of God, trusting the power of the Holy Spirit to transform hearts and motivate the people in the pews to action.

Only through the power of preaching can the church address ALL the issues facing the poor, from the poor’s personal issues to societies injustice, to inaction by Christians. Let us hope that church rises to the challenge and returns in faith to powerful preaching.

It is somewhat ironic that Dan Kelly challenged me to come up with more specifics in dealing with the poor than just idealogical foundations as that was the direction I intended to head in this post anyway! I fully agree with Dan that church leaders should play a key role in leading the push to care for the poor. However, I personally believe that it is actually best if church leaders are the cheerleaders for helping the poor rather than those doing the footwork. The reason for this has to do with presence and available resources.

Some seem to believe that all the poor lack is education or encouragement. If the poor are taught about work and economics or we come alongside them and encourage them, the poor will have the necessary means to pull themselves out of their poverty. The church comes alongside to provide a few meals, a few tidbits of advice, a little education, but often little more. Is this really helping? I would suggest it does not.

What is often lacking with the poor is resources. Yes, food and education are resources, but I mean true economic resources. Any poor person can go to their local McDonalds and get a job. Why don’t they? Some say it is because they are lazy, others because they are not educated in the need to get a job. An alternative explanation is that a minimum wage job only wastes their time because it does not pay enough to solve their issue of poverty. What they need is a higher paying job, a job that is typically not in the area they live.

The resources they lack are possibly transportation to a higher paying job, knowledge of where those higher paying jobs are located, the ability to relocate to where those higher paying jobs are or having higher paying jobs come to them, or the necessary training to fill those higher paying jobs (yes, sometimes it is a lack of education). Where does the church enter into this problem of resources: Presence.

Rather than the churches planning soup kitchens and so on (which are great, don’t get me wrong), what if a church encouraged its members to take businesses into poorer areas, or provide personalized micro loans to those who want to start their own businesses, or starting car pooling for those who could fill a job in the suburbs, or encouraging businesses to offer on the job training rather than only hiring trained people. What if the church sought to be a presence in poorer communities, not just through mercy ministry, but through economic activity?

This is why I suggest that pastors should be cheerleaders but not doing the footwork. Let the entrepreneur in the pew be encouraged by the pulpit to start a business in an area where the workers could use the work rather than where the owner of the business gets the best tax rate. Let the person in the pew be encouraged to support businesses in the poorer areas of the town rather than in the suburbs. The church supports these initiatives when we buy coffee from poor Colombian farmers, sells baskets made by poor African women, and so on. Why not do the same for the poor in our own areas? The Church should not simply be a personal presence in the community but an economic presence (or paying presence to keep the p’s). Pray, personalize, partner, but also proprietorship. Could economic involvement help deal with poverty?

Prayer, Presence, Personalizing, Partnering, (yes, Greg, the Pastor in me got carried away with the P’s.) In reality, though, while these form the foundation for caring for the poor, true caring does not continue to take place for two reasons. The first is that we as human beings are by nature selfish and would rather talk about caring for the poor than actually doing it. In response, I refer you back to step one: Prayer. We all need to examine our hearts for those selfish attitudes, repent of them, and pray that God would change our hearts and give us a compassion for the poor.

There is a second reason–It’s hard. One of my favorite books is by Steve Fikkert, When Helping Hurts. In that book he reveals that often the good that we think we are doing is actually harmful to those we desire to help, which makes the job of helping even harder. Even when we think we are helpful we may be harmful! And, to complicate issues even more, there is no simple answer to helping the poor. Sometimes when we try to help someone we realize that they do not want our help, may not need our help, or simply throw our help back in our face! Helping the poor is not an overnight process but an ongoing, frustratingly painful process. Hmm, almost sounds like the Christian life and the process of sanctification.

We do not expect perfection in ourselves overnight, but we often expect the poor to be helped in a few hours. This is not realistic or Biblical. Helping the poor is a lifelong endeavor. As Jesus said, you will always have the poor. That’s the reality. There will always be poor people in need of helping. But, rather than throwing our hands up in the air after a week, we need to realize that Christ continues to work in us, and with that grace in mind we must persevere in our efforts to help the helpless. Does this guarantee results? No. But it does mean that we are continuing to  seek out those who need help. Perseverance means continuing despite set backs, despite frustration and wanting to quit. Perseverance understands the reality of working with people…sinful, messy broken people. People who have problems. Just like us. It may not get any easier, any simpler, and more successful, but our calling to help the poor will keep on keeping on in that endeavor all the same.

It is often the assumption of those of various perspectives that no one is doing anything to help the poor, as though there is some large vacuum of assistance for the poor that must be filled. However, that is simply not the case. Oftentimes the church creates a plurality of programs that all attempt to handle a single problem, but no one is working to partner with one another, creating redundancy.

This post is not that long because this idea is simple not that complicated. We as the church need to take a little time to figure out who is doing what before jumping in blindly with both feet. Perhaps some one already has a program or someone already has an effort that is reaping some success.

Several years ago I met with someone from Lutheran Social Services about caring for the elderly. I asked if such care was needed in our area of Wisconsin and the answer surprised me. The woman told me that the last thing that was needed was more people providing programs. There were already enough programs to go around and another program would simply dilute the already limited resources and elderly senior citizens even more. She advised that if a church really wanted to care for the elderly, they should partner with an existing organization.

The same is true of the poor. As we look around and find a need, we also need to see if someone is already working on that need. The last thing we need is redundancy. There is simply too much work to be done to duplicate efforts in such a small area. Instead, as the church personalizes its response to the needs of the individuals, it also needs to partner with those who are already working, those who may understand the problems and solutions better, and those may already have that personalized connection.