“A bottomless pit of desires…”
15 Feb 2008
This past year, I read about a ministry initiative that a suburban church employed to bless their community. On the day when the cost of postage was scheduled to go up, members of the church stood outside the post office handing out free sheets of 2 cent stamps to make up the difference in people’s postage. The effort was a part of a national campaign where churches were selected through an application process to receive $1,000 to use in some way to bless their community.
The pastor involved described it like this: “They asked that we do one event in May and one in June and that they be either a giveaway or community service project. They offered some ideas like paying for everyone’s’ donuts or coffee or doing some improvements at a local school in need of help. Other than that, they left it up to us.”
Last week I had the opportunity to sit in on a lecture given by William Willimon to a class of doctoral students at Fuller Seminary. Something that he said has lingered in my mind and spirit, and it had to do with the role of the church, and the pastor in particular, in responding to the needs of a congregation. Willimon contends that what masquerades as needs in our culture (North American) today are really a bunch of inflated desires that have somehow been elevated to the status of entitlements. And seeking to meet these needs, according to Willimon, will therefore always be a losing battle for ministers and churches because, as he self-described: “I am a bottomless pit of desires.”
He pointed to the things we pray for as an indicator of this: in his opinion, because we simply do not need to pray for things like daily bread, our prayer life has been hijacked by issues of personal fulfillment. And so we busy ourselves with prayers for things like mutual orgasms (his words!) instead of petitioning for the things of Jesus’ kingdom.
As a church-planter, I am struck by this challenge. My context is one where prayers for food are actually still at the forefront of people’s minds. But there are certainly enough other things that fall under the category of “inflated desires” that we regularly encounter, and I wonder how it is that we are called to authentically witness to the kingdom in that context? As we seek to love God and neighbor here, we take seriously the call to make our neighbors needs our own. But in a culture that so elevates personal fulfillment, when and how do we as a church offer kingdom critique? Too often what I see are churches that cater to a bunch of felt needs in a given community to get people “in the door”. It is no wonder, then, that churches and their leaders feel quickly overrun with an impossible list of expectations and unmet needs.
It made me think about some of the postage stamp/free donut witness, and wonder how the landscape of the church would change if such initiatives were redirected toward the daily bread sorts of needs we hear Jesus address? What if we were as committed to making sure that there were no hungry among us as we are to serving high-end coffee at our gatherings? Would we see a very different demographic at the center of the church’s witness?
Tagged: desire; consumerism
20 comments
Trackback
Comment by dan brown
4.58 pm on 15 Feb 2008
It really gets down to delayed gratification and teaching a telelogical view of ethics. It is interesting that the professor used the word entitlements as we all see and hear that word used in political discussion. We have all strived to see Christian community grow and have the shape of love and yet in so many ways our Christian charity can back fire so easily and become enabling and thrwarding to real character development. It is a real challenge to become living sacrafices and develope a prophets’ consiousness of being in the presense of God. May we all grow!
Comment by Jonathan Greene
11.27 pm on 16 Feb 2008
Yeah…contrast our pitiful “plight” with the sufferings of the first century church, and you begin to get an idea of how superficial our “needs” are.
Comment by Bryan Riley
8.26 am on 17 Feb 2008
It was to those most down and out Jesus went. This is a great post and thought process through which to go. I recently posted an email from a pastor friend of mine in the Philippines where he was trying to raise the equivalent of $1000 US over about a half a year to do building improvements – and they saw it as only possible with God’s help. It was considered impossible and miraculous to achieve. Meanwhile, here we see a church who has 1000 to do anything they want with and I often read of multi-million dollar building projects. Perhaps more and more of the Western Church will turn to the needs of the poor and hungry in the West as well as internationally.
Comment by petey*crowder
6.53 am on 18 Feb 2008
Jason,
Thanks for writing this. Sometimes my students see other ministries on campus doing free hot chocolate giveaways in the Quad, etc. and they ask why we don’t do similar things.
I tell them because I don’t believe Jesus’ call was to give free crap to people who can already afford it. I should probably be more tactful, because I catch flack for taking that sort of stance. But it’s how I feel after reading the Gospels, and that hasn’t changed. I think I could have good conversation with Mr. Willimon. Take care,
Petey
Comment by Erika Haub
7.03 am on 21 Feb 2008
“I don’t believe Jesus’ call was to give free crap to people who can already afford it.”
Love it.
Comment by petey*crowder
8.28 am on 23 Feb 2008
BTW, Sorry I didn’t realize it was you (Erika) instead of Jason… I’m slightly ignorant most days :)
Comment by Jason
7.01 pm on 29 Feb 2008
‘I don’t believe Jesus’ call was to give free crap to people who can already afford it.’
Priceless Petey, thank you.
Comment by Ben
7.06 pm on 29 Feb 2008
Actually, I don’t believe Jesus’ call was to give free crap to people who couldn’t afford it, either.
On top of that, looking at the example of Jesus, he didn’t spend too much effort feeding the poor, and the church only fed other members of the church. They did, however, welcome anyone in (at first, immediately after baptism; later, during persecutions, after a period of learning culminating in baptism and confirmation).
Comment by Laura Anne
4.16 pm on 19 Feb 2008
This is a huge challenge, and one that I’ve been thinking about…do we fulfil people’s perceived needs because it’s more comfortable to do so than find people with actual need and serve them??
Comment by Erika Haub
7.03 am on 21 Feb 2008
I think that is exactly the sort of question we have to ask. When I initially reflected on Willimon’s remarks on my own blog, I was struck by how easy it is to live our lives without ever having to encounter a Lazarus at our gates. I think too that there is a way where avoiding the genuine brokenness and neediness of others, and sticking with stamps and Starbucks giveaways, can be a defense mechanism for admitting and owning our own neediness.
Comment by Tom
1.57 am on 23 Feb 2008
We have so socialized our presentation of the Gospel that, in many ways, we don’t even need Jesus or the Holy Spirit to guide us, just our promos and programs. All these social things are “good” yet we’re missing the mark if that is all we are about. The problem is much deeper than just giving or not giving and to what or who and for what reason. The problem is simply that so many of us in the Western Church don’t really hear from the Lord. It’s as if we allow the “so called experts” to lead us and we blindly follow. The real question for us is not should we go to the hungry or should we give away high dollar coffee to those who can afford it, but rather, what is God doing in your world today and how are you responding today to the things He is showing you? Are you asking Him to guide you and show you the ones He has for you today and what to do to, for, and with them? Are you asking Him if He has something to say to them or something to share with them from His heart to theirs? Jesus said that He only did what He saw the Father doing (my paraphrase). He set an example for us as to how to have a relationship with the Father and how to engage in a daily walk with our Creator. The problem is that many of us have simply opted out for something less intimidating – following man’s ways. If you’re up to following after God’s heart you’ll be in for the adventure of your life. You see, with God everyday is an adventure because you never know what He is going to do today and you’re invited, if you want! Walking with God is what will make the difference – not works – only Him!
Comment by Faith
7.08 am on 24 Feb 2008
One note on this article, it’s not entirely accurate:
“It made me think about some of the postage stamp/free donut witness, and wonder how the landscape of the church would change if such initiatives were redirected toward the daily bread sorts of needs we hear Jesus address?”
yes, Jesus addressed daily bread needs frequently, but he also met needs that weren’t so essential…wine at a wedding when it ran out so they wouldn’t be embarrassed-not essential but nice, food when people came out to hear him speak-he didn’t have to but he felt compassion for them and some of them may have been poor but not all of them i’m sure…in sum Jesus also supported helping out and being nice to people who don’t have any desperate needs other than the love of Christ-the most important and most essential need at all. If we meet felt needs without letting them know why we do it-Christ’s love- then we are forgetting the most important need of all and become some other charity that might as well be entirely secular. Jesus didn’t always meet essential physical needs but He always met essential spiritual needs-He always brought forgiveness and the Gospel with Him everywhere He went (not in a pressuring condemning way, in a loving and helpful way).
If you follow this article to it’s natural conclusion, then why help people at Harvard ever? all of them have enough food and shelter and are going to get a Harvard degree-they’ve got all they need. The thing is, they don’t these people here are suffering from a worse poverty than just physical, and yes many people who are physically poor are also suffering from spiritual poverty, but if we don’t bring the gospel to our neighbors at Harvard while we’re here what are we saying about the Gospel-that God can’t make it possible for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle? that rich people don’t need the gospel? Jesus talked to many tax collectors who were pretty wealthy, and by dishonest means…they didn’t have physical needs in the way some of the others Jesus reached out to did, but they had spiritual needs for sure.
What I’m trying to say is we should love our neighbors and bring the Gospel wherever we go and I think it’s great to love the poor, but while we’re at Harvard our neighbors aren’t all poor, in fact some of them are really rich and if we want to be like Jesus, we should love them too. Taking the Gospel to all nations, includes taking it to rich people as well as poor people. I bet those people in the suburbs that were giving out the postage stamps didn’t have a lot of people in their community who lacked daily bread, but many lack the love of Jesus, and if giving them a stamp worth two cents helps them reconsider Him and come to a place where they can get their spiritual needs met by hearing the Gospel, I’m all for it.
Comment by Erika Haub
7.47 am on 24 Feb 2008
Faith,
I am so glad you brought the points you share here to the discussion. I agree with you: Jesus certainly engaged the spiritual needs of rich and poor alike. And I certainly was not suggesting that any one demographic was more or less worthy of receiving the loving witness of Christ-followers everywhere! Whether at Harvard, in Hollywood, or in South Central where I live, people are in need of Jesus. And followers of Jesus are called to bear witness to the kingdom in all of those places.
The question I was wrestling with has more to do with how or whether our witness should critique the needs/desires/entitlements of our culture. Your answer is that caring for people where they are at, meeting what they see as their needs, is a great way to show God’s love for them. I totally agree! When I think about how we are living in our community, there are so many illustrations that come to mind of how this exact thing led someone closer to a relationship with God. Maybe I am wondering where we draw the line…
Here’s an example, and it’s also from Willimon (his book, co-authored with Hauerwaus): a church planned to open a day-care for families in the community (a very huge felt-need). One of the elders raised this challenge: she suggested that the reason most of these folks needed childcare was so that they could work two jobs to have a bunch of money to buy a lot of stuff and keep up with their neighbors. She suggested that maybe the church shouldn’t be the place enabling that.
Thanks, Faith, for pushing back. It is great to have some discussion here!
Comment by Faith
8.07 am on 24 Feb 2008
So sorry, I sent this out over an email list at school and decided to post on the site too, that’s why it says Harvard.
Thanks for your reply, I do see what point you were trying to make more clearly now, and though I definitely see that, I think people take articles like this to the extreme sometimes.
Comment by Ben
11.31 pm on 24 Feb 2008
This is a very difficult topic as it touches many nerves. One nerve is the need/want/entitlement issue. Another is the idea that the church should serve the poor with no strings attached as opposed to meeting needs to get ‘people in the door.’ A third is the relationship between felt needs, material needs, emotional needs, and spiritual needs
I personally take a very firm line on some of these issues that is deeply unpopular. I believe that the church, institutionally, has no business helping the non-Christian poor until everyone in the church has already been provided for. I am for striking widows from the rolls unless they behave appropriately, etc. In short, I stand with the apostles and early deacons.
I’ve heard arguments from plenty of people who don’t.
However, as individuals, I think we should be willing to give alms or otherwise meet the needs of non-Christians, poor or otherwise, who won’t be able to repay us. A guy with a flat tire needs my help in his moment, and compassion should move me to pull over and render assistance. Sure, he isn’t starving, but so what? The Good Samaritan was Good. I should want to be good.
I put these behaviors in different categories, and neither are really about evangelism – though if people saw that the church contained no poor, no needy, no lonely, no unemployed, they might get themselves in the door without any prodding…
Comment by Tom
3.02 pm on 25 Feb 2008
Thanks for this post, Erika.
Your statement, “Too often what I see are churches that cater to a bunch of felt needs in a given community to get people ‘in the door.’ It is no wonder, then, that churches and their leaders feel quickly overrun with an impossible list of expectations and unmet needs.” really touched a nerve. I don’t know whether to repent or reflect more deeply on the shortcomings of my own leadership. I loathe the idea of becoming an ecclesiastical programmer. And so do many of my friends. But it seems that we have become beholden to a system that is structured towards infancy and resists the missional impulse given to us by God.
Once again, thank you. Peace.
Comment by Dave Walters
5.04 pm on 26 Feb 2008
Every person’s deepest need is God. Most of our fulfilmnent issues are an attempt to find significance, security, or provision somewhere other than the true God. How do I use a person’s present perceived need to direct their attention to the pressing, eternal, and transcendant need for Jesus? Jesus did this with the woman at the well and various other points in His ministry. Will I trust the Holy Spirit to help me to do the same in life and ministry. Church is something we are rather than a building we enter. Our position is a forward projection of God’s power and light into a dark world. We are not abandoned and God is faithful to His word and promises.
Comment by Scott Lenger
2.27 pm on 27 Feb 2008
From my reading of Steve Sjogren’s, the Conspiracy of Kindness, the primary intent of giveaways (also known as Servant Evangelism) is not to meet someones ‘inflated desire’ (though this is certainly a byproduct) but to create an opportunity to connect.
A free donut given to morning commuters is obviously not going to meet their need for food, but it may bring attention to the cultural problem of isolation and reveal the individual need for community. At the same time, I’ll grant that there are certainly better ways of connecting than handing someone a donut.
However, I think the real problem is when people misuse servant evangelism as a marketing strategy for church growth – at which point I would argue the action ceases to become servant evangelism. The example of giving away $.02 stamps probably falls in this category.
I agree with Willimon’s criticism of our cultures exaggeration of legitimate needs, but I think the interests of servant evangelism are a little more nuanced than he gives credit.
Comment by Erika Haub
3.16 am on 28 Feb 2008
Scott,
Thanks for attending to the nuance here…
Willimon is of course being provocative (which is one of the things I love about the guy!) and that serves the great purpose of bringing us to a place of examination and evaluation: we can so easily drift into stuff that over time becomes unexamined in terms of ministry practices.
Thanks for your thoughts!
Comment by Julie Clawson
8.41 pm on 29 Feb 2008
I am all about changing systems, but I am wary of ideas that could prevent us from showing love wherever and whenever. Sure no one physically needs hot chocolate – but the gesture of love might be exactly what that person needs right then. As for the day care example – I agree that some people do work two jobs just to keep up with their neighbors, but if the church stereotypes all those needing day care like that then true needs are ignored. I also have to then wonder what the church then did to change people’s perspectives? Did they insist everyone sell their homes and move away to cheaper neighborhoods? Sometimes bringing light to a broken system isn’t about condoning the system, it’s just about bringing light.
Comments are now closed.