The World Around Me

My world is expanding, and the world around me is getting smaller all the time as I proceed through Module 4.

By that I mean simply - the more I learn the broader my vision of the world becomes. At the same time, the more I learned, I realize how connected we all are and how actions have impacts far beyond our national borders. In that sense, my world is bigger, but the world is smaller.

The lessons I've studied recently in Module 4 (lessons 13-17) underscore this point significantly. Through these lessons, I have examined wealth and poverty from a global standpoint. I've learned that the poor of Los Angeles would be the middle class in Calcutta. This is stunning to me.

My study program emphasizes development, so much of what I have studied presents different viewpoints on development. Many of these are new to me and I'm still processing them, and trying not to come to conclusions too quickly. But there have been some key themes that emerged in the study of wealth and development that merit sharing here.

• The industrialized countries hold 20% of the world's population, but consume 80% of the world's food. An interesting fact - but what do we do with that information. Bringing that into a healthier balance would be good for everyone - they wouldn't starve and we wouldn't overeat. But how does that happen? We know that forced redistribution isn't a viable long-term option (see: USSR). We could send massive quantities of food around the world, but that's relief - not development. How can we help them help themselves? And what about countries with poor soil - should we approach those differently. More questions than answers.
• Development problems are both spiritual and material. Often, physical problems have spiritual causes. And sometimes, addressing material needs opens the door to meet spiritual ones. But we have to recognize that the issue cannot be separated. The struggles of Israel in Judges would have looked to the outside rather material - wars, poverty, oppression. Yet we know from biblical revelation that they had spiritual causes. In today's world, the same is true. Not that every spiritual cause can be laid on those suffering - sometimes they are victims of another's sin. But separating the spiritual from the material causes is a western concept, not a biblical one.
• Incarnational mission will meet people where they are, in a manner that honors who they are - but will love them enough to move them beyond their present situation. That's what God did for us when He walked this earth.
• Development should consider how to be of, by, and for the people. If we truly believe in democracy, we should apply that to development. Often we do it "for them" (or worse, for ourselves). We need to come alongside and find ways to help them identify the need, be involved in the process of meeting it, as well as serve them authentically in a way that is truly "for" them. This can happen in a number of ways: micro loans; incarnational service; national involvement; grassroots opportunities. We just have to quit thinking of ourselves as the hero and see ourselves as a servant in God's kingdom purpose - leading the people to a better place materially and spiritually.

Note that this is different than relief. In urgent crises, relief is necessary. People have to survive before they can thrive. But relief can also be counterproductive to successful development. We should be wise about how long to extend relief and also seek to involve locals as much as possible. (For example, the IMB distributes food through local churches, who know those who truly need food and those who just take it and sell it on the black market. In contrast, some major secular relief organizations just open the back of a truck and give food to whoever is in line first - often the strongest who got there by pushing back the weak.)

• We cannot refuse to respond. Yes, indigenous involvement is important. Yes, we have to take into account ways to avoid creating a dependency culture. But God has always used instruments to achieve His purposes. In the case of Israel noted earlier, the judges were raised up as tools of God. Matthew 25:31-40 gives practical, not theoretical, ways to serve. As an article by World Relief noted, "God never intended for the righteous to sit idle while the restless poor struggle for survival." It would take $30-40 billion a year to meet the educational, health, and water needs of the entire world - and that's the amount spent each year on golf.
• Stewardship is vital. Obviously, we want to use funds wisely, so that we don't send $30-40 billion a year forever. That isn't healthy either. As we gain knowledge, we should pray for wisdom and look for organizations that are serving the grassroots level in ways that demonstrate successful development, not institutionalized programs. As Ralph Winter notes, "When the means to an end becomes the end, you are in big trouble." Watch your giving to assess whether the goals are being accomplished by the organizations you give to, or whether the means to an end has become the end.

Finally, I'll close with a significant quote from Lesslie Newbigin on having a Christian worldview. As someone who has focused much on theology but has been weak on practical application, I appreciate his message:

"The Christian story provides us with a set of lenses, not something for us to look at but to look through."

May we learn together to look through those lenses on a global scale!

New Attitude

How do we change at the deepest levels? That's the heart of the questions in this section. How do we get a “new attitude”. One of the authors pointed out that where Christianity has entered into medical missions, it has made a difference not just because of the medical deeds accomplished, but because of the “new attitude” it brings toward the sick. How is this developed? Obviously, the Holy Spirit plays a key role, working change from the inside out. But how does change look on a societal level?

Broken Earth is a book about the rural Chinese following the Cultural Revolution. It's interesting to read because it reveals how the Chinese ethnos remained despite the cultural revolution. There was a significant difference between the propaganda and the reality, the cadres and the peasants. The ethic or worldview didn't change despite forced attempts. Surface level does not equal heart change!

Assessing the evidence of real change involves a willingness to get to know people and drill down to the basics – to promote reflective thinking and not reactionary responses. Polarizing or reacting tends to lead to reductionism – we see this in the liberal/fundamentalist camps, which reacted to each other so sharply that for many years Christianity had the “social Gospel” wing and the “evangelical” wing. There are new organizations today that are blending the two again as they always have been Biblically ... but the process is hard. It's hard for an old organization to bring in the other element.

When we let Scripture guide though, we see so much balance. We can bring all of life under kingdom principles in perfect balance. There is an emphasis on both individual and community. New cultural forms of faith are extolled without any hint of using indigenous churches as an excuse for racism. The balance is perfect.

Ultimately, through the Spirit and the Word, God will work a new attitude. As believers, we can best influence our society in the manner mentioned by Mother Theresa: Let people be "reminded of Jesus" by our actions.

Us and Them

Us and them. At least since Babel, humans have been able to differentiate on the basis of differences. THEY are not like US…however we define that.

Perhaps that’s why one of the most deeply rooted reactions that cultural anthropologists note is the fear or distrust of “outsiders”. Throughout the world, people seem hard-wired to reject, fear, or even attack those who are “not us”. Social psychologists have noted that in addition to assuming negative facts about outsiders, humans worldwide tend to reinforce negative stereotypes of “others” on minimal facts. (Think Archie Bunker.) This isn’t just the domain of “racists” – the research shows it’s our default reaction as humans. We all have the potential to be Archie Bunker. It’s called sin.

In this light, the Biblical commands to love and actively seek the good of the “foreigner” – placing the outsider in the same category with widows and orphans in many passages – can be seen as a corrective to our sin nature. We have to be guided toward loving them.

One of the best tools that we have, in conjunction with the empowering of the Holy Spirit, is knowledge. The more we know about a group, the less “other” they become. When we actually come to know someone from a group, “they” begin to be less “them” - a faceless conglomeration. They take on flesh and blood. We begin to see our co-worker or friend in the faces of others from that group.

Much of the church in the West is still in the process of embracing multiculturalism. We’re scared of the word. It’s understandable that this will be a process – in 1945, 99.5% of the world was under colonial rule. By 1969, 99.5% of the world was free from colonial rule. We’ve only been really dealing with this issue for a couple of generations.

One of the best things we can do is learn to ask questions about our own culture and worldview. What are the elements in our culture that seem strange to outsiders? Why do we believe what we do? Where do we get the idea that silverware is better than chopsticks? What are the benefits of a family-oriented culture over an individual-oriented one like ours? And so on.
Within the church, we will see benefits if we do these hard things. Christianity is accepted by more people when it is freed from political power. So if we can separate what is cultural versus what is Biblical, we take a big step toward freeing Christianity from being perceived as “Western”. We then take a huge step toward seeing people – and cultures – on equal footing with ours: All in need of grace. All with some attributes to be embraced, some to be rejected, and many to be redeemed.

This is called incarnational ministry. The Incarnation was the translation of Word to flesh. Our Bible, unlike the Qur’an, is translatable. Likewise, our faith is translatable into different cultures. Jesus established the model Himself: At places He adapted to culture; at other places He broke mores.

“The Incarnation was not and is not primarily a doctrine. It was and it is an event. It was a life lived, and it is a life to be lived.”