Keeping the Lamps Trim
by Ezra O'Leary
Mainstream Christianity could do well to re-establish a greater claim over this virtue.
I feel like mainstream Christianity missed a trick when it came to the financial crisis. Imagine the chord that might have been struck with the greater public had there been someone front and centre in visible televangelism ranting about keeping the lamps trim and how consumerism was out of control. Even without a soothsayer, if large tracts of Christian communities had emerged unscathed from the financial crisis, the claim to God inspired wisdom around matters of finance would have greater resonance in public discourse. However, a large cross-section of society, Christian and not, were touched by the financial crisis. You can bet there were a fair few financial traders who take a pew on Sunday who were caught out by the collapse.
Indeed, in the lead up to the current global financial woes, one of the more prominent themes in visible Christian discourse has been prosperity preaching. Now, I’m not against prosperity, but the problem is that the prosperity in prosperity preaching comes across predominantly as monetary.
Prosperity in a spiritual relationship surely bears its blessings spiritually first and foremost. Being spiritually blessed is its own reward and should surely be seen as separate and having no connection to financial means. In terms of what sustains a person, in a Christian dynamic it’s fitting that bread is the metaphor for what a person should be careful about focusing on in living day to day.
Mainstream Christian discourse could do better to make the distinction clearer. Financial means aren’t a necessary or promised part of the package of spiritual prosperity. Many communities through history have found ways to unite through times of material drought and maintain great spiritual prosperity despite the hardships suffered. Unfortunately the message that comes across in some Christian circles is that monetary ‘blessings’ are a fruit that proves spiritual prosperity. However, as the financial crisis showed, money doesn’t mean you’re spiritually prosperous, so it should follow that we should never see monetary means as evidence of spiritual prosperity, even if the person is a Christian.
In fact, if anything monetary means shouldn’t be seen as a blessing in reward for a strong walk with God, but a heavy responsibility to be exercised with wisdom to benefit those in need. Otherwise the temptation can be to acquire objects that exemplify spiritual prosperity through monetary blessing, even while fundamental spiritual aspects of a person’s life fall by the wayside. This approach typifies part of what brought us the financial crisis in the first place, the desire to exude success through acquisition, done quickly rather than thoughtfully.
If the Christian community can knuckle down and keep the lamps trim, a great foundation can be laid for future prosperity. Gains can be made with hard, humble work, rather than an ethic that falls in too easily with capitalistic mores that don’t lean far enough towards clothing the naked and feeding the hungry. Perhaps in lowering our monetary expectations for ourselves, we can learn to better share our abundance with those in need. This doesn’t need to be a straight transfer of money. It could be as simple as sacrificing potential earnings through time spent helping others to help themselves using our experience and expertise. It is this human to human contact which has the greatest chance of building spiritual prosperity, so much greater than writing a cheque.
Money is an evil we have made necessary, not a necessary spiritual tool gifted to us from God along with life since the time of Adam. There are enough of us whose parents did much to enrich our lives with a lot less than what many of the rich have done for the children we regularly see exemplifying excess and wayward behaviour in the media. This is not to say that being rich is bad for children, only that monetary means aren’t necessary for good children. Perhaps now is the time to double our efforts to extol a trimming of the lamps. Let others get excited over recoveries that may or may not eventuate. We can keep a constant ethic of conservative consumption, tied to spiritual prosperity, that people can take comfort in no matter what the financial conditions. What better way to prepare for any future financial storms?
The NT is unambiguous on the subject, but there is some trouble dealing with the Hebrew Bible. Material and spiritual prosperity are so often bound up with each other. But even ignoring the tel-evangelical bling, you're right that mainstream Christianity is no barrier to the consumerism/materialism of the culture (Christmas is coming up). It would be interesting to explore this further, including a discussion of monasticism.
I'm glad you brought up monasticism. I think if I'd been better built for monasticism, or at least that sort of lifestyle, then full-time ministry might've been an option for me. I think it would send a great message to be able to full-time minister and live on the bare minimum, and being able to say the joy of the ministry fulfills in a way that using tithes for personally enjoyed chattels never could. Plus being open about church finances, particularly disclosing what is spent on your living costs, would take away from some of the critiques often levelled by people on the outside looking in. I saw a news item on the general coordinating the military effort in Afghanistan, and he had a small, spartan room.
"What else do you need? He said."
Sent a message about a man dedicated to his mission.
I think mainstream "Christianity" has forgotten one simple directive that Jesus Christ gave at Matthew 10:8, "You received free, give free." For far too many, preaching is a job and a means to gain wealth. There's not very much Christ in Christian. This carries over even into the fact of what is taught and placated and even praised. It's all very Pharisaical. Preachers/ministers or whatever title you want to give them will say just about anything to keep the pews and thus the coffers filled. 2 Timothy 4: 3&4 says, "For there will be a period of time when they will not put up with the healthful teaching, but, in accord with their own desires, they will accumulate teachers for themselves to have their ears tickled; 4 and they will turn their ears away from the truth, whereas they will be turned aside to false stories." And isn't that what we see? Politics and religion and commerce being bedfellows? Megachurches? Paying for the front pew? Telling people that whatever lifestyle they live is "okay with God" even when there are scriptures that say the very opposite? Oh no. . . . can’t turn away those with the money. Let's tell 'em what they wanna hear. Lie, smile and pass the collection plate.
Don't get me started on paying for the front row. Down here some churches will go so far as to call those people kings and queens. What do you think churches should do to meet today's challenges though? How do you stay current with technology and being accessible without driving up the need for tithes? I have my own perspective, but I'd like to hear yours. With such a focus on churches and the idea that a large church shows a strong spiritual following, how do you maintain that without bringing a truckload of money into the equation?
I don't think that size and spirituality are the least bit related, nor is current technology part of the mission. The building we call a "church" has little to do with the biblical church (better, "congregation") of believers. How do you maintain it? By keeping the lamps trim. Don't commit the congregation to a burdensome physical edifice in the first place. There's a church in downtown Dallas made up of a bricolage of bricks, because everyone brought what what they could, or what they had left over from their own homes. What a great start.
By the way, I would have been a great monk!
Why does worship have to be about technology? I'm not saying that in order to worship, the atmosphere should be ascetic: no electricity, no indoor plumbing. But on the other hand, why the need for a multi-million dollar sound system and a jumbo tron in order to pay reverence to God? I mean, when it gets to that point, it's not so much worship as a performance. That's when you start hearing about the performer and not the message. It becomes "Pastor so and so was really feelin' it today" or "Sister Choir Solo really tore it up. You could hear/see him/her all the way in the back." The size of the congregation is not a factor in whether or not it has God's support. Does not the Bible say at Matthew 18:20, "For where there are two or three gathered together in my name, there I am in their midst.”? For me, I think a smaller congregation is better all the way around. In that way, the mature ones in the congregation can better shepherd the flock. The members of the congregation can actually tell who is new or who is missing and give encouragement accordingly. I had someone ask me once, "do you go to Potter's House, too?" My response was, "if you go there, shouldn't you know?" So in short my perspective is that a large church doesn't equal strong spirituality. That to me is a very fallible line of reasoning. If that were the case, wouldn't the converse be true. Wouldn't that mean that the person sincere of heart who lives someplace where they are isolated does not have blessing? Om addition, I think the individual spirituality of each congregant can better flourish when said congregation is kept to a manageable size–when each member is able to receive the personal attention that's needed. As for financial support of the congregation, we handle ours completely based on voluntary donations and the lights ain't been turned out yet. And there's always enough for growth and new buildings when needed, etc. It's not a status symbol about who's church is the newest, biggest and shiniest with the most bells & whistles. That's not what impresses God. He can read our hearts and can hear us when we talk to him in silence so there's no need to flash and shout.
Sorry. . .put my response in the wrong place. My answer to your question is under Vlad's comment!