The Church Has Failed: A New Social Club
On my way to the gym, I pass small, red-brick houses lined with miscellaneous items, missing parts of roofs, and in need of a grass-cut.
Poverty. They aren’t living great, they don’t have money for vacations, and they can’t go start a payment on a new car. They lack money to replace their roofs, motivation to move their items and a mower to cut their grass.
Yet there are 7 churches within a mile radius of this neighborhood.
Where are the donations going, and why has the church failed their neighbors?
Well, part of the blame goes to the United States government, and the welfare program.
Prior to the Great Depression, welfare was provided by mostly charities and churches. When the economy tanked, the federal government had to step in. Roosevelt started providing work relief and passed the well-known Social Security Act.
This welfare program relieved the church of its obligation to help the poor. The taxes of every citizen in the country were giving them handouts, benefits, and free money; the church felt like it no longer needed to take care of these needs.
Luke 3:11 (ESV)- And he answered them, “Whoever has two tunics is to share with him who has none, and whoever has food is to do likewise.”
In a way, this is similar to what has happened to the food industry. Prior to the 20th century, food was bought from local restaurants, whose chefs and staff genuinely cared how the customer felt. They had a personal stake in the business. Now, fast food reins supreme. Genuine, concerned employees were replaced with blank-faced teenagers who couldn’t care less if you enjoyed the food or threw it in the garbage bin.
A separation has developed, between the consumer and the provider, that creates a void of apathy. Relating this to the prior example: the poor are the consumers and the citizens are the providers. Yet, there is a disconnect, so the void of apathy appears. Taxes are a necessary evil, and instead of seeing the results of the given money, the citizens may as well be tossing their hard-earned dollars into a void.
Alternatively, if a church is investing in a community, the fruits are abundant and clear. There is no government, no fast-food worker. The congregation (the church) sees the direct effect of their given money for the community. The poor have homes, the hungry are fed, the sick have doctors, and the man down the road has a lawnmower to cut his grass. A community in desperate need of sustenance is now able to spring with life and thrive.
However, there is one key factor limiting the amount of community outreach that churches can provide, and that is the central tenant of Christianity:
Making disciples, and growing the congregation.
Let’s say a church received $1000 from the Sunday offering. They could:
a) invest it in the local community, sponsoring a food bank or building homes
b) invest in itself to make it more appealing to a broader base
c) give it to missionaries
I would wager that the majority of churches do a great amount of b) and c), and much less of a).
It makes perfect sense. Investing in the local community may not show returns in membership, attendance, or revenue. The local community may receive the gifts with open arms, yet refuse the offer to attend on Sundays or accept the Christian God as their god.
This is the fundamental flaw in assuming that churches can spur community growth.
Then perhaps the church is not the greatest unit of community impact. Perhaps, social organizations are superior. There exist volunteer centers, homeless shelters, and food banks among others. Couldn’t these fill the gap that churches have left?
In fact, these organizations have an even greater flaw- lack of leadership and participants.
In order to get actual work done, there must be a leader in place to manage resources and delegate tasks. A food bank gets volunteers that have researched volunteer opportunities in the area. These people stepped out of their comfort zone to volunteer at this food bank. Likewise, a homeless shelter attracts volunteers who decided to volunteer at a homeless shelter.
A church gets all of these people and more.
It attracts passionate, community-driven volunteers and it attracts hard-working, money-making intellectuals who can fund the projects. It has a leader with the ability to direct people to an array of tasks, with a wider scope and a vision for the future.
The problem is that, in order to participate in this organization, you must have a belief that there is a God, and that the one true God is the God of the Bible.
If the idea of a church was abstracted out from the central tenant- belief in God, then it would surely attract many more workers and volunteers, driven by the idea of helping others and putting a spark to the community’s flame.
This new social club would be a grassroots effort to clean up each community and bring life and livelihood to all people, everywhere.
Luke 6:36 (ESV)- But love your enemies, and do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return, and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High, for he is kind to the ungrateful and the evil.
Written by Davidson Poole
