So, now that I have your attention, allow me to expand on and substantiate these purposeful provocations. Jesus, in the Gospels, like Moses in the Pentateuch, makes clear that the Christian's most important relationship and obligation is to love God with all their being and then to let that love overflow to all mankind—even their enemies. And, arguably, the Christian's second most important is to provide for and serve the poor. This is not works theology, but rather recognizable fruit and a measure of our selfless faith and love of God. Do you doubt this? Then, let's look deeper at some Scriptural guidance.
A central teaching is in the 25th chapter of the Gospel of Matthew at verse 31, a section my NAS Bible informally titles, "The Judgment." And it is in the context of final judgment that Jesus offers the teaching on the separating of the sheep from the goats—and that the "sheep" are to "inherit the kingdom prepared for [them] from the foundation of the world." Why? Because the "sheep" are those who serve Him by serving the poor: giving them food and drink and clothing, visiting and helping the sick, and visiting the prisoner. The "goats" are those who do not serve the poor, and therefore do not serve Jesus. They will be judged "accursed" and sent "into the eternal fire which has been prepared for the devil and his angels." However a faithful and thoughtful Christian may relate to the hellfire and brimstone imagery or metaphor, there can be little doubt how high a personal and community priority Jesus' teaching places on providing for the poor. If we do not follow this teaching, we do not follow him.
(Of course, 1Jn.1 makes clear that if we earnestly confess our errors or sins, God is faithful to forgive us and cleanse us from all unrighteousness. And earlier in Matt.12, Jesus makes clear that any sin or blasphemy shall be forgiven except blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, likely ascribing the good work of the Holy Spirit to Satan. Read further on forgiveness, ours and God's, in my later post, "Forgiveness.")
And the Gospels and Epistles offer many other everyday examples and events that make clear the special relationship of the poor with Jesus and God, and highlight the attention and healing directed by Jesus and the Apostles to them. It is hard to miss the point, yet somehow so many of us do.
But there are also those who would cavalierly invoke Paul's Epistle to the Ephesians, Chapter 10, saying, "…if [I] confess with [my] mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in [my] heart that God raised him from the dead, [I] shall be saved." "So, I'm covered," they would say. For those folks, I would only note that Jesus is not Lord if they do not endeavor to follow his example and teaching, especially a teaching with such important implications as this one. They appear as those referred to in Matt. 7 who would say, "Lord, Lord," but follow Him only when it is convenient--and Jesus says he does not know them.
Yet, it is still so easy for some to take out of context and embrace Jesus' statement in Chapter 26 of Matthew's Gospel, that "... the poor will always be with us." It is easy to allow that phrase to serve as a rationale for diverting the bounty provided us to first acquire our finer things in life—and to pursue that consumption with a shrug of the shoulder that suggests there is no helping the poor anyway because, after all, they will always be with us. But it is clear, isn't it, that this phrase uttered by Jesus, and His broader teaching, is not a dismissal of the poor at all, but rather addresses a more important point about that exception that proves and affirms the rule?
In that unique circumstance, Jesus reminds the disciples that they are there and then dealing with that most important obligation and relationship: the love, reverence and adoration of Jesus and God. Implicitly, in other circumstances, providing for the poor would take priority. And this is affirmed by the instinctive response of Jesus' disciples that a thing of value—especially costly perfume or oil like that being applied to Jesus' hair—should be sold and the proceeds given to the poor. And that was so even when they were living largely on the charity of others. Surely the old adage, "We are called [by God] to serve, not to succeed," would find appropriate context and application for us today to the extent we wring our hands over whether or not we can make a difference in the lives of the poor.
And what of the inclination of some to be distrustful of government or disinclined to give or increase their taxes owing, however understandable that may sometimes seem? Aren't we admonished in Paul's Epistle to the Romans,
...to be subject to the governing authorities...For there is no authority except from God...[And] because of this [and for "conscience sake"] you also pay taxes, for rulers are servants of God, devoting themselves to this very thing. Render to all what is due them: tax to whom tax is due [government], custom to whom custom...And when confronted about paying the Roman poll tax, didn’t Jesus simply, tersely, admonish the duplicitous Pharisees and the secular Herodians to "…render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's”? When these two teachings of Paul and Jesus are taken together, isn’t it hard not to conclude that we are to honor government and play a supportive role because it is God’s means of assuring civil order, public protection and supportive community? And when the taxes “rendered unto Caesar" so clearly serve the purposes of God, including providing for the poor, shouldn't there at least be a comfortable, affirmed sense of acceptance in the giving?
Further, isn't it clear that, however innovative and important their contribution, all the faith-based ministries and private charities together cannot come close to meeting the needs of the poor? Isn't it clear that only the scope, resources and authority of our government can meet that need? Don't we then have to view our taxes—in part, at least—as a tithe-like contribution to serving the poor and those in need and, in the process, serving our Lord?
Now, if only I could live this teaching as well as I understand it, and as passionately as I share it with you.
First written: June 2008
© Gregory E. Hudson 2008
