In Christian circles, we tend to hear a lot about being relevant, doing church differently and being good stewards. We hear about the latter every time our churches enter building campaigns or want to sell their congregations on the Biblical validity of the tithe.
I’d like to see the church as a whole actually put its money where its mouth is. What if we actually did something relevant that was an amazing display of stewardship.
Rotary International has vowed to end Polio worldwide, and they’re actually going to get the job done because they set a vision, got together and started putting their money towards a cause that would make a difference.
What if the church, instead of giving its money to bricks and mortar that decay or burn up, were to focus the money it collects on ending a real-world problem? For example, what if the church committed to ending Cancer or AIDS throughout the world? What if instead of telling Cancer patients we will pray for them or lecturing them on the sovereignty of God, we actually put our money towards medical research to end this disease that has in some way affected all of us?
What if instead of condemning the people in Africa who have AIDS, we committed ourselves to preventing and curing it?
In the United States alone, there are about 225 million people who identify themselves as Christians. Imagine if each of them were to give just $5 to cancer research? What about $10? What if during October, all of our churches took a hit and donated half of their tithe money to breast cancer research?
Think about the difference such a commitment would have on the world. I don’t know about you, but if I had a child who had cancer and a cure was found because of the work of Christ’s people, that would mean so much more to me than any Christian who knocked on my door or any sermon I ever listened to.
You want to talk about world missions? What if the church put an end to AIDS in Africa? Can you imagine the impact of millions throughout Africa knowing that the Jesus-people healed their land?
We used to do it. The church used to build hospitals. We used to see it as part of our calling to bring physical healing to a fallen world. Now, we tell people not to trust doctors and to load up on fish oil. In some cases, we tell people if they had more faith they would be better. Meanwhile, we give our money to build bricks and mortar kingdoms that moth and rust destroy and that thieves can break into.
Would Jesus have worked on making a beautiful and elegant stained glass window when their were lepers in his city who needed healing? I think we all know the answer to that. We may not be able to cure Cancer or AIDS. There may not be enough money in the world to accomplish such a task. But what if we could and we are instead sitting on our hands in church buildings that would have put the palaces of ancient kings to shame?
I don’t think the world actually despises organized religion. Organized religion at its best can be beautiful and can do amazing things. What the world can’t stand about us is the organized hypocrisy of watching our brothers and sisters die from deadly diseases or from poverty, while we build bigger and better churches for the dwindling number of Christians to sit in.
In the more “charismatic” or Pentecostal circles, if you brought something like this up, they’d counter with something to the effect of: “What about the supernatural healing power of God? Does God not heal anymore? Does he not perform miracles anymore?” I think, to them, donating money to cancer research or to eradicate AIDS in Africa would be tantamount to saying, “We don’t believe God can heal anymore,” or even “We trust man more than we trust God.”
To me, I think you *can* donate money to such causes and still retain your beliefs. And I agree that using church funds in such ways would be far more meaningful and whatnot than using them to advance the church’s (small “c” = the institution’s) agenda, be it building expansion or whatever.
Besides, I thought God didn’t live in a building anyway? Why do we have to make it nice?