Book Review: The Great Omission

"All the churches in North America cannot eradicate homelessness in Mexico, let alone the rest of the world. There just aren't enough Christians or enough money to allocate to it. We could probably blitz the border towns and make a pretty good showing. But as soon as the millions of poor people living further south heard about free housing on the border, a homeless migration would start." In his book The Great Omission, Steve Saint explores how the Great Commission could actually be accomplished in our world, arguing that worldwide evangelization isn't about the number of workers, but about multiplying the number of workers and the viral nature of their message's communication.

How long should a missionary stay on his field? Under what conditions should he consider his job “complete”? I believe many well-intentioned missionaries overstay their job in planting churches. After the church is planted, they want to stay and weed around it, water it, help it grow new leaves and deal with old ones. Eventually, this missionary, now a “gardener,” must leave indefinitely for medical reasons, at which point the plant loses more and more leaves, shrivels, and dies. Without its caretaker gardener, the plant doesn’t have its own structure, doesn’t believe that it is indeed a “plant.”

In fact, if the gardener had tended the plant until it reached basic maturity, and then left it alone, the plant would have had more chance of surviving long-term. This reminds me of peanut-butter sandwiches. My six-year-old nephew didn’t know how to make one because someone always made it for him. He was dependent on the sandwich-maker for his sustenance. However, when he learned how to make his very own sandwich – sloppy as it was – he knew he “owned” the sandwich, that he was responsible for it. And many more sandwiches were in his future!

Imagine a missionary and a national believer. Maybe the national is uneducated, informal, and poor. Many Western missionaries assume these qualities result in a dumb person, unable to understand the Bible or share his faith effectively. What about Christ’s students? He chose them, however lowly (fishermen) and despised (IRS agent Matthew) they were. These qualities, along with being poor and uneducated, should have disqualified them from Kingdom work. How did our Master think about them? He certainly would not trust them with building His church, would He?

When we see a believer, whether affluent from the suburbs, poor from the city, or uneducated from Appalachia, do we see them as equal workers in God’s kingdom? Who does Christ choose to build and maintain His church?

From the book’s cover: Steve Saint – Born and raised in South America by North American parents, Steve Saint has gone on to be a businessman, missionary, pilot, builder, designed, certified financial planner, speaker, and writer. Some of missionary martyr Nate Saint, Steve has become “family” to the tribe who killed his father. His unique life has given him a perspective on the Great Commission that is vital to the Body of Christ.

******************

This guest post was written by Chris H who lives with his wife, Cassie, and son, Chaim, in the sunbelt. Chris & Cassie are currently preparing to go overseas as missionaries. When they aren't in training, working, or caring for Chaim, they raise ferrets and think up other names that start with "C".

Responsible Charity: Book Review

I hadn't heard the term "responsible charity" until I got out of college. I had always assumed that you were a responsible citizen when you gave to charities. One very influential book challenged my thoughts on this. At the time the book was published under the name and you call yourself a Christian - Toward responsible charity by Dr. Robert Lupton. It is now published under the title of Compassion, Justice and the Christian Life - Rethinking Ministry to the Poor.

In this book Lupton points out an often overlooked consequence of charity: charity can actually take more from those we seek to help than it gives. When we are in the business of charity, it is in the best interest of that business to always have clients, "the poor". When the poor are no longer poor, there are no jobs in the charity business. Lupton explores the attitudes we must have in order to come along side the poor, to be their neighbor, to stay out of the business of charity and to embrace a life-style of love. Lupton points out that, "Doing for others what they can do for themselves is charity at its worst. We know from 40 years of failed social policy that welfare depletes self-esteem while honorable work produces dignity. We know that reciprocity builds mutual respect while one-way giving brews contempt. Yet we continue to run clothes closets and free food pantries and give-away benevolence accounts and wonder why the joy is missing"

Lupton challenges those with a heart for the poor to not just have compassion on the "least of these" but to use their minds to creatively affirm the value, contribution and responsibility that everyone has. I was reminded that "when [I] do for others what they can do for themselves, [I] cripple them." I must invest in people in a way that doesn't enable them to be poor, but to help them learn how to improve their situations themselves. Yet, Lupton is also realistic in how he views this responsibility that everyone has, "We are equal in neither our capacity nor potential. We are equal only in responsibility." It is an unrealistic to think that everyone has the capability to break the cycle of poverty, yet it is realistic that everyone has a responsibility to work towards that end.

Lupton's final challenge is to live among the poor, to make their problems our problems and to work TOGETHER to break the cycle of poverty while always keeping in mind that we can't ever change people - only God can. We are to follow Christ's example of living among those we want to help and love and in the end point them to Christ.

It's a good book. Check it out.