Miguel Labrador's Blog

The concept of moral greediness has been churning in my mind of late. I’ve accepted the permanence of greed in this world as I’ve accept the permanence of poverty. I think they’re causally related. Greed, along with its cousins, envy, jealously, and violence, cause poverty. Jesus said, “The poor you will always have with you,” (Matthew 15:11), which is a restatement of His own words to Moses;

“For there will never cease to be poor in the land. Therefore I command you, You shall open wide your hand to your brother, to the needy and to the poor, in your land.” (Deuteronomy 15:11)

I’ve seen it all my life, even within the recesses of my own heart. It’s like an old piece of furniture that everyone wants to keep around but no one is sure why. It still surprises me when I see it in religious circles, especially Christianity, which is a religion supposedly based on an all sacrificing God who gave Himself for humanity. Christianity touts self-sacrifice as a defining characteristic and requisite for inheriting eternal life, but outwardly appears to give little thought to “dying to oneself” or “giving to those who ask of us.” (Matthew 5:42) Granted, these principles are primarily related to fiscal behavior, but that’s not what this post is about.

In a conversation with my wife a couple of days ago about businesses choosing whom they will serve or not serve because of religious reasons, we tossed around the idea of “moral greed.” Moral greed can be equated with fiscal greed in almost every way. Those who are not content with what they already have, want more, and usually at the expense of others. Incrementalism, the idea that we can make small moral moves over long periods of time to change how people think is no longer sufficient. Believers and unbelievers alike want all that they want morally, right now. It’s like a land grab for the moral high ground. It’s no longer adequate to let each live their own way on their own moral property. Tolerance has become intolerable and trespassing second nature. There’s a sense of entitlement for an eminent domain which is not debatable, and demanded in the moment. Regardless of one’s faith, or lack thereof, the land is full of moral misers.

To be fair, Jesus demanded repentance and belief in the moment and not incrementally, but He’s the one who followed hurting humanity into their pain and poverty. If we’re set on demanding behavioral change in others, and we call ourselves Christians, then we should also follow people into their pain and poverty. Believers should exemplify moral generosity. They are to  do justice, love kindness, and walk humbly with their God. (Micah 6:8)  Additionally, I’m not so sure that any person should demand moral compliance of another. Moral Greed postures, demands, and manipulates. I’d like to continue along on this theme in a short series, but for now… A few questions:

1. Do you think the concept of moral greed is a valid? Why, or Why not?

2. What sorts of behaviors would you describe as morally greedy?

3. In your opinion, does moral greed cause moral poverty?

I remember asking a bunch of agrarian Latino Christians if they would rather eat tomatoes grown in a hothouse, or those grown in under natural conditions, in their own soil. Most said they preferred the hothouse tomatoes. They were more flavorful, they looked better, and had a better texture.

The I asked them, “If you were tomato growers, would you want to grow tomatoes in a hothouse, or under natural conditions in your own soil?” All of them responded, “naturally under our conditions, and in our own soil.” There were many reasons for their choice, but most centered around: Sustainability, Strength of plant & seed in future generations, and Supplies.

For them, hothouse tomatoes were great to eat, but not great to grow.

What conclusions would you draw from their thoughts about tomatoes with respect to Making Disciples?

1. Make yourselves the primary beneficiaries of the trip. ~ It’s not exactly new, but it’s becoming ever more prevalent that short-term missions serve to benefit the ones going on mission more than the ones being ministered to.  There are at least three possible beneficiaries:  People being ministered to on the field, those who go, and the church who sends them.  If we’re honest, we’ll admit that the latter two are often the ones that benefit most.  These things ought not be so.

2. Make your agenda, program, or project more important than people. ~ I’ve seen it numerous times.  Missionaries who host short-term mission teams have seen it as well.  Projects, or better yet, “products,” become more important than people.  How can you know when this happens?  It’s simple.  It happens when your priority for the impersonal and inanimate dominates the personal, incarnational, and relational.  It happens when being late for your next appointment supersedes your present appointed time with a person in need.  These things ought not be so.

3. Assume that you’re the only ones who can do what you’re going to do. ~ You’re not!  God has an army of willing an adaptable people who He will send in your stead if you screw things up or fail to accomplish His mission for His people in the place that He chose.  Exclusive ability on the mission field is a dangerous addicting drug.  If you think you’re the only one who can give them what they need, then you just might be a pusher, a dealer, or a pimp, instead of a missionary.  These things ought not be so.

4. Serve the haves instead of the have-nots for convenience sake. ~ Short-term missionaries often serve in situations that are already self-sustaining, or convincingly write themselves into another mission’s story for convenience sake.  These sorts of arrangements are frequently parasitic rather than symbiotic.  It is not uncommon in these situations where sending agency and the receiving party benefit more than those who are supposed to be ministered to.  These things ought not be so. 

5. Plant Churches ~ Yes, you read that right.  But this applies when you assume that planting tiny facsimiles of the church where you came from is the best model for other’s contexts as well.  This applies when your view of church is place, a flea market of religious goods and services, or a dispenser of sacraments.  This applies when you assume that a church is a hierarchically structured local snap-shot of  the Kingdom.  If this is what you mean by church planting, then STOP planting churches!  Plant the gospel, plant yourselves, plant an contagious mission posture or attitude instead.  These things ought not be so.

6. Treat your translators poorly. ~  Your translators are the most critical part of your team.  They are the ones who interpret you.  They bridge culture.  They engender the first generations.  They are the people of peace that God has directed towards His mission endeavor.  Often, less money is invested in them than the tourism excursions planned for the team or souvenirs.  They are the ones who should experience the most concentrated discipleship, the most equipping, and the most encouragement.  Stop being cheap with your time, resources, and connections.  These things ought not be so.

7. Do everything but disciple people. ~ Short-term mission evangelism often resembles treasure hunting or skeet shooting.  It’s a minimal commitment engineered to temporarily snare people in the name of proclamation.  It’s manipulation and domestication more than discipleship.  It’s making promises that you’re not sure you can keep and convincing yourself that you’re going to make sure there’s follow-up by someone else.  These things ought not be so.

“Well then,” you might say… “If we can’t do any of those things, then what?”

1.  Give away all your rights, they belong to the Lord anyway.

2. Fast from your privileges and self assumed entitlements. Sacrifice them in the short-term for long-term impact.  Be disposed to receive instruction and direction.

3. Resist the urge to have the answer for everything on every subject.

4. Avoid every temptation to play the role of the wealthy provider, advantaged information dispenser, or aristocratic paradigm shifter. 

5. Cheerfully adjust, change, or drop your planned program to meet the local needs and fit into the local context.

6. Consult and support local leaders, translators, and believers.

7. Seek to live and work in a way that reflects Christ living in you.

These are the things that ought to be so… 

These principles could easily have been applied to any organization on the move anywhere.  I chose “short-term” mission trips because they are the most visible demonstrations of the the attitudes expressed above.  It could have easily been titled; “7 Ways to Make Sure Your Missional Endeavors Suck.”  What do you think?

No, I’m not talking about architecture, or interior design, I’m talking about the gathering of the saints, ekklesia, or what is commonly called “church.”  Mobile operating systems are getting “flatter,” “simpler,” and “minimal.”  Certain segments of the Church are doing likewise.  In fact, the idea of “simple” church has been around for some time.  

Some would say that streamlining how we do church would make for more effective mission.  Complicating church slows mission and eventually envelops it.  Intricacy for them, is the enemy of mission mobility.  A few questions:

1.  What are the absolute minimum requirements for making a gathering of God’s people “church?”

2.  Are there any advantages of large and complex systems to mission?

3.  If your church was having trouble getting of the ground due to excessive weight, what would you jettison first? 

It’s raw and unrehearsed, but this podcast takes an audio snapshot of the mission, culture, and church here in Ecuador.  It’s not too long, and you can listen to it here. 

We answer the question, “Why isn’t the Disciple Making that’s happening where you are, happening where we are?” and others in this podcast.  Pay attention to what Claudia says at the end about “Family on Mission.”

Found this quote today:

“And God has appointed these in the church: first apostles, second prophets, third teachers…” (1 Corinthians 12:28). This does not describe a hierarchy, but a divine order. Apostles are first in that order.”  

I have seen this work itself out in various ways, but I suspect that the author of this quote meant first in:

Authority

Status

AND

Position

What do you think of the quote? 

For a related post, see: “7 Debilitating Lies Of The Covering Doctrine.”

“Be careful with people who are quick to mentor, but lack one themselves.”  

This cautionary proverb was written on a friends Facebook wall today, and I’ll have to admit, it got to me.  It got to me because I don’t think I have one.  A mentor that is.  At least not in the same sense that my friend meant.  

I suppose I would love to have a mentor.  Someone wiser, more experienced, more knowledgeable, more mature in the faith, etc., and I’m positive they are out there, but I am a missionary.  My wife and I laid down everything in our former everyday lives to answer a call that God issued and “distanced” ourselves from those who could mentor us.  We’re on the edges of culture where none have been before.  I’m not so sure that apprenticeship or mentoring is viable for missionary pioneers.

I can’t help but wonder what a mentor would look like to me or any other missionary that has done the same.  If someone’s going to “show me the ropes,” then I suppose it fair to assume that they have a familiarity with them.  Also, I believe that incarnational/missional living is proportionate to the sacrificial.  Who mentors the missionary in being more sacrificial without the intention to be more sacrificial themselves?   

I’m not feeling guilty for not having a mentor, but I suppose I’m sad.  I’m sad that there is not a pool of mentors at my disposal to choose from.  So, what do I do?  I draw encouragement, exhortation, and education from a broad spectrum of Christ’s body as they live out their callings in their own contexts.  As a missionary, what other choice do I have?

A few questions:

1.  Who’s suppose to mentor the missionary?

2.  Should I have a mentor?

3.  What are the character traits of someone who mentors a missionary?  

Social Media has been buzzing with “Church” talk.  What is the “Church?”  What is the “Local Church?”  Do we “go” to Church, or are we to “be” the church?  I think it’s a great conversation, even if it polarizes at times.  Some folks get a little nervous when reconsidering, re-evaluating, and perhaps even re-defining what the local church is, but I believe the Church has the ability to dialogue without unfounded accusations and uninformed exhortations.  In other words, the Church can talk about church, and even debate about it, without acting contrary to it.  I think that some ecclesiastical doubt is a good thing and ultimately healthy for the Church.  From my perspective, I believe that there is tremendous diversity in how local gatherings/fellowships/churches can express themselves, but also believe that whatever characteristics are true of the Universal Church should be reflected and represented in its slices, chunks, and parts.   A few questions:

1.  Is the Universal/Local Church distinction biblically supported?

2.  If local churches are structured according to, modeled after, or conducted in such a way that directly contradicts the accepted characteristics of the Universal Church, then can they be considered churches?

3.  At minimum, a local church can be considered a church when ______________.  Fill in the blank. 

If you know me, you know I like blogging about church, posting about church on Facebook, and questioning the status quo when it comes to church.  Donald Miller, author of “Blue Like Jazz,” has done a great job of stirring up the Christians on the subject of church this week with a blog post on why he rarely goes to church.

There have been multiple spinoff articles as well.  I’ll admit I got bogged down in reading them ALL.

Here are some interesting descriptions or definitions of church I saw in some of these articles:

1. Church is where you experience the love of God, support God’s people, and accomplish God’s mission.

2. Church is a place where Christians can use their spiritual gifts to bless one another.

3. Church is a place of spiritual protection.

These are the first three descriptions that I will post in this series.  Is there anything wrong with them? 

Sitting around chanting “Kumbaya” while passing existential weed wrapped in bible paper is apparently how some think the church should “be.”

In essence, the thought is that Christians should be “doing” less and “being” more. It sort of a self deafeating proposition when you think about it. Encouraging others to simply “be,” requires action, or at least a shift in current action to some sort of non-action, which, is an action in and of itself.

It’s as if “Abiding in Christ” (John 15:4) were a passive thing.

Mankind, in general, but more specifically the church, lives and moves and ‘has’ its being or existence in God. To be fully human and fully Christian exhibits, at least, these three things. The Church, or members thereof, are to exemplify these three things, or shine as the optimum example of them.

“Living life,” is one part. “Moving,” is another. “Having our being, or existence in God is, or should be, a given which provides the backdrop for the other two.  Being sentient, self aware, or knowing that we “are,” is simply the recognition, to one degree or another, that we are created in God’s image. That being becomes more clear when every living person asks two primal questions;

“Who am I?

And

“Why am I here?” or “What is my purpose.”

John Gill says it this way,

“The natural life which men live is from God; and they are supported in it by him; and from him they have all the comforts and blessings of life; and all motions, whether external or internal, of body or of mind, are of God, and none of them are without the concourse of his providence, and strength assistance from him.”

God is the living, immanent principle of life, movement, and being in all people. If God is a missionary G0d, then by definition he is a moving God. As we conform to His image, we too will move like Him.  Silly statements like “Christians need to “be” more & “do” less, often result in stagnant, self-rotting, and selfish, non-action which segues into killing the mission and its church. 

The Church of God’s Mission must move. It “stays” in motion. There are times of rest, equipping, corporate worship, and meditation, etc., but those exist SO THAT the Mission of God in the world may continue. It LIVES and MOVES, continually, but already ‘has’ its BEING.

In a quick survey of the scriptures, I was trying to find passages that supporrted ideas like, “be more than you are,” or “be all that you can be,” etc. I didn’t find any. Perhaps you can point to some and reference them in the comment section.

On the other hand, There are an overwhelming number of references on how we are to LIVE and MOVE.

One Question for today;

Is there any merit to the idea that Christians should “be” more and “do” less?