The Reformed Pastor

Last week, a group of religious left leaders (including Jim Winkler of the United Methodist General Board of Church and Society, J. Herbert Nelson of the PCUSA Office of Public Witness, and Michael Livingston, former president of the National Council of Churches) got themselves arrested at the U.S. Capitol in one of those pointless, feel-good protests that are so beloved on the left. “We’re talking action to help the poor!” they proclaim to all who will listen as they are led off in cuffs, immediately forgotten by the people they were allegedly trying to influence.

The religious left has been engaged in a variety of publicity stunts, ad campaigns, and letter-writing frenzies trying to head off the debt deal that the House passed last night and that the Senate will almost certainly pass today. In the process, as I’ve noted on several occasions, what they’ve mostly done is demonstrate how little they understand about basic economics or the way the government actually works.

Not wanting President Obama or Congress to be left with the impression that Jim Wallis and Company somehow “speak for Christians,” a group called “Christians for a Sustainable Economy” (CASE) has come together and sent its own missive to the powers-that-be. Unlike the kind of people who typically sign on to a Sojourners rant, this one includes some people who presumably actually know something about economics. (They include P. J. Hill, Emeritus Professor of Economics at Wheaton College; Eric Teetsel, Program Manager, Values & Capitalism at the American Enterprise Institute; Ramona Marotz-Baden, Emeritus Professor of Family and Consumer Sciences, Montana State University; Michael Cromartie of the Ethics and Public Policy Center; Hunter Baker, Associate Professor of Political Science at Union University; David Stanley of the National Taxpayers Union; and a variety of business owners, as well as the usual theological academics, pastors, etc.) I offer that letter, which I have signed myself, for your consideration and comment:

Recently, in the midst of the debt-ceiling crisis, a group calling themselves the “Circle of Protection,” led by Jim Wallis of the activist group Sojourners, met with you and your staff to claim that biblical mandates preclude limits to federal programs for low-income people. The Circle includes representatives of the National Association of Evangelicals, Bread for the World, and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.

Wallis and the “Circle of Protection” do not speak for all Christians. However laudable their intentions, the consequence of their action is to provide a religious imprimatur for big government and sanctify federal welfare programs that are often ineffective — even counterproductive. Contrary to their founding “Statement,” we do not need to “protect programs for the poor.” We need to protect the poor themselves. Indeed, sometimes we need to protect them from the very programs that ostensibly serve the poor, but actually demean the poor, undermine their family structures and trap them in poverty, dependency and despair for generations. Such programs are unwise, uncompassionate, and immoral.

Let no one be deceived: Whether or not an agreement resolves the immediate debt-ceiling crisis, the long-term crisis of insolvency in our government remains. A trillion-dollar cut barely puts a dent in the mountain of debt we are preparing to pass on to our families. This debt will only impoverish even more Americans. So we ask that you meet with us, Christians for A Sustainable Economy (case4america.org). We believe the poor of this generation and generations to come are best served by policies that promote economic freedom and growth, that encourage productivity and creativity in every able person, and that wisely steward our common resources for generations to come. All Americans – especially the poor – are best served by sustainable economic policies for a free and flourishing society. When creativity and entrepreneurship are rewarded, the yield is an increase of productivity and generosity.

Compassion and charity for “the least of these” is an essential expression of our faith, flowing from a heart inclined towards God. And just as the love of God frees us for a more abundant life, so our charity must go beyond mere material provision to meet the deeper needs of the poor. To suggest that Matthew 25 – or any commandment concerning Christian charity – can be met through wealth redistribution is to obscure these truths. We encourage you to consider the whole counsel of scripture, which urges not only compassion and provision for the poor but also the perils of debt and the importance of wise stewardship.

To the question, “What would Jesus cut?”, we add the question, “Whom would Jesus indebt?” The Good Samaritan did not use a government credit card.

The government plays an important role and communities do need social safety nets for those in need. A Christian approach to the budget crisis considers the interests of the poor. All of us suffer when our nation exchanges wisdom, prudence, liberty and faithful stewardship for the chronic unemployment of a stagnant economy and the enslaving power of debt.

Both parties have failed. Our common resources have been stewarded unwisely and the United States is trillions of dollars in debt. We have reached a breaking point. Fiscal recklessness must stop. Just as we should not balance the budget “on the backs of the poor,” so we should not balance the budget on the backs of our children and grandchildren.

Even as the debt-ceiling crisis passes, the long-term challenge of making federal spending wise and effective remains. We recommend three steps:

1. Correctly identify the problem.

The debt disaster is a spending issue. Tax revenues are finite, while the growth of government is unceasing. By any measure, federal spending has skyrocketed, from $2.9 trillion in 2008 to $3.8 trillion in 2011. We presently borrow over forty cents of every dollar we spend. While increasing taxes will generate additional revenues and reduce the deficit in the short term, it will ultimately harm the economy, constrain economic growth, and hasten the out-of-control growth of government. To give more money to Washington is to give the sickness the remedy it requests. The last thing the government needs is more money. It needs to cease its unwise and profligate spending.

2. Put narrow political interests aside.

Entrenched political interests stagnate reform. Every cent of government spending must be on the table, for ‘liberal’ and ‘conservative’ priorities alike. The stated intention of helping the needy does not make poverty programs sacrosanct. Some of these programs ‘serve’ the poor so well that they make more people poor and keep them in poverty longer. Stop the demagoguery against those who propose substantive changes to entitlements and social welfare programs.

3. Lead for the long term.

Americans yearn for, and deeply appreciate, leaders who embraces a burden of responsibility that transcends the implications of the next election cycle. While we agree that budgets are moral documents insofar as they reflect values and decisions for which we are morally culpable, long-term budget plans are morally meaningful promises we make to later generations. Right now we are morally failing our children and grandchildren by selling their future flourishing for our present comfort. In hard times, true leaders make hard decisions. We encourage you to put aside political calculations and the pressures of special interest groups to make commitments that are in the long-term interest of the American economy and the American people.

People of faith come in all stripes, and differ on many points. Jim Wallis and the “Circle of Protection” are but one perspective. We believe they have misrepresented “the faith community” and conveyed less than the full biblical witness and the counsel it provides in the current crisis. As such, even as you met with the “Circle of Protection,” we request a meeting as well. If you are committed to hearing voices of faith, even those that challenge your policy priorities, we hope you will meet with us.

As Christians striving for a sustainable economy, one that will lift the poor out of poverty and dependency on government (learn more at case4america.org), we thank you for considering our message – and for your service to our nation. May God bless America, and return us soon to wise stewardship of our common resources.

UPDATE: This is why a counterweight to Wallis & Co. is needed:

We ‘lift the bun’ to hear from Rep. Emanuel Cleaver who explained to CNN’s Wolf Blitzer the debt deal went against every major religion.

On Monday he tweeted, “This deal is a sugar-coated Satan sandwich. If you lift the bun, you will not like what you see.”

The four-term Missouri Democrat continued his Twitter diatribe against the deal to raise the amount of money the nation can borrow and make a down payment on the federal deficit saying, “This debt deal is antithetical to everything the great religions of the world teach, which is take care of the poor, aged, vulnerable.”

I’m a church planter, and therefore virtually of necessity forced to think outside the box. There are a lot of ways to plant a church, a lot of ways to be in ministry, and a lot of ways to bring the gospel to non-believers. There are limits, however. Once you’ve jettisoned God, you’re actually dealing with a social service organization, or a non-governmental organization, or a political organization. Or, in this case presented by the Presbyterian News Service, a business:

The town of Bend, in central Oregon, is in what is often referred to as the least-churched county in the least-churched state. Even still, it is no stranger to church plants.

“Bend is like a graveyard for churches,” said one of its more recent pastors, the Rev. Zachary Hancock.

Hancock was called to be the organizing pastor for a proposed Presbyterian new church development in Bend.

“When I got to town all the young pastors looked at me as if ‘That’s just what we need here: another church planter,’” he said.

But Hancock wasn’t actually that interested in getting people to go to church.

“My big goal is not to get people to go to church, but to engage people in doing the living into the reality of God, which is the way of the gospels, the way of Christ,” Hancock said. “That doesn’t necessarily have to look like going to church and sitting in a pew and listening to a sermon.”

As soon as I encountered the expression, “living into the reality of God,” I knew I was in trouble.

What it is about is ‘doing service’ in and for the world.

As with many churches, the steering committee of this NCD was interested in finding a way to reach out to young adults ages 18-35.

So what did they do, especially since Hancock wasn’t interested in actually, you know, planting a church? They didn’t start a church, they started a restaurant:

“I felt that we could really engage young people who don’t want anything to do with church if we could give them something to participate in and believe in that their heart knows as truth,” Hancock said.

This is different than simply trying to gather the young people and bring them into the church.

“What I was saying is that we need to pursue not an age group, but what we have been called to — what Christ has called us to. When we do that, people will follow, whatever their age is,” he said.

That call, in the case of Bend, has taken the form of the Common Table Public House. Its mission: “Feed all people, cherish the earth and pursue awareness.” Hospitality, welcome and action are at the heart of this ministry experiment that serves people daily, in the form of food and drink, and monthly with a shared meal and faith gathering.

“We are trying to be a place, to use the cliché, that earns the right to be heard — more than that, that earns the right to have the privilege of people joining you and trusting you that you are a safe place where they can be authentic, tell their story and participate.”

There are no crosses up at Common Table; as a public house, it has a full bar.

Common Table is trying to live up to its name — a common table that draws no distinction between people, regardless of who they are. One of the menu items, called the ‘World Bowl’ is offered by donations on a sliding scale. They’ve also created wooden tokens, with $10 carved onto them, which are distributed to those in need, who can then trade them in for a meal.

That’s all fine and good–certainly soup kitchens, for instance, can be the kind of place where it is possible to bring the gospel to people–but there’s something, shall we say, squishy about this whole idea.

“A lot of our labor is through volunteers — and that is not just to save a buck,” said Hancock, who believes people practice a spiritual discipline when they volunteer. As a reminder, the dishwashing sink is surrounded by a painted mural of Brother Lawrence, the monk who is know for his ‘practice of the presence of God’ in all situations — including washing dishes.

Which is fine, if people have any idea why Brother Lawrence did what he did.

“One of the other reasons that we opened a restaurant was because I felt like one of the ways we can make an impact on our planet is how we source our food — how far we bring it, how it is raised and how it is delivered,” Hancock said.

OK, so Hancock is a crunchy granola type who is saving the planet by using local tomatoes. Whatever. When I go the web site linked above, I find…a restaurant. A restaurant with a peculiarly Northwest feel, a do-gooder mentality, and no Christian content whatsoever. Instead, I read stuff like this:

Common Table exists to feed all people, cherish the Earth and pursue awareness. We are an experimental volunteer-driven non-profit cafe. We endeavor to serve extraordinary food regardless of ability to pay.

This was on the events page, which gave no evidence that any of the establishment’s events had anything to do with the gospel. (However, Common Table will be participating in the Northwest Crossing Farmers’ Market, and hosting “family friendly free music.”)

Common Table is a non-profit Social Entrepreneurship project for the betterment of our community and world.  At the core of Common Table is a café from which we endeavor to serve extraordinary food to all people, both those with the ability to pay, and those who under typical circumstances would not be able to eat at a café of our quality.  The Social Entrepreneurship model that we have studied and intend will allow Common Table to serve the privileged and under-privileged, while being sustainable for many years without major annual infusions of new donations.

In addition to providing meals for all people, we will train workers in the food service industry; offer education about healthy eating, sustainable agriculture, local sources of food, and ethical sourcing; gather a diversity of people in the same space for many kinds of public discourse, music, and learning opportunities.  We will use the proceeds from our breakfast and lunch business to pay for the expenses of the facility, evening events, speakers, films, music, discussions, classes, etc. – all pieces of the full Common Table vision.  Common Table aspires to be the best of what a Public House can be.

Common Table exists for the good of the overall Bend community.  An investment in Common Table is an investment in people who need jobs, people who need wholesome good food, people who need community, people who need education and experience in the best life has to offer.

This is the “About Us” statement. I’ve read everything on the web site, including all the blog entries. The latter include an article from the Bend Bulletin that describes what Common Table is doing, as well as the growing number of non-profit, philanthropic restaurants across the country (evidently Panera opened one last year). The article quotes Hancock as saying, “We wanted to value humans, humanity, and highly value the Earth (on) which we live,” Hancock said. “We have a high priority to be a good contribution to Bend.” Which sounds nice in an air-headed kind of way, but which also has nothing really to do with the gospel.

In fact, after a perusal of the entire site, I realized that there was not a single reference to God. This “new church development” not only isn’t a church, it offers no evidence that it is any different from any of thousands of non-profit community aid organizations across the country. Exactly the same business might be run on exactly the same principles by Jews, Muslims, Wiccans, Unitarians, or atheists. I don’t know what happens at the “discussions, classes, etc.” mentioned above–there was no information that would lead one to think that such things are happening, but maybe they are–but if it has anything to do with the gospel, Hancock and his steering committee have done everything in their power to disguise it.

I understand that in a place like Bend, it is necessary to think even farther outside the box than usual. But this seems to have strayed so far away from the box as to not even be in the same state any more. If in the process of “living into the reality of God” you no longer show any signs of being any different from a hundred other do-good groups, can you really be said to be doing the work of the Kingdom at all? I would be happy to be put straight about Common Table, and hear all kinds of testimonies from central Oregonians about how lives have been transformed and people come to Christ as a result of the work being done there, but unless such testimonies are forthcoming, I’d have to say that the PCUSA is not getting what it thinks it is getting.

(Via Layman Online.)