Stewardship

It's 1984 All Over Again

In 1949, author George Orwell published a book titled "1984." It was a tale about the future with one of the specifics being the fact that nothing was done in secret. "Big Brother is watching you" was a perpetual theme throughout the story. I read the book as a High School student in the 1960’s, and we all kind of chuckled when 1984 came and went without anything resembling Orwell’s fantasy world.

Now, it appears that we have finally arrived. The year 2009 has some striking resemblances to the made-up world of 1984. Chief among them is the fact that someone is always watching. It does not appear to be "Big Brother," but we should be a little uncomfortable that our every move might be preserved on someone’s camera or every spoken word is maintained on a recorder somewhere.

This has been happening for several years, but it became especially apparent to me this week as I have followed the Tiger Woods incident. Unless you have been in a monastery this past week, you know the story. An apparent domestic disturbance, a fight between Woods and his wife, led to smashing his big Cadillac into a fire hydrant and a tree. This somehow gave permission to all the tabloids to drag out all the smut they had been collecting on Woods. Now, within a few short days, we have pictures, recordings, text messages, etc. that prove the golfer’s lack of faithfulness to his wife.

Like everyone else, I had a lot of respect for Tiger Woods. It did not idolize him or place him on a pedestal, but he seemed like a really good man who had his life together. I am saddened, but I realize that he is human just like everyone else. It was not a robot making those crazy winding putts at the Master’s Tournament or putting the rest of the field in his rear view mirror at the U.S. Open. He may not play golf like a human, but he lives life like the rest of us. What did they use to say, "He puts his pants on one leg at a time."

Generous Church - Part 3

For the past fifteen years, I have had the opportunity to visit hundreds of churches and to be able to worship with them on Sunday morning. Many times my involvement is just the one Sunday morning service. Other times, I work with them for a longer period of time. It does not matter the size or style of church, it does not take very long to notice something about the church that makes it attractive. It is sad to say, but the majority of the churches leave me wondering why people attend week after week. I am curious as to what I missed that makes them want to keep coming. Many others, however, are very appealing and often it is hard to describe the appeal.

For lack of a better descriptor, I simply define these appealing churches as "being alive." There is something about them that testifies of life. It has nothing to do with the music or worship, the preaching (often I am the one preaching when I am there), the facilities, the location, the attendance, or any other thing I can delineate. The church is just alive. They have something to offer that helps me experience life.

Read these descriptions of "generous churches" and see how they share the life they possess in Christ:

Church #1: "I just wonder if there is someone in this room who ought to receive, not give, today," the pastor said. "Maybe someone here doesn’t even have gas money to get home. If you’re in that type of need, would you raise your hand?" He spoke these words while introducing the morning offering time. A young, single mom timidly raised her hand. As she did, the pastor walked over to her, took twenty-dollars from his wallet and gave it to her. As he did so, many others seated nearby did the same thing. This church has a history of giving money away to those who have needs during the offering time, sometimes tens of thousands of dollars.

The Generous Church - Part 2

It has probably been occurring a lot longer, but fifteen years ago was the first time I was a witness. It was a Sunday morning and I missed church because I was sick. Spread out on the couch while the rest of the family goes to church was not fun, so I turned on the television to watch others go to worship. I tuned to a channel that was broadcasting a large congregation in our neighborhood and I was eager to see how they did church.

I was especially interested when they announced that it was Stewardship Sunday since I was just beginning my ministry with churches in this area. As the pastor walked to the pulpit to speak, I was prepared for a great sermon. Instead, what I got was an apology.

The first words out of the preacher’s mouth were expressions of sorrow and regret that this was the one Sunday each year that he felt that he needed to preach on money. He promised the visitors that if they would come back next week they would not hear him talk about money or giving. He would deal with more practical and spiritual matters.

Since that day, I have heard similar statements by many preachers. I have heard and read in church publicity that potential visitors are promised that they will never be asked for money if they attend church. I have listened to pastors brag about the fact that they never talk about money. Even as I am being introduced to speak to a Sunday morning crowd, I have heard the pastor say they are grateful that I am there to speak about money so they will not need to do it themselves.

While listening to the pastor apologize for talking about money, I realized the church has a serious problem. The problem is that we have taken the wrong approach to the issue of money and stewardship. In contrast, Jesus tackled the subject head on.

The Generous Church - Part 1

There are many things the seminary does not teach prospective pastors that are important to know about the church. I loved my seminary experience, but when it was finished, I felt better equipped to handle the classroom than a church office. Fortunately, I had another resource. My father had been in church work for nearly thirty-years when I first started. On more than one occasion, I called home to ask for help.

He taught me two valuable lessons about church finances. The first is that there is no need to ask to see the giving records of church members. He assured me that if I paid attention, it is easy to separate the givers from the non-givers. I did pay attention and this is what I learned.

Givers:

• Seldom talk about their personal financial situation
• Appreciate sermons and Bible studies that deal with money
• Support the work of the church with their words and presence
• Do not worry about the church running out of money

Non-Givers:

• Like to discuss their personal financial situation and it does not matter if it is good or bad
• Are uncomfortable when the sermon addresses the issue of money
• Tend to criticize church programs and efforts
• Hold the church back because a ministry is "too expensive"

I realize these statements might be simplifications, but if you will pay attention to folks in the church hallway or at the coffee shop, you will seldom be surprised by their giving to the church.

The second lesson my father taught me is that there was no need to protect a person’s wallet. He assured me that they would protect it themselves. In other words, do not be afraid to ask people to give, they will never give too much. Although the church frequently is accused of asking for money too often, I am afraid that we do not ask people to give often enough. It is a shame that we ever allow people to miss the blessing of giving.

Halloween and Hypocrisy

Sharon and I were sitting in the living room a few nights back when the dogs started barking incessantly. It was the tell tale bark that someone was actually coming to the house, not to be confused with the similar bark they utilize when a leaf blows across the front yard. Within a matter of seconds, the front door burst open and I could tell someone was in the house.

It is not unusual for a number of people to enter our house, without knocking or unannounced. However, this time as I looked up, I saw a large man wearing a dark pinstripe suit. He had broad shoulders, the size you might see on a football field on Sunday afternoon. His face was huge, similar to Sal Bonpensiero from the Sopranos. The intruder was rough looking, like the kind of guy you would expect to meet if you are unable to pay off your gambling debts. Everything about his appearance shouted stay out of his way.

However, my concern about the possible home invader lasted only a second as I quickly realized it was my son Matthew, obviously on his way to a Halloween party of some kind. It was a great costume! I don’t know, but I would not be surprised if he won a prize of some kind. When he left the house to go to the party, he was carrying a baseball bat to lend a little more authenticity to the mobster facade.

Halloween has become a really big deal for many people. Stores display supplies several weeks ahead of time, more and more people are decorating their yards each year, and costumes have become much more elaborate than the simple throwaway plastic mask and paper thin clothing we wore as children. Exotic haunted houses and jubilant parties fill the late evening for many after the kids have completed the trick or treat rounds.

Halloween was always my least favorite holiday. Although I like to eat a small amount, I have never been a true candy connoisseur. It never took very long for me to pick out the candy pieces I would eat when we spread the contents from the sack on the dining table. When I was young, it was a much more innocent time so it was quite common to receive fresh fruit or homemade goodies. Now, if you even think about distributing something that is not professionally sealed at a candy factor, they will haul you downtown for questioning and your name will start appearing on child molester lists.

Killing for Jesus

The Civil War provides a fascinating study for military historians. The Union forces of the North were much larger than the Confederate Army. In fact, there were more than one million Union soldiers compared to approximately 200,000 Confederate troops. However, one of the most serious weaknesses of the Union forces was a succession of Generals who were not aggressive enough to attack. They always waited for the enemy to begin the battles.

One of these early Generals was George B. McClellan. President Abraham Lincoln described McClellan as "a superb organizer. He has good points, but he won’t fight." Later, he referred to his army as "the personal bodyguard of General McClellan."

Finally, in disgust, Lincoln wrote to General McClellan and said, "Would you please loan me this army if you don’t intend to use it?"

This picture of the Union army reminds me of the church. The church has a massive army of powerful combatants but is losing ground to the enemy every day. In the past forty years, since Richard Nixon used the phrase, we have turned the "Silent Majority" into a strident minority. In many arenas, the church is considered an irrelevant relic in spite of the fact that many Christians are becoming louder and louder.

I believe the church has a large enough army to share the Gospel to all nations, feed the hungry, protect the unborn, and fulfill all the other tasks God has called us to do. But, there is a problem that is keeping all of these good things from happening.

If you will allow me to continue with the military theme, the problem begins with the fact that we are attempting to fight the wrong battle. It seems that many Christians are engaged in a conflict to protect a culture that no longer exists. Some are of the opinion that it was the culture of our nation’s founding fathers that we must protect. Others, not wanting to return to the 18th century, are fighting for a culture from the middle of the 20th century,the "Father Knows Best" era.  

Hating the Sin Because We Love the Sinner

Years ago, a young woman who was a member of our church and her boyfriend asked if I would perform their wedding ceremony. I expressed my willingness but advised them that they would first need to meet with me for several counseling sessions. I did not know the young man and the girl attended church very rarely.

They came for counseling and after a couple of sessions, it was apparent that they were not ready for marriage. I have always felt the church was too lax by just performing a wedding ceremony for anyone that comes along, so I decided to take a stand. I advised the couple that I would not perform the ceremony because I was confident the marriage would not last six months. Tact has never been one of my strengths.

They found another preacher and got married anyway. I was wrong! The marriage lasted seven months.

I have always taken marriage very seriously and considered divorce a total failure that should be utilized only in extreme circumstances.

At about the same time, I noticed the adult Sunday School classes had a Bible study lesson on divorce. We were a small church with two adult classes, one for older and one for younger adults. After the lesson, I asked several from each class about the study. To my surprise, the older adults were much more forgiving and accepting of divorce than the younger ones. I quickly surmised that the older adults were more experienced with life, and they had more first-hand encounters with the reality of divorce. It was not so easy for them to be dogmatic.

My lesson continued when a family member went through a painful divorce. It was a difficult time for the whole family. He worked hard to make the marriage work. I remember one evening sitting next to him at a restaurant and telling him it was time to give up, it was not going to work. He replied that he could not give up, and he did not for many more months.

As our family walked through this experience, we learned a great deal. Malachi 2:16 says, "God hates divorce…" In my younger days, I probably had the tendency to claim this meant that God hates divorced people. However, as I matured, I realized God does not hate people; He hates the sin of divorce. Now, after even more years of experience, I realize the reason for God’s hatred of divorce. He hates it because of what it does to the people He loves. Divorce is very painful for everyone involved. Like God, I hate divorce because of the pain it caused my loved ones.

Stewardship Is Who We Are, Not What We Do

In times past, if I were reading a book and the author quoted a long Scripture passage, I frequently skipped over it. It seemed only reasonable because I had read it before and if you tell me what the story is about, I already know it. Then one Sunday, God taught me differently. As he began his sermon, the pastor indicated that he was using a long passage for his text. Since time was short and he had a lot to say, he announced that he was not going to read the entire text.

It struck me that the pastor thought his words were more important for me to hear than God’s Word. It seemed arrogant to think he had more to say on the subject than God. Then I realized that I was doing the same thing when I skipped Bible passages in my reading. I have since changed my ways.

Then reason I relate this experience is because my article this week has a long quote from the Bible. I want you to read the entire text because it is the real point.

Good stewardship begins with who we are, but most of our stewardship teaching has focused on what we do. I plead guilty. I spend a great deal of time showing people how to. . . budget their money, get out of debt, clean up their credit, give to their church. . . the list is endless. In doing so, I have discovered that "how to’s" do not change lives. Stewardship is more concerned with who we are than what we do.

Stewardship is the result of a relationship. A good steward is the person who lives in the proper relationship with the owner. The foundational truth of stewardship is that God owns everything. The Psalmist declared, "The earth is the Lord’s, and all it contains" (Psalm 24:1). There is no doubt, in spite of our frequent actions, that we do not own anything. It all belongs to God.

Disrespect - A New Political Strategy

Last week, during the public posing and political posturing of parents being encouraged to keep junior home from school because the President was going to speak, I made a statement that elicited some friendly discussion. I wondered about the loss of respect for the President in this country. The debate continued for a couple of days on my Facebook page, and all of us had the opportunity to make our case clearly. I was satisfied and ready to leave the subject.

My original point was that it seemed disrespectful to refuse to allow our children to listen to the President. I thought about all the Presidents I could remember from my past. I recall that whenever the President spoke, it was always a big deal. Our family would stop down whatever we were doing and listen.

Political debate was never an issue in our house until I got old enough to argue about the legitimacy of the Vietnam War. I can vaguely remember my parents expressing concern about President Kennedy being Catholic and the fear that he would be open to orders from the Vatican. However, that did not happen and reports of his lifestyle indicate that he was not a very good Catholic. We were still taught to respect the man and I can clearly recollect the genuine grief felt by everyone on the day he was killed.

My politically formative years were dominated by the Presidency of Richard Nixon. Those who start their list of worst Presidents with either Bush or Obama have quickly forgotten about Nixon. He left office with the claim, "I am not a crook!" My dislike came from having to say goodbye to many of my high school friends who were marched off to Vietnam under Nixon’s command. Some of them did not come back, giving their lives for a war we never understood. However, if Nixon would have addressed the schools, every one of us would have listened with no thought of boycott.

We see and hear the President speak much more frequently today, so when he makes a speech it is not such a big deal. I will not change my schedule to hear what he has to say since I can listen to it later at a more convenient time. But, keeping children home from school lest they hear the man is nothing but disrespect. This new disrespect goes far beyond boycotting a speech and is seen in the way people talk and the attitudes expressed about the President. What happened to our admiration for our President?

The Forty-Eight Dollar Band-aid

The healthcare system in this country has some problems that need to be fixed. I don’t think it needs a complete overhaul, but it does require more than just a few tweaks. For example, I visited the doctor recently with an infected sore (it was not a pretty sight). While reading the itemized bill, I noticed they charged me for the band-aid and for putting it on. The strip of plastic cost $48 and the labor for putting it on cost $18.

This was not some type of specialized band-aid developed for rapid healing. This was the same kind of band-aid I was wearing when I went to the doctor, the kind you can buy at the Wal-Mart for $5 a box. The skill of putting it on did not require special medical training. There was not even any topical ointment.

I don’t know why it costs so much to slap on a band-aid. Perhaps they noticed on my insurance card that I had good coverage so they went for it. What my card says is that my co-pay is zero, but it does not reveal that I have $1,000 deductible. In other words, I will be paying for the band-aid.

I do have good health insurance, but it is expensive, even with the high deductible. Not everyone can afford expensive insurance. In fact, 47 million Americans do not have any kind of health insurance and are at the mercy of public medicine and the fortune of good health. Although I would rather not pay $48 for a band-aid, I will survive. It is those folks without any health coverage who need help.

Not only am I aware of the need for a change, the government is also on top of things and a bill has already been introduced in the Senate. It has been the subject of a massive amount of debate, on radio, television, print, and the Internet, as well as conversations at the coffee shop. Several have even asked me specifically for my opinion on the subject (if you have really good insurance, that attitude might be covered as an illness). So, I decided to wade into the health care waters and offer my perspective.