Or, “Did You Think That Money Was Heaven Sent?”
I’m reflecting on the need churches – like any
family or community – have for material and financial resources.
We are often tempted to believe that the way to
address our resource needs is to attract a larger crowd. More people, more
money.
On one occasion, Jesus fed a crowd of more than
5,000 people, with five small loaves and two small fish (Matthew 14:13-21; Mark
6:30-44; Luke 9:10-17; John 6:1-15). Some people suggest that what actually
happened was that others, resistant at first, got out their food and shared it
too. After all, a change of heart is a greater miracle than full stomachs. But
it doesn’t add up. If a significant number within the crowd had brought food
with them, the crowd would not have needed feeding in the first place. The
crowd benefit from the food, but they don’t contribute anything: they don’t even
participate in the distribution or in the clearing up afterwards. In fact, the
crowd simply add to the workload of the disciples.
The ‘crowd’ represents those we serve (and we
should serve gladly). But Scripture reveals – and our own shared lived
experience confirms to us – that our resource needs are never met by attracting
a crowd.
If the crowd is not the answer, then we are often
tempted to believe that the way to address our resource needs is for the
faithful few to give more.
But the disciples had very little. The faithful
few always have limited resources. Not just finite resources (everyone’s
resources are finite), but limited resources. God knows this, and indeed, would
appear to prefer to use such people.
There is never enough money to do the thing God
has asked you to do. Never enough. Why? Because if we had enough, we would receive
the glory. But if there is not enough – not by a long way – and yet God
provides, the glory goes to him.
Does that mean, then, that we don’t do anything?
Not at all! To return to the feeding of the multitude, Jesus involves his
disciples from start to finish.
Let us consider the various forms of capital:
spiritual, relational, physical, intellectual, and financial. How is each at
play in this event?
This story begins with spiritual capital, with the
covenant relationship with God (“all that I am I give to you, and all that I
have I share with you”) and shared kingdom responsibility that Jesus knew and was
drawing his disciples into. Though the four Gospel writers draw out different emphases,
the context for this story is one of conflict between the life-affirming kingdom
of heaven and the enslaving prince of this world.
As Jesus draws his disciples, spiritual capital
overflows into (overflowing) relational capital. Andrew looks beyond the
disciples to find out whether anyone has any resources they are willing to
contribute. He asks around. The crowd is a poor return for his investment
(1:5000+) but hidden in the crowd of people who have come to Jesus for what he
can do for them is one person who is open to respond – and one disciple who is
open to bring them together.
Relational capital in turn releases physical
capital. In this situation, the physical capital is edible. In itself, it is
not enough; but, blessed, broken and shared, it not only goes far enough for
everyone to eat their fill, it creates a surplus. The surplus amount speaks to
us (a symbolic reminder of the tribal affiliations God liberated from Egypt and
would shape into a people; a symbolic indication that in Jesus, God was
liberating and people-making once more); but it is clear from Jesus’
instruction that he also intended the surplus to have a literal benefit – that,
rather than being wasted, even more people might be fed, somewhere else, before
the bread went stale.
Stewardship of physical capital requires an
investment of intellectual capital. God-given intellect does not meet the need,
but it plays its part. Jesus has the disciples organise the crowd into groups
of a certain size, and deploys them to distribute the bread and fish. This is
not a chaotic free-for-all, whereby some receive too much and others go
without.
Finally, we come to financial capital. At first we
might think that there is no financial capital involved in this miracle of
provision. Philip does suggest that two hundred denarii would be woefully
inadequate (intellectual capital helps us to be realistic about the need facing
us, which is essential, for denial of our need separates us from the resources
of heaven) but as it turned out, no money was required. And that in itself is
significant, for whatever financial resources the disciples had – and needed –
were not depleted. Financial needs are real. God is capable of meeting them.
Part of his meeting our financial needs may include enabling us to do certain
things without cost.
interesting. I'm praying and working towards a situation where the administration and staffing of our church family is paid for by income from the buildings and businesses we run and set up. So that giving/tithing can be used for supporting the needy in the church family and beyond and mission. If the monks could do it...
ReplyDeleteI think kingdom thinking and discipleship often gets lost in the desires for bums on pews and keeping the financial engine ticking. If we didn't feel reliant on giving but on God and His plans for our provision we wouldn't count pew-sitters or worry about where those coming to faith chose to worship, the size of our church numerically etc...
"If the monks could do it.." - perfect example of investing what God has already given in order to see what is needed released!
ReplyDeletenice writing and thinking Andrew. i highly reccomend There is Always Enough, by Heidi Baker.
ReplyDeleteCharles Stephens wrote: "I would rather make mistakes in my kindness and compassion than miracles in unkindness and hardness." - Mother Theresa of Calcutta