Not A Squirrel

When I was at theological college, there was a particular lecture room that sat below a grass bank. Through the window, we could see squirrels playing among the trees. We used to say that, whatever the question, the answer was always “Jesus” – and if it wasn’t Jesus, then it was “a squirrel.”

The answer isn’t always Jesus, but tomorrow it is. Tomorrow, in the Lectionary, we are trying to make sense of Luke 16:1-15.

First, let us consider the context. Jesus has been hanging out with “sinners” and the Pharisees have muttered against him. So he has told them a series of parables, in the hearing of his disciples, culminating in the parable where a man had two sons. The younger son asks for his share of the inheritance, goes on a long journey to a far land, squanders everything he has on reckless living, and returns. The father celebrates, for his son who was dead is now alive; but the older son, who has never celebrated anything, refuses to join the party. The man is God; the younger son, Jesus; and the older son, the Pharisees.

Now Jesus turns to address his disciples, in the hearing of the Pharisees. He tells them a parable about a man who was accused of mismanaging his master’s estate. The master is God; the accused manager, Jesus; the accusers, the Pharisees. Like the other parables Jesus is telling, this conjures up a scandalous image; for the master is as corrupt as his manager (the master has charged illegal interest, which the manager – who has been syphoning off his own cut – can write off without fear of dismissal, for to expose him would be self-defeating). Would we be so bold as to depict a good God by a corrupt illustration?

The manager writes off debt: in one case, 50%; in another, 20%. Elsewhere, Jesus depicts God as a ruler who cancels debt in its totality; but his emphasis here chimes with his belief that those who have been forgiven much, love much; while those who have been forgiven little, love little.

But Jesus goes a step further: he wants his disciples to learn from the manager – something he doesn’t ask them to do from the shepherd, the woman, or the father and sons. What is it that he wants them to learn?

I would suggest that he wants them to learn to use whatever resources are available to them to cancel debt, to let people know that they are forgiven. On reconciliation.

Debt is the dominant image, and reality, of our day too. We are in debt to the bank, the mortgage lender, the student loan provider. We are in debt to our parents, our lovers, our government, society. God, alone, says, “You owe me nothing.” And that is why God, alone, deserves our everything.

Is learning the lesson of the unscrupulous manager what we are known for?

Is the main focus of our use of resources – be they financial, physical (people, buildings), intellectual (what we know), relational (who we know), or spiritual (love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control) – embracing “sinners,” even at risk of being misunderstood and misrepresented?

Or do we spend our resources on building an enviable reputation in a world falling over itself to worship money?

Lady Madonna

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.

How, then, do we partner with God in relation to our resource needs? By investing what he has given us – creatively; prayerfully; generously – and asking for what we need.

Five Forms Of Poverty : Update

This post, ‘Five Forms of Poverty,’ has just become the most-read of all the posts I have written (over 4,500 views and rising).  Since I wrote it, in October 2009, I have moved to a different local context, but the issues addressed there are still those facing our society.

Five Forms Of Poverty

Recently I’ve been reflecting on five forms of capital - spiritual, relational, physical, intellectual, and financial – and how they might be applied in my life. I wrote about that here, here, and here. Reflecting on mission in AMDs (Areas of Multiple Deprivation), I observe that there are five correlating forms of poverty: spiritual, relational, physical, intellectual, and financial.

This is significant, because the problems facing AMDs are complex, and addressing any of them in isolation is unlikely to have sustainable impact. On the other hand, we who have been invested in by God - who is looking for a return on his investment - need to look to invest all five forms of capital in order to address all five forms of poverty. But different church traditions have tended to place an over-emphasis on particular forms, while undervaluing the importance of others within the gospel.
So here are some initial reflections:

Spiritual poverty:
If we are created to be in relationship with God – drawn into as close relationship as the Father, Son and Holy Spirit enjoy – then spiritual poverty underlies all other forms of poverty, because spiritual capital funds all other forms of capital. That is, all good gifts flow from our heavenly Father. But society has disconnected the gifts from the Giver, as the church has tended to disconnect spiritual capital from the other forms (focusing on spiritual capital, disconnected from the other forms; or on the other forms, disconnected from spiritual capital).

One of the things that I observe, watching culture, is that people have an almost total ignorance of the story of the Bible, but have an astute awareness of preaching. Which makes me wonder what the hell we have been preaching about?

The gospel, for the church, for the wider community, must involve a rediscovery of the stories that reveal to us the spiritual capital we have been given, and how to invest it for spiritual, relational, physical, intellectual, and financial return.

Relational poverty:
Relational poverty is on the increase in every part of our society. Inability or unwillingness to commit to long-term relationships (sexual partners, children, friends, employer/employee, or any other relationship) is evident among those of low and high income – though the things people put ahead of relationships may differ. But those of higher income have greater capacity to attempt to insulate themselves from the effects of relational poverty, for example by the growing dependence on paying strangers to raise our children for us. Trust, in wider society, is at a record low; suspicion of others – fear of youths, fear of paedophiles, fear of people of other ethnicity – at a record high. People in their 40s and 50s remember a childhood (i.e. not that long ago) where doors were left unlocked, and local shops provided not just commodities but social cohesion – or, ‘community glue’ – to neighbourhoods (supermarkets provide commodities, perhaps more efficiently, but cannot provide social cohesion: the catchment is too large and too loosely-tied for retailers to know customers – the same loss of community glue can be observed with larger churches that draw people from a wide area).

In my view, the nuclear family is as dysfunctional as the atomic family. The gospel must include rebuilding the extended family – that is, not only multi-generational but having a wider understanding of family than just our relatives, by blood or marriage, and including an economic dimension. Missional effectiveness must be measured in terms of the church playing a role in rebuilding local community, not in terms of people ‘coming to church.’

Physical poverty:
There tends to be a higher degree of visible addiction in AMDs, though in fact addiction of various forms is an increasing problem across our society, as we attempt to sate certain appetites and suppress others, without recognition of spiritual poverty. There certainly tends to be a higher degree of malnutrition, tied to intellectual poverty in regard to healthy eating, and the preparation of healthy food. Recent studies suggest a link between bottle-fed babies and childhood obesity. And smoking remains most prevalent among the poorest members of our society.

The gospel must include concern for the physical body: both modelling healthy lifestyles (long-term, prevention is better than cure); and caring for those who are reaping the consequences of endemic physical poverty.

Intellectual poverty:
Intellectual poverty has a very obvious impact on both financial and physical poverty. But better education is not, in itself, an adequate answer to poverty, in particular spiritual and relational poverty: if it were, then the middle and upper classes would be less dysfunctional than the working classes, whereas they are just as dysfunctional, but in different ways. Nonetheless, investment in intellectual capital is an essential part of addressing poverty. Within AMDs we need to recognise that the failure of an overly-academic school education to equip people in practical skills (relational, physical), combined with a lack of sustained - sometimes, any - job-creation investment to connect to (financial), has resulted in a deeply-ingrained negative attitude towards learning.

The gospel must include nurturing the mind, and fostering an environment where learning is valued – not idolised, as the middle classes has done, but valued. After all, the call of the gospel is a call to be lifelong learners, or disciples.

Financial poverty:
Clearly, financial poverty is most prevalent among the poor, because though the rich have lived increasingly beyond their means they also enjoy the power to offload their debts on others. While recession hurts everyone, it will hurt those most responsible for recession the least.

Addressing financial poverty is part of the gospel, and it must include partnership and redistribution of resources. However, this must not be done in such a way that creates dependency, and the resentment that follows dependency, by failing to involve ownership.


I am blessed to belong to a local church that takes addressing financial and physical poverty, in particular, very seriously (through debt advice/management; a credit union; support in developing various basic life skills; support for those wrestling with addictive issues; mental and physical health support). I wonder to what extent the five forms of capital/poverty are connected to each other in our missional engagement with the community, and how we might create more connections...

Applying Five Forms Of Capital : Example 2

God has invested in us, and he expects a return on his investment. Which begs the questions:
in what ways has God invested in us?
and,
how do we put that investment to work in such a way as to earn a return for him on his investment?

There are, essentially, five types of capital – spiritual, relational, physical, intellectual, and financial - and if we want to grow any one of them, we do so by investing the others.

Here is another personal example, to illustrate how this might work in practice:

Having moved to inner-city Liverpool, I want to see the kingdom of heaven extended in the community where I live...

We cannot do that on our own, but need to invest in relationships with others – specifically with those who sense a call to the same immediate neighbourhood...

I have observed that several of the men I probably need to invest in relationally are keen cyclists; and going cycling together would seem an obvious way to see those relationships grow. As it happens, one of them has lent me a spare bike (which is in itself an example of investing physical capital in hope of a return in relational capital). I have not ridden a bike in years, and so it will require an investment of physical capital to get fit enough to ride with cyclists – but that in itself ought to result in an increase in the physical capital available to me as I get fitter, and that in turn will enable me to invest more in the kingdom...

It will also require an investment of intellectual capital. For example, I have made enquiries about cycling in Liverpool, been directed to relevant sites online, got hold of maps of on- and off-road routes. And I will need to learn some basic bike-care skills, too...

Finally, it will involve financial capital. Having been lent a bike, my initial financial investment is a helmet, but, if I get on with riding then a point will come where I need to buy my own bike.

[As it happens, in this case I have the financial capital to buy a bike. But, if I did not have the necessary financial capital, and believed that I needed a bike in order to invest what God had given me, then I could invest spiritual capital, praying in faith for the provision of a bike; relational capital, discovering who could find or lend me a bike; or physical capital, working to earn the financial capital to buy a bike. The principle of the parable of the shrewd manager is:
invest what you have in order to grow what you need.]

The question is: if I want to see a return on the spiritual capital I invest for God’s glory in this part of Liverpool, am I prepared to employ the other forms of capital at my disposal to see it happen?

Applying Five Forms Of Capital : Example 1

God has invested in us, and he expects a return on his investment. Which begs the questions:
in what ways has God invested in us?
and,
how do we put that investment to work in such a way as to earn a return for him on his investment?

There are, essentially, five types of capital – spiritual, relational, physical, intellectual, and financial - and if we want to grow any one of them, we do so by investing the others.

Here is a personal example, to illustrate how this might work in practice:

As a family, we are committed to growing the spiritual capital of discipleship in the context of community...

Over the years, we have been drawn into relationship with other people who are committed to the same investment of spiritual capital. This network of relationships grew into the Order of Mission, to which we belong. This is in effect (though not exclusively) our spiritual extended family. And in particular within that growing, global family, for the past four years we have got together once a month with a group of other families in the north of England. This ‘huddle’ is a place where we meet with friends who share our vision and our values, and in that context of committed relationship we encourage and challenge one another, and our faith grows as a result...

This requires of us a physical investment. The huddle meets in Harrogate, which was a two-hour drive from where we lived in Nottingham, and is a two-hour drive from where we now live in Liverpool. That means that we set off at 6pm, get there for 8pm, leave there at 10:30pm, and get home again for 12:30am. And that is physically tiring; it leaves us physically tired; it costs us an investment of the physical capital at our disposal. But we have decided that it is a priority on our use of capital; which simply means that there are other things that are less of a priority...

If we are to engage fully with the huddle – to allow God to speak into our lives through the other members of the group, and to listen for what God wants to speak into their lives through us – an investment of intellectual capital is required. We need to grow in our knowledge and understanding of God’s word, in order to bring it to bear – to draw on capital reserves - in the situations we face. Jesus said scribes of the kingdom draw out treasures old and new. And this is a context where we get to do both: not only drawing on existing reserves of capital, but receiving a return, as we consider new things together...

Finally, it also requires of us a financial investment. The combined cost of petrol for the journey and a babysitter mean it is not a cheap night out...but, again, we choose to prioritise it because of the return we have seen over the years, in both relational and spiritual capital.

Five Forms Of Capital

God has invested in us, and he expects a return on his investment. Which begs the questions:
in what ways has God invested in us?
and,
how do we put that investment to work in such a way as to earn a return for him on his investment?

There are, essentially, five types of capital; and if we want to grow any one of them, we do so by investing the others.

Spiritual capital
Jesus spoke of storing up treasures in heaven, and of faith that is intended to grow as it is applied. The Bible is full of examples of spiritual gifts God invests in his children, to be exercised to his glory.

Relational capital
Jesus invested in relationships: with the 12; with Peter, James and John; with Mary, Martha and Lazarus. He knew that he could not complete the mission he had been sent to fulfil on his own.
Note: the rise of social networking – seen by some as enhancing, by others as detrimental to, relational capital – raises both opportunity for and threat to this form of capital.

Physical capital
God has given us a physical body, to be responsible for. As a general rule, our physical capital decreases with old age, but we can invest in the physical capital God has given us. Rising obesity, rising early liver damage as a result of binge drinking, and an epidemic of Chlamydia all indicate that we have a generation of young adults in our society that do not know how to invest wisely in the physical capital God has given them.

Intellectual capital
God has given us a mind, and commanded us to love him with all our mind (as well as all our heart, all our soul, and all our strength). This does not mean that we are all academically gifted; but we have the capacity to grow in our understanding of the things of God. The psalmist writes of meditating on God’s word day and night; while the books of Proverbs and Ecclesiastes are full of enquiry into the workings of the world, human and animal, in order to learn from God.
Note: in our age of information technology economy, intellectual capital has become increasingly important. But note also the difference between in/access to information, and the ability to interpret information wisely.

Financial capital
This is the one that most people appear to consider most important. Straw polls indicate that the number one ambition of young adults today is to be rich, closely followed by to be a celebrity. This is aggravated by the hope of instant riches held out by the Lottery, and a media obsession with people who are famous not for any talent or achievement but simply famous for being famous...But financial capital, according to Jesus, is not there to be reinvested in its own sake.