Beyond Christmas charity
Fostering dignity, accountability, and gospel relationships year-round
Everyone knows that Christmas is a time for charity.
Christians acknowledge that charity should be year-round.
But is charity in the traditional sense – the giving away of goods or cash – the best way to serve the needy?
Well… not really, no.
To clarify, we are not talking about the needy within our church families, although some of the principles below will apply. Instead we are talking about the needy out there, outside the church – those whose biggest need is a relationship with their Creator through Jesus Christ.
This is especially relevant because poverty stems more from broken relationships than a lack of goods. Not all broken relationships cause poverty, but all poverty stems from broken relationships – missing parents being one of the most accurate predictors of poverty. (Several books convincingly make this argument including When Helping Hurts by Steve Corbett and Brian Fikkert.)
So it turns out the best way to serve the needy is within relationship. Handing out Christmas presents or free groceries is lovely, and may well have its place. But what if we structured our help so it fosters accountability, and not dependency? So it helps without hurting in any way? What would that look like?
Let’s think outside the box
Consider this:
62% of churches have food ministries
2% of churches have workforce development ministries
As the Jobs for Life organization asks, what if the church flipped that list?
Writer Nathan Mayo points out:
Simple provision of material goods isn’t the pressing need for people in poverty in America; relationships, connections, and skills development are far more useful. Numerous programs you can run or partner with provide mentorship, life skills classes, job fairs, and personal goal-setting and follow-up. These high-touch approaches create more space for meaningful gospel conversations as well.
You can hand out canned goods to a needy man, but that’s not a situation that puts you in any kind of meaningful relationship with him. And it won’t help next time he’s hungry.
After all, we’ve all heard the old “give a man a fish vs. teach a man to fish” idea. The first offers dependency; the second independence.
But perhaps more importantly, the first requires no relationship at all. You can even put those canned goods on a table and stand back without interacting at all. The second requires interaction and relationship.
There is a reason that federal programs to help the poor are rife with abuse and fraud: No accountability. State programs may be a little better (depends on the state). Local programs are less likely to be ridden with corruption. But the place where meaningful help, accountability, and integrity come together is unquestionably the exact place the Lord designated – the church.
Local churches can make a meaningful difference in their communities, working to break the cycle of joblessness and poverty, by providing the proverbial hand up, not just handouts. The result would undoubtedly be restored purpose and dignity for individuals, which leads to healthier communities as well.
But all this requires a lot more of Christians than tossing some cans in a paper bag for the local food drive. It requires us to work within our churches – carefully planning, sacrificially serving, and committing to building long-range relationships with individuals we might otherwise never meet. Individuals who – just as a reminder – need Jesus. And who need Jesus’ people to show them the way to Him.
Expect a little something in return?
Author Mayo advocates what he terms “calling the poor into reciprocity.” By this he means have them bring something to the equation, which actually honors their dignity:
We should offer the poor a subsidized exchange—such as asking them to mow the lawn in exchange for the payment of an electric bill, or stock a food pantry in exchange for some of the groceries—that rewards their effort and expands their capabilities.
Some of his ideas are more ambitious but offer potentially huge impact – for example, food pantries transitioning to food co-ops where customers become club members, requiring a financial or labor contribution to belong.
Or what about this great idea – maybe too late for this year, but a perfect time to start planning for next Christmas. Ditch the Christmas giveaways and offer a Christmas market, where needy parents buy deeply discounted items for their children’s gifts.
Mayo suggests that earn-it models could replace handouts as the default way to meet a need – maybe even shifting some of the church “benevolence fund” to interest-free loans.
I love his final comments, which I hope we’ll all take back to our churches:
All these approaches naturally reduce the quantity of applicants to people serious about improving their situation and allow for a deeper relational connection with those people. It also tends to lower cost and volunteer commitment, as it amplifies people’s ability to contribute to their own solutions. These strategies leverage the relational power unique to Christ-followers, and they can’t be replaced by any centralized solution, regardless of the budget. The church will always be the main character in any successful efforts to increase human flourishing. God has given us more than enough to make a difference.
A hearty amen. We should always be looking for innovative ways to not just meet physical needs but to forge relationships. Because this, of course, is where the gospel is most effectively shared.