Reclaiming Missional Service with a View of Rescue Missions - Part 2

In an effort to provide an advocacy for our local churches to reclaim a theology and practice for missional service to the homeless and disadvantaged in our communities, I will be posting a series of blogs. These will be somewhat a compilation of several papers and discussions over the last few years. I hope they will generate discussion in your sphere of influence and in our churches.

Reclaiming Missional Service with a View of Rescue Missions
~ © by Rev. Jim Lewis

Historical Christian Service

Following the pattern of Old Testament directives to Israel with regard to hospitality toward strangers, examples of New Testament charity focused primarily upon hospitality within the church, such as the Apostle Paul directing the believers to “welcome one another” as was modeled by Christ (Romans 15: 7). On the surface, it would seem there is little scriptural evidence of direction to the church toward charitable outreach to the world beyond the Great Commission and making disciples – which may have been the lack of impetus for outreach beyond basic evangelism. However, throughout history, the people of God have involved themselves in numerous forms of charity and hospitality toward others.

In the majority of New Testament texts, hospitality refers to serving other believers in need of assistance. In some texts it is not clear if there is a distinguishing between serving believers and those in the community, although it seems clear that a believer’s responsibility was outward as well (Gal 6: 10; 1 Thes 3: 12). Literature of the fourth century speaks of Christians establishing hospitals for strangers, poor, and widows. In her book Making Room: Recovering Hospitality as a Christian Tradition, Christine Pohl quotes the Emperor Julian (A.D. 362), who provides historical evidence of an external ministry of Christian charity, and who directed those of his own religion to “imitate Christian concern for strangers,”

“For it is disgraceful that, when no Jew ever has to beg, and the impious Galileans [Christians] support not only their own poor but ours as well, all men see that our people lack aid from us. Teach those of the Hellenic faith to contribute to public service of this sort.” (1999a, 44).

Change came subsequent to Christianity becoming the accepted religion of Constantine’s empire; “government” resources supplanted the church’s role as provider of public assistance. It was during this period that the response to needs became institutionalized and specialized as “social service.” What had been considered personal hospitality in the early church became separated and distant from the church and the home. Charity became so far removed from the church that in the fourth and fifth centuries John Chrysostom challenged that “hospitality remained a personal, individual responsibility as well,” urging them to make a place for the needy in their homes to serve “the maimed, the beggars, and the homeless” (1999a, 45).

Reformation brought a rebirth of charity and hospitality, as it once again began to be seen as a response to a moral or ethical “duty” to share with those less fortunate. Pohl quotes John Calvin commenting upon what he saw as the “demise of ancient hospitality,”

This office of humanity has . . . nearly ceased to be properly observed among men; for the ancient hospitality celebrated in histories, in unknown to us, and inns now supply the place of accommodations for strangers.” He warned that the increasing dependence on inns rather than on personal hospitality was an expression of human depravity. (1999a, 36)

Similarly, the Second Great Awakening changed how charity was viewed in various movements of that time. Differing works either separated or combined secular and spiritual interests. In Transforming Mission, David Bosch explains the changes denominations saw as some chose to separate secular and spiritual interests. Some focused on souls, and societal change was viewed as result, not purpose (2005, 278). Bosch points out that many Evangelicals were becoming quite involved in aggressive advocacy for societal change as part of faith (e.g. Wilberforce and Carey):

At the same time these evangelicals had no doubt that soteriological emphasis had to take precedence, that they were not proclaiming mere temporal improvement of conditions, but new life in the fullest sense of the word.” . . . “by the end of the nineteenth century the rift between the conservative (or fundamentalists) mission advocates on one hand and liberals (or social gospelers) on the other was becoming even wider” (2005, 281, 297).

The paradigm shifted from evangelism to social concern, which indicates a change in the interest from individual to society. Secular philosophy felt that changing the person was a waste of time if the environment was left unchanged (2005, 323). Along with this shift came a change in environmental concerns within society as it moved away from agrarian (familial) to an urban (corporate) society – as land ownership became coalesced by a few; exploitation of workers; and a growing need for welfare for the growing urban poor. James Okoye explains in Israel and the Nations, “The traditional kinship values that ensured the welfare of the poor were under pressure from the market economy” (2006a, 74).

An industrial economy would change the landscape of charity; charity and social services would move towards centralization and federalization. From this point we see a growing philosophy for a corporate—or central—responsibility for society rather than the local community or the church. General welfare, once supplied via the church, is now seen as the duty of government agencies, funded through taxation, and is for the most part non-reciprocal – seen as merely a hand-out. An exception to this trend was the Rescue Mission movement, which took various forms – reflecting the differing theologies of the time; some focused primarily on individual spiritual renewal, while others integrated societal change.