service, part two

I’ve gotten some positive feedback about the post on service (part one) and that has prompted me to think more about the topic.

Here are some questions:

Does the modern church’s approach to service work?

Most churches have ministry programs in place to address service needs. In some cases these require no more than a monetary commitment from members. Sometimes members donate time or other resources.

Let me say first that I think these programs accomplish good things. My question is meant to address the average church-goer’s concept of service as a result of those programs. Have we developed a mentality that limits our concept of service to a weekly check given or a few hours of volunteer time? Is it possible that these sort of programs have inadvertently encouraged us to justify a lack of service in our everyday routines because our “service quota” has already been met through a church program or a financial gift?

Do you have to be physically feeding the poor to be serving?

I struggle with this seemingly simple question. On one hand, no, certainly not. The individual who works tirelessly in various ministry efforts that indirectly provide needed services to the poor, the hungry, the needy and the abandoned is doing service. And yet, there’s no relational component to a hands-off form of service, and isn’t that the most important component?

In other words, if my ministry efforts result in 1,000 hungry people receiving food, that’s good. But if I never meet one of those hungry people, never talk to them or get to know them, never invest time in relationship with them, never show them love in a personal way, while it’s still good that I’ve helped to feed them, how is my effort any different from a government relief program? What makes my effort “Christian”? What connects it to Christ?

I feel strongly that the relational component of service is vitally important. I do believe we should be giving money to programs (both Christian and secular) that help people (locally and abroad), but I also think we should each be finding ways to interact with those we serve in a personal, relational, ongoing way. A single trip to the children’s hospital you’re giving money to does not constitute “relationship”.

Why do we make this a one-or-the-other situation? You rarely hear about the person who gives both money and time generously. But maybe that’s what we should be doing.

More to come…