How to prevent corruption in the Church?

[Hans Deventer]

Like every human organization the Church is constantly in danger of corruption. As soon as power and wealth come to the Church, manipulation, exploitation, misuse of influence, and outright corruption are not far away.

How do we prevent corruption in the Church? The answer is clear: by focusing on the poor. The poor make the Church faithful to its vocation. When the Church is no longer a church for the poor, it loses its spiritual identity. It gets caught up in disagreements, jealousy, power games, and pettiness. Paul says, "God has composed the body so that greater dignity is given to the parts which were without it, and so that there may not be disagreements inside the body but each part may be equally concerned for all the others" (1 Corinthians 12:24-25). This is the true vision. The poor are given to the Church so that the Church as the body of Christ can be and remain a place of mutual concern, love, and peace.

Henri Nouwen, Daily Meditation for October 31, 2005

[Sharon Isley]

Interesting...but I'd say, focusing on Christ is a better solution. Then we can focus on the poor, and all people, with the attitude of Christ Himself.

[Bruce Carriker]

Whenever I read these threads having to do with economics, obligation to the poor, etc, I frequently ask myself this quesiton:

"Are we still the movement Phineas Bresee started? Or have we become the church that he left?"

[Hans Deventer]

Interesting...but I'd say, focusing on Christ is a better solution. Then we can focus on the poor, and all people, with the attitude of Christ Himself.

So you say, the Church hasn't focussed on Christ?

[Dave McClung]

I grew up in a Nazarene parsonage. By any objecive measure, we were "poor." The message of the Chruch of the Nazarene was:

1. Live a Holy Life.
2. Get all the Education you can.
3. Work Really Hard.
4. Live Below Your Means.

If you do these things, you won't remain poor. Even those like John Wesley and Billy Graham who give away enough to prevent their net worth from increasing have enough cash flow that they are no longer really "poor."

If "focus on the poor" means that the church will grow by helping those who are poor improve thier lives and come out of poverty, then I agree.

Sometimes I get the idea that some who have not done all they can to improve their own lives, believe the church should pull those who have gotten ahead back to a common level of poverty. Neither the chruch nor the kingdom benefit from a message based on class envy.

I can tell you that some of those who are doing the most to address the needs of the poor are among the wealthest in our denomination. Let me give you some examples:

Bob Helstrom is a person who has been very successful in business. He got into the burglar alarm business years ago and has built one of the leading alarm business in the northwest. I don't claim to know everything he has done to help the poor, but I know he sponsors a Gospel Mission in Olympia, has given generaously to NNU and to Nazarene World Missions. The President of Africa Nazarene University told me that the University wouldn't be there without the support of the Helstroms.

Ray Cook is a medical doctor from Wichita, KS. Ray's passion is the Jesus Film. Ray and his wife have been major supporters of the effort to present the Gospel to the poor around the world through the Jesus Film project.

Jim Couconeur is a building contractor from Ohio. Jim's story is remarkable. God gave him a burden for the patrons of a bar in his community. Jim was led to "hang out" at the bar to minister to that community. Over time, he led the bar owner and many of the patrons to the Lord. The bar has been converted to a coffee house for youth in that town.

I can tell you of others who give significant amounts to our schools to provide education for those who can't otherwise afford it. And, many who support compassionate ministries in the U.S. and abroad.

My point is that if "focus on the poor" means that we exclude those who have been blessed to arise out of poverty, then I think we miss the point.

[Sharon Isley]

Hans, In my opinion, when someone gives in to corruption, there is a good chance that their focus has gotten off Christ and onto themselves. Just a thought...

[Bruce Carriker]

I grew up in a Nazarene parsonage. By any objecive measure, we were "poor." The message of the Chruch of the Nazarene was:

1. Live a Holy Life.
2. Get all the Education you can.
3. Work Really Hard.
4. Live Below Your Means.

If you do these things, you won't remain poor.

Dave, this seems to be precisely the dilemma Wesley was concerned with when he wrote the following, in his sermon, The Causes Of The Inefficacy Of Christianity (Works VII, 290).

"Doesn't it seem that true Biblical Christianity tends, over time, to undermine and destroy itself? Consider this: Wherever Christianity spreads, diligence and frugality are the result. And in time, these two things must lead to some degree of financial independence and self-sufficiency. Self-sufficiency, in turn, leads to pride, materialism, all kinds of opinions and desires that are destructive of Christianity."

[Hans Deventer]

Hans, In my opinion, when someone gives in to corruption, there is a good chance that their focus has gotten off Christ and onto themselves. Just a thought...

Yes, of course. But I think Nouwen wants to keep it practical, in the line of Jesus words in Matthew 25.
To keep Christ central is a great concept, but it can mean almost anything. It can mean a focus on the truth of the gospel, on Jesus as a person, on worshipping Him in songs etc, on what He wants us to do (Matt 28:19-20), you name it!

[Hans Deventer]

My point is that if "focus on the poor" means that we exclude those who have been blessed to arise out of poverty, then I think we miss the point.

I don't read that in the Nouwen quote, Dave. I do however know a lot of nice middle class churches that absolutely don't minister to the poor, including my own local church.

[Terri Knoll]

ministry to the poor only needs someone to step up to the plate. maybe that is you? God provides, but He does need someone with hands and feet to do it.
try it, you may like it :)
blessings on your heart
it is very important very important

[Bruce Carriker]

This is my personal experience from observing the church of Jesus Christ and the Church of the Nazarene in a fairly limited geographic area (US Midwest), and from reading very widely concerning the Church and the church in the rest of the United States.

For all the rhetoric, most well-to-do American Christians do not practice sacrificial giving. Few intentionally downsize their lives for Jesus Christ. The general practice looks something like this:

1. 10% tithe (I will give them that!)
2. Nice home in the 'burbs
3. 2 SUV's in the driveway (more if their are teens at home)
4. College fund for the kids
5. Fully funded IRA every year for both spouses
6. All desired extras and amenities covered (country club, health club, Aspen time share, annual Caribbean cruise, etc)
7. Anything left at this point? Give some to the church and get your name on a classrom, building, chair, scholarship, etc.

I can honestly say I've never seen anyone look around and say,

"You know, I can live in half as much space and send what I save on my mortgage payment to missions."

"You know, these SUV's are just impractical. A nice used Accord will get me where I'm going just as well, at half the cost. And I can use the difference to help with the homeless shelter XXXXXX Church is trying to get started."

"You know, it won't hurt my kid to work some while they're in college, like I had to. Maybe we'll just pay for half their school, and use the other half of what we've saved to help send a poor student to SNU, ONU, ENC (pick one)."

"You know, we really don't need that timeshare in (pick a place). We can sell our share and give the difference to the Bresee Instiitute for inner city ministry work."

I'm not saying those things don't happen. I'm sure they do happen, if not nearly as much as they should. I'm only saying that I've never seen them happen. Even planned giving, which sounds great, is basically a statement that says, in effect: "You can have it when I'm done with it."

Granted, that is very cynical, but from my experience it is more true than not. It honestly and accurately reflects my observations. If I have not observed YOU or your friends or your family, please to not take this personally.

[Hans Deventer]

ministry to the poor only needs someone to step up to the plate. maybe that is you? God provides, but He does need someone with hands and feet to do it. try it, you may like it :)
blessings on your heart
it is very important very important

I'm not sure if that is true. It cannot be a coincidence that we simply have no lower class in our church. I think it is not just a lack of a specific ministry, I seems to me it has to do with the whole manner in which we "do church".

Apart from that, I certainly have a personal responsibility towards the poor as well.

[Cindi Hammons]

Bruce,

You have made some very interesting points.

Cindi H.

[Hans Deventer]

Henri continued on "the poor". Quite interesting take!

Who Are the Poor?

The poor are the center of the Church. But who are the poor? At first we might think of people who are not like us: people who live in slums, people who go to soup kitchens, people who sleep on the streets, people in prisons, mental hospitals, and nursing homes. But the poor can be very close. They can be in our own families, churches or workplaces. Even closer, the poor can be ourselves, who feel unloved, rejected, ignored, or abused.

It is precisely when we see and experience poverty - whether far away, close by, or in our own hearts - that we need to become the Church; that is hold hands as brothers and sisters, confess our own brokenness and need, forgive one another, heal one another's wounds, and gather around the table of Jesus for the breaking of the bread. Thus, as the poor we recognise Jesus, who became poor for us.

Henri Nouwen, Daily Meditation for November 2, 2005

[Ian Gentles]

I would have said "shoot the board" lol ok J/k. We were warned of this in college, and to a good extent I can report corruption dosent exists, more misunderstandings and conflict of interests! We, any church, have to dicide what our mission field, church interest is! I can remember poor people who would pull every trick to gain from the church, ok genuine poor people yep, help them!

[Dave McClung]

Henri says: "Even closer, the poor can be ourselves, who feel unloved, rejected, ignored, or abused."


If I follow his logic:

1. The way to avoid corruption in the church is to focus the church on the poor.

2. Then, we redefine what it means to be "poor" to include ourselves in the definition.

I think not.

First of all, when Henri suggests that the "center" of the church has always been the poor, I believe he is distorting history. The "center" of the church has always been those who have arisen out of poverty and have a passion to help others arise out of poverty too.

When Jesus spoke of the "poor" he wasn't referring to himself and his disciples (with one exception). He was referring to the blind, the sick, the lame and those who were outcast.

Our objective as Christians isn't to be "poor." It should be to help others arise out of poverty.

[Hans Deventer]

Henri says: "Even closer, the poor can be ourselves, who feel unloved, rejected, ignored, or abused."


If I follow his logic:

1. The way to avoid corruption in the church is to focus the church on the poor.

2. Then, we redefine what it means to be "poor" to include ourselves in the definition.

I think not.

First of all, when Henri suggests that the "center" of the church has always been the poor, I believe he is distorting history. The "center" of the church has always been those who have arisen out of poverty and have a passion to help others arise out of poverty too.

When Jesus spoke of the "poor" he wasn't referring to himself and his disciples (with one exception). He was referring to the blind, the sick, the lame and those who were outcast.

Our objective as Christians isn't to be "poor." It should be to help others arise out of poverty.


Dave,

I don't claim to be an expert of Nouwen. I'm not. I can however say how I read his words, how I interpret them. For a man who gave up teaching at Harvard to live among indeed the blind, sick and lame, I can't imagine he would conveniently "redefine" poverty in order not to have to help them to rise above their poverty. That reading would make no sense, considering his life.

Further, he doesn't say anything about history, so I am not sure how he would be distorting it. In fact, read together with the post that started this thread, it is clear to me he means it as a "should be" situation. Since he writes about corruption etc that is going on in the church, he clearly understands that the poor have not been the center of the church for a long time.

What he does mean, as I read it, is that the focus on the brokenness of others and indeed ourselves as well, prevents "disagreements, jealousy, power games, and pettiness".

As soon as power and wealth come to the Church, manipulation, exploitation, misuse of influence, and outright corruption are not far away."

I would say that is historically true. I would say, very true indeed. The focus on wealth and power, instead of a focus on the poor regarding wealth and health and a true understanding of our own brokenness, has caused great harm. I understand how an attituted of serving the poor and understanding who we are ourselves would be a step in the right direction. As he wrote:

It is precisely when we see and experience poverty - whether far away, close by, or in our own hearts - that we need to become the Church; that is hold hands as brothers and sisters, confess our own brokenness and need, forgive one another, heal one another's wounds, and gather around the table of Jesus for the breaking of the bread.

[Dave McClung]

"It is precisely when we see and experience poverty - whether far away, close by, or in our own hearts - that we need to become the Church; that is hold hands as brothers and sisters, confess our own brokenness and need, forgive one another, heal one another's wounds, and gather around the table of Jesus for the breaking of the bread."

Yes, I can relate to that quote, but what he is describing isn't "poverty" it is "humility." To me there is a distinct difference. "Poverty" divides people. Automatically, when we start dividing people into "rich" and "poor" we begin to erect barriers to communication and fellowship. Class envy doesn't benefit the church in any way.

"Humility" tears down barriers and puts us all on the same level. If you substitute the term "humility" for "poverty" then I find myself in complete agreement.

In Matt. 5, Jesus doesn't say, "Blessed are the poor." He said, "Blessed are the poor in spirit for theirs is the kingdom of heaven." Poor in spirit relates to humility more than to poverty.

[Bruce Carriker]

Republicans read Matthew's version; Democrats and socialists read Luke's:

6:20 And he, lifting up his eyes on his disciples, said: Blessed are ye poor: for yours is the kingdom of God.

6:24. But woe to you that are rich: for you have your consolation.

[Hans Deventer]

Dave, we may want to talk this over in person one day. I guess I'm reading things somewhat differently.
But that's okay. Some writers appeal to some, some appeal to others.

[BobHunt]

In our first pastorate, a pioneer work, it was so very difficult to barely make it from week to week because some weeks we would get no salary, some weeks $40, but at least one family of the church were well off. It was if they expected us to sacrifice, work 2 jobs and remain poor. I feel that if you receive blessings financially from the Lord, its your obligation to see that your pastor should be helped wherever he or she needs it.
When you speak of ministering to the poor, it will help us to get our eyes off from each other, splitting hairs, and give us a common goal! Most important, we are commanded to do this.

[G R 'Scott' Cundiff]

This is a bit off topic, but one time our church was raising some money for some special offering, and one of my board members said something along the lines that the pastor should lead the way. This was a long time ago and I am not sure what I said, but it was something like that I was ready to give half a weeks salary if he was. He didn't rise to the challenge.


In our first pastorate, a pioneer work, it was so very difficult to barely make it from week to week because some weeks we would get no salary, some weeks $40, but at least one family of the church were well off.

[Billy Cox]

Hans,

I think you're on the right track, but even a compassionate ministry focus can become corrupt. We humans are highly creative and we can mess just about anything up.

I think most churches have a 'non-lethal' level of corruption. By that I mean that there are shady transactions involving money/influence, but not so blatant as to cause outright division in the church. They may be in an ethical gray area, but the end justifies the means.

There are two types of 'money people' in the Church. There are those who give freely and don't want to be treated different from everyone else...and there are those that give to the church and expect something in return, whether it's recognition, special access to the pastor (aka weekly golf outing), or a position of prominence in leadership. It is this second type that tempts church leaders to be corrupt.

I was once instructed to involve a specific person in the worship band because (and I quote) "they are loaded." The person was qualified, so it didn't violate my integrity, but the principle of the matter made my stomach ache.

I don't mean to sound like a 'Ricklet' (my term for those pastors who aspire to be Rick Warren), but having a well-defined and broadly owned purpose/mission will go a long way toward preventing corruption.

There are also measures taken by most companies to fight corruption. The church would do well to make sure that checks and balances are in place and that accountability is real.

Anyway, I hate corruption. To be transparent, I have never been a beneficiary of corruption, so maybe I would wink at it a little easier if I had. That's what makes corruption so hard to fight.


-Billy

[Billy Cox]

HAHA! That had to be a Holy Spiit moment because it's as clever as many of Jesus' responses to the Pharisees.

[Hans Deventer]

Some further explanation from Nouwen:


The Poverty of Our Leaders

There is a tendency to think about poverty, suffering, and pain as realities that happen primarily or even exclusively at the bottom of our Church. We seldom think of our leaders as poor. Still, there is great poverty, deep loneliness, painful isolation, real depression, and much emotional suffering at the top of our Church.

We need the courage to acknowledge the suffering of the leaders of our Church - its ministers, priests, bishops, and popes - and include them in this fellowship of the weak. When we are not distracted by the power, wealth, and success of those who offer leadership, we will soon discover their powerlessness, poverty, and failures and feel free to reach out to them with the same compassion we want to give to those at the bottom. In God's eyes there is no distance between bottom and top. There shouldn't be in our eyes either.

One may disagree with the way he talks about poverty, but he's not creating gaps, I'd say. And Dave, I don't think "humility" is the word that would be a synonym.

[Gina Stevenson]

... from Nouwen, about the emotional state of leaders sometimes ... well, it fits anyone from the leaders on down. The idea of "taking care of the poor" including ourselves isn't offbase, so far as I can see. If we're not taking care of ourselves ... if we're depleted ... then what will we have to give to those who are even poorer to help them up/out??

NOW, a different subject, re this board: there's a post that Billy Cox made that's replying to someone else in this thread; because of the placement of these posts -- as opposed to how they are in Ceilidh -- I'm not even sure who's post he's commenting on! THIS software has it's downside, for sure, in spite of its "features/perks," methinks.

[Hans Deventer]

there's a post that Billy Cox made that's replying to someone else in this thread; because of the placement of these posts -- as opposed to how they are in Ceilidh -- I'm not even sure who's post he's commenting on! THIS software has it's downside, for sure, in spite of its "features/perks," methinks.

Well, we COULD of course use the good old method we have in email: quote what you are replying to. Makes for better reading anyway.

[Gina Stevenson]

'was going to come here, suggesting that when our remarks leave it rather obscure re to whom we're replying, that we "must quote" them. :p

'bet there's even a feature somewhere for moderators to delete the "REPLY" at the bottom, so someone has to click the "QUOTE" button when replying, so anyone knows to which post one's reply belongs. NO??? :rolleyes:

[Billy Cox]

I use a view that lets me view the entire thread by subject while also viewing the message I have clicked on below it. It's most similar to the frames view on the old forums...that was the view I always used.

So what I'm saying is that my (point of) view is the best. I trust you will come to the same conclusion. :basic02