Should We Preach the Gospel or Feed the Poor?
James 1:19-27
To look at the universities of Harvard and Yale today, it is hard to imagine that they had a thoroughly Christian beginning. Harvard was started by the Puritans and was grounded on the word of God. Yale came along 65 years later and was started by the Congregational Church. It wasn’t long, however, before these two schools began to drift from their Christian foundation. Yale kicked the famous missionary David Brainerd out of their school because he dared to question the salvation of some of the faculty members. Because of this growing tendency toward liberal theology, in 1746 a new college in the American Colonies was formed and was given the name, The College of New Jersey. It was started by Presbyterians and Jonathan Edwards served as its third president. Later its name was changed to Princeton University. Today we know that Princeton has drifted far from its Christian roots as evidenced by the hiring of an ethics professor named Peter Singer. Singer believes that it should be legal to kill infants, the elderly and disabled persons. He also believes that humans are no better than animals and to think otherwise is akin to racism, what he calls specieism.
Harvard, Yale and Princeton were all once bastions of conservative theology but are now as far left on the liberal scale as you can get. The same thing has happened to traditionally conservative organizations like the YMCA as well as Christian denominations like the Episcopal Church and U.C.C. These denominations and organizations deal in humanitarian efforts such as the treatment and prevention of disease and feeding the hungry. Conservative evangelicals have responded to this theological drift toward liberalism by strengthening their strong stance on orthodox doctrine. But they have been so strong on doctrine and right beliefs that they have tended to neglect humanitarian efforts. For much of the 20th century we have had two choices: conservative theology with weak humanitarian efforts or weak theology with strong humanitarian efforts. What is more important—preaching the gospel or feeding the poor?
This distinction between preaching the gospel and feeding the poor is a false distinction that was never taught or envisioned by the Biblical writers. James is one book that bridges the gap between right beliefs and right actions. If we could ask James the same question—What is more important—preaching the gospel or feeding the poor?—he would answer, "Yes!" They are both equally important and let me show you why preaching the gospel and feeding the poor are inseperable.
?19?
My dear brothers, take note of this: Everyone should be quick to listen, slow to speak and slow to become angry, ?20? for man’s anger does not bring about the righteous life that God desires. ?21? Therefore, get rid of all moral filth and the evil that is so prevalent and humbly accept the word planted in you, which can save you.22
? Do not merely listen to the word, and so deceive yourselves. Do what it says. ?23? Anyone who listens to the word but does not do what it says is like a man who looks at his face in a mirror ?24? and, after looking at himself, goes away and immediately forgets what he looks like. ?25? But the man who looks intently into the perfect law that gives freedom, and continues to do this, not forgetting what he has heard, but doing it—he will be blessed in what he does.?
26? If anyone considers himself religious and yet does not keep a tight rein on his tongue, he deceives himself and his religion is worthless. ?27? Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.The theme of this passage and a main theme of the entire book of James is that right beliefs and right actions are inseparable. 22? Do not merely listen to the word, and so deceive yourselves. Do what it says. Do you recall our definition of wisdom? Wisdom is right beliefs plus right actions. You must have both to have wisdom. Then James goes on to say that if you know the Bible but do not live it out in your daily life, it is as ludicrous as looking at your own reflection in a mirror and then forgetting what you look like. Knowing the word of God and doing the word of God are inseparable. If you know the Bible but do not do what it says, then you are acting like you do not believe it. Such a person fits into the category of a foolish Christian—you say you believe God but you act as if you don’t believe.
James also says such a person is deceived. You are deceived because you think you are living a godly life when all you are doing is believing a godly life. James must have been born in Missouri because his rallying cry is constantly the same—"Show me!" Are you a true follower of Christ? Then show me your good works that flow out of your faith. Are you a Christian? Then prove it to me! Saddam Hussein is now on trial for war crimes against humanity. No doubt the evidence will prove him guilty. If you were on trial for being a Christian, would there be sufficient evidence to convict you?
The book of James is filled with types of behavior that would make someone guilty of being a Christian. In this passage he lists three things: keeping a tight rein on your tongue, demonstrating acts of love and compassion and showing evidence of moral purity. James has a longer section on the taming of the tongue in chapter three, so I will let you off the hook this morning by not addressing topics like anger, gossip and criticism. Are you OK with that?! What I want to focus on is the last two behaviors which must flow from genuine faith—demonstrating acts of love and compassion and showing evidence of moral purity. In v. 22 James says that if you do not do these things then you have deceived yourself and in v. 26 he says that without the evidence of these behaviors in your life then your so-called religion is worthless.
Instead of a worthless, self-decieved, unbelieving, wisdom-deficient type of religion, James says that Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world. Is James claiming that unless we look after widows and orphans that we are not good Christians? Don’t get caught up on the specific examples that James used. He is illustrating his theme about the inseparable bond of right beliefs and right actions by using the plight of widows and orphans. Throughout history, widows and orphans have been the most vulnerable of all people. Since men have historically been the predominant wage earners, wives were always dependent on their husbands. If their husbands died they could very quickly lose their home and be thrown to the brink of poverty and even death. Orphans of course are vulnerable because they are still children and are incapable of taking care of themselves.
In Jesus’ teaching on the sheep and the goats he uses several examples of vulnerable people to teach the exact same lesson that James is teaching. "Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. ?35? For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, ?36? I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’ 37? "Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? ?38? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? ?39? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’ 40? "The King will reply, ‘I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.’
These are the vulnerable people of the world—those who are hungry and thirsty, those who are homeless and lack necessary clothing, those who are sick and in prison. James adds to this list by including widows and orphans. It’s not that you must help everyone on this list or that you need to help any specific groups of people on this list. The important thing to understand is that there are vulnerable and needy people all around us and if we ignore them and pretend that they don’t exist, then our religion is worthless. It is necessary to demonstrate acts of love and compassion to those who need it the most. As I indicate on the outline, these are things traditionally strengths of those with liberal theology. Although evangelicals have given much more emphasis to compassion ministries in the past several decades, they have historically played catch-up with those of liberal persuasion.
But conservatives have always been traditionally leaders in the third behavioral category—showing evidence of moral purity. James said it this way in v.27, to keep oneself from being polluted by the world. Christians are often ridiculed for being overly moralistic. We are maligned for attempting to impose our conservative values upon the surrounding cultures. We have been accused of caring more for a person’s soul than we do for their body. To some degree I would have to say—"guilty as charged!" Fundamentally we are engaged in a spiritual battle. In order to do this we need to be unpolluted by the world. We must maintain high moral standards. But we can do all of these things and at the same time demonstrate acts of love and compassion—such as taking care of widows and orphans in their distress.
Let me give you a real life example of how the caring for vulnerable people and maintaining high morel standards go well together. My aim is to prove that not only are these two concepts not at odds with one another, but that they indeed must go together.
You are probably aware that aids is decimating sub-Saharan Africa. Currently there are 27 million people infected with aids in this region. Because so many mothers and fathers have died there are also 11 million aids orphans and this number is expected to swell to 20 million by the year 2010. By the way, this is in addition to the millions of children who have been orphaned due to starvation, warfare and other causes—the current estimate is 34 million orphans in sun-Saharan Africa. Now what is a church like ours going to do about 34 million orphans in Africa? It is an overwhelming proposition, isn’t it? A little later I will talk about some practical suggestions that we can do to help needy people in general, but I am not suggesting we can solve the orphan problem in Africa. But let me give you a striking example of what some Africans have done to reduce this very problem.
The country of Uganda, which is just west of Kenya, has been recognized world-wide as the obvious leader in the fight against aids. In the late 80’s and early 90’s
Uganda 
had one of the largest
prevalence of aids—about 30% of the adult population was infected with aids. Can
you imagine—30%!! Several countries had similar rates. But in a short seven
years, Uganda has dropped in aids prevalence from 30% TO 12%--A DROP OF 70%! By
2002 the infection rate had dropped to 6% for a total decrease of 80%. Many
countries rates of aids have increased over the same seven years and some have
decreased a little—but none have come close to the success of Uganda. What is
the secret to their success. They have been extremely diligent about emphasizing
and educating the entire country about the ABC’s—Abstinence, Be Faithful and
Condoms. But out of the three parts to this initiative, which do you think have
helped the most.
See if you can guess the not so hidden agenda of this organization. While explaining the benefits of the ABC’s program, they are obviously biased against the moral virtues of abstinence and monogamy. They are also ignoring lal prevailing evidence to the contrary.
U.S. Global AIDS Coordinator Randall Tobias, said that promoting abstinence and monogamy are "far more effective" than distributing condoms for preventing the spread of HIV. "Statistics show that condoms really have not been very effective," Tobias said, adding, "It's been the principal prevention device for the last 20 years, and I think one needs only to look at what's happening with the infection rates in the world to recognize that has not been working." "The message to young people in the schools is not either 'Be abstinent or here are condoms, take your pick.' It is a message of 'Be abstinent.' Delaying sexual activity is a means of eliminating the risk of infection." Another study reported in Science magazine came to the same conclusion. They reported that "reduction in sexual partners and abstinence among unmarried sexually inexperienced youth … rather than condom use, are the relevant factors in reducing HIV incidence." "The outcome was equivalent to a highly effective vaccine," the researchers say http://www.pharma-lexicon.com/medicalnews.php?language=&newsid=7558&token=phbYa2WrOXAgY
Did you catch that? By practicing the moral virtues of abstinence and monogamy the people of Uganda have accomplished the medical equivalent of developing a highly effective vaccine against aids. Now what would happen if every country in Sub-Saharan Africa adopted the same level of commitment to moral purity as Uganda? What would happen to the numbers of orphans? Over time, tens of millions of lives would be saved and millions of children would not become orphaned due to aids. Do you see how these two principles from James have worked together in Uganda? Practicing Biblical virtues of moral purity is in itself an act of love and compassion because of the phenomenal reduction in suffering. Moral purity and acts of love are not at odds with one another, as some would want us to believe, but they are mutually dependent upon one another. The question is not—"which is more important, moral purity or acts of love". Both are equally important and are inseparable.
So why would anyone try to downplay the importance of abstinence and monogamy in favor of condom use? Because many people are so committed to individual freedom that they are willing to deny facts to suit their own preferences. For example, if one admits that moral purity reduces aids, disease and untold suffering, then this might interfere with unrestrained sexual freedom. It proves they care more about their sexual freedom than they do the reduction of human suffering. By comparison, this makes moral purity all the more virtuous because it is both the right thing to do and the best thing to do for all people everywhere. It is one of those absolute truths—it works for all people in all places at all times.
Let me give you another example. About 12,000 women are diagnosed with cervical cancer each year. Did you know that 100% of ALL cases of cervical cancer are caused by a sexually transmitted disease called HPV—Human Papilloma Virus)? ["Objective: Summary of the studies carried out by the IARC on HPV and cervical cancer is presented. Results: the first one was the international prevalence survey of HPV types in invasive cervical cancer (ICC) conducted in up to 22 countries. Overall, 99.7% of 1000 cases with histologically confirmed ICC were also shown to be HPV DNA positive. http://www.health-science-report.com/cgi-bin/alotek.cgi?topics=1&article=12] In other words, unless you contract the sexually transmitted disease HPV, it is impossible to get cervical cancer. You would never know this from reading about HPV on the Planned Parenthood website. I found this under their FAQ section. Does HPV cause cervical cancer? A: A small number of genital HPVs is linked to cancers of the cervix. They are giving misleading half-truths. It is true that only a small number of HPV’s is linked to cervical cancer. Approximately 70 million people have the disease, but only 12,000 per year are diagnosed with cervical cancer. However, that is terribly misleading because it does not answer the question. The questions was "Does HPV cause cervical cancer?" The correct answer is that HPV is the ONLY known cause of cervical cancer. Once again it appears we have another organization that cares more about unrestrained sexual freedom than they do about human suffering.
In example after example it is obvious that the practice of moral purity is compassionate and loving because it drastically reduces human suffering. This does not mean that we don’t do anything about those already infected with aids or suffering due to their own moral deficiency. Remember the compassion that Jesus demonstrated to the woman caught in adultery. What if Jesus had not come to her defense but instead said to her, "What’s wrong with you? Didn’t you listen to my tape series on moral purity? Didn’t you attend the mandatory abstinence education classes? I’m sorry—you created your own problems now you have to fix them!" Instead he said to her, "Has no one condemned you?" "No one, sir," she answered. "Then neither do I condemn you," declared Jesus. "Go now and leave you life of sin."
We are to aggressively and confidently promote Biblical moral purity, but we must never discriminate in our acts of love and compassion. So what is a small church in rural Wisconsin supposed to do?
1. Keep preaching Biblical truth. What happened to Harvard, Yale and Princeton? What happened to the United Church of Christ and the Episcopal Church? They all abandoned Biblical truth in favor of modernism and relativism. We preach Biblical truth because it is the very word of God, We preach Biblical truth because it is the only answer to millions of lost souls and But as we have seen this morning, the preaching of Biblical truth also has the pragmatic result of reducing human suffering. Reducing human suffering is not the only reason for preaching the truth, but it is inseparable from it.
2. Support compassion ministries through our missions giving. About 10% of our church’s annual budget is designated for missions. It is intended that a portion of that money will be given to compassion ministries throughout the world. Two days ago a representative from our denomination met with our Missions Committee to explain the EFCA Compassion Ministries so that we can make an informed decision. On Sunday morning I spoke with Dr. Tim Wester, the national Director for AIDS initiative for our denomination. Dr. Wester works primarily in Congo and CAR—which by the way are countries which will not be receiving any of the $15 billion from the U.S. government.
3. Form an Outreach Committee for local compassion needs. Just as we cannot solve the world’s hunger and disease problems, we cannot solve the social and fiscal problems in the Viroqua area. But we can do something. We have already given away hundreds of dollars to members of the community so that they could buy groceries and pay their utility bills. Don & Jeri Eisermann have extensive knowledge about benevolence committees. We have offered budget training to the community through Crown Ministries. We have people in our church who are or have been involved with compassion ministries to unwed pregnant women and single mothers, to the mentally ill, to prisoners, to those suffering from post traumatic stress disorder due to abortions as well as other things of which I am not aware. I would like to bring as many people as possible together for a brainstorming and praying session to dream about how our church might be more intentionally involved in compassion ministries in our area. Hopefully we are becoming increasingly known for Biblical teaching and moral purity, , which is a necessary foundation for compassion ministries, but are we known for acts of love and compassion.
4. Support or take part in the Walk for Hunger in October. Last year was the first year our church participated in the local Walk for Hunger. We now have the option of directing the funds raised through the walk to World Vision. World Vision is one of the leading evangelical organizations that is helping to fight aids in Africa. Bruce Wilkinson left his ministry at Walk Thru the Bible so he could concentrate his efforts fighting aids through the ministry of World Vision.
Rich Maurer
July 11, 2004
Abstinence, Condom Controversy Erupts at AIDS Meeting
Jul 12, 8:55 AM (ET)
BANGKOK (Reuters) - A controversy erupted at a global AIDS conference on Monday over whether abstaining from sex or using condoms was more effective to prevent the disease.
Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni brought the issue, which has set many AIDS activists at odds with Washington, into the open at the first full day of the AIDS conference by saying abstinence was the best way to stem the spread of the killer virus.
The remarks by Museveni, whose country is a rare success story in Africa's war on AIDS, were at odds with health experts who back condoms as a frontline defense against the incurable disease.
"I look at condoms as an improvisation, not a solution," Museveni told delegates on the second day of the 15th International AIDS Conference in Bangkok.
Instead, he called for "optimal relationships based on love and trust instead of institutionalized mistrust which is what the condom is all about."
Museveni added fuel to a debate within the AIDS community over the best way to halt the spread of a disease that has killed 20 million people and infected 38 million. Uganda's "ABC" method (Abstinence, Being faithful and Condoms) is a model for the AIDS policies of the administration of President Bush and which are under fire at the conference for advocating sexual abstinence to stem infection.
This year's smaller U.S. delegation, which the United States says reflects a desire to cut costs, is seen partly as a sign of Washington's displeasure that its approach appears to have had little influence on the agenda.
"I AM ABSTAINING"
U.S. Congresswoman Barbara Lee, the only member of Congress to attend the week-long meeting, accused the Bush administration of using ideology, not science, to dictate policy.
She said the U.S. AIDS initiative requires that one-third of prevention funding go to "abstinence until marriage" programs.
"In an age where five million people are newly infected each year and women and girls too often do not have the choice to abstain, an abstinence until marriage program is not only irresponsible, it's really inhumane," Lee said.
"Abstaining from sex is oftentimes not a choice, and therefore their only hope in preventing HIV infection is the use of condoms," she added.
But Ted Green, a member of Bush's council on AIDS, said programs aimed at changing sexual behavior were not obtaining funding. He also questioned the focus on condoms.
"If you are telling me that people can't stop AIDS unless they buy a product. I simply don't agree with that," he said.
Simon Onaba, a Uganda youth delegate who first had sex at age 15 but shunned it for the past three years, said condoms were not a 100-percent guarantee against infection.
"I am abstaining," Onaba said as he described Uganda's campaign to change behavior by urging young people who were most vulnerable to abstain or be faithful, and if needed use a condom.
"I am a sexual being, but I recognize HIV/AIDS is a killer," said Onaba. "I will wait until my wedding night."
Official figures suggest six percent of Uganda's 26.5 million people are now infected, down from 30 percent in the 1980s.
But Uganda's success has been twisted by the U.S. government in an effort to keep the support of religious conservatives, said Steven Sinding, director general of the International Planned Parenthood Federation.
"It appears that this is naked pandering to an extremist constituency," Sinding said.
"Millions of people around the world have been persuaded by the arguments of the U.S. government and religious right. Their actions represent a setback in bringing HIV/AIDS under control."
Health experts point to countries such as Thailand where a heavily promoted condom campaign is credited with slashing infection rates among sex workers in the 1990s.
In Asia, where infection rates are rising among injecting drug users, young people and homosexuals, some NGOs advocate the "CNN method" which stresses condoms, needles and negotiation.
Helene Gayle, head of AIDS programs for the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, said one approach was not better than the other.
"The debate is more distracting than it needs to be because we need to get on to the business of saving lives."