Mutual Support - A modern parable

Have you ever been to a meal in a restaurant with a number of people where each person chooses what they want and then, at the end of the meal the issue of how to settle the bill comes up? Well I have and I find that the dynamics of this situation are a very good parable on the issue of 'being Church' and 'Mutual Support'. Are you sitting comfortably? Then I'll begin:

One night a group of people decided to meet together to have a celebration meal for one of their friends. They decided at the beginning that each would buy their own drinks and they'd sort out the bill at the end. And so some had starters whilst others choose just to go to their main course. Everyone had a main course, each choosing what they wanted and then whilst others wanted dessert, others decided they were full and so their meal ended there.

Then came the moment of reckoning and one person suggested that they took the cost of all the meals and divided it by the number of people and so this is what they did. Now some of those at the meal, having eaten just a main course, found that the 'divided out' sum was twice the cost of what they had eaten, and yet they paid the agreed sum. Others decided that they would pay for, "What they'd eaten," and gave this money and no more. Still more people, having had starters, a main and a dessert paid the 'divided out' figure in the knowledge that they were 'winning' because their meal had actually come to more than the 'divided out' figure.

When the money was collected in they found that there wasn't enough to pay the bill and so some of those who had already given more than their own portion of the bill really was found themselves giving more so that the bill could be paid and they could go home.

Now which of those acted in the way that God would have us act in order to build His kingdom?

+ Those who paid more than the cost of their own meal acted 'generously'(especially as the giving of the extra from some was 'sacrificial' in that they had little to start with!),

+ Those who paid for their meal and nothing more acted legalistically in that 'you get what you pay for (and vv)' or perhaps it was merely the outworking of 'begrudging meanness' or 'thinking only of themselves (but nevertheless they paid their own way I hear some say, but what does this say of community and relationships?), and

+ Those who paid the 'divided sum' knowing that their meal cost more than that acted in a self-serving (or perhaps 'greedy or grasping') manner. The good old 'won that one' syndrome!

Do you recognise yourself, or your church, in this story I wonder?

have a think - more to come

Down with money - send the Gas Company a Chicken!

Having had my rant over the CofE selling its possessions, let us move on to the second placed suggestion:

"The 'Church' should oppose all financial dealings and seek a return to an equitable world where people traded and lived by bartering and sharing resources and skills - like we used to!"

Well, this is an interesting comment to attempt to respond to because first and foremost I think it joins ranks with those who see standing on the prow of an unsinkable ship (which is about to sink!) and those who see Celtic Christianity as thinks of romantic beauty. The wonderful world of everything was much betterer then when it really obviously wasn't! Not only that but I don't think the world was equitable, fair or a very nice place when people bartered their skills for food, drink, medicine or homes.

I think there is some great confusion regarding matters financial and the day-to-day exchange of money for food, drink, clothes, housing and the like is something that will always be with us. Bartering is merely a changing of the currency and to be frank, many who propose this as a way of living would find themselves quite badly off because they have little to bring to the party. Those who would prosper under this scheme of life would do so to the extent that they swapped the excess produce and possessions they'd accrued by providing their skills that they would, within that setting, have become 'wealthy' and this is the root issue for so many I've met who support bartering.

For many this is an issue of wealth and the divide between the 'haves' and 'have nots' and looking at history - the poor (and inadequate) fared much less well when this was the order of the day. Of course the Bible tells us that, "The workman is worthy of his wage," and further instructs us to ensure that those who labour receive the benefits of that labour for we, "Do not muzzle the ox that treads the grain." (i.e. if you do the stuff you reap the benefits. The problem also comes when you get too old or are to ill to do stuff, for who will provide you with the necessities of life because you've been non-productive? Only a welfare state will do this and of course to do this there needs to be taxation (or insurance) present to provide.

What I think is really meant here is that we should deal with those who make money by losing money for their customers and then make money again by selling the stocks that lost the money for less money again! The wonderful world of commission and the dodgy world of insider dealing, big bonuses and the like are what is really being spoken of here. The demand from investors that their dividend yields and the profits of the companies in whom they invest coupled with the increasingly large salaries 9and benefits) of the people at the top (IDS - 50% increase over the past year - immoral, not even close - it's much worse than immoral!).

I think the issue is that we have different rules and standards for the ordinary person, the rich, the financial types and those in power and this, the Bible tells us (Deuteronomy 25) is wrong:

"You shall not have in your bag differing weights, a large and a small. You shall not have in your house differing measures, a large and a small. You shall have a full and just weight; you shall have a full and just measure, that your days may be prolonged in the land which the LORD your God gives you."

The problem is that the regulators failed to regulate, the government failed to govern fairly and without favour or concession to certain people whilst oppressing (for it is oppression) others. There were (and are) different weights in use and our government and those who regulate them all stand condemned and guilty as they show favour towards those who seek great returns for doing nothing and expect others to pay for their privilege. In doing so they, all, defy Deuteronomy 10:

"For the Lord your God is God of gods and Lord of lords, the great God, mighty and awesome, who shows no partiality and accepts no bribes. He defends the cause of the fatherless and the widow, and loves the alien, giving him food and clothing."

No thanks, forget bartering and pay in good old fashion pound notes but stand and shout for those who oppress the poor, who raise the cost of living, see services cut to fund their excesses but do not pay, brought to book - and brought to live as The Book and its author commands. But the answer lies in prayer, prayerful dialogue and sticking to that which God commands, not disobedience and anarchy for these are the fruits of him against whom we contend.

Pax