Leviticus 19:9-10 September 28, 1997
Overcoming the Obstacles to Giving

As the hecticness of summer comes to a close and the long, warm days become shorter and cooler, we are faced with the often monumental task of preparing for the winter. Twice a year, if we have our act together, we order our affairs by shifting through all the junk that has accumulated over time. The fun of summer and the isolation of winter precludes that Promethean task from occurring but now is the time.

I must admit, I hate doing that kind of house cleaning. I hate having to evaluate what to keep and what to dispose of. I dislike the work and the thinking incumbent to do the job right. I’m a pack rat at heart. I like the stuff I have; it may even be junk, but it is my junk.

That aspect of my personality creates a hurdle for me to jump, an obstacle to overcome. But to make matters worse, I go to the mailbox, and among the assortment of bills and ads come the pleas for help for the poor. Not only am I forced to face my mounds of stuff, I now must be reminded that others have less. I’ll be honest, those mailings bug me because they hit me where I’m most vulnerable. Not at the theological level, where they remind me of my duty to God and man, not on the personal level, as if they were people I knew from the past, but at that all to sensitive spot we all have--at the guilt level. When they strike that cord, they hit a very sensitive nerve. When they do that, they have already succeeded.

In a calmer, more sane moment, I may be able to evaluate the guilt for what it is. I may know that a response based on guilt is not just silly, it is wrong. But it forces me to ask that question that I, being surrounded by my stuff, don’t always like to ask: How am I to respond to the less fortunate? Leviticus 19:9-10 gives us some insight.

Leviticus 19 offers what at first appears to be a random list of laws. It reads as though we’ve encountered God on a bad day. His hit list is lengthy. He’s annoyed and we get the brunt of his anger. But that misses the point. It is not that God is just heaping on more rules, but Leviticus 19 is a restatement of the Decalogue, the Ten Commandments. It is a reminder that as God has made us His own, as He provides the means by which we can be related to Him, He then states His requirements. Those requirements explain how we are to relate to each other. These horizontal laws are summed up in verse 18 with the familiar second half of the greatest commandment: love your neighbor as yourself.

One way that love can be shown is explained in verses 9-10 in the laws of gleaning.

"Now when you reap the harvest of your land, you shall not reap to the very corners of your field, nor shall you gather the gleanings of your harvest. Nor shall you glean your vineyard, nor shall you gather the fallen fruit of your vineyard; you shall leave them for the needy and for the stranger. I am the LORD your God."

This passage forces us to confront our own attitudes toward the poor. When it comes to our relationship with the poor there are three obstacles in giving which we must surmount.

THE FIRST OBSTACLE IN GIVING IS THE INSTRUCTION

What is the instruction here?

Gleaning was a means by which the poor could be feed. Notice how it is done. The land owner is not commanded to give a portion of his produce to the poor, but rather is to allow the poor, in this case, those who do not have land on which they might plant and harvest, to harvest some of the crops. The landowner was not to go over the field with a fine tooth comb himself, but to allow, after he was finished, those who did not have enough food and grain to gather something extra at the harvest. Landowners could specify which of the deserving poor could glean on their land (see the book of Ruth). Gleaning was not an entitlement which could be claimed by any poor person versus the landowner. The gleaning law cannot be used as a basis for social redistribution of wealth.

Second, gleaning was hard work - much harder than normal harvesting. Gleaners labored arduously in order to gather sufficient food.

“Only a little would be left after the reapers were finished: a small cluster of grapes here, a sheaf of grain there. Israel was no welfare state. Recipients of charity had to be diligent workers. The lazy and improvident could expect no saving intervention by a benevolent bureaucrat.” (David Chilton’s Productive Christians in an Age of Guilt Manipulators, pg 57)

The instruction is an obstacle because of our sin. The basic reason I am a pack rat is that I am at the core an idolater. I love things and I want to keep them for myself. The problem is that there is nothing wrong with things. We live in a universe created by a loving God who made something out of nothing and then said it was good. We must never buy into that ancient heresy that matter is evil and spirit is good. That kind of dualism smells of smoke because it came from the pit of Hell. But while there is nothing wrong with things, they easily become the object of my affection; I’ll define who and what I am by them. When that happens, they are idols. The problem is never the things, the problem with things is the problem with everything: my heart.

My heart is not that much unlike that of a two year old. If I get the toy first, it is therefore mine and nobody, I mean nobody had better lay a hand on it. Imagine the response of the farmer to God’s command in verse 9. “Hold it right there, God. I worked hard for this field. I’ve got a family to feed, livestock to care for. Why can’t I harvest all the food that I planted? It’s mine, isn’t it?”

“Well, yes, my son, it is yours, but remember who gave it to you. Who made the land, who provided the sunshine, who gave it rain? I think you’re forgetting Someone else in the equation here.”

We are not that much unlike the story of the Franks, who, when converted to Christianity were sometimes given baptism at one stroke. So the story goes that many warriors went into the water with their right hands held high, so that they did not get wet. Then they could say, 'This hand has never been baptized,' and they could swing their battle axes just as freely as ever. The modern counterpart of that partial baptism is seen in many people who have been baptized - all except their pocketbooks. They held these high out of the water.

No, the first obstacle is that I just plain don’t like to give. "God, you may have my mind, my heart, my life, just leave me my stuff."

The instruction is an obstacle also because of “their” sin. Have you ever thought: “The reason I don’t give is because there are some, not all, but some poor people who are just plain lazy. Others will just take advantage of my generosity. That unfortunate, but true perception was realized by the Benedictine Monks of Gloucestershire's Prinknash Abbey a few years ago. In an effort to minister to the physical needs of their community, they provided meals to needy passers-by. But their dinners--featuring roast beef on Sundays--were attracting the wrong crowd. “People were arriving in late-model cars, sometimes bringing two or three friends with them," says one monk. Now visitors are given soup, bread and tea--and crowds are down by half.

The Financial-Aid Office at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill received a call from a student who said he was having trouble making ends meet. "I'd like to apply for financial aid," he explained. The administrator answered she'd be happy to send him an application, but she was having trouble hearing him. "Is there a train going by?" she asked. "Oh, no," he replied. "It's just that I'm using my car phone."

We need help to get us over the obstacle of instruction - a biblical definition of the poor. Poor: ani - means afflicted or humble. It can refer to someone who is physically disabled or in such a circumstance that sustaining life is very hard. This term is used of the person who is defenseless, who has no other recourse to provide for himself.

Alien: this is not a reference to someone from outer space, but the person who has become a part of Israel, but has not yet been able to be established. Again, it is a person who is defenseless against attack or famine. Deuteronomy 23:19 gives another category, Widow and Orphan: Especially in that culture when the husband died, the woman may well have lost her land and could not find honorable employment which could provide for her or her children.

The distinction is not one of economic net worth, but refers to a specific class of people who can not provide for themselves. It would not include the indolent and lazy. The poor are not those who have less them me or are below some imaginary and subjective line. There were plenty of times during my student years our family lived well below the poverty line, but we would not be classified as poor according to the Bible.

THE SECOND OBSTACLE IN GIVING IS THE IMPLEMENTATION

Once we surmount the obstacle of our sin or the sin of another, understanding that we are to care for the poor, our next difficult task is to implement that command. The task seems too large.

The first aspect to this obstacle of implementation is governmental intrusion. We think, “Hey Washington is doing what it can and I pay enough in taxes.” Thus we imagine that government money will take care of the problem. But there is no such thing as government money—only taxpayer money. One politician once aptly noted that “In America, we tax work, investment, employment, savings and productivity, while we subsidize non-work, consumption and debt. It's time we start to reverse this trend.”

But we often adopt a hysterical perception of the problem rather than a historical. We speak emotionally without thinking rationally. We do not implement because we think government does it best. Let’s put this obstacle of how to implement helping the poor in perspective. Marvin Olasky, professor at the University of Texas at Austin and Editor of World Magazine recently noted that: “Early on, Israel and Rome showed contrasting patterns of welfare. The biblical model emphasized gleaning, with direct alms going only to widows who had demonstrated good character, and to others who were truly helpless. Pagan Rome's idea of welfare highlighted bread and circuses, which meant giving the poor enough food to keep them in misery, along with gladiator contests to distract them from their plight.

"Early Christians emphasized real change rather than governmental spare change. They believed in turning away from both idols and idleness: The able-bodied were to work. Some Christian communities established 'the three-day rule,' which meant that strangers received food and lodging for three days. After that, they had to go to work or at least show evidence of responsible behavior. If they sat around, aid was terminated.”

The rigors of self-discipline and tough love proved too much. In time Christians stopped fighting poverty and instead made it a mark of spirituality - a kind of “if you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em” attitude. They thought that if the love of money was the root of all evil, then material things are evil. Begging became more holy than working. Such a lifestyle was thought to bring a person closer to God.

But such thinking was dangerous. A bishop in Lyon, France, in an effort to promote this odd spirituality, invited beggars from all over Europe to his city so that the believers there could give them money and in turn, all would earn brownie points with God. But all the city got was debt, disease and death.

“Then came the Protestant Reformation. Martin Luther criticized the theology of nonessential alms-giving and called for 'the abolition of all begging throughout Christendom.' Soon, families and friends cared for the poor in Wittenberg, with the church as backup. Deacons met weekly to discuss particular cases and distribute aid.” (Olasky)

In Geneva John Calvin taught from Genesis 2 that poverty is not natural or desirable: "Men were created to employ themselves in some work, and not to lie down in inactivity and idleness.” Calvin fought poverty by encouraging new businesses and teaching that all lawful vocations were good. Those in need were overseen by the deacons who did not just dole out cash, but often used church funds to purchase tools, raw materials and initial rent for shops.

History teaches us that true compassion for the poor is a hands on, face to face encounter that does not throw money at a problem, but offers assistance, education, encouragement to become independent. Our implementation of this command must be for the benefit of the recipient, not the guilt or ego of the giver.

The second step in overcoming the obstacle of implementation is asking certain questions. Again, Olasky offers what he calls the ABC’s of effective compassion. They force us to ask questions when we are faced with the question of "to whom do we give?"

Affiliation: Does this organization build relational bridges from the recipient back to family, friends, and community? Bonding: Is there a direct bond between the giver and receiver? Is there a mentor to walk with the recipient over time? Character: Does this group build good character in its recipients, fostering the virtues of self-restraint, honesty, and reliability? Discernment: Does this organization distinguish between people looking for a hand out, and those who need temporary help to get on their feet? Are solutions tailored to fit the individual? Employment: Do recipients receive marketable job skills and learn a work ethic that will empower them to get a job and keep it? Freedom: Do recipients learn to use freedom to make choices responsibly? Do they learn to take responsibility for their actions? God: Do recipients come closer to knowing their Creator, loving Him, and serving Him? Is this work building His kingdom?

THE THIRD OBSTACLE IN GIVING IS THE JUSTIFICATION.

Creation teaches us to give (Genesis 1-2). God made us stewards of His creation. He commissions us to work in His creation for our good and His glory. While we are to be fruitful and multiply, while we are to subdue the earth as part of our cultural mandate, we must not forget that God is the Creator. We are not the owners. What we have has been given to us. We are entrusted with what we have. Creation and God’s providential care in our lives should motivate us to look for ways to be used of God to share with those who are honestly in need.

The light of nature instructs us of the necessity to give to those in need. It is frightening when those outside the church give at a higher rate than those inside, when people so are genuinely touched by the need of abject poverty that they give sacrificially to a cause. But that is not reason enough. There is another reason here in this passage.

Redemption teaches us to give. The justification used here is found in that repeated phrase we’ve seen before: “I am the Lord.” This phrase reminded the Israelites that they were all slaves in Egypt, but God rescued them from that. Because God reached down to rescue them, their attitude toward the alien, the widow and orphan should be different.

This is made more clear in the parallel passage in Deuteronomy 24:22. We were slaves and God rescued us. We were bound in sin and God provided the means by which we might escape. Only a heart that has never been warmed by the Gospel would be so miserly as to tightly hold on to his or her own stuff. Sure, taxes are high. Yeah, you may not get much of a tax break on it. But giving is not designed to benefit you. Rather it is to benefit the other person.

Jesus Christ, we are told, “though he was rich, yet he became poor, so that you through his poverty might become rich.”That’s about our salvation and has nothing to do with giving, right? 2 Corinthians 8:9, where that verse is found, is the justification Paul gives to the Corinthian believers to give to the poor in Jerusalem. That is reason enough. Our response to the poor should not be a guilt reflex or a manipulated, emotional appeal. Rather it demonstrates that God has redeemed us, saved us and is now guiding us.