Now, I'm just enough of a renegade and against-the-flow kind of guy to appreciate the statement and to endorse it immediately. But I think the assertion is too important to give it a wink-and-a-nod and move on to other topics. We should "try on" the statement to see if it fits. Think with me for a bit. How do your neighbors and/or family members - or coworkers - view Christians? Too often, they perceive us as morality police who take it upon ourselves to legislate "fun" out of life. Whether we deserve that tag or not, it is their perception, and perception is "truth" as far as the one doing the perceiving is concerned. So, does that make us "takers?" Probably. But that doesn't seem to be the context of Chan's comment.
Chan levels his charge against the Church in conjunction with the 2nd great commandment (Matt. 22:39), where we are commanded to "love your neighbor as yourself." In other words, he (Chan) challenges 21st century Christians to get dirty with people outside the walls of our church buildings. Leave behind the safety of the compound and hit the streets - especially the dangerous ones - driven by a love for God that flows through us to those people out there.
Here's where I think Chan misses it with us. The modern expression of Christianity seems to have embraced the task he suggests. Look around our church and you'll find a host of people actively "going out there" and giving. I know that's true of many churches these days. So, I'm not too sure that our reputation is that of "taker" rather than "giver." I fear that there is a deeper pit into which our reputation has fallen. This is the one that disarms our message, even as we freely give our resources to help people. This is the perception of Christians and their message that kills their witness. I believe that non-Christians tend to see Christians as...irrelevant.
And, if I'm right about that, I believe that we have earned that reputation. It's not enough to "give" to people in need. The Red Cross does that. So do multiple aid agencies of the US government. Shoot, even the people Christians so often castigate for loose morals (entertainment types) do that. And they give BIG bucks for causes! Giving stuff is good, to be sure. But giving self is best. Need a good example of that? Check out the cross event as recorded in the gospels. Love that drives us to involvement and investment of ourselves on behalf of the ones we help gives us credibility. That's called earning the right to be heard. But it won't ever occur if we intend to perch ourselves on the pinnacle of morality and throw resources down to the dirty little needy people of this world. Throwing money at a problem might be the preferred option, but it certainly isn't the smartest - nor the heavenliest (yeah, I make up my own words!). We follow the lead of our leader, who humbled himself...and got dirty; and he did it because that's what it took to help me. How could I settle for anything less than his model?
