1

The Poor You Will Always Have With You?A Christian Response to Extreme Poverty

Ken ChitwoodTier One

President’s Academic Showcase of Undergraduate ResearchFinalist and First Place Overall - April 2007

Extreme poverty is a hot topic in today’s syndicated television newscasts, magazines, and

local newspapers. The world is grappling with how to respond to extreme poverty and

various individuals and organizations claim to have the answer to ending extreme

poverty. The Lutheran Christian community has long struggled with how to respond to

the needs of the extreme poor. In The Poor You Will Always Have With You? I will

address the problem of extreme poverty and discuss theological considerations that

necessarily condition a Christian response. In light of those considerations I will examine

effective strategies for Christian response to the needs of the extreme poor. I will answer

this question in several steps. First I will identify and discuss the problem of extreme

poverty; next I will consider the historical context. Theological dimensions and ethical

implications of a response will be explored, and I will evaluate current methods of

responding to extreme poverty while commenting on whether or not it is possible to end

extreme poverty. Finally, on the foundation laid in the previous steps, I will develop

arguments in favor of actions that Lutheran service organizations, individual churches,

pastors, and lay people can take in the fight against extreme poverty.

2

“Give… and do not refuse, for the Father’s will is that we give to all from the gifts we have received.” -Didache I: V (ca. A.D. 90)

Far off in Eastern Africa the people of Malawi fight day-by-day against HIV/

AIDS, malaria, and hunger. For most of the impoverished in Malawi, home is a tiny mud

hut with a thatched roof, like the one Cecilia Mkhota and her children live in. In the rainy

season, “we don’t sleep, we stand in a corner just to make sure we aren’t wet,” says

Cecilia.1

The term “poverty” has a wide range of meanings in today’s society. I find it

useful to follow Jeffrey Sachs in distinguishing three general categories of poverty: 1)

relative poverty, 2) moderate poverty, and 3) extreme poverty. 1) Relative poverty can be

defined by reference to some proportion of the average national income.2 In the United

States it would be around $15,000-$20,000 per year for a household family of four. 2)

Moderate poverty is defined by reference to the ability to meet basic needs. Those

suffering from moderate poverty are able to meet basic needs, but just barely.3 3) Extreme

poverty is defined by reference to the inability to meet basic needs. The extremely

impoverished lack the basic necessities for survival and the ability to obtain minimal

nourishment, clothing, and lodging.4 Extreme poverty means that households cannot meet

1 Haviv, Ron, People Magazine, 3 March 2006 http://www.people.aol.com/people. 10 April 2006

2 Sachs, Jeffrey D., The End of Poverty; Economic Possibilities for Our Time. New York: Penguin Books, 2005 (20).

3 Ibid.

4 Lindberg, Carter, Beyond Charity: Reformation Initiatives for the Poor. Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Fortress, 1993 (22).

3

basic needs.5 Very few, if any, Americans live in extreme poverty, yet the problem of

extreme poverty is the most prominent poverty issue in the world today.

Extreme poverty affects millions of people. Before you finish reading this

paragraph three to four people will die from starvation or a poverty related disease, and

by the time you are done reading this paper nearly 180-240 people will die for the same

reasons. Extreme poverty stares this generation in the face and challenges this world to

respond.6 Poverty is an issue for every Christian. Poverty is a problem facing our world,

our country, our community, and our church.

In this essay I consider whether or not Lutheran Christians can offer a

theologically sound and effective response to the problem of extreme poverty. I will

address this question in several steps. First I will identify and discuss the problem; next I

will consider the historical context. Theological dimensions and ethical implications of a

response will be explored, and I will evaluate current methods of responding to extreme

poverty while commenting on whether or not it is possible to end extreme poverty.

Finally, on the foundation laid in the previous steps, I will develop arguments in favor of

actions that Lutheran service organizations, individual churches, pastors, and lay people

can take in the fight against extreme poverty.

Identifying the Problem: The Facts of Poverty

Extreme poverty exists in almost every corner of the world and affects billions

worldwide. However, not all continents are equally impacted by extreme poverty. The

numbers in 2001 were: 250 million in East Asia, 10 million in Eastern Europe, 50 million

5 Sachs, (20).

6 UNICEF, Make Poverty History, 2003 http://www.oxfam.org. 27 February 2007

4

in Latin America, 6 million in the Middle East, 415 million in South Asia, and 300

million living in Sub-Saharan Africa. This brings the total number of people living in

extreme poverty to one-sixth of the world’s population in 2001 (for a visual refer to

Appendix A).7 Currently, eight million people around the world die each year because

they are too poor to stay alive.8

I will argue that the facts of such widespread extreme poverty demand a focused

response from Lutheran Christians. However, my argument requires that I first review the

historical, theological, and ethical foundations that will illustrate the necessity of such a

response.

Historical, Theological, and Ethical Context

Historical Context

The early church made care for the needs of the poor a high priority. Paul Johnson

writes that early Christians “ran a miniature welfare state in an empire which for the most

part lacked social services.”9 Acts 2:44-46 and 2 Corinthians 8-9 testify to the early

church’s social activism. Another testament to Christian compassion for the poor is the

tale of St. Laurence. During the third Christian century, Laurence served at the church in

Rome as a deacon. When the Romans heard that the church brought in many offerings, an

official came and asked Laurence to present the “treasures of the church.” The saint

promised to gather them in three days and when the prefect returned he was met with

Laurence who had gathered the city’s poor and needy, referring to them as the treasures of

7 Sachs, (21).

8 Ibid., (1).

9 Johnson, Paul, A History of Christianity. New York: Atheneum Press, 1980 (75).

5

the church.10 St. Laurence’s audacity earned him martyrdom, but his story still today

stands as an attestation to the spirit of the early church.

Medieval Christianity took the responsibility of the church to respond to the poor

to an even higher level. In the Old Testament worldview poverty was understood as a

curse, but because of the Medieval theological and social construct, poverty had garnered

for itself a place of respect and formed a symbiotic relationship with the rich of the

world. This symbiotic relationship was hallmarked by ideologies that said the poor were

favored in God’s sight and that God had specially chosen the poor as his own people.

This theological construct made charity a condition of salvation in the Catholic Church.11

Charity became an element of the system of righteousness that assured salvation. The

Catholic Church proposed a system by which giving alms to the poor atoned for the sins

of the rich and by which the poor were given reason to intercede on behalf of those who

practiced charity.12

The 16th century brought a sweeping reform to the Catholic Church, including its

theology and system of charity. With the relationship to God shifting from a foundation

of charity to faith, the reformers were enabled “to envision a new social ethic in relation

to poverty.”13 Martin Luther himself promoted this social ethic most forcibly. He called

for the demolition of the Catholic system of alms for atonement in his 95 Theses but not

for the abandonment of the poor. Luther and his colleagues called for Christians to live

10 Commission on Theology and Church Relations-LCMS, Faith Active in Love: Human Care in the Church’s Life. St. Louis, MO: Lutheran Church Missouri Synod, 1999 (22).

11 Ibid., (26-27).

12 Ibid.., (28).

13 Lindberg, Carter, The European Reformations. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1996 (111-112).

6

out their faith active in service to the neighbor. Luther centered his social ethic in love, as

Augustine did, and said, “One should give willingly, moved by a love that is very ready

to give.”14 Christians were no longer to see their loving acts as works that repair their

broken relationship with God, but they were nonetheless called to loving acts.

In addition to motivating fellow Christians to a faith active in love for the

neighbor, Luther also called for reform in the Catholic prescriptions for alms giving.

Luther was convinced that everyone has the right to basic necessities, but he called for

the development of prophylactic as well as remedial assistance to the poor.15 As he said,

“[F]or so to help a man that he does not need to become a beggar is just as much of a

good work and a virtue and an alms as to give to a man and to help a man who has

already become a beggar.”16 This shift from remedy to prevention, in my estimation, was

the beginning of a transformation from charity to social assistance.

During the time of the Industrial Revolution, and continuing into the nineteenth

century the Christian church encountered a looming social crisis.17 As economies shifted

from the rural countryside to the booming factories of the cities, so did the people. As the

people moved into the cities many of them became mired in extreme poverty. The

primary evangelical response was a movement commonly known as the Social Gospel.

This movement had its origins in America and was promoted by theologians who worked

together to fight social wrongs. Their central belief was that God’s salvation included

14 Plass, Ewald, What Luther Says, An Anthology. St. Louis, MO: Concordia Publishing House, 1959 (534).

15 Lindberg, Beyond Charity. (119).

16 Luther, Martin, Luther’s Works (American Edition). St. Louis, MO: Concordia Publishing House, 1960 (54).

17 Shelley, Bruce L., Church History in Plain Language. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1995, (405).

7

reform of corporate structures as well as personal lives and that Christians are obliged to

work for the reconstruction of the social order, because it is part of their religious

responsibility.18

Walter Rauschenbusch had the longest lasting impact for the Social Gospel.

Somewhat like Luther, Rauschenbusch called out the “evils” of the capitalist system of

his day and called for greater social response to the problems of the poor.19 In fact,

Rauschenbusch drew a strong comparison between the early Christian movement and his

own Social Gospel, because both, he postulated, were motivated by the same condition of

poverty and devised by the same Christian spirit of love and fellowship.20

Unfortunately, the Social Gospel movement has left a stain on Christian social

activism. The Social Gospel has been decried as not simply a skewed version of Christ’s

Gospel but as a message where the Gospel is unrecognizable. Current Lutheran

theological debate on extreme poverty centers on the careful balance of engaging in

social activism while also attending to the primary responsibility of the church, Word and

Sacrament ministry

Theological and Ethical Context

For a Lutheran, theological discussion of the Christian response to poverty must

begin with, and find its foundation in, Holy Scripture. The Old Testament contains

numerous references to poverty, but one point remains clear; in the Old Testament,

18 Ibid., (413).

19 Rauschenbusch, Walter, “The Case of Christianity against Capitalism.” From Christ to the World: Introductory Readings in Christian Ethics. Ed. by Wayne G. Boulton, Thomas D. Kennedy, and Allen Verhey. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing, 1994, (455-462).

20 Rauschenbusch, Walter, “Social Ideas in the New Testament.” Ibid., (27-30).

8

poverty is understood best as a curse.21 Conversely, prosperity was a blessing from God,

a blessing that, rightly experienced, should result in generosity and care for the poor

(Deut. 15:7-11). Some prescriptions within the law also were for the benefit of the poor,

such as: the right to rest on the Sabbath for servants and strangers/foreigners (Deut. 5:

12-15), the harvest and reserving a corner of the field for gleaning (Lev. 9:9-10; Deut. 24:

17-22), and prohibiting a creditor from taking interest from the indebted poor (Ex. 22:

25-27; Deut. 24: 12-13). In addition the Wisdom literature of the OT abounds with

references to the fact that those who care for the helpless will be blessed (Prov. 14:21, 31;

19:17, 22:9, 28:8, 31:20; Ecc. 11:1) and those who close their hands and ears to the poor

will be dealt with harshly (Prov. 21:13; 28:27).22

Luke stands out as the premier author on issues of poverty when compared to all

other New Testament authors. Luke’s discussion of riches and poverty is placed in the

context of the Great Commandments and finds its best expression in the parable of the

Good Samaritan. The Great Commandment, to love the Lord your God with all your

heart and all your soul and all your mind and to love your neighbor as yourself (Luke 10:

27), is a foundation for all New Testament teaching and practice in regards to giving to

the poor and responding to those in need (Acts 20: 35; James 2: 1-13 etc.). This

commandment also is the context in which the parable of the Good Samaritan is read.

The parable of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10: 25-27) is a good example of a

Christian’s faith active in love. In the parable a man is robbed, beaten, and left for dead

21 Alexander, T. Desmond et al., New Dictionary of Biblical Theology. Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press, 2000 (688).

22 Ibid.

9

along the side of the road. As indicated (v. 33) the Samaritan had compassion on the man

and gave up at least two-day’s wages (two denarii, v. 35) to help him. The Samaritan,

most likely on a long journey, had means to the help the man but also the choice not to.

However tempted by his own affairs to not respond, the Samaritan acted in love and gave

to the man in need.23

The Church today stands in the same position, equipped with the means and the

choice to respond. She need only be moved by compassion and love stemming from the

Gospel to come to the aid of the impoverished people of the world. Thus, Jesus’ directive

at the end of the tale stands true for the Church today, “!"#$%"% &'( )% *"($( "µ"(+)”

“You, go and do the same thing.”

Still the questions remain of how we do so first, with theological integrity and

second, with practical effectiveness. Lutherans are well equipped to answer the first

question, and because of this, they also stand poised to effectively answer the second. In

this instance the themes of the love towards the neighbor, the prime function of the

church, two-kingdom theology, and diakonia will provide a construct upon which the

remaining theological discussion will rest.

Love Towards Neighbor

As mentioned previously, Martin Luther included the care of the poor in his

Christian ethos. So important was the topic to the German Reformer that it found a place

in quite a few of his books and treatises. Luther’s Treatise on Christian Liberty states,

“[A] man does not live for himself alone in this mortal body, so as to work for it alone,

23 Nicoll, W. Robertson ed., Expositor’s Greek New Testament Vol. I. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1951 (544).

10

but he lives also for all men on earth,”24 and in addition, “He [the Christian] lives in

Christ through faith, in his neighbor through love.”25 While these quotes summarize

Luther’s view on Christian service, an excerpt from his Epistle Sermon, Sunday After

Ascension Day touches on his view toward charity for the poor:

“Christians are to serve one another by ministering temporal blessings. Especially

are the poor and the wretched to be remembered, they who are strangers or

pilgrims among us, or come to us houseless and homeless.”26

In his Treatise on Usury Martin Luther even went so far as to say that Christians should

give less for the church’s beautification (in reaction to Catholic indulgence peddling) and

instead, “let the real stream flow towards God’s commandment, so that among Christians

good deeds done to the poor would shine more brightly than all the churches of stone or

of wood.”27

Primary Function of the Church

This theme of love toward the neighbor is the particular theological foundation

from which Lutherans are so readily poised to answer the call of the world’s

impoverished. Among Lutherans there is no debate as to whether or not Christians are to

care for the needy, this love is inherent with faith. Rather, the disagreement focuses on

how and to what extent.28 Concerning the “how,” some argue that the church confuses its

role in the world when as the church it organizes for social activism. They fear that a

24 Luther, Martin, Works of Martin Luther Vol. II. Philadelphia, PA: A. J. Holman Company, 1931 (335).

25 Luther, Martin, On Christian Liberty. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2003 (62).

26 Kerr, Hugh T. A Compend of Luther’s Theology. Philadelphia, PA: Westminster Press, 1943 (182-183).

27 Luther, Martin, Works of Martin Luther Vol. IV. Philadelphia, PA: A. J. Holman Company, 1931 (48).

28 Commission on Theology and Church Relations-LCMS, (7).

11

church that is organized for social activism and care for the world’s needy and

impoverished may confuse itself and others about the church’s responsibility to proclaim

the Gospel through Word and Sacrament.29 They argue that while Christians can and

should organize to address poverty, they ought not use the church itself for this purpose.

These arguments and fears point to a valid concern and should not be taken

lightly. However, there are significant grounds to say that being motivated by love, the

individual Christian, the local congregation, and the whole church should be organized

for social effort in service to the neighbor, both near and abroad.

Two Kingdom Theology

Matthew Harrison, director of Lutheran Church Missouri Synod World Relief and

Human Care, states “[T]he Lutheran doctrine of the two kingdoms grants broad freedom

for the church to engage and be active in its community.”30 The Lutheran doctrine of the

Two Kingdoms declares that God is Lord of all and that he reigns over his church with

the Gospel in his right hand rule, and reigns over the world with the Law in his left hand

rule. Christians live in both kingdoms and the church lives out its life in both kingdoms

as well. Doing so, “[C]hurches would also do well to recognize that not everything they

decide to do is part of their ministry of word and sacrament.”31 For example, the church is

obedient to local and national governments, but also free to be active by encouraging its

members to voice their opinion or collectively to do so on important matters.32

29 Ibid., (8).

30 Harrison, Matthew J., “Human Care Ministry” in Reaching 100 Million: International Lutheran Leaders Speak Out. St. Louis, MO: Lutheran Society for Missiology, 2005 (71).

31 Mueller, Steven P., Called to Believe, Teach, and Confess. Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2005 (401).

32 Harrison, (71).

12

Diakonia

In all of this the church will need to maintain its identity in the Gospel even as it

engages the need of the impoverished world. The church can do so as it balances its

various roles in the world. The church on earth is a church in mission (Matthew 28:

18-20). As it pursues its mission to bring the Gospel to every corner of the globe the

church engages in kerygma (proclamation), didache (teaching), and diakonia (service).33

These three tasks all must be included in the mission of the church to the world. Without

one, the others will fail. Diakonia is invariably a part of the church’s mission to the

world, both individually and corporately. While it is true that, “[I]f an assembly of people

is to be and to live as church, then its central mission must be nothing other than to

preach the Gospel and administer the holy sacraments,”34 it is also true that those who

need to hear the Gospel and receive the sacraments “must all at least have warm feet if

they are to understand the Word of God.”35 The above quote from the CTCR document

Faith Active in Love also makes it clear that the church cannot be so enamored with

diakonic service that it loses sight of the source of diakonia, the Gospel of Jesus Christ. If

so, the church’s work becomes solely secular and may as well be done by a secular

entity.36

While it is not required that every act of love be done along with proclamation of

the Gospel, more often than not acts of mercy will be linked to the preaching of the

33 Bloesch, Donald G., The Crisis of Piety. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing, 1968 (52).

34 Commission on Theology and Church Relations LC-MS, (17).

35 Köberle, Adolf, The Quest for Holiness. Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Publishing House, 1938 (199).

36 Harrison, (68).

13

Gospel. “[L]oving care, in harmony with God’s Word can draw people into contact with

the Gospel.”37 Therefore, the church, its congregations, and its individuals can and should

respond, although there is no prescribed manner to this response.38 The manner in which

to respond instead should be chosen based on that which best serves the poor and their

needs.

On a More Practical Note

While the imperative for Lutherans to reach out to the impoverished is clear, the

most effective method of reaching those who need it most is still undecided. In an effort

to find the best method various considerations exist. Thus, a set of criteria by which

various response methods will be judged is most helpful in this endeavor.

The task at hand is to investigate which method of alleviating extreme poverty

best fits the call, mission, and function of the church. I recommend the following criteria

for assessing methods for addressing the plight of the poor: 1) the method must work in

concrete ways to meet the needs of the poor, 2) the method must show evidence of

sustainability, 3) the method must be validated by the wider economic community, 4) the

method must be feasible (not utopian in scope), 5) the method must be something the

church can participate in according to its theological parameters, 6) the method must be

something individual congregations and their members can participate in.

These criteria will be used to compare and contrast various response methods

existing and popular in the economic, philosophical, and religious realm today. The four

major ways that the world has attempted to alleviate the poverty of the world in our time

37 Commission on Theology and Church Relations LC-MS, (38).

38 Ibid., (28).

14

have been through 1) aid assistance, 2) the solidarity and empowerment movements, 3)

the Millennium Development Project, and 4) various homegrown solutions.

Aid-Assistance

A recent television commercial features a medieval round table with the lord and

his attendants of various position and stature discussing a problem the lord is having with

his fiefdom, one could easily imagine that the problem involves invaders. One advisor

suggests that the lord build a giant catapult from which bags will be thrown at the

problem. When the lord asks what is in the bags, the advisor responds by dumping a sack

of coins on the table. The lord is being advised to throw money at the problem.

The World Bank, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the United Nations

(UN), and many Western powers have long seen the need to alleviate the plight of the

poor in the world, but have long reverted to the same solution, throwing money at the

problem. Through major loans and grants the Western powers have funded the World

Bank, IMF, UN, and various Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) who have sought

to pump more money into failing economies and make investments in development

projects among the poor themselves. For example President Bush was recently praised

for pledging 1.2 billion U.S. Dollars to fight malaria (a crisis affecting millions of poor

worldwide) in Africa and doubling assistance to that region by 2010.39 This sounds like a

significant step in the right direction; unfortunately the reality is that the money will be

bogged down in bureaucracies, a confusion of agencies, and any real world solutions

introduced as a result of the aid increase will not be properly evaluated with feedback

39 Baker, Peter. “Bush Pledges 1.2 Billion for Africa to Fight Malaria.” The Washington Post. 1 July 2005: A01.

15

from the poor or monitored in such a way as to hold the investing powers responsible. As

William Easterly puts it, “[I]t’s a tragedy that so much well-meaning compassion” does

not bring results for the needy poor.40

The assistance approach, as defined and exhibited above, seeks to provide

resources to directly meet the needs of the poor through welfare, relief, humanitarian aid,

and long-term loans. This method falls short in various ways. Although direct assistance

and monetary input temporarily alleviate the needs of the poor the results are usually not

concrete or fail to have lasting effect (criteria 1 and 2). It fails to address the sources of

human suffering and poverty, and thus is stuck in a perpetual cycle where poverty and

need always exist, and persist at their present numbers. Furthermore, various economists

such as Jeffrey D. Sachs, William Easterly, Raghuran Rajan and Arvind Subramanian

(both from the IMF) criticize both past and present aid approaches (criterion 3).41 They

criticize aid-assistance by decrying its lack of visibility in practical ways, its proverbial

red tape of political motivations, and the fact that statistically countries with high aid are

no more likely to “take off” than those with low aid.42

Finally, it is difficult for church organizations, congregations, or Christian

individuals to participate both theologically and practically (criteria 5 and 6). With aid

channeled very often through secular organizations Christian aid assistance risks being

turned into social activism alone, forsaking its primary mission of being an aid to

40 Easterly, William. The White Man’s Burden: Why the West’s Efforts to Aid the Rest Have Done So Much Ill and So Little Good. New York: Penguin Books, 2006 (4).

41 Ibid.

42 Ibid., (51).

16

preaching the Gospel. Whereas Christians can contribute their money to such programs,

they realistically cannot do much more.

The aid assistance approach has been prevalent in the fight against poverty since

World War II. Although there has been some progress in alleviating hunger and poverty

since the 1960’s through the assistance approach43, and indeed things could have been

worse without aid, the surge of aid was not successful in reversing or halting the slide in

growth for developing economies44, thus the poor remain poor. In the end the answer is

not in the assistance approach to alleviating poverty. In that spirit the remaining methods

stand united in their criticism of the aid-assistance approach. Although each theory finds

varying points of contention, each poverty alleviation idea responds to the weaknesses of

aid-assistance.

Solidarity and Empowerment

One of the glaring criticisms of the aid-assistance approach is the lack of feedback

and communication with the impoverished communities themselves. Proponents of the

solidarity and empowerment movement latch onto this criticism and espouse a

philosophy centered on communication with the poor, sensitivity to their needs, and

empowerment of the impoverished to accomplish their own goals. The solidarity

movement seeks to be sensitive and to commit to the struggles and fears of people who

live in abject poverty. This translates into having aid associations and NGOs building

43 Buttel, Frederick H., “Ending Hunger in Developing Countries.” Contemporary Sociology Vol. 29 No. 1 (January, 2000) 25.

44 Easterly, (45).

17

mutual trust, accountability based on feedback, and partnership in the endeavor.45 By

listening to the needs of the poor aid can be directly invested into real time effective

solutions, and the impoverished can give immediate and informed feedback as to whether

or not the investment was effective. Building upon these foundations, empowering the

poor takes this approach one step further. The basic tenets of the empowerment

movement include empowering, equipping, and evangelizing at the same time.46 The

empowerment movement depends upon a philosophy of pedagogy where action by the

humanitarians inspires reflection and action on the part of the impoverished.47 For

example an organization might supply two goats to a farmer who needs to expand his

farming business in order to provide for his large family and begin saving for the future.

Having been taught basic business principles and perhaps been provided a few

technological tools, the man can become an efficient farmer with a reproducing business,

which allows for him to meet basic monetary needs and invest for the future.

The solidarity and empowerment movements avoid the mistakes of the aid-

assistance approach and result in a better organized, more accountable, and more feasible

approach to poverty assistance. These methods alleviate the plight of the poor in concrete

and long lasting ways (criteria 1 and 2), are generally validated and accepted by the wider

economic community (criterion 3), and are feasible and not utopian in scope (criterion 4).

In fact their attention to detail prevents wide reform of a nation, much less a community.

45 Aaker, Jerry. Partners with the Poor: An Emerging Approach to Relief and Development. New York: Friendship Press, 1993 (123-128).

46 Linthicum, Robert C., Empowering the Poor: Community Organizing Among the City’s ‘rag, tag, and bobtail.’ Monrovia, CA: MARC (a division of World Vision), 1991 (2).

47 Ibid.,, (61).

18

Furthermore, Christians can easily participate both on a theological and practical level

(criteria 5 and 6). Along with economic training and support comes education in a

Christian context where the Gospel is preached and people hear the Good News of

salvation through Jesus Christ.

Millennium Development Goals

One of the criticizers of the aid-assistance approach is Jeffrey D. Sachs who wrote

the book The End of Poverty. Instead of broad development goals, what Sachs proposed

were the Millennium Development Goals, which focus on five key areas of investment

and hold the hope of ending extreme poverty by 2025.48 A lot of leading evangelical

church leaders look to Sachs as the answer to the end of poverty in this generation,

including Rob Bell, who mentions Sachs in his book Sex God,49 and Ronald J. Sider who

mentions the Millennium Development Goals in his book Rich Christians In An Age of

Hunger.50

Sachs is about empowering and financing the extreme poor so that they can get

themselves onto the proverbial ladder of economic development. Poverty is a massive

problem that has seemingly always existed. So in order to combat poverty, Sachs

understands that the world must band together and be more creative in order to save the

millions of people afflicted, and struggling to survive in the impoverished areas of the

48 Sachs, (24-25).

49 Bell, Rob. Sex God. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing, 2007 (193).

50 Sider, Ronald J., Rich Christians In An Age of Hunger: Moving From Affluence to Generosity. Nashville, TN: W Publishing, 1997 (256-257).

19

world.51 He suggests a global partnership, or initiative, to rescue the extreme poor of the

world.

This philosophy depends upon Sachs’ theory that struggling nations are stuck in a

poverty trap that they cannot free themselves from. The poverty trap that Sachs speaks of

is an economic system wholly unfamiliar to most wealthy nations; it is one where critical

capital does not exist. It is an economic situation where all of the nation and its people’s

income go to just staying alive. Unlike America and other Western powers, there are no

substantial tax inputs or personal savings. Even worse, depreciation and population

growth exacerbate the problem so that impoverishment continues incessantly into the

future.52

According to Sachs the only way to break this poverty trap is by substantial

foreign aid. This foreign aid, if it is substantial and long lasting, will raise capital stock

enough to sufficiently lift households above subsistence. Thus, growth in these poverty

stricken areas becomes self-sufficient. This type of foreign aid is not a welfare handout,

but actually an investment. To make this investment work, appropriate administrative

structures and areas for proper investment of capital are needed.

Sachs proposes making five key investments into impoverished areas: 1)

agricultural inputs, 2) investments in basic health, 3) investments in education, 4) power,

transport, and communication services, and 5) safe drinking water and sanitation.53

51 Sachs, (238).

52 Ibid., (246).

53 Ibid., (233-234).

20

The impoverished are indeed ready to respond. The only problem is, the wealthy

world is not as ready to respond. Most wealthy communities complain that there is not

enough money to go around to truly solve the problem. Unfortunately, the rich world still

fears the investments on the grounds of possible tax raises and increased competition in

the world economy, and shirks the call of Sachs to provide the necessary financial aid.

This theory, although avoiding the mistakes of aid-assistance, still is akin to the

same approach it desires to separate itself from. By making these key investments the

Millennium Development Project can alleviate the needs of the poor, can work in

concrete ways, and can bring long-term results (criteria 1 and 2). However, this is all

contingent upon whether or not nations are indeed stuck in a poverty trap. William

Easterly says that it is possible that some countries are in a poverty trap; “it is just that the

average poor country is not.”54 Furthermore, this Big Push initiative is the same as the aid

assistance approach’s proverbial money throwing. Ross Levine (Brown University) and

David Roodman (Center for Global Development) found that there is “no evidence that

aid raised growth among countries with good policies.” (Criterion 3)55 (For an illustration

refer to Appendix B). The Millennium Development Project is also fatally utopian

(criterion 4). By depending on a united world partnership operating off of a Schweitzer-

like “reverence for life” philosophy 56 (what Sachs calls an “enlightened globalization”57)

Sachs and his proponents await disappointment. Unfortunately the sinful nature of this

54 Easterly, (41).

55 Ibid., (48).

56 Marty, Martin E., A Handbook of Christian Theologians. Cleveland, OH: Meridian Books, 1967 (115).

57 Sachs, (358).

21

world prevents the motivation necessary for such a world partnership. Ending poverty

may be too great of a hope in a world tainted with original sin. In the closing chapters of

his book Sachs outlines, with a hope-filled pen, the major social changes that will result

from breaking the poverty trap: a world without slavery, devoid of terrorism, without

hunger, and without colonialism. The biggest problem with this idea is its hope for a Big

Push in foreign aid, and its aspiration to a utopian blueprint to fix the world’s complex

problem of poverty.58 Finally, it is difficult for Christians to partner with this project

because of its reliance on secular organizations and its utopian blueprint that focuses on

ending poverty and not preaching the Gospel (criterion 5). Again, if Christians are to

participate they can only hope to invest capital into the program (criterion 6).

Homegrown Solutions Owned by the Poor

Although these approaches cannot meet all the criteria it is wise not to reject them

wholesale. Each of the three has redeeming qualities about them. Realistically a Christian

response to poverty must rely upon foreign aid, and a substantial amount of it. The aid-

assistance approach and its proponents understand this but fail in their application of the

donor aid. The solidarity-empowerment movements make a valid argument in positioning

for listening to the needs of the poor and responding directly to them. Finally, some of

Sachs’ proposals do indeed take fruit in the field. For example, his five key investment

arenas are areas that any response program must pay attention to (especially agricultural

reform,59 education financing, and medicinal input60).

58 Easterly, (367).

59 Besley, Timothy and Burgess, Robin, “Land Reform, Poverty Reduction, and Growth: Evidence from India.” Quarterly Journal of Economics. Vol. 115 No. 2 (May 2000) 384-430.

60 Easterly, (372-373).

22

What is needed then is piecemeal reform and homegrown solutions from

individuals (native and foreign) who listen to the needs of the poor and develop

innovative solutions to meet the needs at hand. Some of these solutions will take into

consideration some of the pieces of other approaches mentioned above. There are

numerous examples of successful homegrown solutions, but none as fascinating as the

story of the Grameen Bank. The Grameen Bank founded what is known as

“microfinancing” the poor. Relying on the traditional skills and entrepreneurial instincts

of the impoverished, the Grameen Bank gives out small loans and provides other

financial services. Support from local organizations enable the impoverished (usually

women) to start, establish, and grow small self-supporting businesses. The key to this

system is the recycling of loan dollars. As a loan is repaid the loan is recycled to finance

another loan and the loan’s effect is thus multiplied.61

Neither the microfinance approach, nor any other homegrown solution, is a

panacea. No one program alone can end extreme poverty. But piecemeal reforms, like the

microfinance approach, are the simplest, often the most effective, most realistic, and most

adaptable approach for Christian congregations and church bodies to consider in the fight

against world poverty.

Poverty is a complex issue with various influences affecting its many contours,

and so it is difficult to say there is really just one answer. Extreme poverty is influenced

by various social and biophysical factors, including (but not limited to) income

distribution, agriculture, war and social strife, population distribution and growth, social

61 Grameen Foundation. (2007, January 26). Frequently Asked Questions http://www.grameenfoundation.org/what_we_do/microfinance_in_action/faqs (24 February 2007).

23

welfare, and international politics.62 With so many influences, international

confederations, NGOs, and various other aid organizations cannot hope to address all the

problems of extreme poverty. Instead, a variety of small homegrown solutions hold the

key to making well-focused and effective impacts. The future, it seems, is one of multiple

paths.63

However there are some guidelines for bringing aid to the extreme poor. These

guidelines include but are not limited to: 1) Homegrown solutions, which will involve the

testing of ideas and the constant evaluation of aid dollars’ effectiveness coupled with 2)

effective feedback from the poor. 3) Specialization of aid organizations is central to

making a broad impact for the extreme poor. Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations had at its

foundation, specialization and division of labor, and it seems to have worked well for

capitalism. He states, “division of labour…occasions, in every art, a proportionable

increase of the productive powers of labour.”64 4) Cutting out the bureaucrats in order to

increase communication from the poor to the donors, and in addition to increase

accountability for individual projects. 5) A greater effort to low-cost, high benefit

initiatives, that involve effective targeting of where the greatest impact can be made for

the lowest cost. Michael Keen argues that low cost/high benefit choices must become a

principal concern when developing poverty alleviation programs.65

62 Buttel, (14).

63 Ibid., (26).

64 Smith, Adam, The Wealth of Nations. Pössneck, Germany: Everyman’s Library, 1910 (6).

65 Keen, Michael. “Needs and Targeting.” The Economic Journal. Vol. 102 (January, 1992) 67.

24

The poor you will always have with you?

There is no easy answer or magic bullet solution to ending extreme poverty. Over

the last two years I have taken a journey through theology and economics in the hopes of

finding the answer to ending extreme poverty. The entire time Jesus’ words “the poor you

will always have with you” (Matt. 26:11) hung drearily over the topic and communicated

to me a certain sense of inadequacy on the part of the world and the Church. At the close

of last year I had concluded that Jeffrey Sachs’ theory and its reliance on foreign

investment held hope for the end of extreme poverty. I now stand corrected. My

conclusion is that there is no one method or even combination of methods that rises to the

ascendancy of completely solving the problem of extreme poverty. Instead, there are

small things, piecemeal reforms, which individuals and organizations can participate in to

impact the lives of individuals and communities to enable them to rise out of the mire of

extreme poverty.

Acknowledging this does not stop the Church, its congregations, its individuals,

or organizations from responding to the needs of the extreme poor. The following are

some guideposts for the future, which take both the theological conclusions and

economic guidelines of this paper into consideration.

The individual has two elements to their service and response to poverty. Within

their individual vocations, Christians live out the active love that comes from a vibrant

faith, which will produce indirect and unintentional care.66 At the same time, individual

Christians can team up for greater ministry with others of the same faith tradition, other

66 Commission on Theology and Church Relations-LCMS, (13-14).

25

denominations, or even caring institutions of society.67 By doing so they can multiply

their impact past their respective vocational dimensions.

C.F.W. Walther states, “the concern for the poor belongs to the particular official

responsibilities of the preacher” and that “‘There are in general seven duties or tasks of

the ministers of the church…(number seven) the care for the poor….’”68 Thus, the pastor,

as shepherd of his people, has the responsibility of leading his congregation into

responding the needs of the poor. The congregation’s foremost concern will remain the

proclamation of the Gospel and the distribution of Sacraments, however, if the church

body were to cooperate with other churches or organizations it need not compromise that

sacred and crucial duty.69 They could do so by donating their money, sending trained-

teams into the field, or organizing a committee to address the needs of the impoverished

in their community through programs and events at the church. As they do so, John A.

Fale from LC-MS World Relief and Human Care suggests that congregations “work with

established partners” since many well intending churches sometimes link up with projects

that end in “dismal failure” due to “theft, graft, and corruption.”70

On a grander scale Christian organizations can engage in producing homegrown

solutions that meet the immediate needs of the impoverished while simultaneously caring

for their eternal needs. Currently, LC-MS World Relief and Human Care is working with

partners as they address issues of poverty where their organization can bring leverage to

67 Ibid..,(27).

68 Harrison, Matthew, “The Pastor and Care for the Needy.” Sharing. (January-February 2006) 2.

69 Commission on Theology and Church Relations-LCMS,, (27).

70 Fale, John A. Interview by author, 26 March 2007, Irvine, CA. Word document.

26

help the impoverished in that area. Where as LC-MS World Relief and Human Care

cannot turn around an economy, one suggestion Associate Executive Director John A.

Fale had for future development was sending specially trained ambassadors who could

bring their skill sets to the indigenous impoverished communities in order to enable the

best and brightest of that area to lead their community into diakonia in regards to poverty

needs.71 This idea, if it were to come to fruition, would be a beneficial way that LC-MS

World Relief and Human Care could interact with the needs of the poor that would

encourage homegrown solutions to help the extreme poor.

Conclusion

I recently had a conversation with someone regarding Jeffrey Sachs’ book, The

End of Poverty. At the end of the conversation the other party asked me, “Do you really

think we can do it, I mean, end poverty?” My answer today is no. Jesus’ words in

Matthew ring true, the poor will indeed always be with us.

The problem of extreme poverty has been persistent throughout all of time. From

Old Testament times to the age of Christ, throughout the history of the Christian Church

up to present day. It is naïve of economists, theologians, and the like to propose that the

end of extreme poverty can be achieved, especially from a Christian perspective.

These words should not be discouraging. Christ still calls us to active service to

the neighbor, to diakonia in this present darkness, and promises that by grace through

faith we will live to see the world without poverty at the end of days. There is indeed a

valid and effective Christian response to extreme poverty, it is just not as hopeful as some

71 Ibid.

27

may like to think. The future of diakonic service cannot be misdirected with a false hope

for the end of extreme poverty. Instead Christians should realistically evaluate the

situation, balance their social activism with Word and Sacrament ministry, and seek to

establish effective/on the ground solutions for poverty that are well researched and

involve constant feedback and evaluation from the poor communities themselves.

Without the proper humility Christians are doomed to exacerbate the problem of poverty

and do the opposite of what they set out to do in the first place, to effectively respond to

the plight of the extreme poor.

28

Appendix A:

72

Appendix B:

73

72 Sachs, Jeffrey. The End of Poverty. New York: Penguin Books, 2005.

73 Easterly, William. The White Man’s Burden: Why the West’s Efforts to Aid the Rest Have Done So Much Ill and So Little Good. New York: Penguin Books, 2006 (46).

29

Works Cited

Aaker, Jerry. Partners with the Poor: An Emerging Approach to Relief and Development. New York: Friendship Press, 1993.

Alexander, T. Desmond et al., New Dictionary of Biblical Theology. Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press, 2000

Baker, Peter. “Bush Pledges 1.2 Billion for Africa to Fight Malaria.” The Washington Post. 1 July 2005: A01.

Bell, Rob. Sex God. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing, 2007.

Besley, Timothy and Burgess, Robin, “Land Reform, Poverty Reduction, and Growth: Evidence from India.” Quarterly Journal of Economics. Vol. 115 No. 2 (May 2000) 384-430.

Bloesch, Donald G., The Crisis of Piety. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing, 1968.

Buttel, Frederick H., “Ending Hunger in Developing Countries.” Contemporary Sociology Vol. 29 No. 1 (January, 2000) 13-27.

Commission on Theology and Church Relations-LCMS, Faith Active in Love: Human Care in the Church’s Life. St. Louis, MO: Lutheran Church Missouri Synod, 1999

Easterly, William. The White Man’s Burden: Why the West’s Efforts to Aid the Rest Have Done So Much Ill and So Little Good. New York: Penguin Books, 2006.

Fale, John A. Interview by author, 26 March 2007, Irvine, CA. Word document.

Grameen Foundation. (2007, January 26). Frequently Asked Questions http://www.grameenfoundation.org/what_we_do/microfinance_in_action/faqs (24 February 2007).

Harrison, Matthew J., “Human Care Ministry” in Reaching 100 Million: International Lutheran Leaders Speak Out. St. Louis, MO: Lutheran Society for Missiology, 2005.

-------------------------, “The Pastor and Care for the Needy.” Sharing. (January-February 2006) 2.

Haviv, Ron, People Magazine, 3 March 2006 http://www.people.aol.com/people. 10 April 2006

30

Johnson, Paul, A History of Christianity. New York: Atheneum Press, 1980

Keen, Michael. “Needs and Targeting.” The Economic Journal. Vol. 102 (January, 1992) 67-79.

Kerr, Hugh T. A Compend of Luther’s Theology. Philadelphia, PA: Westminster Press, 1943.

Köberle, Adolf, The Quest for Holiness. Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Publishing House, 1938.

Lindberg, Carter, Beyond Charity: Reformation Initiatives for the Poor. Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Fortress, 1993.

-------------------, The European Reformations. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1996

Linthicum, Robert C., Empowering the Poor: Community Organizing Among the City’s ‘rag, tag, and bobtail.’ Monrovia, CA: MARC (a division of World Vision), 1991

Luther, Martin, Luther’s Works (American Edition). St. Louis, MO: Concordia Publishing House, 1960

------------------, Works of Martin Luther Vol. II. Philadelphia, PA: A. J. Holman Company, 1931

------------------, On Christian Liberty. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2003. ------------------, Works of Martin Luther Vol. IV. Philadelphia, PA: A. J. Holman Company, 1931.

Marty, Martin E., A Handbook of Christian Theologians. Cleveland, OH: Meridian Books, 1967

Mueller, Steven P., Called to Believe, Teach, and Confess. Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2005.

Nicoll, W. Robertson ed., Expositor’s Greek New Testament Vol. I. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1951

Plass, Ewald, What Luther Says, An Anthology. St. Louis, MO: Concordia Publishing House, 1959

31

Rauschenbusch, Walter, “Social Ideas in the New Testament.” From Christ to the World: Introductory Readings in Christian Ethics. Ed. by Wayne G. Boulton, Thomas D. Kennedy, and Allen Verhey. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing, 1994, (27-30).

----------------------------, “The Case of Christianity Against Capitalism.” From Christ to the World: Introductory Readings in Christian Ethics. Ed. by Wayne G. Boulton, Thomas D. Kennedy, and Allen Verhey. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing, 1994, (455-462).

Sachs, Jeffrey D., The End of Poverty; Economic Possibilities for Our Time. New York: Penguin Books, 2005

Shelley, Bruce L., Church History in Plain Language. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1995

Sider, Ronald J., Rich Christians In An Age of Hunger: Moving From Affluence to Generosity. Nashville, TN: W Publishing, 1997

Smith, Adam, The Wealth of Nations. Pössneck, Germany: Everyman’s Library, 1910.

UNICEF, Make Poverty History, 2003 http://www.oxfam.org. 27 February 2007