The Normal Church

A Glorious Vision

“You have already become satiated? You have already become rich? Without us, you are kings?” I Corinthians 4:8

Like every other middle manager in the world, the pastor has his dreams.  The average pastor spends his day torn between ennui and overexcitement, a tug of war between the internal war of knowing what to preach and keeping certain parishioners off of each other’s throats.  But in a pastor’s careless moments he might reflect on what his ideal ministry would be, what some church leaders might have already achieved in his lifetime:

• Thousands in the congregation, thirsting after his wisdom.
• A large building, a modern cathedral with stained glass and exalted spires.
• Programs seven days a week, meeting all kinds of needs from 12 Step meetings to singles outings.
• A large paid staff.
• Bible studies every day for different social categories.
• Leading regular retreats for a variety of Christian groups.
• A counselling center advising spiritual life direction at reasonable fees.
• Meetings with the mayor… and perhaps even the governor!... giving counsel on political matters that relate to their constituents’ spiritual health.
• Leading groups of local churches in important matters such as pornography or international persecution of the church.

This lowly pastor can see every Sunday, after worship led by a local conductor, he embarks on a verbal journey through the chosen text that week, which he has studied for almost twenty hours this last week.  His elocution and scholarship is praised and hundreds are moved to follow Christ in a deeper and more profound way than they had ever experienced due to his homiletic skill.

A pastor dreams of this, for this is what is called spiritual success in our society. Mind you, few pastors reach this lofty vision, even as few local basketball stars achieve playing in the NBA, but it is still the standard to which every pastor reaches.  And the local pastor is frustrated at his lack of talent, his lack of organization and, especially, his lack of fund-raising ability to obtain such lofty goals.

It is fascinating to watch what a society, or a segment of a society, calls success, because that determines the everyday goals of those who attempt to achieve that success, whether they have the skills or resources to obtain that particular definition of success.  What is “normal” for a person is determined by how far they miss their ultimate goals.  Some might think they could be president, but they might be satisfied with being on a school board or a state senator.  Some might think that they could be a Corporate Executive Officer, but they are content with being an office manager.   But none of these would be content with being a fast-food worker on minimum wage, because their definition of “success” finds that this occupation is too far from their lofty goals. 

Even so, in the church, there is no honor in being a poor congregation.  Not when the goal is to be a mega-church with thousands of congregants and a huge budget.  According to that definition of success, the house church with an unpaid pastor is a failure.  If they move from this model to another model with a budget or building, that’s wonderful, because it means that it is becoming a “real church”.  There are some denominations that will not call a congregation a member of their denomination until it has a building and enough money to pay for a leader.

Looking at the Gospels

If our goals determine what our measure of being normative is, then perhaps rather than looking at Christianity’s view of success, we should look toward Jesus and the apostles to determine our goals.  If we were going to look at the New Testament’s expectations of churches in general, this would be a very long text.  Instead, I would like to look at the social expectations of the normative congregation.  How is the church expected to compare to society at large on an economic and class level?

The writers of the gospels all had one goal: to communicate Jesus to their groups.  Matthew probably wrote to an early Antiochian Jewish Christian group.  Mark probably wrote to a mixed Jew and Gentile Christian group.  Luke wrote to a Roman and Greek Christian audience.  John probably wrote to a group of Greek and Jewish Christians. 

But they all used a base of sayings and narratives that all the church used to communicate Jesus’ life, mission and teachings to all peoples.  Although the books we have were written after some of the other writings of the New Testament, the foundational words and stories were from earlier, and they are the best representations of the person of Jesus that we have today.  These evangelists were trying to communicate Jesus, just Jesus, with the only resources they had.  They were not communicating a version of Jesus, but rather the only Jesus they knew, the only Jesus they loved and committed themselves to.

A Collection of Insurgents

"If anyone wishes to come after Me, he must deny himself, and take up his cross and follow Me.” Mark 8:334

Jesus is speaking to his disciples, but especially to those who were considering to be his disciples.  Jesus’ method of proselytizing is unique in that he more clearly expresses the most difficult requirements of joining his group, instead of the benefits.  The benefits were clear to anyone who spent an afternoon with Jesus: healing and the ability to heal; wisdom and an education that was greater than the teachers of their day (Luke 7:20-23).  So Jesus emphasized the difficulty of obtaining a place in his school, and so the kingdom of God.

The requirement of “coming after,” or following, Jesus that is most shocking is to “take up his cross.”  The cross was not just a symbol of the death penalty, which today is used almost exclusively on murderers.  The Jews never crucified, but when the Romans used a cross, it wasn’t on common criminals, such as simple murderers or thieves (as many mistranslations of the gospels might indicate).  The cross was reserved for those who were the enemy of the state, those who planned the overthrow of the state or who acted against the rightful government or against society at large.  Alexander might crucify 2000 citizens of Tyre who defended their city against him because he saw himself as their rightful ruler.  It was exclusively used of non-citizens who attempted to undermine the proper order of society.  Slaves were crucified for running away because they were teaching other slaves to forsake their proper role.

Jesus is commanding all of his school to take up the mantle of the insurgent, the one who undermines the state.  Yet, at the same time, he implies that this insurgence will be unsuccessful, because they take up a cross, not a crown. The normative Christian is an insurgent who is caught and punished.

A School of Persecuted Paupers

“Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God. Blessed are you who hunger now, for you shall be satisfied. Blessed are you who weep now, for you shall laugh. Blessed are you when men hate you, and ostracize you, and insult you, and scorn your name as evil, for the sake of the Son of Man. Be glad in that day and leap for joy, for behold, your reward is great in heaven. For in the same way their fathers used to treat the prophets. But woe to you who are rich, for you are receiving your comfort in full. Woe to you who are well-fed now, for you shall be hungry. Woe to you who laugh now, for you shall mourn and weep. Woe to you when all men speak well of you, for their fathers used to treat the false prophets in the same way.” Luke 6:20-26

Jesus is speaking to specifically to his disciples, who have already accepted Jesus’ call to repentance. Now he divides his congregation between the rich and the poor, the comfortable and the oppressed, claiming that the former will not obtain the ultimate blessings, while the poor among them receives all that He has promised.

The Lucan version of the beatitudes is less familiar to us than the version in Matthew which begins “Blessed are the poor in spirit”, for the Matthew account, it seems to some teachers, has eyes of the needle to allow the wealthy and important into Jesus’ blessings.  However “poor in spirit” refers to Proverbs 16:19, which commends those who lower themselves with the “anawim” poor, rather than being “haughty” and ambitious for social achievement.

It is certain, however, that Jesus expects his disciples to be of a lower economic status, for even the wealthy among them would be expected to surrender their possessions (Luke 12:33, Luke 14:33).

But the primary economic and status loss occurs not from personal surrender, but from attacks from the outside.  The heart of Jesus’ congregation, those who receive the promises, are those who are declared outcast.  Some of the attacks might be mild (insults), but some would be severe (hatred). 

Not all of Jesus’ congregation would be outcast from mainstream society, but all of those who truly receives the reward of God would experience this and live in this.   The normative disciple is poor and outcast.

Being Like Jesus

"If the world hates you, you know that it has hated Me before it hated you. If you were of the world, the world would love its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, because of this the world hates you. Remember the word that I said to you, 'A slave is not greater than his master.' If they persecuted Me, they will also persecute you; if they kept My word, they will keep yours also.” –John 15:18-20

John 14-16 is a discussion between Jesus and the twelve about the nature of a life of following Jesus without Jesus being physically present.  Many principles of faith and love are explained, which are not only for the twelve, but for the totality of those who follow Jesus.

The basic principle Jesus is drawing from is that a “slave is not greater than his master”, or, as this idea is communicated in Matthew, A disciple is not above his teacher, nor a slave above his master. It is enough for the disciple that he become like his teacher, and the slave like his master.” (Matthew 10:24-25).  The one submitted fully represents his authority by being like his authority.  Since Jesus was rejected, hated and persecuted, those who are under him would experience the same.   

It is interesting that throughout the history of the church, the typical understanding of imitation of Jesus is ethical: being loving or pure.  But in the New Testament, the almost exclusive understanding of being like Jesus is that of lowliness, vulnerability and rejection.  This passage is no exception.  The normative follower of Jesus is hated and rejected by mainstream society.

The Tough Choice

“Everyone who confesses Me before men, I will also confess him before My Father who is in heaven. But whoever denies Me before men, I will also deny him before My Father who is in heaven. Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I came to SET A MAN AGAINST HIS FATHER, AND A DAUGHTER AGAINST HER MOTHER, AND A DAUGHTER-IN-LAW AGAINST HER MOTHER-IN-LAW; and A MAN'S ENEMIES WILL BE THE MEMBERS OF HIS HOUSEHOLD. He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me; and he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me.”  –Matthew 10:32-37

In Matthew 10, Jesus prepares his itinerant apostles to expect persecution and arrests.  Beginning in verse 32, he broadens out his statements to be not only those who are travelling evangelists, but all who is a disciples of Jesus.

Not every follower of Jesus is required to evangelize, but all must be ready to confess Jesus’ name, and this is dangerous business. Jesus’ name and teaching is associated with division and those who stand with Jesus must be ready to accept the consequences. The “sword” Jesus speaks of is not a sword of violence but is a tool of division, that spurs hatred, anger and separation, as his quote of Micah 7:6 indicates.  At the name and teaching of Jesus, the closest-knit families will be divided and those who loved will become the bitterest of enemies.

At this point, the follower of Jesus must make a decision between remaining with Jesus, or remaining with their family.  And those who choose family who hates the name and promises of Jesus will also reject the kingdom Jesus offers.  The normative Christian will be divided from those closest to them.

A Conclusion to the Matter

The normative church isn’t the megachurch, and the normative pastor isn’t the charismatic, popular pastor.  Rather, the standard for church growth, according to Jesus, is persecution and oppression.  Not that everyone in the church must be oppressed, but that as a group, oppression is felt and community is built because of the outside pressure.

Riff Raff in the Church

Okay, so we know that Jesus hung out with tax collectors, but do we have to go so far as to say he hung out with drugies and child pornographers?

Oh, yes, these are exactly the kind of folks Jesus hung out with.

He welcomed those whom the Standard Religious Society (SRS, or, if you please,the church) didn’t want to have anything to do with.

There were the ones that the SRS called “sinners”, but many of them really weren’t, or at least no more than anyone else. The tax collectors were folks who worked for the Romans to collect tolls for their roads. While some tax collectors DID cheat the Romans and others (like Zaccheus in Luke 19), but these toll collectors did no such thing. They didn’t make much, but they didn’t collect enough to cheat the Romans. So they had a job, just a job. But because they worked for the Romans they were automatically rejected by the SRS (i.e. the church).

So Jesus, were he here today, he would hang out with those who were “unacceptable” in the church’s eyes today. He would hang out with the homeless who are often excluded from the church simply because they don’t have good enough hygiene. He would hang out with those who belonged to cult groups like Samaritans (or like Jehovah’s Witnesses today) and explain to them the heart of God’s truth.

Jesus also hung out with those who really, seriously sinned.  People like Zaccheus, but also prostitutes and betrayers.  If Jesus were here today, He would hang out with the homosexuals and drunks who are unsure of their reception, even if they repent. He would hang out with the druggies and tell them about the gospel, welcoming them, eating with them, hoping to bring them— or to keep them— in God.      

Who are the Riff-Raff? 
Jesus targeted three groups that were set outside of the church. He welcomed the ones who were just not good enough to be in a “proper” church— Samaritans, the lame, the blind, women, the Gentiles. All of these groups were people who could be in right standing with God, but they were set out of the Temple for one reason or another. The church, like the Temple of old, has a pretty strict idea of who belongs to it. No, they don’t set up rules for it, but they set boundaries through their subtle but negative reactions to those who are poor, of different beliefs, or of a different culture.

The church today is as cultural as it is spiritual— sometimes it is more culture than Spirit. And those who do not belong to the culture are outcast.

Another group that Jesus targeted is the sinner. Some of these are professional sinners, such as prostitutes and tax collectors— those whose very profession excluded them from good graces in God’s community. Some are sinners by what they did— adultery, theft, rebellion— and they are painted as such for the rest of their life for one sin. These are like those who are in jail or prison for crimes done. While some churches might accept them, they certainly don’t allow them near their children. Again, the welcome is only partial

The other group Jesus specifically targeted is the judged. These are people who were judged by God or by people and they have the mark of judgment against them. In Jesus’ day they are the demon possessed or the lepers. Today, they may be sufferers of AIDS or those going through withdrawal from drugs or alcohol or some other addiction. They may be people who have chronic mental illnesses. At first they might be welcome into today’s church, but then they would be rejected because they are “too difficult” or “cause too many disruptions.”  

Should the church welcome the Riff Raff?
Absolutely. If it was good enough for Jesus, then it is good enough for the church. If God sees sinners repenting as more important than a bunch of people who go to church regularly, then maybe we need to stop growing our churches and getting out on the street.

Jesus didn’t just sit in the temple, looking for the riff raff to come to him. He didn’t just have a seeker’s service. Rather, he went out and established a party in every village he went to, and shared the gospel at the party. He attracted the riff raff with the kind of gathering they liked, in their area, and then spoke a message that wasn’t easy for them to hear, but it was the truth. Not everyone believed, but it was important.

So the church doesn’t just need to welcome the riff raff, they need to go out where they live and give them a party.

Why should we do this? Because these riff raff— even if they’ve been following Jesus for years, they feel that they are second class Christians, or that they have no chance of being right with God at all. They think that their lives are apart from God and there is no acceptance for them. How is this? Because the church has separated themselves from the riff raff. As long as the church will have nothing to do with the riff raff, the riff raff figure that they don’t need God, either. Yet Jesus focused his ministry on the riff raff. Jesus loves the riff raff. And Jesus’ first church was full of the riff raff— more than the “normal” folks.  

How are the Riff Raff saved?
This is the easiest question to ask, but the hardest one to live out. We know that everyone is saved by faith in Jesus, by their devotion to God, their repentance from sin and their reliance on the Holy Spirit. That’s how everyone is saved, without exception, forever and ever, amen.


But the church doesn’t act that way.

Rather they act like the homeless are saved by pushing through paperwork to gain homes. They act like the addict is saved by going to some anonymous group and never relapsing. They act like the homosexual is saved by getting married to someone of the opposite sex. They act like the mentally ill person is saved by taking medication.

Now, there’s nothing necessarily wrong with these things by themselves. But they aren’t the answers for people with these problems. The only way anyone is saved is through Jesus and reliance on the Holy Spirit. And Jesus and the Spirit will lead the outcast person to the things they need for their lives.

Sometimes the answer will be homes, marriage, medication and dishwashers and everything that makes up a middle class life. But for many people, it won’t.

Jesus, in calling the riff raff, chose to be homeless himself. He chose to be rejected. He chose to be without a family. And many of his followers went the same way. Jesus became homeless to welcome the homeless. He became family-less to welcome the family-less. He became penniless to welcome the penniless. He became rejected to welcome the rejected. And so we cannot insist that the outcast— or even the middle class— to be a part of the church must have homes, families, money and acceptance.  

If the Riff Raff aren’t in the church, the church isn’t of Jesus

Kimes, Steven (2012-04-04). Long Live the Riff Raff: Jesus' Social Revolution (Kindle Locations 422-432).  . Kindle Edition. 

The Ins and Outs of Outcasts

All religions draw distinct lines between those who are in and those who are out.  Actually, all communities have that determination-- passports, memberships, rights for those who are in and prisons, immigration laws and bouncers for those who are out.  It is a distinctive of society.  And there's a good reason for clear guidelines for those who are in and those who are out.  If we have a community with a lot of children, we don't want people around who will attack or molest those children.  We don't want to have in our midst those who are dangerous or who destroy our communities.

In religions we have other lines of who is in and who is out.  Again, this isn't a bad thing.  Not everyone is a Buddhist, a Muslim or a Christian, and if we didn't have definitions or determinations of who is actually a part of a religion or religious group, then the label is meaningless.  Thus we have doctrinal statements, memberships, baptisms, rituals, requirements for leadership, disciplinary measures and catechisms.  These are intended to let us know who belongs to our group and who doesn't.

More often than not, however, we take a potentially good thing and we go way too far.  Some groups make entrance into their groups very difficult, or pile on rules on their members, making discipline very easy.  One has to believe a very narrow definition of faith, or one must enact a particular list of actions and rituals or one has a long list of moral requirements to obey.  Worse, a member of a religious group might have to belong to a certain social class or ethnic group or have a certain education level.  It seems that the older the religious group, the more narrow the membership requirements, because as time goes on, traditions increase, excluding more and more people. 

Jesus had a different way of dealing with the lines of membership.  He did have lines, mind you.  Remember, he clearly rejected most Pharisees.  And he had high standards for disciples.  But one thing he did that was unique, different than any other religious leader, is that he sought members for his community from those who had already been rejected by society.  In fact, those who were accepted by society he gave indications that they wouldn't make good members of the community he was forming.  He had difficult words for the wealthy and financially secure.  At times he completely rejected the religious establishment.  But those who were on the outskirts of society, he sought.

Sometimes Jesus looked for those who were outcast by no fault of their own, like lepers or others who were chronically ill.  Sometimes Jesus looked for people who were often misunderstood to be traitors or evil-doers but weren't, like tax collectors (or more accurately called toll-collectors).  But Jesus also sought out as members those who had done terrible sins in their (even recent) past, such as prostitutes and other sinners who had done such horrible things to keep them from the mainstream of society.  Jesus recognized that these who had made horrible mistakes recognized their need for change much better than the religious who had never done a big "screw up" their whole lives.

When Jesus accepted these outcast, he didn't bring them into the mainstream religious establishment, but brought them into his alternative community-- a nomadic commune.  This meant that they didn't have to face the judgment of the religious that didn't have anything to do with the judgment of God.  It meant that they could have an opportunity to work out their weaknesses in a training ground of encouragement and hope.  It also means that they became a different kind of outcast: instead of being rejected for being a prostitute or a tax collector, they are rejected for being a part of a heretical group.

But when we look at Christianity, we find a very different kind of establishment.  It IS the establishment.  Those who go to most churches belong to the mainstream of society, the accepted, the financially secure (if not wealthy), the well-connected.  The "salt of the earth" mean the core of society, the good people who keep communities running instead of Jesus' original intent, which was the poor, the mourning, the persecuted, the hated, those who don't have justice in their lives (Matthew 5:3-15).  Our churches are not filled with the homeless, the mentally ill, the drunks, the drug addicts, the felons, the socially awkward, the powerless, as Jesus community would be.  Instead, we have rejected the outcast, just like all the other religious establishment.

Perhaps we say, "Anyone is free to come to our church!  We don't select those who come in."  Well, we all do.  We don't even mean to.  And, again, this isn't necessarily a bad thing.  If we speak English in our congregation, we weed out those who don't speak English.  That is a cultural decision, perhaps one we didn't even know we were making.  But a congregation to an immigrant population has to make a conscious decision as to what language or languages they use to reach out to their group. Every decision we make as a church is a cultural decision, and we are weeding out those who don't fit in our culture by making those decisions.  If we have a large auditorium with pews, we are welcoming some group and we are rejecting another.  If we use hymnals or choruses or pop songs, we are making cultural decisions that draw some in and reject others.

We need to make these decisions.  We can't be a church for everyone, because that is a narrowing cultural decision as well.  Jesus also made those cultural decisions.  And the culture he developed was for the outcast and rejected.  He chose not to meet at the temple, but in the fields.  He chose to hold meetings at meals, some for the religious, some for the distinctly non-religious.  He met in homes where the sick and the needy would be welcome.

Perhaps we need to re-think church growth strategy.

Taming the Revolution

The revolutionaries that make a difference never look revolutionary as soon as they get into the history books.  Lenin was truly revolutionary, but by the time Stalin came along, Lenin was co-opted, kidnapped, beaten and misshapen.  No longer was Lenin the compassionate genius, ready to do whatever necessary for the good of the working class.  He’d been adopted and abused by the ruling class in a way he’d never been when he was alive, because when he’d come out of the process, his image was no longer who he really was.

          Think of how modern China can use Mao to support their capitalist policies.  How Dorothy Day is made almost non-religious by many of her modern workers.  How Lutherans reformed Luther to make him the leader of the quiet, passive denomination.  How Buddhists made Siddartha an object to be worshiped rather than primarily a life to be imitated. 

          That’s what happened to Jesus. Again and again.

          Over two centuries of spinning, Jesus has become a never-ceasing top, and cannot be recognized in the theology that bears his title.  “Christology” is all about “the essence of deity” and “two natures” and “was it God or the human Jesus that picked up the toothbrush, May 2, 27AD?”  Jesus’ philosophy suddenly is about “intellectual assent” “faith and works” “predestination” and other non-issues.  The results of Jesus’ work has become building churches, pastoral education and conservative platforms.  Jesus isn’t spinning in his grave—although the church that bears his name treats him as if he were dead—rather, he is vomiting spiritual fruit.

          Jesus wasn’t about opulent wealth, but surrendering possessions.

          Jesus wasn’t about taking the name of deity, but humble leadership.

          Jesus wasn’t about complicated philosophy, but straightforward ethics.

          Jesus wasn’t about intellectual satisfaction, but the release of prisoners.

          Jesus wasn’t about supporting the decadent authorities, but about radical politics.

          Jesus wasn’t about forgettable worship, but about life-destroying devotion to God.

          It is always the descendants of a great revolutionary that destroy his real persona, his pure revolution.   Some say that Jesus was co-opted by Paul, transformed to be “Christianity” as we know it.  It isn’t really true.  Paul’s presentation of Jesus was filled with radical politics and life-pretzeling ethics.  Some say that it was the early church, as represented by the interests of the writers of Matthew, Mark and Luke.  Hell, if they were the problem, we would never know it, would we?  They are the only real way we experience Jesus as all.

          The real problem began in the second and third centuries, when the simple, straightforward words in first century Judea began to do flip-flops, becoming trained dogs in the hands of expert etymologists.  By the time the church of the fourth century, having bitten the fruit at the encouragement of Constantine, the original intent of Jesus was lost in quagmire of Greek philosophy, interpreted by Ignatius and Augustine, never to return. 

          Well, not “never.”  Should the true intent of Jesus never have been seen, then surely God would have nuked the church and started over.  All throughout the history of the church there has been a minority that pursued the ideal of Jesus—a slender thread that the church quelched or bureaucratized as quickly as possible.  Montanus, Francis of Assisi, Peter Waldo, John Wycliffe, Michael Sattler, Dorothy Day.  Some intellects, some simple, but all of them cutting through the layers of lard that had been thrust upon the gospels.  They opened the velvet cage that had attempted to tame the wild Jesus, and the Tasmanian Devil of a religious leader was released, albeit briefly, to wreck waste upon the tame Christendom. 

It is time to do it again. 

It is time to open the real Jesus to scrutiny and public mocking again—this time by those who claim his name.  This Jesus isn’t passive or quiet—he is loud, boisterous, insulting and rebellious.  This Jesus is angry, violent, insane and superstitious.  This Jesus wasn’t killed as some supernaturally-fated accident.  This Jesus was killed for good reason.  If we met up with this Jesus, we might think ourselves that for the good of our society, he would need to be killed.  I’m not sure who would like him in our white bread, MTV-as-revolution, anesthetized society.  But it is time to set him loose.  Then we’ll see who follows him.

How can we do this, how will we set him loose?  We will write the gospels again—not as if they were set in this time.  But we will write them as if they were written by revolutionaries in first century Judea.  Some explanations will be necessary along the way, so we can understand what they were fighting.  This isn’t a translation, it is a paraphrase, but I am attempting to keep as close to the text as possible.  If I change it, it is change so we can appreciate how radical, how contrary Jesus’ look at reality and society really was.  

And is.

Anawim: The Cross In Community

Jesus did not just come to teach and die for his own personal gain—just so he could be risen and lifted up to political heights. He came to establish a kingdom. He did not want to establish a kingdom made up of one person alone, but of a community that lives in and for God. He suffered for others, to create a place where God’s people can live in peace and security. But the big question for the Jews of the first century, as well as the Christians in every century since, is: What characterizes the people of God?

Jesus uses a number of terms for his people who participate his kingdom: “Little ones” (Luke 17:2), “little flock” (Luke 12:32), “my brothers” (Matthew 28:10) and more. Most of the titles he gives are diminutives, indicating the humble state of those who follow him. Some of the most curious titles he gives for his people, however, are those found in the Beatitudes—“The poor”, “The poor in spirit”, “the meek”. Again, these indicate the humility of those who follow Jesus, but they seem more extreme than those found in other places.

There is a single Hebrew source for these three titles (“poor”, “poor in spirit”, “meek”): the word anawim. It is used extensively in the Hebrew Scriptures, all of which the word would usually be translated “the poor”. In all of the contexts that the word is found, though, the poor that are indicated are the oppressed poor who cry out to Yahweh for deliverance out of their situation.

An excellent example of this is the passage Jesus quotes in the Beatitudes, and that might be the source of the theological concept of the Beatitudes—Psalm 37. Jesus quotes verse 11, “the anawim shall inherit the earth.” In this Psalm, it is described that though the righteous suffer and are oppressed under the hands of the wicked, yet the anawim should not take vengeance against the wicked, or do evil in any way to get themselves out of the situation. Rather, they are to trust in God, and God will arrange reality around the justice of their situation. The wicked will perish at God’s hand and the anawim will be raised up—granted land, provision and leadership.

This theological context goes hand-in-hand with the background behind the Beatitudes. Jesus is describing a people who are oppressed and suffer under hardship and persecution due to obeying the message he is teaching. Because of these circumstances, his people are poor, mourning and desiring justice. But they remain righteous in these circumstances, being merciful, completely devoted to God and creating peace in the situation. Because of this, God rewards these “poor” and exalts them, granting them all they need and even the rule of the world.

This “story” constitutes the foundation of Jesus’ answer to one of the great debates in the first century Jewish world. As many scholars have recently proclaimed, there was not one monolithic “Judaism” of the first century, but in fact many constructs on how to follow Moses’ approach to God. The differences between the various groups rest basically on one question: “What kind of people does God accept?” All the various debates about forgiveness, circumcision, Sabbath-keeping, separated or integrated communities and other arguments all rest on this one question.

Jesus’ answer to this question, as found in the Beatitudes and other gospel teachings, is summarized thus: The people of God is the anawim. They are the people so devoted to Him and so merciful to others that they are persecuted for it. God will see their suffering and cause them to be delivered from it.

More specifically, the community of Jesus is described as follows:

Pure in Heart: The Anawim is a devoted community
The basis of the community of God is to “love the Lord your God with all of your heart, with all of your mind, with all of your heart and with all of your soul.” (Mark 12) This is a complete devotion, the opposite of which is idolatry. But idolatry is not just concerned with traditional images of worship, but also untraditional ones, such as money, one’s family and possessions (Luke 12, 14, 16). Jesus warns that none of these things should stand before one’s devotion to God, if one wishes to be of the people of God. Also one’s obedience should be to God first, above the traditions of humans. (Mark 7). And traditional acts of devotion to God should be done for the purpose of devotion, not for one’s personal gain on earth (Matthew 6:1-)

Merciful: The Anawim is an ethical community
The community of God not only is devoted to God but is devoted to doing the actions of God. The primary action of God is mercy, or love. In other words, the Anawim are deeply involved in doing acts that benefit others. The benevolent acts of the Anawim are not exclusive, either, picking and choosing carefully those who deserve care or not. Rather, the Anawim do good to even those who do evil to them—no one is excluded. They give to the needy, they tell the truth to those who are ignorant, they heal the sick, they release the oppressed—all without charge or necessarily gaining anything back.

Kingdom of God: The Anawim is a political community
The community of God is the nation of God. This nation is a political entity, under authority and using authority. They have a king, the Messiah, the human representative of God on earth, who is appointed to sit at the right hand of the Father, ruling the heavens and earth (Matthew 28:18). The community of God acts like a political entity, a group with authority. They command powers on earth (Matthew 10:8); they pronounce whether one is acceptable or unacceptable before God (John 20:23); they make judgements as a court and punish those who refuse to repent (Matthew 18:15-17); they offer welfare to the needy (Luke 12:33; Acts 4:32-35); they have their own official messengers, delivering pronouncements from their king (Luke 9:1-2; Matthew 28:19-20); they have a police that provides security, if needed (Matthew 26:53; Acts 12:1-12).

The Earth: The Anawim is an ambitious community
Suprisingly enough, the Anawim has ambitions. They are in competition with the other nations of the world, vying for power. The ambition of the people of God is to rule the earth, under his Messiah, Jesus. Nevertheless, they are an alternative community, not having come unto their own yet. But soon, they are confident, the king will recognize them and raise them to the political authority they desire. But they know that the only way to obtain their rightful position, they must remain lowly and await their king’s justice. (Mark 10:42-45; Luke 18:7-8)

Hunger for Justice shall be satisfied: The Anawim is a dependant community
The Anawim recognizes that they will not gain justice in the world on their own. They desire to see wrongs righted and justice rule. But the justice they seek will not be gained by them manipulating positions and obtaining more and more power. The power they need is already available—it rests in God alone (Luke 18:7). The power of God is the “secret weapon” of the Anawim. Although they are outcast, although they are needy, although it looks like they have nothing to help them politically, in fact, they have the greatest political tool—the promise of the king of the universe that he will establish them to rule, if only they will be humble and cry to him. Thus, the Anawim continues to cry out to God, relying on him alone, and waiting for him to create justice.

Persecuted: The Anawim is a suffering community
The community of God is not like the communities around them. Others find them to be “judgmental” because they hold to a strict standard. But they can judge no person, they only do what they must to obtain God’s kingdom. Nevertheless, they are hated and rejected. Sometimes they are arrested and put on trial. And sometimes they are beaten and killed for their difference. But all of this is a part of God’s plan, and they trust in Him to gain greatness on the other side of the persecution.

The Poor: The Anawim is a community made up of the poor and outcast
The community of God is not made up of the great and powerful. Those have made their choices to obtain power by their own effort and the powers of this age and world. They do so for their own glory or their own ideals to be realized in this age. The Anawim are those who have given up the path of the world to take on the way of the cross. The way of the cross does not seek greatness straightforwardly, but via the way of humility, of downward mobility, of dishonor before honor. The way of the cross does not focus on one’s own effort or money or popularity, but depends on the power of God. The way of the cross does not uphold one’s own ideals, but the will of God.

Thus, all who follow the way of the cross, are the Anawim—the poor, those rejected by the powerful of the world. They are the ones who obtain blessings of God and the powerful take advantage of them to obtain such blessings. The anawim shrug their shoulders and say, “The Lord gives, the Lord takes away. Blessed be the name of the Lord.” Then they await God’s justice. The anawim give to those in greater need than they and depend on God to provide them with greater blessings than they can give away. The anawim are rejected and hated for all the wrong reasons, even the reasons that are technically correct. The anawim are idiots for taking the long route, for not getting what they can now, while they can. Certainly, this is how it looks to those without faith—but to the anawim, suffering and rejection is all part of the plan to obtain joy unceasing.