Brief synopsis of the readings: Still reading from the Acts of the Apostles, we see a problem developing. The community had grown to the point where there was too much work and too few workers. The community was still dividing resources but not fairly and it was interfering with the work of gaining new followers. The community then decided to appoint members dedicated to feeding everyone, freeing up the leaders to evangelize. These select were prayed over and the community laid hands on them and “even a large group of priests were becoming obedient to the faith.” In John’s Gospel Jesus promised his disciples that “[i]n my Father’s house there are many dwelling places” and encouraged them to follow. Confused, the disciples asked where Jesus was going and Jesus replied that he is “the way and the truth and the life” and he is the only road to the Father. Jesus went on to explain that “I am in the Father and the Father is in me.” He ended by saying “whoever believes in me will do the works that I do, and will do greater ones than these, because I am going to the Father.”
So what do you do when the job gets bigger than you expected? We’ve been reading how the community of believers experienced tremendous growth and it was in large part because they welcomed everyone with a sincere heart. The Hellenists described here were Greek speaking non Jews and felt they were being treated like second class citizens, particularly those most vulnerable (the widows). At the beginning the leaders were the original Twelve that Jesus chose at the beginning of his ministry and no provisions had been made to expand the leaders.
But the numbers grew and they had a decision to make going forward. They could have decided that they had a “higher calling” to attract new members and those at the bottom just needed to figure out a solution on their own. Or they could decide that their numbers would expand sufficiently and produce enough to ensure enough for all. We’ve seen a modern version of this with what’s called “supply side economics.” Believers in that hold that if we ensure the wealthiest are left alone there will be so much that everyone will be taken care of. Its appeal lies in the fact that it requires no change or awareness. They don’t need to provide anything to the vulnerable or even notice them because the system will take care of it.
It sounds great but it doesn’t work. Unevenness in distribution of resources gets worse when left alone, not better. Even a cursory reading of the Old Testament book of Amos tells us that God cares a great deal about our treatment of the poor. It was also of great concern to Jesus: “whatever you did for one of these least of mine, you did for me” (Matthew 25). Finally, part of the attraction of this new community to outsiders was how they cared for each other. If some of them were being neglected, particularly the Hellenistic widows, it would reflect poorly on everyone and would make it harder to attract new members.
This sounds obvious but it’s not. If you’re one of the few leaders, welcoming more will dilute your power and if you’re in it for the power, well that’s bad news.
And on a basic level we’ve all seen this. It’s been nearly 30 years since I’ve been employed by a church but I can remember several times when we were faced with a new need, only to be told by the clergy that “I’m too busy and the parish is too poor to hire anyone. Best to keep things just like they are.” Imagine if that happened in our first reading. The Hellenistic widows would have continued to face neglect and it would not have gone unnoticed. Eventually that hypocrisy would have become more obvious and the numbers would have plateaued and then decreased. This community may not have survived and it certainly wouldn’t be the Church we see today.
If we wish to dream the dreams God has for us we need to look boldly not only at what needs to be done but what we can do. When Jesus, in the Gospel, talks about many rooms in God’s kingdom he’s not talking about real estate. He’s talking about inclusion. The many rooms are not for our ongoing enjoyment but for ongoing expansion, hospitality and welcome.
Several decades ago (we’re talking the 1970s here) my future father in law felt he was called to be a permanent deacon in his parish but there were already two deacons. When he asked his pastor about it, the pastor replied that he could use 20 deacons and encourage him to apply. In his 32 years of ministry he baptized babies, performed weddings, counseled couples and fed the poor. Many pastors would have said that two deacons were enough and more would only complicate things.
Empty rooms benefit nobody and exclusion on any level offends God’s promise to build a large mansion. Obviously this is not exclusive to parishes and we can see it nearly everywhere. Those in need are not problems or impediments. They do not take us away from our mission, they are our mission.
And yes, this is hard stuff. We can debate how best to feed the poor, how to provide help to those on the fringes. We can struggle with solutions that give a path out of addictions without giving addicts tools that allow them to stay sick. These interventions require creativity and imagination on our part. But too often this difficulty becomes a justification for doing nothing and that’s wrong. If we don’t wish to give cash to an alcoholic out of a well placed fear that he will use it to buy more alcohol, we need to find the next right step. I spent a summer volunteering at a hotline that tried to do exactly that. People called us in need and we strove to find ways to give them a path out that still required them to do the walking. It wasn’t easy and we weren’t always successful but we were determined not to give up.
At the end of the day if we walk away from the modern day Hellenistic widows we walk away from the tools God has offered us and we sow the seeds of our own destruction. Let us continue to expand by ensuring enough for the marginalized even if it means populating more rooms. I promise God will not put out the “no vacancy sign.”
Tom Allain's Thoughts and Musings 