The Genius of the Spiritual AND

David Orendorff · John 12:1-8 · March 18, 2007

From her deep love of Jesus and probably with the knowledge and approval of Martha and Lazarus, Mary does a very generous thing. She takes pure nard, the most expensive of perfumes (the story says it cost a year’s wages for a laborer), anoints Jesus’ feet and then wipes them with her hair. It is a beautiful act of love and devotion.

This raises a question for the disciple Judas. Make no mistake: the writer of this gospel does not like Judas. For John’s gospel Judas is the epitome of everything bad, for, though one of the chosen twelve, he betrays Jesus. His name becomes synonymous with betrayal of the gravest sort.

But beyond the adoration of Mary and the villainy of Judas is a good question, and Judas asks it, “With funds limited in a world of pain and suffering, why waste so much money on perfume? Wouldn’t it be better for the money to be used to feed the poor?”

Judas knows that the funds are limited and therefore one can either care for Jesus or care for the poor. The early church struggled with this question. The anointing of Jesus is the care for the body of Christ, the institutional church. In the beginning of Christian communities, in the simpler days, this institution had very few needs, but as Christianity became larger and more successful, the needs and cost of the institution rose. At first most of the offering given was used for the care of the poor. But as the body of Christ grew, there were increased needs for teachers, for buildings, for administrators, Bishops, and apostles and more of the funds were used for the institution.

It was inevitable that the works of Jesus would come to clash with the care of Jesus’ body. And the followers of Jesus’ way, assuming they had limited resources, would ask themselves, “What is more important: caring for the body of Jesus (the institution) OR caring for the needs of the poor?”

A friend of mine at his birthday party put it this way: “I feel guilty because there are so many who suffer in life while I party.”

Because John puts the question in the mouth of Judas, we already know what John thinks. But in spite of that, I think it is a good question still with us. So before you decide on how you answer this “OR” question, I am going to contemporize the discussion.

Your elected leaders are in the process of planning a fall capital campaign for Bear Creek. Fully 25% of our income goes to service our debt, primarily from building this building. We feel like we have limited resources and our mortgage payment is straining our financial stewardship, causing this part of the body of Christ to limp rather than run. We are living dangerously close to the edge and maybe beyond what our income permits. That is, the amount of money we pay for the institution significantly decreases the amount of funds we can dedicate to the acts of Jesus in serving the poor.

So here is the question: “Is it better to take care of the institutional needs to keep the body of Jesus alive among us (pay off the building) OR is it better to serve the poor?” That is, “Is it better to raise a bunch of money for our institutional needs or should we put the same effort into raising a bunch of money for the poor?”

Let me give you another one: The Church and Society Committee are in the midst of an important internal debate about their primary function. Some time ago they had a medical doctor come speak to the Sticky Issues class and other interested folks about her medical missions to Iraq and the conditions of Iraq’s people. What they got was this information plus a strong condemnation of the war and its advocates.

So I asked if they might not consider having a speaker who favored the war in Iraq come and speak. Now, to be clear, though I oppose the war in Iraq and its continuation, I believe that institutionally it would be best to present both sides because we have people on both sides. In honesty, I was not thinking about the poor, the victims of this war in Iraq, only about the health of this part of the body of Christ, the institution.

But much of the committee was thinking not of the institution but of service to the poor. They were thinking about how war always impoverishes the already poor and murders the already near dead. They could not see how inviting a pro-war speaker in was the desirable or responsible thing to do as followers of Jesus.

Both the health of the institution and service to the poor are important and highly held values, and the Church and Society Committee had been placed, by me, in a situation in which they felt compelled to choose one OR the other. It is again Judas’ question: “Do we care for the institution (open education) OR serve the poor (advocacy)?”

Jesus’ answer is a surprise, is it not? He doesn’t pick his body OR the poor. He chooses both, saying, “You always have the poor with you, but you do not always have me.” Jesus does not accept Judas’ assumptions about resources or importance. He evidently believes in unlimited divine resources and in our ability and power to serve both the institution AND the poor.

Jesus answers Judas’ question with what I am calling the genius of the spiritual AND. He says essentially that we have everything we need to do both. When the values of caring for the body of Christ seem in conflict with the values of serving the poor, then we are to seek ways in which both can be realized and enacted. Jesus says we have all we need to serve both the institution AND the poor. Jesus offers the genius of the spiritual AND.

I first ran across “genius of AND” not in biblical or theological writings but in a book on successful businesses entitled Built to Last. 1 James C. Collins and Jerry I. Porras, Built to Last, (HarperCollin, New York, 1997) The authors, Collins and Porras, believe we often seek and settle for the “tyranny of the Or” when we would be best served by the “genius of the And.” They suggest that often businesses have made false choices, believing they have limited resources and must choose between competing values such as high quality or high productivity. This is the tyranny of the OR; quality OR productivity, we can’t do both. The enduring companies, those that thrive for generations, are the ones that seek the genius of the AND. They find a way to have both high quality AND high productivity.

Jesus offers to Judas an answer that encompasses the “genius of the And.” Instead of believing we can’t do both (limited resources) and settling for either institution OR service, Jesus says that both have their place and time and we have what it takes to do both. In this life we can both care for the body of Christ AND serve the poor.

When we review Jesus’ manner of life, we find that he did both. If you are caring for the body, then do it in a big way; make seven barrels of wine for the wedding, eat great dinners with whomever will eat, spend a year’s salary on perfume. And if you serve the poor, then likewise do it in a big way­sell all you own, give your last coat, your last coin, your last cheek, your last loaf of bread, your life. It is the “genius of the And.”

As your pastor, I encourage those planning the capital campaign to consider the genius of the AND; to seek ways of making this a more fiscally sound institution in caring for the body of Christ AND at the same time to seek ways that this will serve the poor. God has given us what is necessary to do both. The capital campaign is not and does not have to be about just the building and debt service; it is also about how we serve the poor. Eliminating our mortgage payments will set free $100,000 a year to cultivate disciples by teaching and enabling the children, the youth and ourselves to be in service to the poor; it will set free funds that can care for the poor such as the man who called last week looking for a job, for the men and women of Tent City, for those who find food at Hopelink, for the families of prisoners as they frequent Matthew House or participate in Kairos Outside, and for our mission trips, to name a few service challenges before us.

And, as your pastor, I encourage the Church and Society Committee to look and pray for the genius of the AND. The choice does not have to be either care of the congregation OR advocacy for the poor. God has given us the resources and wisdom to do both, and our discipleship must embrace both education AND advocacy. I advise them in their discussion to not become polarized, which is what can be easily done, but to become prayer warriors for each other and for all of us in caring for the body of Christ AND advocating for the needs of the poor.

And to us I say the same thing, when having a birthday party and considering the needs of the poor, don’t let this become a case for the tyranny of the OR, but make it an occasion for the genius of the AND; party well and give generously, very generously, to the poor, thus being good stewards of God’s great generosity. Tom Litchford has shown us that if, as a body, we pretended to be living at the poverty level and gave 10% of our financial resources to Bear Creek, we could easily manage all our needs AND greatly strengthen our service to the needs of the suffering world.

It is told that Brigid, a great Celtic Christian saint, was walking by the chapel one day, and outside the door sat a beggar. From nowhere came a great voice, saying, “Feed my sheep.” Brigid looked for the speaker but saw no one. The voice, she believed, must be the voice of God. Quickly she took from her knapsack a morsel of bread she had hoped would be her lunch and she gave it to the beggar. Believing she had been obedient to God, she began to go on her way. The voice again spoke with a weeping disappointment, “Will you never understand?”

The very next day Brigid is again going by the chapel and outside the door sat the very same beggar. And again a voice from nowhere spoke, “Feed my sheep.” Brigid thought of her bread and remembered yesterday’s rebuke. Helping the beggar rise, they together entered the chapel and there Brigid prayed for the soul of the poor one, spoke of God’s love for every child and specifically this child, and washed the beggar with holy water. Leaving the chapel, Brigid believed she had been obedient, but again the voice spoke with a weeping disappointment, “Will you never understand?”

On the third day Brigid came to the chapel, and there was the beggar, filthy and hungry still. And yet again a voice from nowhere spoke the command, “Feed my sheep.” Brigid thought of her bread and thought of the chapel and, raising the beggar up, they entered the chapel where she prayed, preached and washed the beggar’s soul. Then she took her bread and breaking it, she fed the beggar.

It was then that the beggar spoke to her, “You are indeed wise among women, for you have understood the voice of the Lord. May the Lord bless you and keep you.” And with that the beggar signed the cross before her and disappeared.

The voice of God was not satisfied until Brigid fed the beggar’s body AND brought the beggar into the body of Christ. The genius of Jesus’ “AND” is a distinctive genius of Christianity. We are called to care both for the body of the poor and for the body of Christ. God has given us everything we need to do both. By the great mercies of God we can both wash the feet of Jesus with expensive oil AND feed the hungry.

Shalom and Amen.