Shalom and the Poverty of Relationships

Bryan L Myers’ Walking with the Poor is simply excellent. My colleagues and I are spending the next few days discussing the book and its implications for global missional leadership. Andrew wrote a wonderful, probing post on his own work with the poor and pre/misconceptions that he’s uncovered in himself. Chris has written a fantastic post on the shared spiritual poverty that afflicts, and shapes, the poor and non-poor alike. One of Myers’ key themes that both Chris and Andrew pick up on is the relational aspect of poverty and how it shapes one’s worldview.

Myers, early in the book, explains that because we are created as image-bearers of God, we “are intentionally placed in a system of relationships: with God, with self, with community, with those perceived as ‘other,’ and with our environment” (26). Sin, however, as marred all those relationships, distorting them beyond our ability to repair them. Christ, however, serves as the means for the restoration of those relationships and the church he established has as its primary charge the work of witnessing to the restoration of those relationships; that is the essence of the Kingdom of God. Myer’s puts it thusly,

To refer to these restored relationships, Myers employs the use of the word shalom. He writes, “Shalom means just relationship (living justly and experiencing justice), harmonious relationships and enjoyable relationships. Shalom means belonging to an authentic and nurturing community in which one can be true to one’s self and give one’s self away without becoming poor. Justice, harmony, and enjoyment of God, self, others, and nature; this is the shalom that Jesus brings, the peace that passes all understanding” (51, Myers is borrowing from Wolterstorff’s Until Justice and Peace Embrace pp. 69-72 as he develops these thoughts).

One of the factors that limits our ability to abate poverty is that we simply do not have a holistic view of what poverty is–in all its relationships–and therefore lack a comprehensive approach to addressing each of poverty’s relational roots. Myers develops these “blind spots” more in a section on Christian views of the poor in chapter 3. Particularly helpful is the following figure, found on page 60:

Most Christians have a bilateral view of poverty and its causes, which results in a fairly narrow proposed response. The evangelical tradition of which I have been a part for most of my life tends to view the poor as “people in rebellion” and as “lost souls.” Therefore much of the work that is done with the poor and addressing poverty centers on the proclamation of the gospel to the poor in concert with skills-based training to help “equip” the poor to become more productive members of society. David Platt’s book, Radical is an excellent example of this view of poverty. He especially identifies with the “poor as lost souls” view of poverty and related solutions. I reviewed the book in my last post.

Many mainline churches approach poverty and the poor from the “poor as Christ incarnate” and “poor as God’s favorites” points of view. As a result they have been quite successful in implementing programs to address the needs that surround those in poverty and working to create just systems, but often lack any sort of articulation of the gospel, the “why,” in their work. Neo-Anabaptists are more likely to focus on “poor made in the image of God” and “poor as God’s favorites” which takes shape in work to empower the poor to make their own way in the world economically, socially, and politically.

Myers argues that a shalom-centered view of poverty, rooted in the restoration of all our relationships, must encompass all of these views of the poor as well as all of their responses. The thesis of his work is, “Poverty is a result of relationships that do not work, that are not just, that are not for life, that are not harmonious or enjoyable. Poverty is the absence of shalom in all its meanings” (86). For Myers the role of the Christian development agency (those working to transform the impoverished and the systems that perpetuate poverty) must be rooted in the restoration of relationships that do work, that are for life, that are harmonious and enjoyable. He puts it this way, “We are to be citizens of the kingdom, people living in just and harmonious relationships with God, self, each other, and the created order” (109).

Not wanting to be misread, Myers takes the opportunity at several points to rightly cast God as the sole agent for change and transformation and Christians and development agencies as His instruments: “While shalom and abundant life are ideals that we will not see this side of the second coming, the vision of shalom that leads to life in its fullness is a powerful image that must inform and shape our understanding of any better human future” (51) and “Care needs to be taken that we understand we are being asked by God to be obedient, not successful” (110).

It is this “vision of shalom” that I find so compelling. I am in need of constant reminder that the Lord’s business is shalom. It is His gift and his promise. It is already and not yet. I cannot bring shalom, yet I can witness to its presence and its coming. I cannot create shalom, but I can be used by God to reveal it. Shalom is for the soul, yes, but it is also for the body, the earth, and our interactions with one another. Any time I work for harmonious and enjoyable relationships in any of those areas, I am proclaiming the gospel, witnessing to the kingdom of God, practicing faithful presence.