What I Do Have I Give To You

Living here in South Asia places a huge burden on the heart, that does not exist to the same extent in Ireland/the West. Poverty. Now of course, we have poor people in Ireland, and we try to help them as we can. Yes, there are those on the streets looking for money, sad scenes of people roughing it in a sleeping bag in freezing temperatures. But these are comparatively few and far between when put up against what we see here.

We don’t live in a particularly poor area, and yet we have dozens of disabled people on our street, begging for money. We have other people who are just poor, constantly asking for a few notes to help them on their way. If we were to give to absolutely everyone, our wallets would be empty in but a few minutes. We long to help, our circumcised hearts are tender to the needs of the poor. And yet, we are physically incapable of helping everyone we see. And indeed, that is merely what is seen above the waterline.

Beneath the surface of society here are two cultural realities that shape the way people see us as rich westerners, and indeed, one more which we bring with us to the mission field.

The first is the idea of patronage. There are several good books that have been written on this subject in recent years*, and for those interested in living/serving in majority world countries, it is worth looking into. The idea of patronage revolves around how those with money/means relate to those who have less money/means, and vice versa. In a patronage culture, Westerners are often assaulted with requests for money, even from people who seem to be doing OK in life (house, some sort of job, etc.). We tend to easily dismiss it as people just trying to scam us, or use us, but this is not quite accurate.

Jayson Georges describes patronage as a, “reciprocal, asymmetrical relationship”. The keyword here is relationship. Here in our context, having money gives you a responsibility to use that money/means/social standing, to benefit those who do not have such. Society here often operates on the principle that if the benefactor blesses the beneficiary with financial or other types of aid, then in turn, the beneficiary will serve the benefactor in various, albeit lesser, ways. For example, they might be able to help arrange last minute transport, or get a good deal on something, from using their networks. In the perfect relationship, it is also their responsibility to honour the benefactor in various ways, and as such he becomes well-known in the community as an honourable man.

One example of this is the constant requests we receive to provide visas for people to move to Ireland. Unfortunately, we are in no way diplomats and cannot provide such, but that doesn’t stop people from assuming we can, and perhaps concluding that we are not being responsible patrons in this society for declining such requests.

Another example is of a teammate who has recently started a business with few employees. These employees are not shy in expressing their desire for her to hire their spouses, cousins, etc. This is seen as her responsibility toward them, and so she is trying to navigate how to refuse their requests from a healthy business point of view, without offending unnecessarily.

For many centuries, this area of the world was governed by people called Zameendars. Under the Mughal emperors, these men were given authority over vast swathes of land. Their responsibility was to collect taxes, (for which they were loathed), but also to provide for the tenants of the land, with farming supplies, protection, etc.

This system only ended during the British rule of India but of course meant that the people were under another ruler to whom they owed something, and received something in return. So, for centuries, our people group has known only various kinds of Patron-Client relationships, and it is in-built into their cultural values.

A second, and closely associated cultural mindset, is that of the “Limited Good”. This is what makes Patronage relationships so hard to navigate in our culture. The Limited Good mindset means that people think that in every relationship or opportunity, that there is a finite source of blessing attached to it, so they must seize it for themselves before someone else can. For example, two employees may speak behind each other’s back in order to get a step up in their employer’s good books, so that they can be the one who benefits. It is hard for them to understand that a good employer will seek to bless both equally.

It is this mentality that has left this area with a very strong, and well-used word for “jealousy” that exists in so many relationships. It also leads toward a strong-man mentality, forcing your way to the top, rather than servanthood and teamwork. As regards the Westerner’s wealth, well this is a veritable minefield. In trying to bless one person, another becomes jealous. (Not usually helped by the fact that the beneficiary often likes to let people know that they are the “chosen one”, so to speak). So, while one relationship is strengthened, another is strained.

The third complicating factor in the use of money here, is one that we bring with us. In our home countries, most missionaries live simple lives. We certainly wouldn’t count as poor, but we also would never be considered as part of the “wealthy” category in our own countries. We’re the kind of people who live on a single income, drive old cars, and don’t stay up to date with latest fashion trends.

The problem arises from the fact that we then come to a nation with a low GDP, and in our minds, we occupy the same social status. We think that we are just “normal” people. Sure, we don’t live in a slum, but we don’t live it up either. So, we live as if we were in the same demographic of society as our home nation. We don’t wear flashy clothes (no matter how cheap they may be here!), we don’t have a private driver with a fancy brand-new BMW. However, as many locals have been clear to tell us, we are not in those lower strata at all. We may not be like the rich elite, but we are certainly considered as extremely wealthy (which by the local’s standards, we are!). Thus, it happens that people comment about why we don’t wear nicer clothing, live in nicer areas etc. We have recently begun to realise that in certain aspects we need to live according to our social standing here, as opposed to our standing back home. People assume that we are pretending not to be rich, when we are. This is of course an incredibly difficult jump for us, as we have come to serve. But actually, to hold onto our old way of thinking doesn’t draw us nearer to the people, it pushes us away, as they see us as being bad patrons, stingy misers, weirdos etc.

Now certainly, in many areas we can choose to live contrary to people’s expectations, for example, what neighbourhood we live in, or who we employ etc., as an example of the upside-down kingdom’s values. But in others (like how we dress), we need to own our new-found status, and use it to bless… rather than to be perceived to be trying to do anything but bless!

But as these three things (patronage, limited-good mentality, our awkward societal mindset) merge, it leaves us with a very overwhelming reality to tackle. We have so many scenarios to think through how to do this all well, and that is before we even leave the house and see the immense poverty in this nation. Our hearts are bowed down with care that lies unresolved out of our inability to do anything.

This is why we want to set up good systems to bless the poor. It’s incredibly difficult to know how to appropriately help people, in a way that truly blesses them, while also proclaiming the gospel truths of generosity, kindness, equality, servanthood etc. through our works. We have dreams and desires for the future of how to try to do this well through our work on a community level. But on a personal level, and only one year in, that wisdom is going to be hard won.

Having said that, I have been encouraged lately in the response of Peter to the lame man in Acts 3. We are told that:

“And he fixed his attention on them, expecting to receive something from them.”

– Acts 3:5

This is how we feel, constantly, living here in a developing country. Due to patronage, limited-good mentality, and our social standing, people view us as with eyes that expect to receive something from us. In our poverty of cultural wisdom, we aren’t yet able to fulfill that in a meaningful way in most scenarios.

But the strengthening of resolve comes from Peter’s response:

“But Peter said, “I have no silver and gold, but what I do have I give to you.”

– Acts 3:6

And we know what happened next. The man is raised to his feet, and goes about praising God, leading to many others to be filled with wonder and amazement.

Two things are happening here. Firstly, the man expected a quick fix from these men. A token act of generosity that would fulfil a temporary need. But Peter could not give that. Instead, he gave the man the very thing that he did have. Something of lasting value. The manifestation of God’s eternal kingdom, where the lame will all be healed, where the poor will be rich, where fulness of life abounds… this he could give him. This he did give him.

When we are faced with the immense physical need right in front of our eyes, it is easy to want to just give what people expect. But whether we have those means or not, we certainly have something of far greater value – the life-altering gospel of Christ. Even when I cannot give money, or adequately tend to my fellow-man’s needs, I can give them the life-transforming message of Christ, and watch them go on their way praising God, though they have no more money than before.

But secondly, there is a danger of hiding behind that spiritual application. Peter and John gave the man something of decidedly greater value, but it was also touching a physical need on the deepest level. Our ministries ought to be intentionally holistic. We shouldn’t just throw money at causes in a haphazard fashion, just so we can bring the gospel message in words. Rather, our care for the poor and needy of this world should result in seeking deep transformation at both the heart and physical levels.

So, I guess the question remains: What can we give? There are so many needs around us. It is impossible to care for them all individually. But may we nonetheless as individuals, and churches, seek to truly give that which is of eternal value. Not to be content with token donations, but seek to understand cultures, understand needs, and remain deeply rooted in the gospel, that we truly serve people with the deep and life-transforming message of the gospel, and the physical change that they truly need.

*For example, Jayson Georges “Ministering in Patronage Cultures”