Christ the servant/substance

I’ve been thinking about Jesus’ ministry as he lived in the flesh, before his ascension from the tomb. Jesus spent his time and effort in meeting people’s needs. It seems to me that Jesus modeled the perfect union of pragmatism as it encountered the metaphysical realm. If the need was a few drachma for temple tax, just go fishing and it will be met; if the need was for healing, bestow it according to the measure of faith demonstrated; if the need was to deny worldly possessions, then do so and follow Christ in faith to a realization of eternal values and eternal life.
I suppose these examples are fairly approximate if not totally the same with criticisms on the “relevance” of the church in contemporary society. Why shouldn’t the ministry of the church be that of meeting the needs of people? However, when this subject gets pressed, the argument tends to fall toward too much Martha in the mix and not enough Mary.
I don’t know if I’ve struck the right balance in all this or not, but I will go on now to give this personal testimony.
I’m still serving in the nation of India. I’m here doing business, providing education services. Until very recently I was mostly serving the expat missions community. However, I must say that I have felt a growing alienation from that segment of society that I was formerly serving.
“Support” has become a dirty word in my consciousness, as I believe that “business” has become a dirty word to that population I speak of. But I truly believe that business has become my way of meeting needs, just as much as missionaries believe that support is their method.
The apostle Paul, along with (1.) preaching and exhorting the populaces and (2.) working in signs and wonders, also (3.) carried bundles of money from one church to another.
It seems to me that modern-day missions programs are basically operating in two of these three. It seems that dispensational doctrine has rendered the signs and wonders aspect of Pauline ministry as questionable, if not openly fraudulent, but financial gifts and preaching to the brethren are hoped to compensate.
In short, what it seems the missions community has in terms of meeting needs is either cash donations or a suggestion to join a movement. What I don’t see is any convincing effort to serve in ways beyond these two. I’ve been around so many of the NGOs and para-church organizations and relief programs and church planters and this-and-that’s, and I’ve come away with the thought that no one is fooled by these self-promulgating operations but the operatives themselves.
The bottom line is that all these “ministries” are funded by the tithes and offerings of outsiders who don’t expect their programs to actually impress anyone (Mary type) besides the in-house constituency. If they did, that would really smack of a secular (Martha type) solution. I’ve heard missionaries on support actually boast about how they constantly lose money, how they neglect their business for the sake of their “ministry”, etc. (Incidentally, the Indian government is now cracking down on these losers, and I have to say that I applaud this as much as I hate to see it happen.)
Paul wrote enough of the New Testament that it should seem no surprise that a great deal of his doctrine is practiced. However, Peter, John, James and Jude also had a few things to say that should warrant reflection. Their messages bring a refreshing change to the bulk of Pauline doctrine that the church and its missions movements have seemingly glad-grabbed, namely money as authority, reached by corporate agility, without any evidence of meeting the needs of a broken world; in short, no substance.
Once upon a time I was hoping for substance, dying without it, and lo and behold, I found the substance, who is Christ Jesus. I don’t think that idea is so peculiar to anyone who calls himself a Christian.