Why Such Waste?

How many of us have ever thought/said, "I can't believe that church is spending XX Millions of dollars on a new sanctuary!  They could wipe out poverty in a small nation with that kind of money!"? 

Don't worry my hand is raised with you.  Now read this:

Matthew 26:6-13

⁶While Jesus was in Bethany in the home of a man known as Simon the Leper, ⁷a woman came to him with an alabaster jar of very expensive perfume, which she poured on his head as he was reclining at the table.

    ⁸When the disciples saw this, they were indignant. "Why this waste?" they asked. ⁹"This perfume could have been sold at a high price and the money given to the poor."

    ¹⁰Aware of this, Jesus said to them, "Why are you bothering this woman? She has done a beautiful thing to me. ¹¹The poor you will always have with you, but you will not always have me. ¹²When she poured this perfume on my body, she did it to prepare me for burial. ¹³I tell you the truth, wherever this gospel is preached throughout the world, what she has done will also be told, in memory of her."

So I ask - Are we doing the same thing as the disciples?  Do Jesus' words here in V. 10-13 speak to us as well?

What the woman (Mary - according to Luke) was doing was spending a lot of money (some commentaries say a year's wages) to glorify Christ.  If a church is doing the same thing by building a larger sanctuary then should we be saying: "Why this waste?"

Also - the disciples excuse for their judgment of Mary was: V.9 "This perfume could have been sold at a high price and the money given to the poor." Just as ours above: "They could wipe out poverty in a small nation with that kind of money!"  So then - when we look at our own lives - how much are we giving to the poor?  Is a years wages or XX millions of dollars to much to give to Christ? 

Just a thought...

Posted by Matt 

Comments

[Loren Eaton]

Just read this two days ago. How funny ...

[Just Matt]

Did you make this connection as well? It hit me like a rock as we were going over it at BSF this morning.

[Jeremy Myers]

Are you saying we should build large, expensive buildings or we shouldn't?

If you are using this passage in Matthew to argue that we should, you will need to prove that the church building is equivalent to the body of Christ, which you will have a tough time doing from Scripture.

Either way, of course, you are right. The real issue is not how much chuches spend on their buildings, but how much we ourselves are giving to the poor.

[Just Matt]

Thanks for your thoughts Jeremy!

I am just starting the conversation. Not leaning one way or the other on the building thing. Trust me I am usually the first to say that it is a waste of money - BUT what I consider a waste of money vs. what God thinks can be two different things.

I think I would have been in the disciples camp here and thought that Mary's use of the perfume was wasteful - but obviously Christ didn't think that.

I also agree that the main point is that we need to not point fingers and instead redirect the focus on what we ARE doing not what others are NOT doing.

[amy]

I don't think Jesus wants the flatscreen TVs. I'm just saying.

[Just Matt]

Agreed

[Jim]

This post is pure nard! That means it's good btw. There's nothing wrong with putting up our best for Jesus.

[berry]

I think it's a great question.
One thing I see is that Jesus doesn't really chastise the disciples for making that assumption. He says "why are you bothering this woman?" but that is pretty mild compared to what the Pharisees get.

I think our problem is that we would like to give a lot of money, solve the problems of the poor, and then not have to have them interfere with our perfect little lives.

I think we should give more money, but I think it should be given in the context of a relationship not just sent in using a Business Reply Envelope. If the church actually had relationships with the poor, we would easily see that when money is needed there's no choice between a building and their needs. But sometimes money isn't needed, instead friendship, networks, skills, advocacy, etc...

getting back to the passage... it seems that this was a pretty special occasion since Jesus would only be buried that one time. I don't know but I'm through with the long posts for the night. :)

[chet]

I've questioned what the split between aesthetics and giving to the poor should be for a while, without coming up with any sort of good answer. I do think that church buildings are places where art should be redeemed and used to glorify God (and it should be noted i'm not talking about thomas kinkade here), and churches should be in some sense aesthetically pleasing since that seems to mirror what God was doing in creation and serve as some sort of reminder.

i know that amy brought up flatscreen tv's and i guess that would probably include all other technological advances as well, and that's way more up in the air in my mind i guess. Should churches be on the forefront of technology and desire to be cutting edge? Probably not, but I don't know.

[chet]

Also, I really liked Pete Rollins' recent blog on the phrase "the poor you will always have with you." Here's the link:

http://peterrollins.net/blog/?p=23

[Jeremy Myers]

I like the commment that this post is pure nard. Ha ha! Very funny.

Anyway, I really agree with the bottom line statement, that we need to stop pointing fingers and just look at our own lives and we are spending our own money.