"They" have been referred to in a lot of ways. Homeless, helpless, poor, needy... are some of the kinder terms (though not all that kind).
One church we were a part of, where we were also part of a group that served food at the downtown library, would say we were ministering to the "under-served." I liked what that conveyed.
The other day I noticed an article featuring a friend who comes into my gym. He has founded a new initiative (Unified Developments) "focused on economic sustainability in under-engaged communities." They prefer the term "under-engaged" over "under-resourced" because they believe there is an abundance of resources... they're simply not being distributed evenly.
I like this distinction.
I remember the president of the seminary I attended stating how he never felt bad asking people for money. Even clear back then (eons ago), he said there is plenty of money (resources) available, the only question is where people choose to spend it.
In the case of engaging... There are plenty of people/places/things we can engage. So, who will we engage with? And, maybe, how?
***
Matthew 25:40
“The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’"
No comments:
Post a Comment