In theory virtually all who claim the name of Jesus agree that the Bible mandates ministries of mercy and that God is glorified through Christian charity. The difficulty comes when we move from theory to practice. Though we could list a whole host of problems that congregations will encounter in benevolence, there are two that seem to be universal. The first has to do with what some may call “deserving versus undeserving” poor. Should a congregation help those who are victims of what appear to be self-inflicted wounds? By this we mean those who are poor, not merely because of difficult circumstances, but because of poor financial decisions, drug or alcohol abuse, or perhaps laziness. Another common question is,How should a congregation handle someone who refuses to get a job? The second issue is one of standards. The fact is, we all disagree on what constitutes a need. In our day and age, is high speed internet a need? Is a car? Each congregation will have to wrestle through these issues.

Before exploring these two problems we should note that Acts 6 makes it quite clear that the early church also had to wrestle through issue of benevolence. What principles can we learn from their example? First, a congregation should not think it strange when they find themselves disagreeing on policies and guidelines. The Church at Jerusalem had in its membership the 12 Apostles. If a church such as this finds themselves struggling with the difficult questions of this ministry shouldn’t we expect the same? Perhaps we should come to the table assuming a disagreement in this area.

Second, though the principle is simple, the church did not allow the problems and disagreements to discourage them from carrying out their commission. There are three temptations that may arise when a congregation disagrees on how to do benevolence: quitting, division or withdrawal from the discussion. Regarding the first, the easiest thing for a congregation to do is quit. Just ignore the needs in the congregation and community. This approach eliminates bickering in the church and appears to smooth things over. However, in doing so, a church fails to carry out their God given responsibility of ministering to the poor. A second response is to allow the church to be divided through this disagreement. This may mean that parties work through the issues, but with a grudge; or, at the extreme, even split off and begin another ministry. The Church of Jerusalem did neither of these. They agreed to work together at the problem. A final caution is to the church leaders (mainly pastors and deacons). Disagreement over benevolence may tempt youto withdraw from the conversation. However, there is wisdom in a multitude of counsel (Prov. 11:14). If God has given you a voice in this discussion in the local church (this will largely depend upon polity and practice), though you may be the minority voice, the Lord may very well use your words. Even if you ideas never even make it to the table, the minority voice in a discussion such as this can be quite valuable. At the very minimum it gives the group some fresh ideas to think about.

Finally, we can learn something from the men who were put in charge of the ministry of benevolence. To begin with, though the words “pastor” and “deacon” do not appear in the text, the same pattern may be applied to the local church today. Meeting the physical needs in the church and community can be overwhelming. Though pastors and elders should be involved in setting the guidelines, they do well to allow other men (deacons) the privilege of carrying out this ministry. Also the character of those who carried out this ministry should not be overlooked (Acts 6:3). There may even be something to the fact that all seven of the men had Greek names since the initial problem was between the Hellenist and Hebrew widows. However we understand this passage one principle is clear: they had the confidence of both the Apostles and the congregation.