Two shoes

This is an article written by Bob Lupton (Urban developer).  I thought I would pass it on.

Two Shoes

Blake Mycoskie has hit the compassion mother-lode.  Charismatic young founder and CEO of Tom’s Shoes, Blake has devised a formula for combining consumerism and charity that is nearly irresistible to Western shoppers with adequate pocketbooks and big hearts.  Buy a pair of his alpargata design Argentinean slip-ons and he will donate a pair of these canvas shoes to a barefoot child in a desperately poor village.   His buy-one-give-one strategy is not about building a business, he says.  It is about sparking a global movement to provide shoes to the poorest of the poor – children who contract soil-borne diseases that attack their lymphatic systems, children who are excluded from school for lack of shoes.  His idea has caught the attention of Vogue, GQ, the New York Times, to name but a few, and has skyrocketed him to celebrity-charity status.   His imaginative “One Day Without Shoes” awareness campaign that encouraged Americans to go barefoot for a day drew the support of such notable partners as AOL, Flickr, and Discovery Channel.  His “one-for-one” business model has been heralded by respected business leaders as “caring capitalism,”  a successful model of social entrepreneurship, and one of the top ten most innovative retails companies of the year.  He was even invited to the White House to discuss ideas for US economic policy.  Tom’s Shoes are now carried by more than 500 retailers.  More than two million pairs have been distributed free to poor children in 40 countries.
But Blake has not been without his critics.  His collaboration with evangelical mission groups has drawn fire from the more political correct voices accusing him of using his marketing success to proselytize (accept Jesus and get a pair of shoes).  Some say the he is distributing shoes to children who already have shoes – not to the barefoot poorest of the poor as his advertising claims.  Others point out that his model is not sustainable – what happens to children when their shoes wear out in a few months?  But the dissenting voices are weak in comparison to the roar of approval from throngs of warm-hearted consumers who feel a warm satisfaction in knowing that their purchase is making a difference to a needy child somewhere. Some of these consumers even get the opportunity to participate in “shoe drops” – staged events where donors get to personally “fit” needy children with their new pairs of shoes.  This is celebrity charity at its finest.
Patrick Woodyard also has a shoe strategy for helping the poor.  He is another young entrepreneur who has started an innovative for-profit shoe business that is gaining momentum. His Nisolo brand has not yet reached the volume of Toms Shoes – neither in sales nor notoriety – but his heart for helping the poor is much like Blake Mycoskie’s.   His methodology, however, is strikingly different.  Patrick saw the grinding poverty in Peru but he saw something else – the remarkable talent of local craftsmen to design and create quality shoes, some even from old tires and scrap leather.  Instead of adopting a give-away strategy, Patrick decided to build on the capacities of local artisans.  His Nisolo line features fine, handcrafted shoes that are marketed internationally with the motto “Wear change.”  His website states: Our goal is to empower talented artisans in the developing world, allowing them to shape their future by way of their extraordinary work.  Patrick is convinced that giving shoes away does not address the root causes of poverty.  While he does invest 10% of his profits to provide educational opportunities for local children, he believes that employment, not donations, is the most effective way to enable the poor to emerge from poverty.
Patrick did his due diligence as he shaped strategies for his Nisolo enterprise.  He discovered that even the poorest villages seem to have an ample supply of shoes available.  Millions of used shoes find their way into the most desolate places – some given away by non-profits, some sold on the local market.  The shoe-drop idea, he found, was an awkward, feel-good publicity event that had no lasting economic benefit.  Worse, give-away programs undercut small entrepreneurs trying to make a living on local production.  Used clothing imports, for instance, had caused unemployment to deepen by 50% in the African textile industry from 1981 to 2000.  In Nigeria alone a half million workers lost their jobs (1992-2006) due to the inflow of donated clothing.  Patrick’s research convinced him that jobs, not donations, were what the poor needed.  His Nisolo strategy has strengthened and generated hundreds of small, profitable businesses that have spawned thousands of decent paying jobs.
“Buy-one-give-one” or “Wear change.”   Both marketing models are motivated by genuine compassion for the poor.  Both move the poverty needle – but in opposite directions.

What are you looking for?

A little over a week ago I walked to my truck in the morning only to see my shed door open with the light on.  This is strange because I’m an early riser and the people who have access to my shed know better than to leave it open and not turn off the lights.  As I went over to my shed I had the sinking feeling that some else might have visited my shed.  As I got a little closer I was right as I saw my lock cut off and sitting on the ground.   The people who broke into my shed got  away with significant dollars in tools.  Most of them were mine but a couple of them i was borrowing from some friends.

The interesting thing was what happened after the event.  Many people gave a response you would expect to hear like, “oh man!, I’m so sorry” or “wow that sucks!”  But I was also surprised at quite a few responses that felt quite sharp from people we are close to.  Some of them are things like “well what do you expect?  You live in Compton” or “that’s what happens in your city” in a very matter a fact way.

While Julie and I were mad and sad we didn’t expect certain responses that took place in the next couple of days.  One of our neighbors was more pissed off that Julie and I combined.  It was nice to see that someone else cared about us and our stuff.  This same neighbor talked about having a fundraiser to help us get some of the tools back.  Another neighbor heard about what happened on Sunday and said that they wanted to check with her sister to see if she might give us some of the tools from one of her family members.  Another one of our neighbors came by our house on Sunday and brought with her a circular saw, level, drill and square.  She gave them to us as a gift!

Many more responses were given but one of the things i realized is that people find what they are looking for.  If you ONLY want to see the broken pieces of our city you can.  But different stories are taking place all around us.  If you want to see the beauty in the brokenness you don’t need to look any further than my neighbors.  If you want a story of brokenness I can give you one.   But if you want a story of beauty I can easily give you 3 from the same event.  My math isn’t great but it appears that their is more beauty around us than brokenness.

What are you looking for?  You’ll probably find it.  For me Psalm 27 has been ringing in my ears all day, “I remain confident of this:  I will see the goodness of the Lord in the land of the living.  Be strong and take heart and wait for the Lord.”

Are we on the brink of a new Reformation?

I’m very excited about Mike Breen’s new book that just came out.  Here is one of his blog posts.  Happy reading.

If you could have a big tree with only a little fruit or a small tree with lots of fruit, which would you choose? It’s about a choice, right?

But we’ll get back to that in a second.

I’ve noticed there seem to be two things I can do with Jesus. Either I can increasingly look like Jesus, or I can make him look like me.

I can look like Jesus or I can try to make him look like me.

The funny thing about Jesus is that I’m never sure we give him quite enough credit. Sure. He came to earth, left the throne of heaven, took on the nature of a servant and died on the cross in our place, rose from the dead and now sits at the right hand of the Father. Yes. All that happened.

But we really don’t give his three years of ministry much reference.

Here’s what I mean: We think Jesus was the Son of God, but when we read the Gospels, do you think he was the smartest person who ever lived? Most accomplished? Best fisherman? Best evangelist? Best church planter? Best movement leader? Best discipler? Most successful leader?

For instance, in Luke 9 and again in Luke 10, Jesus gave the most detailed strategy you will ever find in the scriptures for how to evangelize, and then we see the exact same strategy used in the early church. Shouldn’t we be using that same strategy? I’m guessing we’re not arrogant enough to think we’ve come up with a better strategy than Jesus. (Example: for most churches, the evangelism strategy is “invite your friends to church and then let the professionals take over. We’ll do the heavy lifting if you get them here.” Not exactly Jesus’ strategy!)

We acknowledge what Jesus did on the cross, but what about what was started before the cross? What about the movement he began that changed the course of human history when it was released and catalyzed after the Resurrection and Pentecost? If being a disciple is “who Jesus would be if he were me” (Dallas Willard), shouldn’t we be learning the patterns and practices of the best whom ever lived if we too want to change the world for the Kingdom?

Yet often when we look at the Western church, I’m not sure we see many of the practices of Jesus among the way we lead. Though…that’s starting to change!

Back to the original question: Big tree/little fruit or little tree/lots of fruit?

It feels that at some point, we might have lost our way. Perhaps we became more concerned with success than fruitfulness. Jesus says we evaluate things in the Kingdom on their fruitfulness…but somewhere along the way it became about the size of your tree. Now having a big tree is a fine thing. Just know you’re only successful in evaluating yourself against the size of other trees, and God has never been terribly concerned about tree size. Just fruitfulness. That’s it. The point of a tree isn’t how big your tree is but how much fruit you have. It’s about fruit! And in the Kingdom, fruitfulness is always about reproduction. (Specifically, reproducing disciples…multiplying Jesus’ life into the life of others who can then go and do the same.) Screen Shot 2013-03-03 at 8.53.46 AM

My experience tells me having a big tree doesn’t mean you have a lot of fruit. In fact, what I’ve seen happen a lot more often is people going after the big tree and hoping to get fruit, rather than going after fruit and knowing you get the tree along the way.

Choose the best, and you always get the good. Choose the good, you very rarely get the best.

Are we trying to start or lead churches, create Kingdom movements and aspire to all the breakthrough Jesus saw apart from the way Jesus did those things? Am I trying to make Jesus like me or do I honestly believe he was the best in the Kingdom business?

The Reformation was a significant moment because among other things, it put the Bible back in the hands of the people. But when we look at the church of the last 100 years, I have to wonder if we have been more influenced by the Enlightenment than the Reformation.

This is the gut check question: If you had to choose between being known as a movement leader but not really having one, or actually being a movement leader but no one knowing it…which would you choose?

Tree or fruit?

Here’s the good news: I believe we are on the cusp of a new Reformation, one that sees the kind of fruit we saw from Jesus’ ministry, because we, once again, embrace not simply what Jesus did on the cross but the way he led and made disciples. Yes. I think we are on the tipping point of a new Reformation and it is about putting discipleship and mission back into the hands of ordinary people. Because when we equip the people of Jesus with the patterns, practices and way of Jesus, it will once again be ordinary people equipped to do extraordinary things.

The key is to embrace the mission of Jesus AND the way of Jesus. He’s just the best there ever was!

Hopefully you hear what I’m trying to convey clearly. I’m not suggesting we should go after a new Reformation. I’m suggesting it’s already happening. And maybe we don’t see it on every street corner yet, but I see it happening all around. A small group of communities, ready to be bloodied in going through the wall first, who are getting the beachhead of breakthrough for the rest of the church.

It’s already happening!

Screen Shot 2013-03-03 at 8.54.14 AMAt the end of the day, I don’t want a big tree. But I don’t want a small tree either. I want an orchard. I want a Kingdom movement where reproduction of Jesus’ life within individuals and communities is happening on every level. I’ve seen this happen before. I know it because I’ve seen it. And I think we are starting to see glimmers of this reality again. Lord, may it be so! May we see a Kingdom movement wash upon these shores.

 

If these longings resonate with you, here are three things you can do to step more fully into this groundswell:

  1. breen_bookSlideREPOST. Repost this link on twitter, facebook or your blog.
  2. RESPOND. Leave a comment on this post. Here’s the question: Where are the places you are seeing breakthrough in putting discipleship and mission back into the hands of ordinary people? We’d love to hear about it!
  3. READ. We just released a new book on this subject called Leading Kingdom Movements: the “Everyman” notebook on how to change the world. You can pick up the ebook by clicking here. We think you’ll love it. Write a review. Read it and pass it on to a friend. The thing we are most concerned about is getting this idea out!

Ezra on Immigration

Bob Lupton is missionary, writer and a lover of his city.  I receive articles from him as he tends to write about topics in an urban setting. Here is a thought provoking article on Immigration.  Enjoy the read.

 

Ezra on Immigration

“We have a problem,” a sober delegation of Ezra’s appointed leaders reported to him. Illegal aliens had infiltrated Israel’s borders. Not like enemy saboteurs. Worse! They had slipped right into the homes, the bedrooms, of some of the most prominent leadership of the society – even the priesthood! Yes it was true. There were disturbing numbers of Jewish men who had taken wives from several of the surrounding pagan countries, had children by them, and were allowing foreign influences to contaminate the Jewish culture. Some were even permitting their wives and children to speak the languages and practice the religion of their foreign homelands. This was clearly a violation of the Law.
No one had to tell Ezra about the Law. He was the leading expert – theologian laureate of the Hebrew faith. That was the main reason King Artaxerxes had named him governor of Israel. Ezra was deeply devoted to the Law of Yahweh which made him an honorable and trustworthy appointee, and one that the Jewish returnees from Babylonian captivity would respect and follow. There was a lot of reconstruction to do after 75 years of exile and Ezra’s first priority was reestablishing Temple worship and adherence to the Word of God. He had not anticipated that returnees would be intermarrying with the women of foreign cultures.
Ezra was distraught. In public display of distress he dropped to his knees and tore at his robe and beard. Such flagrant disobedience could bring on the severe judgment of Yahweh, he bellowed. The Law clearly stated that the children of Israel were not to take foreign brides. Idol worship and other abominations introduced by alien women would pollute the monotheistic Jewish religion. The Law was full of warnings, threats of God’s judgment, if the people did not obey. There were other commands, of course, like slaying all their pagan enemies. And certain allowances to marry slave women from conquered countries. But these were “conquest laws” applied to an earlier time in history when Israel was in a conquering mode. The Law that applied to Ezra’s time was “restorative law”, the law that was needed to restore the faithful practice of Yahweh-worship by a captive people returning to their homeland. It was Ezra’s sacred duty to interpret and apply the Law. And getting rid of the corrupting influence of foreign wives seemed essential if the judgment of God was to be averted and the purity of the religion reestablished.
So that’s exactly what he did. With blind, nationalistic zeal, Ezra ordered the break-up of every mixed-race family and sent all the traumatized women and children away to survive as best they could as widows and orphans in their native lands. His memoirs conclude with a public listing of the names of all the offenders – devastated men forced to divorce their wives and forsake their children. Israel had been purged. But at what a cruel price!
I suppose we cannot be too harsh in our criticism of Ezra. He did what most religious leaders do – selectively read the scriptures and extract those verses they believe fit the situation. Ezra opts for purity of doctrine over compassion, ignoring passages of the Law that admonish Israel to love foreigners as themselves, to judge them fairly, to invite them into worship. Somehow he overlooks Yahweh’s threat to curse those who deal unjustly with foreigners.
Strange, isn’t it, how this issue of illegal immigration repeats itself over and over again throughout history? And how the law is invoked to expel the innocent. One would think that breaking up families would be the last thing a family-oriented culture like Israel and like ours would want to do. Some, it seems, would prefer the Ezra-style purging approach, separating marriages and sending children back to lands they have never known. Admittedly, there is something very clean and decisive about the law and order approach. It certainly worked for Ezra. For a while. And the sacred text never does disclose how Yahweh felt about Ezra’s deportation decision. I guess it’s up to us to interpret whether God is more interested in the law or grace.

Prayer Update for City Church

P a r t n e r
D o n a t e