My (hopefully) final thoughts...

The corporate/individual responsibility model just seems to confuse things further, rather than bring clarity to this issue.

Evangelism is presented as a corporate responsibility, since it was given as a direct command to the apostles. Yet we do not evangelize only as the body, and we would not want to minimize the personal responsibility that is borne by each believer in this area. The individual will give account of himself on the last day, not the congregation.

All issues of obedience and personal holiness are thus matters of personal responsibility, but that does not mean that the body is not responsible for teaching, exhorting, and providing accountability and partnership in the faithful fulfillment of these things. Again, in terms of the judgment, a congregation will not give account, but perhaps the elders will!

Thus, mercy ministry is a personal responsibility, but not necessarily a purely individual effort in the way that it is carried out. As with evangelism, we may run the danger of minimizing personal responsibility with our corporate efforts, but we also give the weak, the immature, and the timid a great opportunity to learn and obey within fellowship, and we give the mature the opportunity to teach and model. I am here focusing only on the benefit of the corporate aspect of this ministry, not to minimize the inherent value of mercy ministry. All this is a good witness of the truth and life at work in the body.

Now, having said all this, I would agree that evangelism does have a special place, even priority, in ministry. We are seeking to change hearts, not because feeding bellies doesn't matter, but because a redeemed life will do good now and be saved for all eternity. Evangelism is mission, not deeds of mercy.

[Side note: It seems to me that those who hold to a Reformed soteriology with an aversion to "decisionism" would have to acknowledge that sometimes the empty stomach is going to have to be addressed if we're going to have an ongoing evangelistic work among the truly, desperately poor.]

So, if we want to talk about evangelism as "priority" or "primary," it is only such as a logical priority, similar to justification and sanctification. Which is more important? That is a poor question based on poor logic and bad theology. Justification can be described as a "priority" in terms of sequence, not in significance.

Am I saying that mercy ministry is as significant as evangelism? No. I am saying that practicing our holiness is must be no less of our concern as being declared righteous, or we might not in fact be justified (See James' epistle). We are declared righteous in Christ by grace, so that we may act righteously in Christ by grace.

"For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation for all people, training us to renounce ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright, and godly lives in the present age, waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, who gave himself for us to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people for his own possession who are zealous for good works." Titus 2:11-14

"And let our people learn to devote themselves to good works, so as to help cases of urgent need, and not be unfruitful." Titus 3:14

Feeding the hungry and clothing the naked will not save our souls and it will not bring in the kingdom, but it does demonstrate that our faith is real, that we truly long for the restoration that Christ will bring, and that we are willing to sacrifice now to bring relief to those who are suffering the most from the effects of the Fall. The blessings of the kingdom will be both individual and societal, and that's why individual and corporate witness to it is essential.

Just a bit more...

Mercy ministry can undermine evangelism, but it does not necessarily lead to compromise or a "social gospel."

The danger is not inherent to mercy ministry. It comes from the fact that we are rebellious moralists, and we tend to either ignore the law or embrace it incorrectly.

Thus, we either ignore mercy ministry and justify it by saying that it is secondary, unnecessary, or someone else's responsibility. Or, we make it the be all and end all, and we make salvation of works, reduce Christianity to ethics, and see the kingdom as horizontal justice exclusively.

The gospel says that holiness is required, but that we cannot produce it in and for ourselves. We need the sacrifice of Christ to deal with our guilt and the imputed righteousness of Christ to stand before God justified.

The gospel also "teaches us" (Titus, previous comment) that righteousness and holiness is something that we must practice as well, as the fruit of lives that have been redeemed.

Let us not separate, categorize, or prioritize in ways that causes us to lose the delicate balance of life in Christ.

As I read my last post again, let me say that I'm not trying to say that Mr. Lawrence is trying to say mercy ministry is someone else's responsibility with his corporate/individual contruct, but I do think that it is a tendency we all have.

Sure seems like the church had some organizational efforts to show physically minister in an organized way (especially to household of faith, Gal 6:10). At least two of these (toward widows) are obvious from Acts 6 and then 1 Tim 5.

This was definitely the corporate "we" caring

Many thanks to Michael, Thabiti, Mike, and Greg for the discussion on this important topic. I'm benefiting greatly from this, especially as I work on making a biblical case for a Christian non-profit's urban transformation initiative. Please keep it going!

Thanks also to Mark for the excellent post on the gospel in December.