January, 2006 Obsessions

January, 2006

I’ve been accused of being “obsessed” with China. Mind you, the accusation came from one who has spent his entire life dedicated to an orange vegetable, so I am taking it in stride. But I still found myself bothered by the accusation. In fact, the actual accusation wasn’t what bothered me, but rather the fact that I was accused of being something other than perfect.

You see, though I like to present myself an independent thinker, uninfluenced by the world around me, at heart I’m more of a people-pleaser than I care to admit. I want people to like me, to look up to and respect me. Basically, I like them one step shy of complete adoration.

So I found myself contemplating my new status as “obsessed”. I became obsessed with the thought that I was obsessed. What was wrong with it? Why was I rankled so? I called a close friend and asked her if she thought I was obsessed with China. “No,” she replied. “Someone obsessed would be dressing Chinese, decorating their house Chinese.” I only have one room with Chinese paintings and a few pieces of Chinese jewelry. According to her, that’d fall short of obsession. The next Sunday a friend was talking in Sunday school and said that when she thinks of me, she thinks of China. Hmmm, does that qualify me for obsession? I felt I should call one more friend.

“Obsessed?” she practically screamed. “What’s wrong with obsession? My girl, if you ever become less passionate, I’ll personally come and kick your rear!”

I thought about what she said. I had assumed there was something wrong with obsession. I mean, it is a negative word, isn’t it? Then it dawned on me. Obsession and passion are often the same thing. The difference is in the observer, not the doer. If the person disagrees with what you are doing, then they say you are obsessed. If what you do fits within their box of what is OK, then you are passionate.

“Look at your giving portfolio,” the accuser had said. “All you give to is projects in China.”

Technically, that wasn’t true. We give to a lot of things, trying to do local projects, national projects and international. Granted, among the international, it was heavily skewed toward China. Besides, how is one supposed to balance their giving portfolio, anyway? One-quarter to the local church, one-quarter to ministries in your city, one-quarter to national ministries and one-quarter to international – a variant of the Jerusalem, Samaria and uttermost parts of the earth scenario? (For that matter, how many people even have a giving portfolio? Perhaps only those obsessed with giving?)

Or should one balance it by the type of ministry? Rick Warren has recommended an acronym of PEACE to divvy up projects. “P” is for planting churches; “E” is for equipping the saints; “A” is for assisting the poor; “C” is for caring for the sick; and “E” is for education. Though skewed, we felt our portfolio was generally balanced because we tried to give to a variety of projects in China – to reach the poor and the privileged elite; for mass evangelism, one-on-one evangelism, and for discipleship. We’ve done orphan projects and university/seminary projects. And does it have to be equal amounts to each of those five categories?

Or should one balance their portfolio by the population, in which case the U.S. should receive one-fifth of what is given to China? Should we balance by reaching equally to urban and tribal areas? There are so many ways to evaluate whether or not a giving portfolio is balanced.

You could even look at what is given. Most give money – that’s the obvious one. But for a few years, we had also given our lives. And now we give of our time, serving on boards and sharing our albeit-limited wisdom.

Then there are those who say you should not have a balanced portfolio. You should be FOCUSED! Focus is a good thing. I always thought I was being focused within my balancing act. Most today would say someone like Hudson Taylor was focused. But since he didn’t stay in their box of what was deemed appropriate, most of the missionaries of Taylor’s day probably would have labeled him obsessed.

Did Hudson Taylor mind being thought of as weird? Did Eric Liddell mind when people thought him crazy to throw away his running career when he went to China? (On the flip side, did the missionaries in China judge him when he chose to stay and run in the Olympics?) Is it obsession to concentrate upon one vegetable to the exclusion of all others? Or is that merely “sticking with your strengths” and being focused? What is wrong with being fully engaged in that which God has laid upon our hearts? I’m reminded of a quote by Jim Elliot, “Wherever you are, be all there”.

Obsession or passion – call it what you will - I think the church’s problem today is too little of it, not too much. So let this serve as my invitation to all to kick me in my blessed assurance if you ever see me as anything less than passionate about my relationship with Jesus Christ, my husband, my children, or whatever else God calls me to.

Like a rock,

The Submissive Despot

Amy