I have been in the habit lately of beginning my mornings by listening to some of my favorite pastors and teachers, so as to focus my heart and mind on life in general, as well as specific issues that I want to hear more about. It also keeps me from just jumping into my day and allowing it to blur into every other day. This morning, I was listening to Rob Bell talk and it was stirring within me some things that I have already been wrestling with. Having just come through Christmas, I have more than a couple items that cost more than a couple bucks. So in light of the couple specific missionaries that I can instantly think of that could be more than blessed with such money (that which went towards my Christmas presents), is it appropriate that I have them? A good question, indeed.
This is one of those subjects that I would love your thoughts on! I have been thinking for some time now that something needs to change in my own life - not just in terms of what I have or don't have, but rather in terms of how I view my material possessions and the place that they have in my life. Rob had some pretty insightful stuff to say, especially in terms of how Zacchaeus was redeemed in terms of his finances. I want to be someone who feels open to have nice things, maybe even nicer than what would be considered average. But even more, I want my finances to demonstrate my new life in Christ. What that looks like is seemingly different for different people. What are your thoughts? Do I sell my car, my stereo, my iPod, my laptop... and give it all to the poor? Especially in terms of the Tsunami Relief Funds all over the place, do I deserve (that is not even the right word, I know) to have such nice possessions? Post away...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Dave,
ReplyDeleteI've struggled with this same question a lot. Everyday, I see students in dire financial circumstances. I wonder what is morally required of me as far as my finances.
I think the answer to this question depends on your ethical starting points. If you are coming from a theistic, deontological (i.e. rule-following) ethic, you would need to look at the biblical rules and attempt to follow them. You would have to seriously consider the passage in which Jesus told the rich young ruler to sell all that he had, give it to the poor, and follow Jesus. You would also have to consider the passages that state that in the manner you give (to the poor) in that same manner will you receive from God. One of the only Christians that I know about that appears to be consistent with this teaching is Ron Sider, author of _Rich Christians in an Age of Hunger_.
If you are coming from a non-theistic, moral relativist position (as I am), you might consider the differences between moral obligations and "going the extra mile". My personal values determine for me that it would be wrong for me to steal from the poor, to take away things that are necessary for their lives. At the same time, I have a lesser duty to give up what I have to those less fortunate. The former is a moral obligation, the latter is going the extra mile. I am not obligated to go the extra mile, but am free to do so when I can.
I often feel helpless in the face of such ubiquitous poverty. I feel that my few possessions would not do much good for anyone anyway. I (like you) drive a simple car, have relatively simple possessions, etc. There is really very little that I can PERSONALLY do about such poverty.
For me, I find that one thing that I can do about widespread poverty is support public policy that provides for people in this situation. I believe that this is one of the good functions of government. I already give 40% of my income to the government, and I feel that the best use of that money would be to support those less fortunate.
I know that you like to stay away from politics on your blog, but my answer to your question is that I feel that I am in some way "going the extra mile" by voting for politicians and political parties that want to spend less money on military and more on healthcare, welfare, education, etc. [I feel that the Horatio Alger mentality in the US (i.e. pull yourself up by your bootstraps) is poorly conceived. It does not take into account the causes or effects of poverty.]
So, for my part, I take the obligation not to take from those who need it as a moral requirement. "Going the extra mile" is just that and is not, therefore, morally required. I do give charitably sometimes when I can, but I feel that public policy is much more effective and I attempt to vote for parties (yes, the democrats!) that will utilize my tax dollars in such a way as to help those in need.
From the Christian point of view (which is not my own), I think that most Christians have not taken the Biblical commands very seriously. I think people like Ron Sider are probably most consistent with biblical mandates. I definitely have no patience for Christians who incessantly talk about how they must "not conform to the world" in church and then hop in their damn SUV's, drive to their huge homes, watch their huge TV's on their expensive furniture, wearing trendy clothes, and smuggly thinking that they are fulfilling that command because they don't drink beer and screw before they get married. They blindly follow everything "the world" tells them, set aside a couple of "vices" and feel like they are praiseworthy because of it. [oops! sorry for the rant]
Read the reviews of Sider's book here: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0849914248/qid=1105715901/sr=8-1/ref=pd_csp_1/103-8536222-3484622?v=glance&s=books&n=507846