I have just donated $100 online to the USA arm of Caritas Internationale, Catholic Charities USA.
Catholic Charities/Caritas remains probably the most low key in terms of publicity and knowledge by the general public of all the charitable social services organizations in the world. As a result, few people realize that Catholic Charities is rated the TOP provider by Charity Navigator:
11/17 - Catholic Charities USA Named Top Provider of Social Services by Charity Navigator, Ranked #2 Overall in NonProfit Times Top 100
In 2007 Catholic Charities helped over 7,700,000 people! They report on their web site that they are already in the midst of helping people who are suffering in the mortgage crisis.
Do visit their site, find out more about what the quiet Catholics are really up to in following the steps of Jesus and ministering to the poor and those in need, and consider following my example and giving them or the international branches of Caritas a donation (I wrote about Caritas about a week ago regarding the crisis in Zimbabwe).
https://www.catholiccharitiesusa.org/NetCommunity/Page.aspx?pid=1174
There is an easy to use online donation page.
Also, if you are interested, you can learn what the Catholic Social doctrine and tradition is, as defined by the USCCB (United States Conference of Catholic Bishops). Also, there are great prayer resources and personal seasonal reflections (such as each day of Advent) by Catholic Charities members.
Showing posts with label alms giving. Show all posts
Showing posts with label alms giving. Show all posts
Thursday, December 18, 2008
Next charity from my Christmas idea list
I have just donated $75 online to the Salvation Army. This is in addition to my usual adding of change and dollar bills to their collection buckets.
Folks, in this time of economic crisis, never forget what a debt the USA owes to the Salvation Army. They are one of my favorite organizations and I can tell you this personal story of why.
My father had a good friend who was a co-worker, who was a child in the 1920's-1930's, during the time of the Great Depression. This friend would always support the Salvation Army because he told us how as a child he would stand in the soup line when they were destitute and his only food came from the Salvation Army: they absolutely saved his life. I, in turn, since hearing that story during my childhood, have never forgotten them for their generosity during our country's great need, and in particular to my father's friend and his family. My father's friend, by the way, was an Irish Catholic (even an altar boy) and in those days no one asked for "special interest group" identification when the way of Jesus Christ was walked by those who serve him by serving their neighbors. Further, in a time when there was scandal around many charities at disasters, such as Hurricane Katrina, the Salvation Army, so far as I can tell, has maintained exemplary morals and ethics, and responsibility for the charitable treasure that is placed in their hands.
Media reports that donations to the Salvation Army is also at a low, due to the economic crisis. Those who can still donate, do not forget them. They are one of the ones that will see people through such times.
www.salvationarmyusa.org
Folks, in this time of economic crisis, never forget what a debt the USA owes to the Salvation Army. They are one of my favorite organizations and I can tell you this personal story of why.
My father had a good friend who was a co-worker, who was a child in the 1920's-1930's, during the time of the Great Depression. This friend would always support the Salvation Army because he told us how as a child he would stand in the soup line when they were destitute and his only food came from the Salvation Army: they absolutely saved his life. I, in turn, since hearing that story during my childhood, have never forgotten them for their generosity during our country's great need, and in particular to my father's friend and his family. My father's friend, by the way, was an Irish Catholic (even an altar boy) and in those days no one asked for "special interest group" identification when the way of Jesus Christ was walked by those who serve him by serving their neighbors. Further, in a time when there was scandal around many charities at disasters, such as Hurricane Katrina, the Salvation Army, so far as I can tell, has maintained exemplary morals and ethics, and responsibility for the charitable treasure that is placed in their hands.
Media reports that donations to the Salvation Army is also at a low, due to the economic crisis. Those who can still donate, do not forget them. They are one of the ones that will see people through such times.
www.salvationarmyusa.org
Another charity from my Christmas idea list
I have just donated $50 to an organization that I've supported with great pride for many years, Project Hope. Read this history to understand true American generosity and use of a Navy ship that is genuinely spiritual. So now I can add another charity reminder box under my tree.
www.projecthope.org
snip
Serving as a medical officer aboard a destroyer during World War II, Dr. William B. Walsh, M.D. was moved by the poor health conditions he saw in the South Pacific - particularly by the affliction and death of young children who could have been easily saved with the application of simple medical know-how. He envisioned a floating medical center that would bring health education and improved care to communities around the world.
In 1958, Dr. Walsh persuaded President Eisenhower to donate a U.S. Navy hospital ship, the U.S.S. Consolation. With $150, a dream, and the support of corporations and individuals, the ship was transformed into the S.S. HOPE, and the organization known as Project HOPE was born.
Over the next two years, the S.S. HOPE was refitted and equipped for its new role as a peace-time hospital ship. The call was put out for American doctors, nurses, and technologists to share their skills and knowledge with the people of developing nations - teaching while healing. For every American on board, there would be a counterpart to be trained.
Read more on their web site about their remarkable and generous medical contribution throughout the world.
I urge support for this very worthy organization; health care providers at their best.
www.projecthope.org
snip
Serving as a medical officer aboard a destroyer during World War II, Dr. William B. Walsh, M.D. was moved by the poor health conditions he saw in the South Pacific - particularly by the affliction and death of young children who could have been easily saved with the application of simple medical know-how. He envisioned a floating medical center that would bring health education and improved care to communities around the world.
In 1958, Dr. Walsh persuaded President Eisenhower to donate a U.S. Navy hospital ship, the U.S.S. Consolation. With $150, a dream, and the support of corporations and individuals, the ship was transformed into the S.S. HOPE, and the organization known as Project HOPE was born.
Over the next two years, the S.S. HOPE was refitted and equipped for its new role as a peace-time hospital ship. The call was put out for American doctors, nurses, and technologists to share their skills and knowledge with the people of developing nations - teaching while healing. For every American on board, there would be a counterpart to be trained.
Read more on their web site about their remarkable and generous medical contribution throughout the world.
I urge support for this very worthy organization; health care providers at their best.
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
Another Christmas idea follow-up
I have just made a $100 donation to SOAR! (Support Our Aging Religious). I am now working on decorative present box for under the tree using, appropriately, turquoise wrapping paper with Renaissance angels and "PEACE" in golden calligraphy.
We must think about two groups of people, especially during the holidays, the impoverished elderly and the retired religious who have dedicated their lives in service to God, the faithful and in selfless charitable service. Despite what many think that the Catholic Church is "rich," remember that our religious take vows of poverty which they maintain until their death. This is something that, honestly, non-Catholic Christians take into account, as worldly they must be, when they consider conversion to Catholicism. Their hearts may say "yes" but their wallets and family needs may say "no." So yes, the Catholic Church has an office of the aging that supports our retired religious, but we all know that basic needs are an ever increasing spiral, just as vocations have declined. Our religious retire to being cared for by other religious, which is why declined vocations are a double whammy for these elderly religious.
Here is information from their web site.
http://www.soar-usa.org/
SOAR! History made Possible by Concerned Lay People
Grim Economic Realities
The economic crisis facing elderly religious in the United States today, begun in the 1960s, is a result of the following realities:
the dramatic rise in the median age of religious due to a precipitous drop in younger members (the median age for religious in 2008 is 69.8 for women and 64.7 for men);
insufficient funds to care for elder members (many religious received modest stipends or no compensation and there were no provisions for retirement); and
the exponential rise in the cost of health care.
snip
The Economic Predicament
Most people are under the impression that the Catholic Church takes care of all those who sign up for religious life. Others believe that aging religious qualify for the same Social Security and disability benefits as everyone else. It is a distressing reality for many congregations that the average Social Security benefit for religious women and men is approximately one-third of that paid to the average U.S. beneficiary. As of December 31, 2006, the annual Social Security for religious averaged $4,290.08 while that of a U.S. beneficiary was $12,024.00.
Today, more than 37,870 religious men and women who taught in Catholic schools or worked at Catholic hospitals or charities have reached the age of 70 and require eldercare. More than 5,000 of these women and men require skilled nursing care. While costs for care in a skilled facility in the U.S. average more that $65,000 annually, religious congregations have kept their average cost of care to $49,850.
The gap has widened between assets available for retirement, the cost of living, and health care for elderly women and men religious from $2 billion in 1986 to $7.5 billion today. Based on 2006 data from the NRRO, the projected shortfall between funds needed and funds available is $7.5 billion. Combined Social Security benefits for all retired religious is projected to be $184 million per year in 2023, but the cost of care will total more than $1.6 billion annually.
Whatever your faith, please do not forget both the secular and religious elderly, those who are impoverished and often without family or any means of income.
We must think about two groups of people, especially during the holidays, the impoverished elderly and the retired religious who have dedicated their lives in service to God, the faithful and in selfless charitable service. Despite what many think that the Catholic Church is "rich," remember that our religious take vows of poverty which they maintain until their death. This is something that, honestly, non-Catholic Christians take into account, as worldly they must be, when they consider conversion to Catholicism. Their hearts may say "yes" but their wallets and family needs may say "no." So yes, the Catholic Church has an office of the aging that supports our retired religious, but we all know that basic needs are an ever increasing spiral, just as vocations have declined. Our religious retire to being cared for by other religious, which is why declined vocations are a double whammy for these elderly religious.
Here is information from their web site.
http://www.soar-usa.org/
SOAR! History made Possible by Concerned Lay People
Grim Economic Realities
The economic crisis facing elderly religious in the United States today, begun in the 1960s, is a result of the following realities:
the dramatic rise in the median age of religious due to a precipitous drop in younger members (the median age for religious in 2008 is 69.8 for women and 64.7 for men);
insufficient funds to care for elder members (many religious received modest stipends or no compensation and there were no provisions for retirement); and
the exponential rise in the cost of health care.
snip
The Economic Predicament
Most people are under the impression that the Catholic Church takes care of all those who sign up for religious life. Others believe that aging religious qualify for the same Social Security and disability benefits as everyone else. It is a distressing reality for many congregations that the average Social Security benefit for religious women and men is approximately one-third of that paid to the average U.S. beneficiary. As of December 31, 2006, the annual Social Security for religious averaged $4,290.08 while that of a U.S. beneficiary was $12,024.00.
Today, more than 37,870 religious men and women who taught in Catholic schools or worked at Catholic hospitals or charities have reached the age of 70 and require eldercare. More than 5,000 of these women and men require skilled nursing care. While costs for care in a skilled facility in the U.S. average more that $65,000 annually, religious congregations have kept their average cost of care to $49,850.
The gap has widened between assets available for retirement, the cost of living, and health care for elderly women and men religious from $2 billion in 1986 to $7.5 billion today. Based on 2006 data from the NRRO, the projected shortfall between funds needed and funds available is $7.5 billion. Combined Social Security benefits for all retired religious is projected to be $184 million per year in 2023, but the cost of care will total more than $1.6 billion annually.
Whatever your faith, please do not forget both the secular and religious elderly, those who are impoverished and often without family or any means of income.
More Christmas idea follow-up
It's hard to believe that Christmas is just over a week away, so I'm pushing forward with getting my charitable giving "presents" wrapped under the tree, and also making the donations that they represent.
I've just donated $50 to the United Negro College Fund. This was one of the first charities that I donated to, back in the 1980's when I was earning a good paycheck. It is one of the greatest causes that you can find, and donations made now can help these students already with their second semesters. Historically black colleges are one of our national treasures, in my opinion, as they deliver high quality education in personal "small town settings" (even when in a city) that many have come to realize is a positive and proactive educational environment. So I now have under the tree the reminder of my intention to make an annual Christmas donation, a maroon color holly decorated wrapped present decorated with an angel of color holding a dove, and will record this donation on the Santa Claus tag.
Read this description from their web site:
There are 105 historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs) across the nation. In 1965, in Title III of the Higher Education Act of 1965, Congress officially defined an HBCU as, an institution whose principal missions were, and are the education of black Americans, was accredited, and was established before 1964. The first HBCU, Cheney University in Pennsylvania was founded in 1837. All HBCUs play a critical role in the American higher education system. For most of America’s history, African Americans who received a college education could only get it from an HBCU. Today, HBCUs remain one of the surest ways for an African American, or student of any race, to receive a high quality education.
While the 105 HBCUs represent just 3 percent of the nation’s institutions of higher learning, they graduate nearly one-quarter of African Americans who earn undergraduate degrees. HBCUs, because of their unique sensibility to the special needs of young African American minds, remain the institutions that demonstrate the most effective ability to graduate African American students who are poised to be competitive in the corporate, research, academic, governmental and military arenas.
UNCF supports minority students at many schools that are not HBCUs. However, UNCF directly supports 39 private HBCUs.
http://www.uncf.org/
I've just donated $50 to the United Negro College Fund. This was one of the first charities that I donated to, back in the 1980's when I was earning a good paycheck. It is one of the greatest causes that you can find, and donations made now can help these students already with their second semesters. Historically black colleges are one of our national treasures, in my opinion, as they deliver high quality education in personal "small town settings" (even when in a city) that many have come to realize is a positive and proactive educational environment. So I now have under the tree the reminder of my intention to make an annual Christmas donation, a maroon color holly decorated wrapped present decorated with an angel of color holding a dove, and will record this donation on the Santa Claus tag.
Read this description from their web site:
There are 105 historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs) across the nation. In 1965, in Title III of the Higher Education Act of 1965, Congress officially defined an HBCU as, an institution whose principal missions were, and are the education of black Americans, was accredited, and was established before 1964. The first HBCU, Cheney University in Pennsylvania was founded in 1837. All HBCUs play a critical role in the American higher education system. For most of America’s history, African Americans who received a college education could only get it from an HBCU. Today, HBCUs remain one of the surest ways for an African American, or student of any race, to receive a high quality education.
While the 105 HBCUs represent just 3 percent of the nation’s institutions of higher learning, they graduate nearly one-quarter of African Americans who earn undergraduate degrees. HBCUs, because of their unique sensibility to the special needs of young African American minds, remain the institutions that demonstrate the most effective ability to graduate African American students who are poised to be competitive in the corporate, research, academic, governmental and military arenas.
UNCF supports minority students at many schools that are not HBCUs. However, UNCF directly supports 39 private HBCUs.
http://www.uncf.org/
Follow-up to spiritually meaningful Christmas idea
Well, today I wrapped and made payments for two of the charity "under the Christmas tree" presents, as I described in my first post about this idea.
I drove to the local wildlife refuge; there is a bird sanctuary in this town that is very important for the preservation of a species of beautiful crane. I put $20 in the cash donation jar and I bought just over $30 of merchandise from their gift shop. When I returned to the apartment I made a box for under the tree, decorated with black, white, silver and blue "bird" motif. I put on a Santa Claus tag and wrote on it the above donation information. Thus I will have this for easy reference next year, and to have a fond memory. This is my first donation to that particular wildlife refuge.
Local conservation efforts are very important, and they struggle to make ends meet, like all charities. Thus, if you can, I suggest that you select your nearest zoo, botanical garden, bird or wildlife sanctuary or national conservation area or wildlife refuge and put that on your regular Christmas or Hanukkah donation list. All conservation is ultimately local; if you cannot protect your local flora and fauna the overall situation of the world surely follows. Do not forget that much valuable work goes on in zoos and botanical gardens.
I then made a box for a Catholic school for impoverished Native American children. This is a charity that I have given to, on and off for over twenty years. During their fund raising they send free items, such as calendars, note paper, and so forth, and so I responded to their mail fund raising appeal, but I used their Internet site to make my $25 donation. I then used the little box that they had sent previous year's Christmas cards in, wrapping it with the gift wrap that was also in that set (angels) and also a photo from their appeal of one of the priests posing with students and their art work. I added my Santa Claus tag and recorded the donation amount on the back.
Catholic schools are unsung heroes, especially in the Dakotas where the poverty and despair among Native Americans is very bleak. Again, do consider contributing to a school in your faith, or otherwise, that is located in an area where they are providing residential education to impoverished and under served children. If you do not know of one, do consider another of my favorites (recently visited by First Lady Laura Bush) Boys and Girls Town.
So, I have two boxes wrapped and paid for under the tree with ????? more to go!?
I hope that you have found this idea of mine inspiring in your own family and among friends and colleagues.
I drove to the local wildlife refuge; there is a bird sanctuary in this town that is very important for the preservation of a species of beautiful crane. I put $20 in the cash donation jar and I bought just over $30 of merchandise from their gift shop. When I returned to the apartment I made a box for under the tree, decorated with black, white, silver and blue "bird" motif. I put on a Santa Claus tag and wrote on it the above donation information. Thus I will have this for easy reference next year, and to have a fond memory. This is my first donation to that particular wildlife refuge.
Local conservation efforts are very important, and they struggle to make ends meet, like all charities. Thus, if you can, I suggest that you select your nearest zoo, botanical garden, bird or wildlife sanctuary or national conservation area or wildlife refuge and put that on your regular Christmas or Hanukkah donation list. All conservation is ultimately local; if you cannot protect your local flora and fauna the overall situation of the world surely follows. Do not forget that much valuable work goes on in zoos and botanical gardens.
I then made a box for a Catholic school for impoverished Native American children. This is a charity that I have given to, on and off for over twenty years. During their fund raising they send free items, such as calendars, note paper, and so forth, and so I responded to their mail fund raising appeal, but I used their Internet site to make my $25 donation. I then used the little box that they had sent previous year's Christmas cards in, wrapping it with the gift wrap that was also in that set (angels) and also a photo from their appeal of one of the priests posing with students and their art work. I added my Santa Claus tag and recorded the donation amount on the back.
Catholic schools are unsung heroes, especially in the Dakotas where the poverty and despair among Native Americans is very bleak. Again, do consider contributing to a school in your faith, or otherwise, that is located in an area where they are providing residential education to impoverished and under served children. If you do not know of one, do consider another of my favorites (recently visited by First Lady Laura Bush) Boys and Girls Town.
So, I have two boxes wrapped and paid for under the tree with ????? more to go!?
I hope that you have found this idea of mine inspiring in your own family and among friends and colleagues.
Monday, December 15, 2008
One spiritually meaningful idea for Christmas
Many ask about how they can celebrate Christmas with both secular and more spiritual joy and meaningfulness. Here is an idea that I’ve just developed, and will do myself.
If you have a Christmas tree (or a Hanukkah bush, as I know many families with children will create), or a place where you put the presents that the family will receive, here is what I suggest that you add.
Decide on the several charities that you already or want to steadily donate money to each year. Many people give cash donations to charities around Christmas, before the end of year, both for charitable reasons of the season, and also so that the gifts are included as deductions in the closing year’s taxes. So you probably already have a list or, alternatively, you tend to reply to the more recent appeals that are mailed to you. Identify a core list that you intend to donate at least a small amount to each year at this time. I recently blogged about the Catholic charity Caritas, so let’s use that as an example; add to it the Salvation Army and let’s say a pet charity like the ASPCA.
Now, select an empty box for each charity, and place inside the box a slip of paper with the name of the charity written on it. Wrap the box and decorate it with bows and so forth, just as you would any other gift with one exception: you will be looking at that box year after year under your tree, so decorate it especially nicely. Then place a tag on the box, labeling the recipient as being the charity and the dollar amount that you intend at the very least amount to donate. Thus, one box would be tagged: “To Caritas, $25” for example. Every year you place this under your tree as a reminder to make the donation, but also to recognize that when you give alms or provide charity you are also giving a gift to yourself.
This will be especially meaningful and fun for families with children. This is one way that very young children can learn that at Christmas one gives a gift to people who are poor, and who do not have a tree or gifts of their own. Little children can learn to place the charity box presents under the tree, and watch then when mom or dad write the check or make the online donation. Children can learn to put an “X” on the tag and the written year when the gift has been made, and understand that this “gift” is on its way to the poor and other needy with good causes.
As children get older they may help to make the donation. As they receive an allowance or earn money through chores or part time jobs when they are of age, they can add their own “causes,” make their own boxes and tags and commitments under the tree.
This is a fun, attractive, easy to do and enduring way to make the Christmas and Hanukkah holidays more spiritually meaningful for the entire family (and for those who celebrate the holidays alone, what a nice way to have something that is also of good cheer for you under the tree). Decorating the box is fun for everyone too because, as I said, it is an enduring decoration, one that is not unwrapped and discarded year after year, but instead, viewed and enjoyed each year, with markings on the tags added that the donations were made year after year. And ha, we know there will always be some children who unwrap those presents and that's cool... that is why the slip of paper with the name of the charity is inside, just in case they do, so they learn that gifts take place even if there is an "empty box," that it is never truly empty if alms or charity have been given. You may even let your kids unwrap the charity boxes and then they can have the choice of new decoration for wrapping it for next year's gift box!
I hope that you like this suggestion!
If you have a Christmas tree (or a Hanukkah bush, as I know many families with children will create), or a place where you put the presents that the family will receive, here is what I suggest that you add.
Decide on the several charities that you already or want to steadily donate money to each year. Many people give cash donations to charities around Christmas, before the end of year, both for charitable reasons of the season, and also so that the gifts are included as deductions in the closing year’s taxes. So you probably already have a list or, alternatively, you tend to reply to the more recent appeals that are mailed to you. Identify a core list that you intend to donate at least a small amount to each year at this time. I recently blogged about the Catholic charity Caritas, so let’s use that as an example; add to it the Salvation Army and let’s say a pet charity like the ASPCA.
Now, select an empty box for each charity, and place inside the box a slip of paper with the name of the charity written on it. Wrap the box and decorate it with bows and so forth, just as you would any other gift with one exception: you will be looking at that box year after year under your tree, so decorate it especially nicely. Then place a tag on the box, labeling the recipient as being the charity and the dollar amount that you intend at the very least amount to donate. Thus, one box would be tagged: “To Caritas, $25” for example. Every year you place this under your tree as a reminder to make the donation, but also to recognize that when you give alms or provide charity you are also giving a gift to yourself.
This will be especially meaningful and fun for families with children. This is one way that very young children can learn that at Christmas one gives a gift to people who are poor, and who do not have a tree or gifts of their own. Little children can learn to place the charity box presents under the tree, and watch then when mom or dad write the check or make the online donation. Children can learn to put an “X” on the tag and the written year when the gift has been made, and understand that this “gift” is on its way to the poor and other needy with good causes.
As children get older they may help to make the donation. As they receive an allowance or earn money through chores or part time jobs when they are of age, they can add their own “causes,” make their own boxes and tags and commitments under the tree.
This is a fun, attractive, easy to do and enduring way to make the Christmas and Hanukkah holidays more spiritually meaningful for the entire family (and for those who celebrate the holidays alone, what a nice way to have something that is also of good cheer for you under the tree). Decorating the box is fun for everyone too because, as I said, it is an enduring decoration, one that is not unwrapped and discarded year after year, but instead, viewed and enjoyed each year, with markings on the tags added that the donations were made year after year. And ha, we know there will always be some children who unwrap those presents and that's cool... that is why the slip of paper with the name of the charity is inside, just in case they do, so they learn that gifts take place even if there is an "empty box," that it is never truly empty if alms or charity have been given. You may even let your kids unwrap the charity boxes and then they can have the choice of new decoration for wrapping it for next year's gift box!
I hope that you like this suggestion!
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
3/3 "Spread the wealth" and what the Bible says
The story of Jesus and the disciples utilizing the charity of the excess grain being kept in the field for use of the poor and the traveler is told three times in the Gospel.
Matthew 12:1-8. At that time Jesus went through the standing grain on the Sabbath; and his disciples being hungry began to pluck ears of grain and to eat. But the Pharisees, when they saw it, said to him, “Thy disciples are doing what is not lawful for them to do on the Sabbath.” But he said to them, “Have you not read what David did when he and those who with him were hungry? How he entered the house of God, and ate the loaves of proposition which neither he nor those with him could lawfully eat, but only the priests? Or have you not read in the Law, that on the Sabbath days the priests in the temple break the Sabbath and are guiltless? But I tell you that one greater than the temple is here. But if you knew what this means, ‘I desire mercy, and not sacrifice,’ you would never have condemned the innocent; for the Son of Man Is Lord even of the Sabbath.”
Jesus and the disciples were collecting and eating grain from the “pantry” that God mandates which is that part of the ongoing harvest of the fields must be kept available for those who were poor or were traveling. And notice that the Pharisees do not criticize Jesus and the disciples for that. However, the Pharisees and many of the devout Jews of that time had come to warp God’s instructions. In this example, the Pharisees had decided that the poor could not collect their food on the Sabbath since the act of picking up food was considered “work” and that is forbidden on the Sabbath. So the rich could eat food they had already harvested but the poor were expected not to “violate the Sabbath” by bending hand to stalk of grain and picking the food up. This is one of the many abuses that Jesus had come to chastise and correct. And so he rebukes the Pharisees pointing out the many scriptural examples where obviously something that would be considered “work” must be done in dire need and those who are sanctified. So this scripture is cited mostly because of Jesus’ rebuke of the Pharisees, but if you know your Bible you also know what I’m pointing out to you, that this is how Jesus and the disciples traveled and gleaned their food. They weren’t like Buddhist monks shuffling along with bowls begging under vows of poverty, though many modern liberals try to paint Jesus that way. Far from it, Jesus and the disciples availed themselves of these continuing food sources that God had mandated be available in every town, in every field, to be available to the poor, the widow, the orphan, travelers and foreigners passing through. (Another example is when Jesus curses the fig tree that is not available with fruit when he is in need of it. People think of that as ‘bad temper’ if they do not realize that it is instead a statement that all is subject to the Son of Man, and that Jesus’ action is to underscore that there is to be an expectation of food available as prescribed by God).
Mark 2: 23-28. And it came to pass again as he was going through the standing grin on the Sabbath, that his disciples began, as they went along, to plunk the ears of grain. But the Pharisees said to him, “Behold, why are they doing what is not lawful on the Sabbath?” And he said to them, “Have you never read what David did when he and those who were with him were in need and hungry? How he entered the house of God, when Abiathar was high priest, and ate the loaves of proposition, which he could not lawfully eat, but only the priests? And how he gave them to those who were with him? And he said to them, “The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath. Therefore the Son of Man Is Lord even of the Sabbath.”
While Matthew and Mark recall the words slightly differently, Jesus makes the same important point. God created rules for the benefit of humans, in his mercy, and not to enslave humans to rules. Thus it is obviously that God created the rule that poor humans could glean food they need from the fields for their benefit since the poor are high in the priority of God. Likewise the Sabbath is created so that all can rest, for their benefit, from their labors, not so that they have “another rule to follow.” Therefore it is doubly insulting to the great mercy of God that the Pharisees of the time had viewed both signs of mercy by God as a way to beat the poor down and call them in violation of the Sabbath because they fed their hungry stomachs on that day. That is quite an example of those who are supposed to know better to be preaching the opposite of what God intended. This is why Jesus said that the Sabbath was made for man (so he can rest) and not man for the Sabbath, just to be having a rule to follow. And likewise Jesus is saying the same thing in Matthew when he cites God in scripture to the Pharisees “I desire mercy and not sacrifice.” Providing food in the field for the poor is another mercy, not imposing another special ‘sacrifice’ on them because Pharisees try to keep them from “working” to gather their food.
Luke 6: 1-5. Now it came to pass on the second first Sabbath, that he was going through standing grain, and his disciples were plucking and eating the ears of grain, rubbing them with their hands. But some of the Pharisees said to them, “Why are you doing what is not lawful on the Sabbath?” And Jesus answered and said to them, “Have you not, then, read what David did when he and those with him were hungry? How he entered the house of God, and took, ate, and gave to those who were with him, the loaves of proposition, which no one may lawfully eat except the priests?” And he said to them, “The Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath.”
I repeated all three of the scriptural references to this event of the plucking grain on the Sabbath in order to point out some additional information. It’s the same event but obviously described in separate writings from Apostles and disciples working separately so slightly different things are emphasized, which adds to understanding, not detracts. Luke, a Greek, mentions exactly how the disciples were gathering the grain, “rubbing them with their hands.” See, Luke is writing for those who are not necessarily Jewish and would not understand what “work” Jesus and the disciples are accused of doing on the Sabbath. A Jewish reader would understand, but a Gentile would not. So Luke adds the explanatory description that when one plucks a stalk or ear of corn (grain), one has to rub the stalk in the palms of one’s hands in order to loosen the grains from the stalk and make them free to eat. It is this rubbing of the hands together that the Pharisees accused of being “work.” I’ve done this, by the way, walking along some wheat fields in Germany back in the 1960’s, and the grains are kind of sticky and you do have to rub in order to get them loose from the stalk to eat.
So it simply is outrageous and not true when liberals try to portray Biblical charity and almsgiving as anything other than that described in the Bible per God’s direct word, and also the example that Jesus himself set of utilizing that very system that God had mandated.
Another problem is that in the New Testament the word “charity” does not mean specifically alms giving and giving or lending to the poor. Charity means “kindness,” including affectionate and benevolent thoughts. This is another thing that drives me crazy. So rather than reading what I have pointed out about what God has said about genuine charity, as in alms giving and lending, and how exactly to do it, those who try to pop culture Jesus erroneously use scripture about “charity” to justify whatever “good cause” and economic or donation structure they are trying to advocate. It’s totally infuriating. When Jesus preaches about charity, whether he uses that word or not, Jesus is referring to benevolence and kindness, not rewriting the rules of almsgiving and lending that God has laid out in the Law.
Further, one cannot argue that those rules were part of the “Old Covenant” and “only apply to the Jews.” No, you cannot. Why? Because as I cited God said in Deuteronomy 6:15 this line “If you but heed the voice of the Lord, your God, and carefully observe all these commandments which I enjoin on you today, you will lend to many nations, and borrow from none.” If God is referring only to the Jews, as a law they keep only among themselves, who are the “many nations?” God is “laying down the law” for all who are believers in him, and so that obviously applies to the Jews, Christians and Muslims. That’s another peeve of mine. Those who cherry pick Bible readings by their agenda like to arbitrarily assign what they don’t want to do as being “Jewish and part of the Old Covenant, and don’t need to do none of that, no sirree” while the stuff they want to do or that they want to apply to someone else (as in their crazy “interpretations” of revelatory material), don’t hesitate to decide what countries or people they wish to slap it onto. So one minute they will say part of the Bible applies only to the Old Covenant Jews, while the next line they claim is a prophecy about “Russia” or whatever. You must believe exactly what God said, and that did not “go away,” anymore than the Ten Commandments “went away” when Jesus arrived, which they clearly did not. In fact, nothing really “went away” from the Old Testament, there were simply the appropriate updates, to use a secular word, as per Jesus and the Apostles. For example, yes, circumcision was no longer required but something took its place, and that is baptism. So that is a primary example of where the spirit of all that was stated by God in the Old Covenant is retained, while the specifics of the New Covenant brought by the Savior fulfills not only the promise of the Messiah but also the behavior that is incumbent upon all true believers.
Think about it. It’s not like that when St. Paul and St. Peter and the other disciples started moving around and preaching in both synagogues and to the Gentiles that they stopped gleaning grain from the fields to sustain them “because the Old Covenant law is no longer valid.” I mean, duh. Their families would have maintained that form of charity and they also would have benefited from it; that would not have changed after Jesus. But because they were going into Gentile areas to preach, this is why they developed different communal and alms asking practices, since they were traveling outside of areas where these Old Testament “pantries” existed. It was not a new chapter in self abasing poverty, as certain ignorant nut jobs like to push. It was the reality of not only a spiritual mindset of “poverty” so that the Lord God can fill that space, but also a literal reality of traveling in areas that never received the original word of God and thus did not have the system of the fields, of the alms, of the lending admonishments, of the Jewish schedule for the forgiveness of debts and provision of free use of the fields, etc. When the disciples encountered such areas of Jewish settlement, obviously they partook of the system that God had established in the Old Covenant.
Pretty much the last mention of almsgiving (not the more generic charity of kindness of thought and deed) is Luke 14: 13-14 where Jesus said “But when thou givest a feast, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind; and blessed shalt thou be, because they have nothing to repay thee with; for thou shalt be repaid at the resurrection of the just.” Again, this is Jesus being specific and connecting via parable exactly what God has already put forth. Jesus is reinforcing how God mandates sharing of the actual goods at the actual time they are being had by the prosperous, not later and not in token “donations.” Genuine charity as in the sense of almsgiving and tending to the poor is continually taught and mandated by God as being enfranchising the poor in normal life, day by day, on special occasions, and when they experience set backs, just as the scripture mandates that I cited from Exodus, Deuteronomy, Leviticus, and Esdras. In fact, remember how Esdras taught the Law that during festival the poor should have the same fat meat and sweet wine as those who have? This is exactly what Jesus says here, with one exception. Jesus explains that now the “crippled, lame and blind” are to be also invited. It’s not like God “left them out” back in Exodus, but in the times of Jesus the erroneous teaching had arisen among the Pharisees and others that the sick and maimed were that way because of sin. So rather than erasing and replacing what is taught in the Old Testament, such as almsgiving and lending, Jesus explains over and over that this is to continue and to refute those who try to exclude in the name of God. Remember that the Pharisees tried to exclude Jesus and the disciples from eating what they gleaned on the Sabbath. Well, the Pharisees and others like them tried to exclude the sick and maimed also from pretty much everything, writing them off as “sinners.” This is of course never what God said or meant (God, in facts, warns in the Law that no one should put stumbling blocks before the blind, which means that people should not allow those who are blind to be hindered in their well being and survival because of their blindness).
Jesus repeated, rather than replaced, what God has mandated and taught, over and over and over again.
Luke 20: 45-47. And in the hearing of all the people he said to his disciples, “Beware of the Scribes, who like to walk about in long robes, and love greetings in the market place, and front seats in the synagogues and first places at suppers; who devour the houses of the widows, making pretense of long prayers. These shall receive a heavier sentence.”
Interesting, the mention of the “market place,” isn’t it? It all comes back to how far astray both the economic structure and its moral unpinning has become, by both the right (“the lords of the market place”) and the left (“first places at the celebrity fund raisers”). Think about it.
I hope that you find this helpful. You better, my friends, you better.
Matthew 12:1-8. At that time Jesus went through the standing grain on the Sabbath; and his disciples being hungry began to pluck ears of grain and to eat. But the Pharisees, when they saw it, said to him, “Thy disciples are doing what is not lawful for them to do on the Sabbath.” But he said to them, “Have you not read what David did when he and those who with him were hungry? How he entered the house of God, and ate the loaves of proposition which neither he nor those with him could lawfully eat, but only the priests? Or have you not read in the Law, that on the Sabbath days the priests in the temple break the Sabbath and are guiltless? But I tell you that one greater than the temple is here. But if you knew what this means, ‘I desire mercy, and not sacrifice,’ you would never have condemned the innocent; for the Son of Man Is Lord even of the Sabbath.”
Jesus and the disciples were collecting and eating grain from the “pantry” that God mandates which is that part of the ongoing harvest of the fields must be kept available for those who were poor or were traveling. And notice that the Pharisees do not criticize Jesus and the disciples for that. However, the Pharisees and many of the devout Jews of that time had come to warp God’s instructions. In this example, the Pharisees had decided that the poor could not collect their food on the Sabbath since the act of picking up food was considered “work” and that is forbidden on the Sabbath. So the rich could eat food they had already harvested but the poor were expected not to “violate the Sabbath” by bending hand to stalk of grain and picking the food up. This is one of the many abuses that Jesus had come to chastise and correct. And so he rebukes the Pharisees pointing out the many scriptural examples where obviously something that would be considered “work” must be done in dire need and those who are sanctified. So this scripture is cited mostly because of Jesus’ rebuke of the Pharisees, but if you know your Bible you also know what I’m pointing out to you, that this is how Jesus and the disciples traveled and gleaned their food. They weren’t like Buddhist monks shuffling along with bowls begging under vows of poverty, though many modern liberals try to paint Jesus that way. Far from it, Jesus and the disciples availed themselves of these continuing food sources that God had mandated be available in every town, in every field, to be available to the poor, the widow, the orphan, travelers and foreigners passing through. (Another example is when Jesus curses the fig tree that is not available with fruit when he is in need of it. People think of that as ‘bad temper’ if they do not realize that it is instead a statement that all is subject to the Son of Man, and that Jesus’ action is to underscore that there is to be an expectation of food available as prescribed by God).
Mark 2: 23-28. And it came to pass again as he was going through the standing grin on the Sabbath, that his disciples began, as they went along, to plunk the ears of grain. But the Pharisees said to him, “Behold, why are they doing what is not lawful on the Sabbath?” And he said to them, “Have you never read what David did when he and those who were with him were in need and hungry? How he entered the house of God, when Abiathar was high priest, and ate the loaves of proposition, which he could not lawfully eat, but only the priests? And how he gave them to those who were with him? And he said to them, “The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath. Therefore the Son of Man Is Lord even of the Sabbath.”
While Matthew and Mark recall the words slightly differently, Jesus makes the same important point. God created rules for the benefit of humans, in his mercy, and not to enslave humans to rules. Thus it is obviously that God created the rule that poor humans could glean food they need from the fields for their benefit since the poor are high in the priority of God. Likewise the Sabbath is created so that all can rest, for their benefit, from their labors, not so that they have “another rule to follow.” Therefore it is doubly insulting to the great mercy of God that the Pharisees of the time had viewed both signs of mercy by God as a way to beat the poor down and call them in violation of the Sabbath because they fed their hungry stomachs on that day. That is quite an example of those who are supposed to know better to be preaching the opposite of what God intended. This is why Jesus said that the Sabbath was made for man (so he can rest) and not man for the Sabbath, just to be having a rule to follow. And likewise Jesus is saying the same thing in Matthew when he cites God in scripture to the Pharisees “I desire mercy and not sacrifice.” Providing food in the field for the poor is another mercy, not imposing another special ‘sacrifice’ on them because Pharisees try to keep them from “working” to gather their food.
Luke 6: 1-5. Now it came to pass on the second first Sabbath, that he was going through standing grain, and his disciples were plucking and eating the ears of grain, rubbing them with their hands. But some of the Pharisees said to them, “Why are you doing what is not lawful on the Sabbath?” And Jesus answered and said to them, “Have you not, then, read what David did when he and those with him were hungry? How he entered the house of God, and took, ate, and gave to those who were with him, the loaves of proposition, which no one may lawfully eat except the priests?” And he said to them, “The Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath.”
I repeated all three of the scriptural references to this event of the plucking grain on the Sabbath in order to point out some additional information. It’s the same event but obviously described in separate writings from Apostles and disciples working separately so slightly different things are emphasized, which adds to understanding, not detracts. Luke, a Greek, mentions exactly how the disciples were gathering the grain, “rubbing them with their hands.” See, Luke is writing for those who are not necessarily Jewish and would not understand what “work” Jesus and the disciples are accused of doing on the Sabbath. A Jewish reader would understand, but a Gentile would not. So Luke adds the explanatory description that when one plucks a stalk or ear of corn (grain), one has to rub the stalk in the palms of one’s hands in order to loosen the grains from the stalk and make them free to eat. It is this rubbing of the hands together that the Pharisees accused of being “work.” I’ve done this, by the way, walking along some wheat fields in Germany back in the 1960’s, and the grains are kind of sticky and you do have to rub in order to get them loose from the stalk to eat.
So it simply is outrageous and not true when liberals try to portray Biblical charity and almsgiving as anything other than that described in the Bible per God’s direct word, and also the example that Jesus himself set of utilizing that very system that God had mandated.
Another problem is that in the New Testament the word “charity” does not mean specifically alms giving and giving or lending to the poor. Charity means “kindness,” including affectionate and benevolent thoughts. This is another thing that drives me crazy. So rather than reading what I have pointed out about what God has said about genuine charity, as in alms giving and lending, and how exactly to do it, those who try to pop culture Jesus erroneously use scripture about “charity” to justify whatever “good cause” and economic or donation structure they are trying to advocate. It’s totally infuriating. When Jesus preaches about charity, whether he uses that word or not, Jesus is referring to benevolence and kindness, not rewriting the rules of almsgiving and lending that God has laid out in the Law.
Further, one cannot argue that those rules were part of the “Old Covenant” and “only apply to the Jews.” No, you cannot. Why? Because as I cited God said in Deuteronomy 6:15 this line “If you but heed the voice of the Lord, your God, and carefully observe all these commandments which I enjoin on you today, you will lend to many nations, and borrow from none.” If God is referring only to the Jews, as a law they keep only among themselves, who are the “many nations?” God is “laying down the law” for all who are believers in him, and so that obviously applies to the Jews, Christians and Muslims. That’s another peeve of mine. Those who cherry pick Bible readings by their agenda like to arbitrarily assign what they don’t want to do as being “Jewish and part of the Old Covenant, and don’t need to do none of that, no sirree” while the stuff they want to do or that they want to apply to someone else (as in their crazy “interpretations” of revelatory material), don’t hesitate to decide what countries or people they wish to slap it onto. So one minute they will say part of the Bible applies only to the Old Covenant Jews, while the next line they claim is a prophecy about “Russia” or whatever. You must believe exactly what God said, and that did not “go away,” anymore than the Ten Commandments “went away” when Jesus arrived, which they clearly did not. In fact, nothing really “went away” from the Old Testament, there were simply the appropriate updates, to use a secular word, as per Jesus and the Apostles. For example, yes, circumcision was no longer required but something took its place, and that is baptism. So that is a primary example of where the spirit of all that was stated by God in the Old Covenant is retained, while the specifics of the New Covenant brought by the Savior fulfills not only the promise of the Messiah but also the behavior that is incumbent upon all true believers.
Think about it. It’s not like that when St. Paul and St. Peter and the other disciples started moving around and preaching in both synagogues and to the Gentiles that they stopped gleaning grain from the fields to sustain them “because the Old Covenant law is no longer valid.” I mean, duh. Their families would have maintained that form of charity and they also would have benefited from it; that would not have changed after Jesus. But because they were going into Gentile areas to preach, this is why they developed different communal and alms asking practices, since they were traveling outside of areas where these Old Testament “pantries” existed. It was not a new chapter in self abasing poverty, as certain ignorant nut jobs like to push. It was the reality of not only a spiritual mindset of “poverty” so that the Lord God can fill that space, but also a literal reality of traveling in areas that never received the original word of God and thus did not have the system of the fields, of the alms, of the lending admonishments, of the Jewish schedule for the forgiveness of debts and provision of free use of the fields, etc. When the disciples encountered such areas of Jewish settlement, obviously they partook of the system that God had established in the Old Covenant.
Pretty much the last mention of almsgiving (not the more generic charity of kindness of thought and deed) is Luke 14: 13-14 where Jesus said “But when thou givest a feast, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind; and blessed shalt thou be, because they have nothing to repay thee with; for thou shalt be repaid at the resurrection of the just.” Again, this is Jesus being specific and connecting via parable exactly what God has already put forth. Jesus is reinforcing how God mandates sharing of the actual goods at the actual time they are being had by the prosperous, not later and not in token “donations.” Genuine charity as in the sense of almsgiving and tending to the poor is continually taught and mandated by God as being enfranchising the poor in normal life, day by day, on special occasions, and when they experience set backs, just as the scripture mandates that I cited from Exodus, Deuteronomy, Leviticus, and Esdras. In fact, remember how Esdras taught the Law that during festival the poor should have the same fat meat and sweet wine as those who have? This is exactly what Jesus says here, with one exception. Jesus explains that now the “crippled, lame and blind” are to be also invited. It’s not like God “left them out” back in Exodus, but in the times of Jesus the erroneous teaching had arisen among the Pharisees and others that the sick and maimed were that way because of sin. So rather than erasing and replacing what is taught in the Old Testament, such as almsgiving and lending, Jesus explains over and over that this is to continue and to refute those who try to exclude in the name of God. Remember that the Pharisees tried to exclude Jesus and the disciples from eating what they gleaned on the Sabbath. Well, the Pharisees and others like them tried to exclude the sick and maimed also from pretty much everything, writing them off as “sinners.” This is of course never what God said or meant (God, in facts, warns in the Law that no one should put stumbling blocks before the blind, which means that people should not allow those who are blind to be hindered in their well being and survival because of their blindness).
Jesus repeated, rather than replaced, what God has mandated and taught, over and over and over again.
Luke 20: 45-47. And in the hearing of all the people he said to his disciples, “Beware of the Scribes, who like to walk about in long robes, and love greetings in the market place, and front seats in the synagogues and first places at suppers; who devour the houses of the widows, making pretense of long prayers. These shall receive a heavier sentence.”
Interesting, the mention of the “market place,” isn’t it? It all comes back to how far astray both the economic structure and its moral unpinning has become, by both the right (“the lords of the market place”) and the left (“first places at the celebrity fund raisers”). Think about it.
I hope that you find this helpful. You better, my friends, you better.
Saturday, August 9, 2008
Commentary on the 9th of Av
This weekend is a fast day of Judaism, commemorating with mourning the destruction of the First and Second Temples, which took place on this same day, though hundreds of years apart. You can read a good explanation here.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tisha_B%27Av
Notice that there is a definite tone that many Jews kind of wonder what this has to do with them anymore. I've noticed in the years that I've been alive that even in my time there has been a rapid diminishment, even among the wise, of what the relevance of the destruction of the Temples means to the modern Jew. This diluting of understanding is part of the overall problem that all faiths have with flourishing within a society that has increased its separation from God. People no longer understand what they had and what they lost on even its most fundamental basis. So here is a reminder.
The Temples were the place where one "gave back to God" in the form of sacrifice. It used to be that people's entire lives were permeated with the understanding that one went into the Temple to thank God for what they received, and to "give back to God" a portion of what they had, rich or poor. They did it in the form of sacrifice (of animal, grain or oil) and monetary donations to the Temple. Jesus points out to the Apostles "the widow's mite," how even the poor widow gave what she had to God. Prayers were also conducted in the Temple but again, against the constant backdrop of sacrifice to God (for example, the priests who conducted daily incensing with the burning of incense being viewed as sacrifice to God, as indeed it was as precious materials were burned in order to create incense pleasing to God).
So Jews wonder today why they should mourn the destruction of the Temples. They should do so because it is recalling that for two thousand years now there is not the permeation among the pious of the "giving back to God" God's portion of what he has given to them. In many ways this is how Jews and Protestants (and other Christian non denominationals) are very different from Catholics and Muslims. Catholics and Muslims retain sacrifice to God, the Muslims doing so in the Haj and Catholics doing so in the bread and wine of the Holy Eucharist in the daily Mass). Jews and non-Catholic Christians have, in my eyes, a much more "Bible study" and Torah study focus in their relationship with God. They view "giving back to God" as being fulfilled in liberal social agendas. And while that is charitable and truthful reflection of God's love, that is not the same as sacrifice to God. I've explained before that Jesus did not eliminate the need for sacrifice to God; he offered himself once for all, but also as the form of bread and wine, a bloodless sacrifice that one does not need the money changers in the Temple. Sacrifice in the Catholic Mass is reverence to God, giving him "his due" and it is free.
So if I were to counsel Jews, especially those who are more liberal and secularized, why this day should invoke a pathos and a mourning, even in these modern times, it would be to explain that when the Temples were destroyed, Jews lost their places where they could "give back to God a portion of all that he has given to them." That is different from the golden rule and liberal social good works. This is taking a part of what you have and giving it to God in the way he has instructed he wishes to receive it, no more and certainly no less than that. Catholics understood that Jesus transformed sacrifice to God from the Old Covenant to the New Covenant, but he did not declare the elimination of sacrifice. This is what we celebrate in the Mass. Likewise, Muslims have a full understanding that the Haj sacrifice to God is separate from the good deeds of the giving of alms to the poor and the needy.
Now, I am not making a commentary that orthodox Judaism is flawed; far from it. I am explaining that orthodox Jews do have a fuller understanding of what was taken from them when the Temples were destroyed, and thus it is correct to be serious, sober and mournful in commemorating this fast day, if you are Jewish. In a way the recognizing that Jews lost the means by which they "gave back to God" is a sacrifice, a prayerful and respectful sacrifice, when one contemplates this. When the Temples were destroyed, a means that the pious had to please God was taken away from the people. God understands, of course, but it is helpful to remember that this is a sad loss for the people, more than obviously God, who does not in the strictest sense "need" anything from humans. However, people are healthier if they retain a continuing activity of sacrifice to God because it brings them closer to God in understanding his ongoing gifts to you.
Imagine if when the Temples were destroyed if God went, "Hmm, well, they can no longer sacrifice meat and grain to me so why bother letting them have meat or successful grain harvest at all? I mean, if they no longer sacrifice to me, why should I give them anything?" Of course that does not happen because God understands the travails of his people, and all that has happened. God continues to shower prosperity and goodness on humanity, even when they do not sacrifice to him in return what is due to him. That is all the more reason to love and honor God and yes, to fear him, because fear means that you understand what it would be like to lose your precious relationship with him.
So these are the kinds of things I would recommend that you prayerfully contemplate on the 9th of Av.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tisha_B%27Av
Notice that there is a definite tone that many Jews kind of wonder what this has to do with them anymore. I've noticed in the years that I've been alive that even in my time there has been a rapid diminishment, even among the wise, of what the relevance of the destruction of the Temples means to the modern Jew. This diluting of understanding is part of the overall problem that all faiths have with flourishing within a society that has increased its separation from God. People no longer understand what they had and what they lost on even its most fundamental basis. So here is a reminder.
The Temples were the place where one "gave back to God" in the form of sacrifice. It used to be that people's entire lives were permeated with the understanding that one went into the Temple to thank God for what they received, and to "give back to God" a portion of what they had, rich or poor. They did it in the form of sacrifice (of animal, grain or oil) and monetary donations to the Temple. Jesus points out to the Apostles "the widow's mite," how even the poor widow gave what she had to God. Prayers were also conducted in the Temple but again, against the constant backdrop of sacrifice to God (for example, the priests who conducted daily incensing with the burning of incense being viewed as sacrifice to God, as indeed it was as precious materials were burned in order to create incense pleasing to God).
So Jews wonder today why they should mourn the destruction of the Temples. They should do so because it is recalling that for two thousand years now there is not the permeation among the pious of the "giving back to God" God's portion of what he has given to them. In many ways this is how Jews and Protestants (and other Christian non denominationals) are very different from Catholics and Muslims. Catholics and Muslims retain sacrifice to God, the Muslims doing so in the Haj and Catholics doing so in the bread and wine of the Holy Eucharist in the daily Mass). Jews and non-Catholic Christians have, in my eyes, a much more "Bible study" and Torah study focus in their relationship with God. They view "giving back to God" as being fulfilled in liberal social agendas. And while that is charitable and truthful reflection of God's love, that is not the same as sacrifice to God. I've explained before that Jesus did not eliminate the need for sacrifice to God; he offered himself once for all, but also as the form of bread and wine, a bloodless sacrifice that one does not need the money changers in the Temple. Sacrifice in the Catholic Mass is reverence to God, giving him "his due" and it is free.
So if I were to counsel Jews, especially those who are more liberal and secularized, why this day should invoke a pathos and a mourning, even in these modern times, it would be to explain that when the Temples were destroyed, Jews lost their places where they could "give back to God a portion of all that he has given to them." That is different from the golden rule and liberal social good works. This is taking a part of what you have and giving it to God in the way he has instructed he wishes to receive it, no more and certainly no less than that. Catholics understood that Jesus transformed sacrifice to God from the Old Covenant to the New Covenant, but he did not declare the elimination of sacrifice. This is what we celebrate in the Mass. Likewise, Muslims have a full understanding that the Haj sacrifice to God is separate from the good deeds of the giving of alms to the poor and the needy.
Now, I am not making a commentary that orthodox Judaism is flawed; far from it. I am explaining that orthodox Jews do have a fuller understanding of what was taken from them when the Temples were destroyed, and thus it is correct to be serious, sober and mournful in commemorating this fast day, if you are Jewish. In a way the recognizing that Jews lost the means by which they "gave back to God" is a sacrifice, a prayerful and respectful sacrifice, when one contemplates this. When the Temples were destroyed, a means that the pious had to please God was taken away from the people. God understands, of course, but it is helpful to remember that this is a sad loss for the people, more than obviously God, who does not in the strictest sense "need" anything from humans. However, people are healthier if they retain a continuing activity of sacrifice to God because it brings them closer to God in understanding his ongoing gifts to you.
Imagine if when the Temples were destroyed if God went, "Hmm, well, they can no longer sacrifice meat and grain to me so why bother letting them have meat or successful grain harvest at all? I mean, if they no longer sacrifice to me, why should I give them anything?" Of course that does not happen because God understands the travails of his people, and all that has happened. God continues to shower prosperity and goodness on humanity, even when they do not sacrifice to him in return what is due to him. That is all the more reason to love and honor God and yes, to fear him, because fear means that you understand what it would be like to lose your precious relationship with him.
So these are the kinds of things I would recommend that you prayerfully contemplate on the 9th of Av.
Tuesday, July 1, 2008
More about charitable giving / cult delusions
In my previous blog post I explain how a surprising number of people dispense their largess to the little people and call it "charity" according to how they think it will benefit them in their "astrology charts." They don't generally care or are not imaginative enough to think of where the need is truly the greatest, and the most logical. So people with "lots of Leo" will tend to give to "sports and arts" while those with "strong 12Th houses" will tend to "donate" to "hidden places" such as "hospitals and prisons." I wish I was joking but I am not. They tend to choose from a bizarre menu that they feel is "given to them" based on hokum about "karma," what I call "manipulative past lives" (people claim to have them and know what to 'do' about them and worse, abuse others according to their mistaken beliefs). So they honestly do not even think of doing charitable work "around the clock" in areas that are identified through regular normal fact based human kindness and logic.
Here's an example of the difference between me and them. When I first had generous paychecks with money that I could reliably spend on helping others, I decided to do sponsorship of children, like many millions of people do. In these programs you send money on a monthly basis in order to help a specific child stay in school, meet basic school needs, etc. There are many famous programs. I decided to select one that deals exclusively with Native Americans here in the USA. Why? Two reasons. One is that I grew up near a reservation, so to me it's not an exotic far away need but a "local issue." I saw as a child the poverty first hand, since my mother and I would drive to the reservation to buy apples and corn. Charity is best and strongest when you get involved with people and situations that you know something about yourself. The second reason is that there were many scandals during that time about poverty in the USA. The great expose about Appalachia and its hidden, deep poverty was a huge topic during my formation as a future charitable giver. I could not understand giving to international programs without giving even more to solve the poverty situation here in the USA. And so those were the two reasons I researched a number of worthy organizations but quickly chose the one exclusively for Native Americans.
Now, I know, even though no one has ever said this (or anything else honest) to my face that the cultists who stalked me never realized that I selected Native American charity for such a simple reason. They are blinded by their own lenses of stereotyping everything as having hidden motivations. And so my several decades of sponsorship and even more "incriminating" (from their point of view) interest in Indian culture could only mean.... yep, you guessed it, "past lives," "Karma," "the great injustice of the robber baron white man," "where are Injuns in her astrology chart, drool" and all sorts of conclusions that I was "drawn" to the Indians for "spiritual" reasons. Yes, I liked reading about their culture (not so much the history) and also their religious practices. I mean, duh, you know who I am by now. Of course I'd be interested in their religious practices. But that doesn't mean I was going at is as a "questor" who is "trying to find answers" or worse, "endorsing a *said in pretentious tone* P-A-T-H-W-A-Y." Yikes.
And so over the past several decades there have been HORRIBLE cascading events and oppressive decisions made by cultists in control because they were too damn arrogant and stupid to actually ask me, "Why did you choose to select Native American child sponsorship?"
If they had asked me this question, they would have learned not only the truth about many things (there is no such thing as reincarnation, it is always a good time to be charitable, and the best charity is where the need is the greatest when the need is the greatest) but they also would have learned another essential thing about me. They would have learned that I am vehemently against abortion and that by investing in the Native American families who I sponsored, many of whom oppose birth control because of their understandable genocidal concerns, I was expressing in the pragmatic dollars and cents way my support of large families that use neither birth control nor condone abortions. My conversations with them were very informative of my previously held belief that the way to fight abortion is to coalition with people who love children and who want to have large families, it's as simple as that. By coalition I mean to make it financially and otherwise feasible for those who might feel pressure to abort to be able to have their child, even if it means subsidizing them. Yes, I told you, I'm a liberal, in the proud, not dirty, sense of the tradition. As I've blogged before I believe that if society organized around charities in order to help surprise pregnancies result in live births instead of abortions, through money and educational/job alternatives and a strong system of adoption and orphanages, we'd not have seen the murder of millions of preborn babies in this country. My long term commitment to the Native Americans was the amount that I could personally afford of expressing support based on this set of values and how I felt practical help is better than confrontation or ignoring when it comes to the scourge of abortion in this country.
Now, my families were not ever thinking of abortion, as I said, they told me this is a dire reminder of genocidal times and against their pro-life values (though this of course is changing as the pro aborts and secular society target the poor young Indian youth). So I'm not saying that my sponsorship was necessary for them to have their children, as they would have done so anyway. But my point is that my sponsorship was my way to glorify and support those who were so determined to be pro-life and produce large, loving families. I did so as long as I could, until the cultists caught up with me and cost me my career, my means of earning a living, and my home. I had to stop sponsorship then, and it's been more than a decade since I've been able to participate in that way. There's worse to this story, but no reason to go into it now, except to say, use your imagination about what people who think that I'm interested in Native Americans because of their stupid, mean, ignorant and craven "past life" and "karma" would do (imitate me but with an ugly twist, since there's the assumption of that light and dark "war" that they live in delusion of, and also, well, think about casinos and so forth). They would assume to be "charitable" where there is lots of money and "luck" involved too. Also, since the cultists did not recognize my Catholicism and my authority to speak to its everlasting truth (even though the evidence was no secret and right in front of them), they assumed all sorts of conclusions about divinity and faith matters on sometimes "evidence" as weak as whatever dorky book about Indian lore I might decide to peruse or to buy. I've explained in previous blog postings that like the Buddhist search for "reincarnated lamas," these unfunny clowns stalk what people read and buy, to see "what objects" they are attracted to because they "tell you about what they are *said in pretentious tone of voice* D-R-A-W-N to spiritually." Cultists would manipulate which children were assigned to me for sponsorship, what would happen to them at work and in school (what opportunities they got, for example), and "study" how "lucky" or "not" my "involvement" was with these different kids and their families and then either infiltrate the families on their own for their own "spiritual benefit" or conclude that "bad karma" was being "worked out" and terminate relationships. It's an ugly, ugly, UGLY problem and one that they think I'm too stupid to know how pervasive it is, but I know, oh Lord, do I know. More importantly, though, they forget that God knows all along and does not depend on human witness, deduction or clues. He knows even when these pathetic thoughts of the cultists were formed in their deluded and sick minds.
So much that is simple and good has been ruined.
Here's an example of the difference between me and them. When I first had generous paychecks with money that I could reliably spend on helping others, I decided to do sponsorship of children, like many millions of people do. In these programs you send money on a monthly basis in order to help a specific child stay in school, meet basic school needs, etc. There are many famous programs. I decided to select one that deals exclusively with Native Americans here in the USA. Why? Two reasons. One is that I grew up near a reservation, so to me it's not an exotic far away need but a "local issue." I saw as a child the poverty first hand, since my mother and I would drive to the reservation to buy apples and corn. Charity is best and strongest when you get involved with people and situations that you know something about yourself. The second reason is that there were many scandals during that time about poverty in the USA. The great expose about Appalachia and its hidden, deep poverty was a huge topic during my formation as a future charitable giver. I could not understand giving to international programs without giving even more to solve the poverty situation here in the USA. And so those were the two reasons I researched a number of worthy organizations but quickly chose the one exclusively for Native Americans.
Now, I know, even though no one has ever said this (or anything else honest) to my face that the cultists who stalked me never realized that I selected Native American charity for such a simple reason. They are blinded by their own lenses of stereotyping everything as having hidden motivations. And so my several decades of sponsorship and even more "incriminating" (from their point of view) interest in Indian culture could only mean.... yep, you guessed it, "past lives," "Karma," "the great injustice of the robber baron white man," "where are Injuns in her astrology chart, drool" and all sorts of conclusions that I was "drawn" to the Indians for "spiritual" reasons. Yes, I liked reading about their culture (not so much the history) and also their religious practices. I mean, duh, you know who I am by now. Of course I'd be interested in their religious practices. But that doesn't mean I was going at is as a "questor" who is "trying to find answers" or worse, "endorsing a *said in pretentious tone* P-A-T-H-W-A-Y." Yikes.
And so over the past several decades there have been HORRIBLE cascading events and oppressive decisions made by cultists in control because they were too damn arrogant and stupid to actually ask me, "Why did you choose to select Native American child sponsorship?"
If they had asked me this question, they would have learned not only the truth about many things (there is no such thing as reincarnation, it is always a good time to be charitable, and the best charity is where the need is the greatest when the need is the greatest) but they also would have learned another essential thing about me. They would have learned that I am vehemently against abortion and that by investing in the Native American families who I sponsored, many of whom oppose birth control because of their understandable genocidal concerns, I was expressing in the pragmatic dollars and cents way my support of large families that use neither birth control nor condone abortions. My conversations with them were very informative of my previously held belief that the way to fight abortion is to coalition with people who love children and who want to have large families, it's as simple as that. By coalition I mean to make it financially and otherwise feasible for those who might feel pressure to abort to be able to have their child, even if it means subsidizing them. Yes, I told you, I'm a liberal, in the proud, not dirty, sense of the tradition. As I've blogged before I believe that if society organized around charities in order to help surprise pregnancies result in live births instead of abortions, through money and educational/job alternatives and a strong system of adoption and orphanages, we'd not have seen the murder of millions of preborn babies in this country. My long term commitment to the Native Americans was the amount that I could personally afford of expressing support based on this set of values and how I felt practical help is better than confrontation or ignoring when it comes to the scourge of abortion in this country.
Now, my families were not ever thinking of abortion, as I said, they told me this is a dire reminder of genocidal times and against their pro-life values (though this of course is changing as the pro aborts and secular society target the poor young Indian youth). So I'm not saying that my sponsorship was necessary for them to have their children, as they would have done so anyway. But my point is that my sponsorship was my way to glorify and support those who were so determined to be pro-life and produce large, loving families. I did so as long as I could, until the cultists caught up with me and cost me my career, my means of earning a living, and my home. I had to stop sponsorship then, and it's been more than a decade since I've been able to participate in that way. There's worse to this story, but no reason to go into it now, except to say, use your imagination about what people who think that I'm interested in Native Americans because of their stupid, mean, ignorant and craven "past life" and "karma" would do (imitate me but with an ugly twist, since there's the assumption of that light and dark "war" that they live in delusion of, and also, well, think about casinos and so forth). They would assume to be "charitable" where there is lots of money and "luck" involved too. Also, since the cultists did not recognize my Catholicism and my authority to speak to its everlasting truth (even though the evidence was no secret and right in front of them), they assumed all sorts of conclusions about divinity and faith matters on sometimes "evidence" as weak as whatever dorky book about Indian lore I might decide to peruse or to buy. I've explained in previous blog postings that like the Buddhist search for "reincarnated lamas," these unfunny clowns stalk what people read and buy, to see "what objects" they are attracted to because they "tell you about what they are *said in pretentious tone of voice* D-R-A-W-N to spiritually." Cultists would manipulate which children were assigned to me for sponsorship, what would happen to them at work and in school (what opportunities they got, for example), and "study" how "lucky" or "not" my "involvement" was with these different kids and their families and then either infiltrate the families on their own for their own "spiritual benefit" or conclude that "bad karma" was being "worked out" and terminate relationships. It's an ugly, ugly, UGLY problem and one that they think I'm too stupid to know how pervasive it is, but I know, oh Lord, do I know. More importantly, though, they forget that God knows all along and does not depend on human witness, deduction or clues. He knows even when these pathetic thoughts of the cultists were formed in their deluded and sick minds.
So much that is simple and good has been ruined.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
