Yet more on charity, clarifications

Hmm.. I think a clarification is in order as to what I think should happen. It's not that I don't think that we should give to the poor - perish the thought! I think that churches and individuals and private programs (for the atheist) should be the way we take care of our poor and needy.

When I say I have a problem with the government forcing me to give them yet more money ... that's what I have a problem with. I don't trust them. Being a government, they have to make rules and paperwork and all sorts of odd things to decide who gets and who does not. And I don't like socialism, because it depends on a large government to run it. I believe it will be inherently corrupt and/or mismanaged. It's been well proven that it's more helpful to hand a small loan to a responsible person than to have a government set up a system. It's more helpful to send a village a flock of chickens than to send them a beaurocrat with a checkbook.

What the Bible sets out is two different sets of rules to deal with the poor. In the OT, the farmers (agrarian capitalism*) were required to tithe (Dr. McGee says that their various tithes added up to 30% or so), they were required to let gleaners in, they were required to be kind to the widow, the orphan and the traveller. But that "required" was required by the Torah - not by soliders and tax collectors! And then those who were faithful in this regard were blessed yet more by God, and the cycle of blessing continued... that's the way it should be. Good stewards get more to be good stewards with, bad stewards get less. And that's the way Jesus said He works.

In the NT, we are enjoined to give to those who ask of us. We are enjoined to again be kind to the poor, to not play favorites, etc. But this gives us the opportunity to develop charity in our hearts and to be blessed in our giving and in our sacrifice. We are supposed to be in church networks where a differentiation can be made between those in need and those who are goofing off. Remember Stephen? Before he was martyred he was in charge of the charity, going around to the various homes and getting to know people and see what they needed so the goods could be shared out effectively. That is one of the purposes of a church family - folks who know you, who can step up.

Having a government tax me for the purpose of sharing my money in ways I don't even know is of no spiritual use whatsoever. It doesn't do anything for giver or givee other than provide some minimum phyiscal good. Is that nothing? Of course not. But it's not enough. And it's badly used. It's abused by some, unused by others in need, it's a system full of holes and lumps and bumps. The value of having charity dispensed by people who might potentially know those in need is that they'll know what is needed and how much. Does this person really need some help getting a job? Or are they permanently disabled, and just need to be put on the church rolls? Is this person needing a little extra food, help paying medical bills... you get the idea. People are individuals, and they should be treated that way by people expressing compassion. In contrast, when individuals are taxed so that the government can step in to provide charity, individuals have less of their own funds to be charitable with and become unable to meet the needs around them.

Now, you want to know... does MY church do this stuff? Yes, yes it does. If you are hungry and go to my church and ask for food, they'll give you a sack of groceries. There's a rotation of churches that provide hot, homecooked meals to the homeless all over my town (we have a large homeless population here). In fact, I think 85% or more of the folks serving the homeless and the programs for the homeless are run by churches. I know my church also offers financial assistance, on a case by case basis. They put "we need pasta and toilet paper" in the bulletin, and then the church members bring it in and it gets shared out.

People, individuals, are ultimately the best vehicle to offer charity and support to those around them. I don't think you can sway me from that position - and *that's* why I don't like socialism. Well, one of the reasons.

As far as the reason to have a government - I think it's to keep us from killing each other, from being killed by neighbor nations, from stealing... it's there to enforce the "thou shalt nots" rather than enforce the "shoulds". I want a MINIMAL government primarily consisting of police, fire department, infrastructure, and military.
..........

And on to the "points" clarification. :) No! I don't think that God was trying to tell me that the Western Church is Laodicean. I think He was trying to get with me about myself. When I say He's been pointing me in a certain direction, it means that wherever I go, I encounter things that make me think the same thoughts. Like, I am reading through My Utmost for His Highest right now - but I'm not on the date I'm "supposed" to be since I just start my new devotional at the beginning, even if it's not January 1. Likewise, I read 4 chapters of my Bible every day, reading it through every year, but I skip from the OT to the NT and my reading isn't tied to my devotional. And then I get Christian books, and listen to sermons, and and and... and when I start hearing the same theme from more than a couple of those places in the same day or two, I perk up my ears because I figure it's God saying, "Hey Hearth - you need to pay some extra attention to this".

When I wrote that entry, I was getting a lot of "Hearth, I want you to love Me for my own sake. I need to you get deeper, I need you to be more dependent on Me, I want you to give more, I want you to be more awake to this situation". And I wanted to know if you get the same sort of thing. Not on the same subject. We're two different women, I don't expect us to get the same message. I was just wondering if this is something that you are sensitive to as well.

* They were definitely out for their own profit, but loaning at interest was forbidden to them. Wall Street/Hard capitalism is based on that. Hard industrialism, or use of people as virtual slaves without taking care of them, was permitted - slavery was permitted - but they were supposed to love and care for their servants as part of their households, and free them after seven years if they were fellow Israelites. Hardly the same as working for your entire life in a sweatshop.