"The Poor You Will Always Have With You..."

Proverbs 17:5

2008-12-15T17:13:00.000-08:00

"He who mocks the poor shows contempt for their Maker; whoever gloats over disaster will not go unpunished."(New International Version) "Whoever mocks poor people insults their Creator; gloating over misfortune is a punishable crime. (The Message)"

Mock Defined from Webster's 1: to treat with contempt or ridicule : deride 2: to disappoint the hopes of 3: defy , challenge 4 a: to imitate (as a mannerism) closely : mimic b: to mimic in sport or derision intransitive verb:jeer,scoff Contempt defined from Webster's 1 a: the act of despising : the state of mind of one who despises : disdain b: lack of respect or reverence for something 2: the state of being despised 3: willful disobedience to or open disrespect of a court, judge, or legislative body I don't know why, but when I look at this verse and these definitions, I think about being in Junior High and High School. I was a teenager during the 80's, which was an incredibly fashion conscious decade. In my little world, everyone wore polo shirts, but not just any polo shirts-they had to be Izod or Polo brand. Nothing else would do. I remember my mom finding me a silky white polyester Izod shirt from a thrift store. Sure, it had the emblem, but it was polyester. It was an old guy's golf shirt. It was what a poor poser would wear. Which is what I was. I wore it to school, but I could tell I wasn't fooling anyone. When I finally got my 100% cotton, royal blue Izod shirt, with an alligator, it was like I had finally arrived. The cool kids even pointed it out, and I received just a taste of affirmation. But it didn't last, and I was relegated to that group somewhere between utter loser and barely socially acceptable. I have been treated with contempt and mocked before. The majority of us have. What I never really questioned was why they had the right to treat me and my other non-Izod wearing friends with contempt. How did these social mores develop in a group of High School kids that we would judge each other on what brand of clothes we wore? I mean, I was covered, I didn't smell and I wasn't wearing stripes and polka dots in colors that didn't match, but still, in my school, your status was judged on what you wore. The short answer is that it was learned behavior. Learned from the media, learned from parents, and then learned from peers. Values were passed on that taught my classmates how to judge a person's worth and value in society. When people did not live up to those values, it was deemed OK to treat them with contempt, mock them, deride them, put them down. Now, we know there is nothing new under the sun. These verses show us that showing contempt for people based on how wealthy they are has always been around. Even now, we hear people joke about people living in trailer parks or in the projects, or make fun of people that work at McDonald's. We joke about people driving broken down cars. I remember working at a warehouse where it was common to make fun of the guys in the prison work release program, because they drove scooters because they weren't allowed to have a car. Jokes about illegal aliens were really common in that warehouse too. I won't use them, but we all have those rude names we use to describe those of our race or cultural group when we want to describe the poor screw-ups that never figure anything out and are always without money but always buy hope from a lottery ticket, and comfort in a bottle. Back to the verses, treating the poor with contempt, mocking and despising them is nothing new, and its still current. While I'm not crazy about stating God desires a classless society, this verse does show that God does not see things the same way we do. He sees contempt for anyone he created as contempt for him. While God does not automatically see wealth as an indicator of intelligence, wisdom or character, he does however talk about problems that are exclusive to rich people and poor people alone-more on that later. "Rich and poor have this in common: The LORD is the Maker of them all." Proverbs 22:2 (New International Version)

Prov 14:31

2008-12-13T09:31:00.000-08:00

"He who oppresses the poor shows contempt for their Maker, but whoever is kind to the needy honors God."(NIV)

"You insult your Maker when you exploit the powerless; when you're kind to the poor, you honor God." (The Message)

What do we do with this scripture? It leaves very little grey area for mis-interpreting or looking for any shades of meaning. Yes, the first thing someone will ask is, "Yes, but are the people truly poor? Why are they poor? Was it something they did? Are they taking responsibility for their lives?" While there is a place and time for some of these questions, this verse is not it. It's a statement without caveats. Oppressing the poor shows contempt for God-period. Being kind to the poor honors God-period. We don't see the exceptions of only the poor who are poor from no fault of their own, or only those who are truly needy, or those who spend too much on cigarettes or beer. There are other places in the bible that talk about slothfulness, drunkenness and other faults of the poor. This is one of those places in the bible where we see God's macro view. It is reminiscent of another verse in the bible. "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life." John 3:16 The similarity between these two verses is this-whoever. Jesus died for the sins of all people-no matter how much they sinned-he died so they had a chance to have eternal life. When we look at Proverbs 14:31 in comparison-that same feeling is there. God hates the oppression of the poor-even if their poverty is their fault, even if they have a lifestyle that contributes to their poverty-it doesn't matter. Oppressing the poor and needy still is contemptuous to God. The hard question is, what do we do with this in applying it to life and business? First off, lets remind ourselves what it means to oppress: Oppress: to burden with cruel or unjust impositions or restraints; subject to a burdensome or harsh exercise of authority or power: a people oppressed by totalitarianism. What strikes me about this definition is "Cruel or unjust impositions". Do we make it harder or easier for the poor to escape poverty? Is the level of profit that is taken in businesses that market to low income customers reasonable, or does it prey on the fact that it knows that desperate people will pay exorbitant fees because they have no other options? At the heart of the matter is an age old question -"How do we treat those who have no power or influence over us?" For some reason, God sees that as the measure of our true feelings toward him. "I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me." Matthew 25:40 He doesn't care how much we give, or how often we go to church. Real religion, real devotion to him takes a much more concrete form. "Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world." James 1:27

Merry Christmas

2006-12-18T01:23:00.000-08:00

Christmas is close at hand. It's my favorite holiday and time of the year. I was standing in church this week and looked up at the screen displaying the lyrics to a favorite Christmas carol.

"Joy to the world, the Lord is come!
Let earth receive her King;
Let every heart prepare Him room,
And heaven and nature sing,
And heaven and nature sing,
And heaven, and heaven, and nature sing."

The arrangement was more modern than I care for. It seemed to be somewhere between Van Halen's "Jump" and something by Coldplay. I'm becoming increasingly annoyed as the church tries so hard to be relevant that we leave behind those things that need to remain timeless. I went to my niece's Christmas program the other night and there was choreography that looked like something a boy-band would do! What happened to simplicity? The message of Christmas does not need this kind of marketing for crying out loud! My niece did a perfectly lovely solo on a normal song. She did a great job and it helped aleve the snit that I have been fighting lately.

Even though the carol had backbeat and syncopation that was not intended by the original writer, the lyrics still spoke to me, especially the phrase "Let every heart prepare Him room". Christmas is the time when we are supposed to make room for God in our lives.

What does that mean? God does not live in a room, he does not occupy space and time the same way that we do, he doesn't need a guest room, or get mad if there is no little mint on his pillow. God is a spirit, so the idea of making room for him leads us to the idea of making room for Him in our hearts, thoughts, desires, and all that we are, since he is not a flesh and blood person.

While that is true, I think some people think that since God is not flesh and blood, there is no real need for any concrete, worldly actions to love Him. Going to church, thinking a happy thought, and throwing a buck into the bellringer's bucket seems to be all some of us need to do and are able to walk away feeling very pleased with ourselves. If we look to His Word, he doesn't let us off so easily.

"If anyone says, "I love God," yet hates his brother, he is a liar.
For anyone who does not love his brother, whom he has seen,
cannot love God, whom he has not seen." ~I John 4:20

We could ask all of the questions that go with this verse, "Who is my brother?", "What does it mean to love?", etc., etc. . But I prefer to cut through all the liberal-arts crap of questioning everything to death, and look at it this way: loving those around you is loving God.

At Christmas time, I always think back to one of my favorite parts of "A Christmas Carol", by Charles Dickens. This is the speech that Fred makes to Scrooge:"But I am sure I have always thought of Christmas-time,
when it has come round-apart from the veneration due
to its sacred name and origin, if anything belonging
to it can be apart from that-as a good time; a kind, forgiving,
charitable, pleasant time; the only time I know of in the long
calendar of the year, when men and women seem by one consent
to open their shut-up hearts freely, and to think of people below
them as if they really were fellow passengers to the grave,
and not another race of creatures bound on other journeys.
And therefore uncle, though it has never put a scrap of gold
or silver in my pocket, I believe that it has done me good,
and will do me good; and I say, God bless it!"
Christmas time is God's way of reminding us that love without action means nothing. That love is not simply a sentiment, or charitable feelings that come but once a year. Instead, love is messy and complicated. Love chose to be ultimately manifested in the pain of childbirth by a young woman who society did not totally approve of, in a stable full of dirty animals. But love came, through the mud and blood of a lost and cold world, love still pushed it's way through. Love pushed through to give us it's gift, it was to a world that did not recognize the value or even appreciate the value of the gift given at the time.

The message of Christmas is that we need to do as God did and reach out in love to the world around us, no matter how messy or uncomfortable it may feel at the time.

Merry Christmas,

AC

Putting Churches in "Neutral" on Politics

2006-10-04T07:13:00.000-07:00

Putting Churches in "Neutral" on Politics

Click the link to listen to a commentary by S. Pearl Sharp about the IRS going after a church in Pasadena that appeared to take sides during the last elections.
My own feelings are kind of mixed on how churches should preach when it comes to politics. Neither party has it all together, and both are evil and good at the same time. God would not vote for either party, he would not endorse either party. We need to stop trying to put God into a box designed by man and instead try to find out what he wants us to do. Check out this scripture:"Now when Joshua was near Jericho, he looked
up and saw a man standing in front of him with a
drawn sword in his hand. Joshua went up to him
and asked, "Are you for us or for our enemies?"
"Neither," he replied, "but as commander of the army
of the LORD I have now come."
Then Joshua fell facedown to the ground in reverence,
and asked him, "What message does my Lord have for
his servant?" ~Josh 5:13-14(NIV)
I remember hearing our president say, "He who is not with us is against us."
I always found that troubling. Now I know why. Sure, we have to appear strong during a war situation, but I have been in churches where it was assumed that if you were a Christian, you must be a Republican. I have seen patriotic services where Republican and Christian are seen as the same thing, and if you weren't, you were misguided and stupid at best, and un-American at worst.

We need to speak the truth in our churches about the hot button issues, we need to say what the word says about them, but we need to speak about all the issues, not just gay marriage and abortion. Minimum wage, welfare, poverty, education, immigration-these issue should not be swept under the rug. If we are going to do one, we should do the other.

Then again, maybe we should seek no political agenda in our church and seek God's agenda. If we seek his truth, we will feed the hungry, take care of the poor, invite the strangers(even immigrants?) in, and politics will take care of itself as something that is a matter of conscience and not a matter of grass-roots activism under our steeples.

Thanks for reading,

AC

Proverbs 14:23

2006-10-03T18:29:00.000-07:00

"All hard work brings a profit, but mere talk leads only to poverty."

Now here's a scripture that conservatives can get behind. There's no way to misinterpret it, or twist it around. After the fall of Adam and Eve, God told them that hard work would be part of the Curse of Original of Sin,

"By the sweat of your brow you will eat your food until you return to the ground, since from it you were taken; for dust you are and to dust you will return."~ Genesis 3:19

In the New Testament, we find a very similar verse that goes even further, "He who has been stealing must steal no longer, but must work, doing something useful with his own hands, that he may have something to share with those in need."~Ephesians 4:28This verse really brings home some other ideas about the nature of work. Work is not simply a method to fill your belly, it is what makes you a blessing to those around you. It is the way that you make the world a better place. You work, in order that you are not a burden to those around you, and so that you are able to help others, so they can become like you.

Work is meant to reproduce good in the world.

More and more, I suspect that charity based on the bible is meant to be spread like a virus. Each person is meant to work and in turn tithe to the church and take care of his family and friends, the church is meant to take care of the community at large, and the community at large is meant to be a blessing to the country, our country is meant to be a blessing to those in the world.

Instead, we have Christians that look to the government to take care of the poor and get annoyed when they hear the local pastor talk about money. Even if you don't believe in the tithe,(which I do), we can all agree that if we all gave a regular percentage of our income to the church, there would be less need for government programs that are so unwieldy they have a hard time being effective locally.

Thanks for reading,

AC

Proverbs 14:20

2006-10-02T19:24:00.000-07:00

"The poor are shunned even by their neighbors, but the rich have many friends"

Some proverbs seem to just be explanations of the way the world works, and point us towards why its wrong. Looking at this in a purely North American viewpoint, many of us can understand it readily. In many of us there is a fear to get involved with people that will be "too needy". Whether it is emotionally, socially, or financially, no one wants a friend that only "takes and takes without giving".

I've heard these sorts of sayings since I was a kid. Maybe its because we think that friends should be able to take care of themselves and our relationships will only be for mutual emotional support, and that helping them in more substantial ways, such as with finances, is something that will almost never happen.

This kind of friendship is not true friendship. It is a deep aquaintanceship. Only being friends with those that are in our same socio-economic group, with those that will never truly need our help is not real friendship.

Yes, friendship is meant to be a two-way street, but we have to be willing to get our hands dirty sometime if we want to be part of making the world a better place.

Thanks for reading,

AC

Do Democrats Want Christians in their Party?

2006-09-30T17:15:00.000-07:00

Click the link to listen to an excellent commentary on NPR by Caroline Langston entitled, Conversion: Political, Not Religious.

She explains how she grew up a dyed-in-the-wool conservative, and became a political liberal later on in her life. Most of the time, it's the other way around, you start out a liberal when you are "young and idealistic", and then become a conservative when you "understand the way the world works".

I really identified with her. My experience has been similar in that I was always more conservative when I was younger, but as I got older, I started doubting the status quo of the Republican party. I still find myself agreeing with them on many things, but not everything by a long shot.

What I found the most interesting about this is that she talks about the fact that much of the Left is not welcoming to Christians, and asks the question, "Is there room for me at the table, just as I am?"

Thanks for reading,

AC

Christ Among Partisans

2006-04-16T01:23:00.000-07:00

Read this very interesting editorial about Christians and politics.
-AC

By GARRY WILLS
Originally in the New York Times

THERE is no such thing as a "Christian politics." If it is a politics, it cannot be Christian. Jesus told Pilate: "My reign is not of this present order. If my reign were of this present order, my supporters would have fought against my being turned over to the Jews. But my reign is not here" (John 18:36). Jesus brought no political message or program.

This is a truth that needs emphasis at a time when some Democrats, fearing that the Republicans have advanced over them by the use of religion, want to respond with a claim that Jesus is really on their side. He is not. He avoided those who would trap him into taking sides for or against the Roman occupation of Judea. He paid his taxes to the occupying power but said only, "Let Caesar have what belongs to him, and God have what belongs to him" (Matthew 22:21). He was the original proponent of a separation of church and state.

Those who want the state to engage in public worship, or even to have prayer in schools, are defying his injunction: "When you pray, be not like the pretenders, who prefer to pray in the synagogues and in the public square, in the sight of others. In truth I tell you, that is all the profit they will have. But you, when you pray, go into your inner chamber and, locking the door, pray there in hiding to your Father, and your Father who sees you in hiding will reward you" (Matthew 6:5-6). He shocked people by his repeated violation of the external holiness code of his time, emphasizing that his religion was an internal matter of the heart.

But doesn't Jesus say to care for the poor? Repeatedly and insistently, but what he says goes far beyond politics and is of a different order. He declares that only one test will determine who will come into his reign: whether one has treated the poor, the hungry, the homeless and the imprisoned as one would Jesus himself. "Whenever you did these things to the lowliest of my brothers, you were doing it to me" (Matthew 25:40). No government can propose that as its program. Theocracy itself never went so far, nor could it.

The state cannot indulge in self-sacrifice. If it is to treat the poor well, it must do so on grounds of justice, appealing to arguments that will convince people who are not followers of Jesus or of any other religion. The norms of justice will fall short of the demands of love that Jesus imposes. A Christian may adopt just political measures from his or her own motive of love, but that is not the argument that will define justice for state purposes.

To claim that the state's burden of justice, which falls short of the supreme test Jesus imposes, is actually what he wills — that would be to substitute some lesser and false religion for what Jesus brought from the Father. Of course, Christians who do not meet the lower standard of state justice to the poor will, a fortiori, fail to pass the higher test.

The Romans did not believe Jesus when he said he had no political ambitions. That is why the soldiers mocked him as a failed king, giving him a robe and scepter and bowing in fake obedience (John 19:1-3). Those who today say that they are creating or following a "Christian politics" continue the work of those soldiers, disregarding the words of Jesus that his reign is not of this order.

Some people want to display and honor the Ten Commandments as a political commitment enjoined by the religion of Jesus. That very act is a violation of the First and Second Commandments. By erecting a false religion — imposing a reign of Jesus in this order — they are worshiping a false god. They commit idolatry. They also take the Lord's name in vain.

Some may think that removing Jesus from politics would mean removing morality from politics. They think we would all be better off if we took up the slogan "What would Jesus do?"

That is not a question his disciples ask in the Gospels. They never knew what Jesus was going to do next. He could round on Peter and call him "Satan." He could refuse to receive his mother when she asked to see him. He might tell his followers that they are unworthy of him if they do not hate their mother and their father. He might kill pigs by the hundreds. He might whip people out of church precincts.

The Jesus of the Gospels is not a great ethical teacher like Socrates, our leading humanitarian. He is an apocalyptic figure who steps outside the boundaries of normal morality to signal that the Father's judgment is breaking into history. His miracles were not acts of charity but eschatological signs — accepting the unclean, promising heavenly rewards, making last things first.

He is more a higher Nietzsche, beyond good and evil, than a higher Socrates. No politician is going to tell the lustful that they must pluck out their right eye. We cannot do what Jesus would do because we are not divine.

It was blasphemous to say, as the deputy under secretary of defense, Lt. Gen. William Boykin, repeatedly did, that God made George Bush president in 2000, when a majority of Americans did not vote for him. It would not remove the blasphemy for Democrats to imply that God wants Bush not to be president. Jesus should not be recruited as a campaign aide. To trivialize the mystery of Jesus is not to serve the Gospels.

The Gospels are scary, dark and demanding. It is not surprising that people want to tame them, dilute them, make them into generic encouragements to be loving and peaceful and fair. If that is all they are, then we may as well make Socrates our redeemer.

It is true that the tamed Gospels can be put to humanitarian purposes, and religious institutions have long done this, in defiance of what Jesus said in the Gospels.

Jesus was the victim of every institutional authority in his life and death. He said: "Do not be called Rabbi, since you have only one teacher, and you are all brothers. And call no one on earth your father, since you have only one Father, the one in heaven. And do not be called leaders, since you have only one leader, the Messiah" (Matthew 23:8-10).

If Democrats want to fight Republicans for the support of an institutional Jesus, they will have to give up the person who said those words. They will have to turn away from what Flannery O'Connor described as "the bleeding stinking mad shadow of Jesus" and "a wild ragged figure" who flits "from tree to tree in the back" of the mind.

He was never that thing that all politicians wish to be esteemed — respectable. At various times in the Gospels, Jesus is called a devil, the devil's agent, irreligious, unclean, a mocker of Jewish law, a drunkard, a glutton, a promoter of immorality.

The institutional Jesus of the Republicans has no similarity to the Gospel figure. Neither will any institutional Jesus of the Democrats.

Garry Wills is professor emeritus of history at Northwestern University and the author, most recently, of "What Jesus Meant."

Proverbs 27:17

2005-09-16T01:23:00.000-07:00

"As iron sharpens iron,so one man sharpens another."~Prov 27:17

Below is a response from Michael Cross to my post entitled "Poverty Was The Ruin of Poor in New Orleans".

It's obvious that Michael and I don't agree on everything. But I have been impressed with his style of writing and obvious good heart that shows through in his writing. In the interest of fair play, and showing another side to the Christian view of what to do about poverty, I wanted to share this excellent response.

As a matter of intoduction, I found your blog as a link at Alison's Live Creative blog. I'm not sure I follow you on this essay. I don't know anyone who blames the poor for being poor. People like myself may blame it on various government programs that enable, and encourage, the poor to remain poor, but not on the poor themselves. I know from experience that none of the government programs that exist are designed to help people to do better. They are designed to keep people in whatever condition they are in. That is a simple, sad fact. Caring for the poor is a matter that is best left to the Church, because the Church has a vested interest in the well-being of our fellow man. Likewise, the Church, as an outreach within each of our own communities, is meant to deal with people on an individual level (as in, "personal relationship"). Which means that the Church, when it is acting as it was meant to, will be able to identify the individual needs of the people within their community, and address them in the most efficient way possible. Unfortunately, the Church has abdicated it's responsibility in this matter in lieu of taxpayer funded welfare programs which are nothing more than "throwing money" at our problems. It is a shame that as Christians we have opted to allow some government agency to take our place in society as a provider for peoples needs. As a result of the Church's retreat from the public square, the government has also taken God's position as the arbiter of morality as well. Look around and tell me that isn't so, but I'll never believe you. However, if giving money (or more money) to the poor were the answer to poverty, then why is it that over forty years, and trillions of dollars, haven't solved the problem yet? By the same token, raising the minimum wage doesn't really help the poor to do better. Instead, it leads to price increases across the board for nearly all goods and services. It also increases the amount of taxes that are paid by the poor. Meaning that while the paycheck may be slightly larger, it doesn't really stretch any further than the previous pay level. Besides, when one considers that a minimum wage job is meant to be something along the lines of an "entry level position", why should any business be forced to pay more for entry level experience. And as for a "living wage", doesn't that depend upon how we choose to live? If you're willing to make sacrifices in order to make your money go further you can do just fine. For several years I supported a family of 4 on a little over $6 an hour. It's a matter of stewardship, being faithful with what God has blessed you with, and personal responsibility. But, again, the programs which are in place, and our very culture, are at odds with the idea of personal responsibility. What we saw in New Orleans was not a result of race or social status. It was the mindset of people who had been told, perhaps for generations, that "The government will take care of "it".". So, when the governemnt failed to "take care of "it".", the people who were expecting help were left on their own. And we all saw the results of that. Nobody faults the poor for being poor, or even for remaining poor, if they are making an attempt to do better. People like myself blame those who don't bother to try to do better because it requires greater effort than accepting monthly assistance. And we blame people for believing that they are owed something simply by virtue of the fact that they want it. And even more distasteful is the notion that people believe that it is morally superior to ask government to force businesses to pay more. Whether it be in the form of a forced "living wage" or through higher taxes. Nobody has that right. But just so you don't think I'm some cruel, heartless, jerk... Should companies pay more to their loyal employees? Yes. Should the wealthiest members of our society be willing to help the poorest? Yes. But should this be an operation of our government? No. Jesus did not tell us to "render unto Caesar" so that Caesar could feed the poor. He told us, as individual disciples, to do His work on earth, and not to leave it up to others. Our calling is to interact with individuals, to change peoples hearts on a personal level. Not to ask our government to take the hard-earned wealth of our fellow citizens. Consider Christ's teaching on "The sheep and the goats" (Matt 25:31-46). If the only charity that someone is giving comes from their tax withholdings, how is this seeing Jesus in need? Does this type of giving come from the heart? You and I may very well agree that the poor and downtrodden ought to be helped. Where we differ is on who ought to provide that help and how. Sorry about making this such a long reply, but you might never read it if I just posted it at my own blog. M+

Thanks for reading,

AC

"Poverty was the ruin of the poor in New Orleans"

2005-09-06T01:23:00.000-07:00

"The wealth of the rich is their fortified city, but poverty is the ruin of the poor."~Proverbs 10:15(NIV)

When I considered why so many people didn't evacuate before Katrina hit, I started thinking about what it was like when we first got married and both had minimum wage jobs. We were in bad shape financially. I remember not having health insurance, and going to low-cost clinics. There were times when we had $10 for the week in groceries. That time of our life lasted longer than I care to remember. I remember being out of work, on unemployment and applying for relief. When I was a teenager I remember when my folks filed for bankruptcy and we lived with relatives for a while. I've been one of the working poor, and there is no easy way out.

I don't know what I would have done if I would have been in the shoes of the working poor in New Orleans. I may have made the same decision to try to ride it out. I would not have had the extra money to get out of town, or take the risk of taking time off for work. In low paying jobs, you can lose your job so much faster than in better paying jobs. There is no such thing as sick days or personal days, especially when all you can find is part-time work. I owned cars that I would have been afraid to take on long trips. If I was in New Orleans, and was as poor as I was when I first got married, I would have had to stay in the city and hope for the best like so many of the working poor that are suffering now.
"I don't make judgments about why people chose not to leave but, you know, there was a mandatory evacuation of New Orleans,"~Michael Brown, Director of FEMA
FEMA chief: Victims bear some responsibility
"To those who wonder why so many stayed behind when push came to water's mighty shove here, those who were trapped have a simple explanation: Their nickels and dimes and dollar bills simply didn't add up to stage a quick evacuation mission"~Wil Haygood-Washington Post
"Why the poor stayed in New Orleans"
I'm not going to spend any time bashing Michael Brown, the rest of the blogosphere seems to be handling that fine. Whether he meant to sound clueless or not, I think his remarks are a good example of a real lack of understanding by many in government, about what it means to be truly without resources.

I think there are a lot of people that seem to automatically define the poor as not smart enough to get out of town when disaster is coming.Its important to people that believe in what I call, at best, "boot-strap capitalism", and at worst, Social Darwinism, to define their world in such a way that so many failures of the poor are always the fault of the poor and no one else.
"In the house of the wise are stores of choice food and oil, but a foolish man devours all he has."~Prov 21:20
Of course there are many of the poor that are making mistakes. When I was in bad shape, I was doing some dumb things with my money. I remember blowing money on things I didn't need and living in the moment. I could have been more responsible. I could have saved. I needed help to get out of an economic mess. But I paid my taxes, I worked overtime, I did everything I knew to do, but was still not making it.

When a person is drowning, you need to throw them a line, not criticize their swimming.

If we would get beyond blaming the poor for being poor, there remain larger issues. There is much more to poverty than just low wages and not knowing how to handle money. There are class and race issues, and there are many forces outside of just "working harder and saving more". "Look! The wages you failed to pay the workmen who mowed your fields are crying out against you. The cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord Almighty."~James 5:4(NIV)
There will continue to be working poor that are caught in disasters and calamities as long as this country continues to prefer profit over people. We will continue to see the ugly side of poverty as long as companies prefer to staff their businesses with entirely part-time workers at low wages, as if the entire work-force is in High School trying to pay for their tricked-out Camaro. As long as we continue to seek tax breaks to "spur economic growth", but never raise the minimum wage to any kind of real living wage for families, and get that confused look every time anyone mentions real health care reform, the human suffering that we saw in Katrina will repeat itself over and over.

Thanks for reading,

AC

Proverbs 14:21

2005-06-27T01:23:00.000-07:00

"He who despises his neighbor sins,
but blessed is he who is kind to the needy"
~Proverbs 14:21

My wife and I "discuss" what to do about the poor often,(she is more conservative than I am).
"So what do you think is the answer to the poor? More government programs? Spend more money? Tax the rich? Become a socialist state where everyone is poor?"-she said one day.
"I don't know what the answer is. I just know that the way things are isn't working. If it is impossible to live simply on minimum wage and there is no way to get health care if you get sick, something is wrong.", I responded.
"Minimum wage wasn't meant to be lived on. Its meant as an entry level wage." She countered.
"But sometimes that is the only jobs that are available. Sometimes there are no raises or overtime available."
"So what do you want the government to do?"
"I want them to step in and do something about wages, and be a conscience for those employers that won't treat their workers well."

Our arguments expose the fact that I'm not sure what the answer is. Because I don't know what the answer is, I've started with what the answer isn't. More of the same status quo is not the answer for the poor. Just another social program isn't the answer. But what is part of the answer is a change in attitudes toward the poor and economics in general.

The capitalistic ideas that the fiscal health of a business is more important than the lives of its workers, that there must always be a race for higher profits and better productivity in order to just stay in business, these are the ideas that I am speaking of. Its obvious that these principles are a surefire way to stay in business, but at what cost?

What good is a company that is proud of how it "provides wages for its workers" if those wages aren't enough to rent an apartment,pay for utilities and food? What some of these ideas do is they allow business to play that common trump card called "the bottom line" whenever wages are discussed. "Increasing wages at this juncture just isn't good for the bottom line." This statement could be true. A business could need to freeze wages for awhile, but ask yourself this, how many employers let the bottom line trump all moral principles? The bottom line does not always have to be so low-down. Preferring profit to people is despising your neighbor.

In Luke 10:25-37, Jesus tells the story of the good Samaritan. He told how many people passed by the man who was suffering, but only one reached out to him. Jesus explained that in order to love God, we must love our neighbor as ourselves. He also pointed out that our neighbor is the person that we encounter that is in need. In I John we read that not giving to help those in need is evidence that the love of God is not in you.

"If anyone has material possessions and sees
his brother in need but has no pity on him, how can the love of God be in him?"~I John 3:17

So is this just another bash the rich post? I don't want it to be. But the bible does say have a lot to say about the rich and judgments
on those that do not treat their workers right. The important point I wanted to make is that the people that employ others have a social and biblical responsibility to do so in a way that helps their employees to do more than just barely survive.

The employees have a responsibility to work for their employers like they were working unto God, but that's a whole different post.

Thanks for reading,

AC

Proverbs 17:23

2005-03-09T01:23:00.000-08:00

"A poor man pleads for mercy, but a rich man answers harshly."

There are many things in this world that cause anger. One of the things that cause intense anger is haughtiness. Most of us may be a little shocked if someone cursed at us, but it would not be make us as angry as polite words spoken with a haughty attitude and proud look that communicated a condescending, disdainful attitude.

In the United States, we try to pride ourselves on being a classless society. While there may not be a royal class in our society, there are class divisions. This is probably most demonstrated among the rich and poor. I'm not trying to demonize the rich, that would make as predjudice as some of them.

But what I am trying to get at is that there seems to be a common sin of pride and self-centeredness that people with money struggle with. It is so insidious, that they don't even notice it. Its the same attitude that migrates to corporations, and human resource departments and government.

The idea that possessing resources is indicative of a better standing in the world, and evidence of a solid character is hot,steaming,excrement in my opinion (I held back, this is a polite blog). Being successful may be a result of hard work, I don't deny that. But it can also be a result of social networks, inheritance, education, and on and on.

What's sad is society's unspoken reinforcement of the idea that being financially successful is evidence of personal success is passed down to the poor. They have no resources, and they look at themselves through society's view of what a successful person is.

In the same way the rich feel they are responsible for their success, the poor feel that they are ultimately responsible for their situation in life. The poor can be personally to blame for their lot in life. They may have made bad decisions, spent their money on stupid things instead of paying their bills, didn't put forth effort at their job, etc. etc. I'm certainly not saying all of the poor are only victims with low self-esteem. But just as there are positive forces to become rich, there are negative forces that make it hard to escape poverty. The poor are nickel and dimed every time they try to climb out of a tough situation. High interest rates, wages that are not enough to live on, high rents, high medical costs; sometimes getting out of poverty is a losing battle with no hope in sight.

While the ultimate answer to poverty may lie on a micro-level for each person, the sin of haughtiness on the part of the rich and self-hatred on the part of the poor may be the first step to these small changes between individuals. The rich developing non-condescending compassion, and the poor finding renewed faith and confidence in themselves and in God is certainly positive. If those with resources would respect and care for those without, and those without resources could believe that they are not what they own, and believe in the power within themselves, we may find a type of success in dealing with poverty that government programs have failed to locate through bureaucracy and endless programs.

Thanks for reading,

AC

Prov 14:23

2005-02-21T01:23:00.000-08:00

"A poor man's field may produce abundant food, but injustice sweeps it away."

At first I was not sure what this had to do with anything related to politics until one word came to mind: Cuba. The U.S. embargo with Cuba has always bothered me, especially when you consider our incredible trading policy with China.

Cuba has great natural resources, and could be a great market for all kind of U.S. goods, but there has never been the political will to overcome the embargo. The Cuban people have been in dire straits for some time. But our government continues to hold onto the hard-line anti-Castro rhetoric.

Fidel is no winner by a long shot, his human rights record is nothing to celebrate. But he is at least on an equal footing, maybe even a better footing when compared to China.

One of the arguments for trading with China is that capitalism will gain a foothold through free trade and cause a loosening of hard-line communist ideologies. We have seen some of that come to pass. Little by little, the government of China is embracing a market economy.

But what's good for China is not good for Cuba. Of course, there is only one reason for this hypocrisy; the rich cuban exile community in this country. Their influence in politics is incredible, and many people say these exiles are a huge influence in the politics of the Bush family.

Many of them still cling to the idea that they will go back to Cuba and take back their houses and factories. It's not going to happen.
I don't blame them. It's not wrong, but at this point its not possible. If they actually had the best interests of their country at heart, they would seek to lift the embargo.

America has too long been the interefering imperialist in Latin America and the Caribbean. Its time we pursued pragmatic,peaceful policies of economic justice instead of stubborn, hard-hearted grudges that bring good to no one on either side.

Thanks for reading,

AC

Proverbs 22:16

2005-02-18T06:23:00.000-08:00

"He who oppresses the poor to increase his wealth and he who gives gifts to the rich-both come to the poverty.

There is a lot in this passage. You could write a substantial paper on just this verse and have a great deal to work with.

What jumps out at me is this concept that one thing is the same as the other. Oppressing the poor is a bad thing. No one would ever make that part of his election campaign, "Vote for me! I'm going to oppress the poor!". Yeah, that's funny, but how many campaigns have as their centerpiece "Vote for me! I'm going to lower taxes!"? I know many of you will jump on the usual, "But we've got to cut taxes to spur investment!" bandwagon. I'm not going to disagree with you. There are sound economic ideas in lowering taxes to spur investment.

That said, where do we draw the line? Trickle-down economics will only bring good to the poor if capitalism has a conscience, if the rich will pay living wages to their workers.

I voted for the current administration, but I don't support all that they do, and am becoming more and more disappointed in their actions. They do not have a clue what it means to be poor, or even middle class. They are more interested in cutting taxes to people that don't need the help than they are in even coming close to any kind of real economic justice.

That's my opinion, you betcha. That's what a blog is all about.

Thanks for reading,

AC

God Bless Us, Every One!

2004-12-24T01:23:00.000-08:00

I have just finished reading "A Christmas Carol". I try to read it every year, because nothing else maintains the sort of mindset that really gets me in the Christmas spirit. Here is the quote from the discussion between Scrooge and Marley's ghost that has bearing on our discussion of the poor:

"But you always were a good man of business, Jacob" faltered Scrooge, who now began to apply this to himself. "Business!" cried the Ghost, wringing his hands agains. "Mankind was my business. The common welfare was my business; charity, mercy, forbearance, and benevolence were all my business. The dealings of my trade were but a drop of water in the comprehensive ocean of my business!"

How many of us will get to the end of our lives and find out we spent all the time we had being busy with the wrong things, and were only profitable in matters that were not important?

Some of you may say, "If it was up to people like you AC, you would have none of us make any kind of profit, and tax us all to death for socialized healthcare! You're a bleeding heart socialist!"

You're wrong. I believe in capitalism. But not the social Darwinistic, law of the jungle dominated, form of capitalism we seem to have in the United States. I believe that this form of capitalism without conscience is what has contributed to the plight of the working poor in this country.

Let me illustrate with Dickens' story. After Scrooge's conversion, he blessed those around him. He started paying his employee a living wage, and assisted him and his family any way he could. This sort of individualized help would probabally not be possible if it was administered through a social agency. Instead, someone who really knew Bob Cratchit helped him, giving him exactly what was necessary.

This is not at odds with making profit. Loyalty and morale increase when working for a good company or being managed by a boss who cares about his employees.

Thanks for reading,

Merry Christmas,

AC

Proverbs 6:6-11

2004-12-01T01:23:00.000-08:00

"Go to the ant you sluggard; consider its ways and be wise! It has no commander, no overseer or ruler, yet it stores its provisions in summer and gathers its food at harvest. How long will you lie there, you sluggard? When will you get up from your sleep? A little sleep, a little slumber, a little folding of the hands to rest-and poverty will come on you like a bandit and scarcity like an armed man." - Proverbs 6:6-11

Like so many issues, there are always two extremes in how people the view the poor in general. Sometimes it appears that there are some people on the left that almost seem to both exalt the poor as both inherently noble and yet too weak to do anything to help themselves. In some ways, it almost seems like some people that seek to help the poor, or other groups become extremely paternalistic, as if they and their plans are the only hope for these weak and ignorant, yet noble people. The worst kind of prejudice is that which assumes your limitations and decides it knows what's best for you.

Then on the other side of the ideological fence, you have the conservative, the right. While not all of them, but many conservatives are quick to quote these sort of scriptures when you start talking about the poor. They assume that everyone that is poor has some sort of character defect that got them to that station in life. I'm not sure I agree with that. What I do know is that the bible does not call being poor a sin. I also see in many places that the bible states there will always be people that are poor.

Another thing I want to point out about the conservative view that many of the poor are just a bunch of slackers is this: the assumption that there is nothing between the poor and the good life that a bic pen and a McDonald's application wouldn't fix is misguided at best and callously stupid at worst. There are social issues related to race, class, and social language that still divide our nation into groups of people that are able to make a good living much easier than others.

However, from this section of scripture and many others, we do see that there is an aspect of personal responsibility. This has always been the downside of our market-driven economy. Everybody can attain their dreams, but they can find their nightmares just as easy. There are people in poverty that are there because of their own actions. To deny this will hinder any kind of real change.

What does this mean in the bigger question of how to help the poor? Whether they got there by their own actions, or whether they are there because of something out of their control, such as a lay-off or plant closing, any help they receive needs to help them with more than just food stamps or a rent voucher. People need help getting out of the mindset that got them to this station in life.

Let me give you an example, my wife and I went to a seminar at our church that taught us how to budget our money and pay off debts. This really helped us, and we have more money for our bills than before because someone showed us how to change our spending habits and make our money work for us, and not the other way around.

The question I still have about the "sluggards" described in the bible is this: Do we just let them die of ignorance or what we percieve as stupidity or laziness? I'm serious here, what is the answer for people that have lost the will to try, or don't care how they live? It's obvious we should take care of the mentally ill and the disabled, but has anyone ever developed a real answer for the people that don't fall into those categories, but still struggle to make it?

I'm hoping I will find this answer somewhere else in the bible, I would love to hear what you guys have to say...

AC

Prov 10:15

2004-11-29T01:23:00.000-08:00

The wealth of the rich is their fortified city, but poverty is the ruin of the poor-Proverbs 10:15

One of the defining differences between the rich and the poor is what happens to each of them in times of trouble. Many of those things that we are all told to do in order to live a good life require money. Changing the oil in your car, making sure you have renters insurance, make sure the kids take their vitamins, makeing sure you have an emergency fund, or have a membership in AAA for when you break down. Many of us assume everyone does these sort of things, but that's not the case. The truth is for those of us who have ever worked for minimum wage, its just not possible.

My grandmother had a saying, "Poor folks got poor ways."

What the poor do when trouble comes is depend on their family, friends, and churches and government agencies.

Poverty is not an easy problem that will be solved with just one tax cut, or another agency, just throwing money at it isnt always the answer(that doesnt mean by a long shot that no money should be directed toward it!). it's a complex problem that needs to be addressed at many levels. More than anything, those that have money need to put themselves in the place of those without, trying to determine what its like to live without abundant resources.

Deuteronomy 24:17-22

2004-10-20T01:23:00.000-07:00

Deuteronomy 24:17-22 "Do not deprive the alien or the fatherless of justice, or take the cloak of the widow as a pledge. Remember that you were slaves in Egypt and the LORD your God redeemed you from there. That is why I command you to do this. When you are harvesting in your field and you overlook a sheaf, do not go back to get it. Leave it for the alien, the fatherless and the widow, so that the LORD your God may bless you in all the work of your hands. When you beat the olives from your trees, do not go over the branches a second time. Leave what remains for the alien, the fatherless and the widow. When you harvest the grapes in your vineyard, do not go over the vines again. Leave what remains for the alien, the fatherless and the widow. Remember that you were slaves in Egypt. That is why I command you to do this."

There's alot in this section of scripture. I'll try to be brief.

First, we see three groups of people that are supposed to be given help, and that special effort is to be made not to allow them to be taken advantage of: The alien, the fatherless, and the widow. I think the one thing that is common about these three groups is that they have no social capital, no network to fall back on. These are the people that don't have the resources to help themselves and are the most deserving of help.

Next, we see the word remember used twice. This point was doubly important. "Remember where you came from, remember what it is like to be a slave, remember..." This returns to problems with our compassion for the poor is that so many of us either don't remember what it means to not have money for anything else besides macaroni and cheese, or remember what it means to work a 10 hour shift at a fast food restaraunt and then spend the rest of the evening at a laundromat.

I remember those things. I remember smelling of burgers, and grease and my feet always hurting. I remember eating ramen noodles for most meals and hoping there was food left at closing time.

Without remembering, or at least trying to imagine the plight of the poor, we will always be lacking in real programs to help them.

Thanks for reading,

AC

Deuteronomy 24:11-15

2004-10-14T01:23:00.000-07:00

Deuteronomy 24:11-15 "When you make a loan of any kind to your neighbor, do not go into his house to get what he is offering as a pledge. Stay outside and let the man to whom you are making the loan bring the pledge out to you. If the man is poor, do not go to sleep with his pledge in your possession. Return his cloak to him by sunset so that he may sleep in it. Then he will thank you, and it will be regarded as a righteous act in the sight of the LORD your God. Do not take advantage of a hired man who is poor and needy, whether he is a brother Israelite or an alien living in one of your towns. Pay him his wages each day before sunset, because he is poor and is counting on it. Otherwise he may cry to the LORD against you, and you will be guilty of sin."

The biblical commands concerning doing business are very foreign and strange to western ears. It's not that they are against all of the ideas of capitalism, they are really just capitalism kept in check by virtue. The ideas of self-determination, and self-empowerment are still there, the ideas of a person receiving reward for working hard is there. But the ideas of profit at the expense of human dignity and causing pain and suffering to those less fortunate is not.

We do not see the callous pursuit of the bottom line above all else. Biblical capitalism does not consume the poor, it gives them the opportunities to get out of poverty.

In my heart I have always wondered the problem with poverty is not really as much of a political problem, as it is a spiritual problem. If the heart of capitalists was brought more in line with these ideas, they would affect the sort of changes that would change the world one family at a time, besides ultimately being more profitable in the long run to the bottom line.

AC

Oh Canada...

2004-10-10T01:23:00.000-07:00

A couple of weeks ago I asked Andrea from "Tales of a Farmwife" to write up something about Canada, socialized healthcare, and poverty. I'm not going to comment any more than to say this is an excellent essay that speaks for itself. Here it is:

"Oh Canada..."
When I hear of horrors (terrorism in Beslan, Sudan attrocities, 911,
widespread poverty and desperation), I cannot help but be so thankful to
live in Canada. But that doesn't keep me from envisioning a different and
better Canada.

We love our identity as 'peacekeepers' but we don't hate injustice and
cruelty enough to fight for the oppressed in so many global situations - we
think diplomacy is the answer to terror. As if we have any answers to peace
in a country so divided that Quebec and Western Canada feel completely
alienated and view separation as an attractive alternative.

We believe we need to 'live and let live' and so we'll fight for the
changing the definition of marriage to support homosexuality (why not, if
it's not hurting us) but we willingly overlook the rights of the unborn and
think we're making society a better place. We are afraid of standing for any
morals so we stand for nothing and become amoral and think it's wonderful to
be so 'politically correct'.

We love the Robin Hood mentality of taking from the rich to give to the poor
without a thought for economic realities that keep businesses from being
viable in a tough global marketplace. We don't seem to understand that
socialism creates a sense of entitlement to those who are not willing to
work hard for what that great standard of living we believe we should all
enjoy. We believe that seniority is more important than hard work when
granting promotions and don't seem to realize that initiative is thus
destroyed. And yet when the business giants are in danger of collapsing due
to huge inefficiencies and problems, we willingly throw money at the
situation because we realize that many jobs are on the line and we can't let
that happen. I think it is erroneous to think that socialist thinking is
more Christian because of its noble sounding cry for the poor and minority
peoples just as I think it is erroneous to believe that Capitalists don't
have great compassion and concern for those same people.

We think tolerance is a virtue but isn't it about what we're tolerant?
Tolerance of criminals and pornographers is considered compassionate.
Tolerance of Christian ideals is not tolerated, however.

We pat ourselves on the back for funding extensive social programs without
asking if those programs are really effective or if more money is propping
up the bureaucracy than is getting into the hands that need it.

We are so proud of our health care system that gives equitable, free
treatment for every citizen. But who gave us the idea that it is free? And
what about the quality of that service? We pay for it and do not get the
benefits unless we live in the right neighborhood. I live 20 min from the
hospital that services the entire Southwest corner of our province and we
can't even get a broken bone set there without being sent another 2-3 hours
to a 'central' hospital. We can't even keep enough doctors and for a time I
was not sure if I'd even be able to have my baby here because there were so
few doctors available. And everyone knows that cutting edge medical
technology is very often found in the States. Why is that iniative so often
found there and not here?

We pride ourselves on not being Americans and yet we are so comfortable to
ride on their shirtails in matters of global economics and national defense.

Socialism breeds mediocrity (Jean Chretien was a good example - not a leader
I ever respected ). There is such a careless attitude about politics. No one
demands integrity, and upright moral character from our leaders. We expect
and accept that our politicians don't mean what they promise - that
everything is just an election game and has little to do with reality. And
we're willing to believe whatever told by media - how conservatives that
favor capitalist ideas are a danger to our society. And a leader who does
not hide that he attends church and has faith in God is a real threat.

We're proud of democracy and yet many have no voice. Because our voice is
only represented by population without the balance of representation by
area, my voice is effectively silenced at the polls. But I will continue to
vote and I will continue to care deeply for this great nation of ours.

Good Stuff Coming...

2004-10-08T01:23:00.000-07:00

Hey, keep your eyes peeled to this space for an excellent series of posts about socialism in Canada by a guest writer. More to come...

AC

Deuteronomy 15:4,11

2004-10-06T01:23:00.000-07:00

Deuteronomy 15:4 "However, there should be no poor among you, for in the land the LORD your God is giving you to possess as your inheritance, he will richly bless you..."

Deuteronomy 15:11 "There will always be poor people in the land. Therefore I command you to be openhanded toward your brothers and toward the poor and needy in your land."

These two scriptures are not contradicting each other. The word that explains it all is "should" in verse four. It's not God's best for people to be poor. He is a good God that wants his children to be well taken care of, and not go hungry.

That said, the earth is under the power(right now) of Satan. In Corinthians he is called the "god of this world", the greek bears it out as the god of this world system. If you remember, Satan was the one that offered Jesus all of the kingdoms of this world if he would bow down and worship him.

This is actually a much larger subject than can be covered in one post, so I will not go into more detail. I believe that there are three reasons people are poor even though it's not God's best for their lives.

1. Not knowing how to deal with finances.
2. Satan's influence in their lives keeping them from being blessed financially.
3. People were supposed to bless them, and help them, and did not-could have been fellow Christians or bad employers, or bad politicians.

Being poor is not a sin. Poor people should not be marginalized or made to feel guilty. Everybody bears some of blame for poverty. So everybody should make some effort to fix it.

AC

Leviticus 25:39

2004-10-04T01:23:00.002-07:00

Leviticus 25:39 "If one of your countrymen becomes poor among you and sells himself to you, do not make him work as a slave."

Those who are in a bad situation and had to become an endentured slave were meant to be treated with dignity and respect. I think this still applies to the equivalent that we have today, the minimum wage worker. I worked in a fast food restaraunt for several years. I remember feeling like a slave. No one should have to live like that.

AC

Leviticus 25:35

2004-10-04T01:23:00.000-07:00

Leviticus 25:35 "If one of your countrymen becomes poor and is unable to support himself among you, help him as you would an alien or a temporary resident, so he can continue to live among you."

Not only do we see that we are to help the alien or temporary resident in our midst, but if one of your fellow countryment hits a rough spot, you are to help him until he gets on his feet.

I know that many times the first word out of hard-core Republicans to thoughts like this is, "But the poor can't get a free ride! They have to work!". I'm not disagreeing with that, not one bit. The book of proverbs is full of admonitions against "sluggards"-(that means slacker in modern english). But I believe that the number of true "leeches" is highly exaggerated.

AC

Blog Explosion

2004-10-02T01:23:00.000-07:00

I had been noticing on my sitemeter all of these hits from a place called "Blog Explosion". I finally went and checked it out and signed up for it. Wow...it's really worth checking out. You surf other people's blogs to gain points that are used to direct people to your blog. You can also use it to put up banner ads for free. So....in the spirit of shameless self promotion....click below to tell them Anonymous Cog sent you and earn me some free hits-Thanks!

**Click here to join Blog Explosion***

AC

Leviticus 19:15

2004-10-01T01:23:00.000-07:00

Leviticus 19:15 "Do not pervert justice; do not show partiality to the poor or favoritism to the great, but judge your neighbor fairly."

While this directly speaks to judicial matters, I think it also speaks in general to the equal treatment for all men no matter how high or low they may be. In applying to political matters, it makes me wonder what is the right way to tax the rich and poor? It's true that the poor should not be saddled with high taxes, and that the rich can afford higher taxes. We also need to consider the real possibility that leaving people with more money in their pockets is a catlyst for the growth of small business.

For many years people have been asking for a flat tax, without the complicated deductions and regulations of our present system. I know in my own life I always felt that the present system is unfair. When I have worked overtime, the total taxes have been more than 20% at times, working extra doesnt always mean extra money in our present system. I think its time for something simple that is fair to everyone.

Any comments?

AC

Leviticus 19:10

2004-09-30T01:23:00.000-07:00

Leviticus 19:10 "Do not go over your vineyard a second time or pick up the grapes that have fallen. Leave them for the poor and the alien. I am the LORD your God."

This scripture is really at odds with many of the concepts of business that we have. The common idea of making sure you know where every penny goes, and getting as much profit as possible in order to be a success is at odds with this idea. This speaks to the heart of the problem that modern capitalism seems to have with an obsession with the bottom line.

How do we compare this agrarian method of welfare to today? What would this be comparable to? My own opinion is that it would be comparable to continuing to give raises and bonuses even when it hurts overall profit. Without a doubt, the turning of priorities from purely the survival of the corporation through the efforts of the workers to the survival of the workers through the resources of the corporation.

Some of you will say that is not good business. I say you are wrong. I have worked in places directed by men who genuinely cared for their employees and gave raises and bonuses even when profits were not good. Those places thrived with a morale you could not find in most factories and warehouses. Taking care of your most important assets is good business.

The other thing we see in this verse is the phrase "poor and alien". There are many other verses about how to treat the alien that is living in your country. Here we see that God wants the alien to be given help if he should need it. We don't see them being kicked out of the country, or marginalized like leeches.

AC

Exodus 30:15

2004-09-29T01:23:00.001-07:00

Exodus 30:15 "The rich are not to give more than a half shekel and the poor are not to give less when you make the offering to the LORD to atone for your lives."

The shekel was the most common coin in Israel. The gold shekel was worth about $9.60 and the silver about 64 cents. So this offering was less than ten dollars and probabally around five dollars.

This says several things about the rich and poor. Number one, they were equal in the sight of God. Number two, the rich person could not get more redemption for more money. Finally, the poor person was required to locate this amount of money. It was not a huge amount, but it was the equivalent of a meal or two. God did require the poor to do something, and did not just let them off or lower the bar. While this may seem callous to some, I think that this requirement contributes to a feeling of dignity among the poor, of being taken seriously, on equal standing with the richest in the community. The requirement stands, no more or no less.

What is so difficult about studying this subject is how different the Eastern viewpoint of the poor is to the Western, mainly protestant based viewpoint all of us are under. Many people in the rest of the world see poverty as a fact of life, as one of many stations that people live under, and not as a sign of failure.

AC

Reaching to the Choir

2004-09-29T01:23:00.000-07:00

Please read this excellent article by Ayelish McGarvey called:

"Reaching to the Choir"

This is a more full view of Evangelicals that are questioning the dominance of only the Conservative view in Christian politics.If you enjoyed the article about Jimmy Carter, you will really enjoy this one!

AC

Nothing Modest About Small Charity's Impact

2004-09-28T01:23:00.000-07:00

Many conservatives argue that increased government spending on social programs would be better spent if given to independent charity groups. I'm not sure one way or the other. While the government can have a reputation for sluggish bureaucracy, how will these charities be monitored to determine that they are helping everyone equally? I'm still working on an answer to this one.

Here's an interesting story about a charity with a unique niche, they give small amounts of money, nothing over $1000 out to 300 people a month for various emergencies, here's a quote from the article that explores how this relates to the Conservative Right's idea that the poor are better served through charities than government agencies:

Proponents of laissez-faire capitalism often point to organizations like Taylor's when arguing against the need for social safety nets such as welfare and Social Security. It's in our own self-interest to look after one another, the thinking goes, and in the absence of a state-funded social welfare system, we're more likely to come to one another's aid before letting someone slip through the cracks.

The idea that you are better served by your family, friends and church making sure you don't fall through the cracks does seem to be supported in the scriptures. The problem is that America and Canada have become such nations of individuals that no one is connected to the rest of the world in the same way they used to be. Taking this one step farther, our social networks have devolved into many acquaintances, few real friends and family that rarely meets or pools resources.

Like many social problems in our world, if the church at large were doing what it was supposed to be doing, the government would not be forced to take up the slack.

Read the rest of the article here:
"Nothing Modest About Small Charity's Impact"

Thanks,

AC

Darwin's Influence on Ruthless Laissez-Faire Capitalism

2004-09-27T01:23:00.000-07:00

Here's a link to an interesting article regarding Social Darwinism and Laissez-Faire Capitalism.

Darwin's Influence on Ruthless Laissez-Faire Capitalism

AC

Exodus 23:6,10-11

2004-09-26T17:56:00.000-07:00

Now we will start examining each of the first list of scriptures and see how they reflect on God's attitude towards treatment of the poor. I think its important to note that while this is the Old Testament, Jesus and Paul both said in the New Testament that the new law of love did not erase these statutes, it just made covered all of the laws with one. If you love your neighbor, you will obey the heart of the laws of the Old Testament. Because some of use have lost sight of these old laws, that is why I am examining each reference.

Exodus 23:6,10,11 "Do not deny justice to your poor people in their lawsuits." vs 10. "For six years you are to sow your fields and harvest the crops, vs 11. but during the seventh year let the land lie unplowed and unused. Then the poor among your people may get food from it, and the wild animals may eat what they leave. Do the same with your vineyard and your olive grove."

Verse 6:This would point to the establishment of a judicial system without built in preference to the rich. At least in the United States of America we need some work on this. Its commonly reported that court appointed lawyers have way too many cases to give their poorer clients proper representation. Those with the money for lawyers do have the advantage.

Verse 10-11: This points to making resources available to the poor. Since Israel was mainly an agrarian society, everyone was commanded to leave food for the poor to gather. But there was a responsibility to those that needed assistance; they had to go and gather the food out of the fields, and convert it into flour, or wash it, and then prepare it.

Here's a question that we may try to answer in the future: Would there have been homeless people in Israel during the period after they settled in Palestine after fleeing Egypt, at least in the same way that they exist here in the United States or Canada?

AC

Scriptures to Consider Part I

2004-09-26T01:23:00.000-07:00

Well, to start the study of Christian views towards poverty, lets look at some scriptures from the Laws to the Children of Israel presented in the Pentateuch and go from there. These are all in the New International Version.
Exodus 23:6,10,11 "Do not deny justice to your poor people in their lawsuits." vs 10. "For six years you are to sow your fields and harvest the crops, vs 11. but during the seventh year let the land lie unplowed and unused. Then the poor among your people may get food from it, and the wild animals may eat what they leave. Do the same with your vineyard and your olive grove." Exodus 30:15 "The rich are not to give more than a half shekel and the poor are not to give less when you make the offering to the LORD to atone for your lives." Leviticus 19:10 "Do not go over your vineyard a second time or pick up the grapes that have fallen. Leave them for the poor and the alien. I am the LORD your God." Leviticus 19:15 "Do not pervert justice; do not show partiality to the poor or favoritism to the great, but judge your neighbor fairly." Leviticus 23:22 "When you reap the harvest of your land, do not reap to the very edges of your field or gather the gleanings of your harvest. Leave them for the poor and the alien. I am the LORD your God." Leviticus 25:35 "If one of your countrymen becomes poor and is unable to support himself among you, help him as you would an alien or a temporary resident, so he can continue to live among you." Leviticus 25:39 "If one of your countrymen becomes poor among you and sells himself to you, do not make him work as a slave." Deuteronomy 15:4 "However, there should be no poor among you, for in the land the LORD your God is giving you to possess as your inheritance, he will richly bless you..." Deuteronomy 15:7 "If there is a poor man among your brothers in any of the towns of the land that the LORD your God is giving you, do not be hardhearted or tightfisted toward your poor brother." Deuteronomy 15:11 "There will always be poor people in the land. Therefore I command you to be openhanded toward your brothers and toward the poor and needy in your land." Deuteronomy 24:11-15 "When you make a loan of any kind to your neighbor, do not go into his house to get what he is offering as a pledge. Stay outside and let the man to whom you are making the loan bring the pledge out to you. If the man is poor, do not go to sleep with his pledge in your possession. Return his cloak to him by sunset so that he may sleep in it. Then he will thank you, and it will be regarded as a righteous act in the sight of the LORD your God. Do not take advantage of a hired man who is poor and needy, whether he is a brother Israelite or an alien living in one of your towns. Pay him his wages each day before sunset, because he is poor and is counting on it. Otherwise he may cry to the LORD against you, and you will be guilty of sin." Deuteronomy 24:17-22 "Do not deprive the alien or the fatherless of justice, or take the cloak of the widow as a pledge. Remember that you were slaves in Egypt and the LORD your God redeemed you from there. That is why I command you to do this. When you are harvesting in your field and you overlook a sheaf, do not go back to get it. Leave it for the alien, the fatherless and the widow, so that the LORD your God may bless you in all the work of your hands. When you beat the olives from your trees, do not go over the branches a second time. Leave what remains for the alien, the fatherless and the widow. When you harvest the grapes in your vineyard, do not go over the vines again. Leave what remains for the alien, the fatherless and the widow. Remember that you were slaves in Egypt. That is why I command you to do this."

This post will be a work in progress for a couple of days while I continue to look over them.

Thanks for reading.

Jimmy Carter interview

2004-09-24T01:23:00.000-07:00

Check out this interview by Jimmy Carter:
Carter's Crusade

I don't agree with all of it, but I respect him and he is an intelligent,sincere man. But it was good to see him finally speak pragmatically about the two "elephants in the living room" that keep most Evangelicals from voting Democratic: Abortion and Homosexuality. I'm still ruminating on my final thoughts on what he said. Any comments?

AC

A Fully Christian Society....

2004-09-23T01:23:00.000-07:00

Here's a quote from the C.S. Lewis book, "Mere Christianity" about what a fully Christian society would be like.

"The New Testament, without going into details gives us a pretty clear hint of what a fully Christian society would be like. Perhaps it gives us more than we can take. It tells that there are to be no passengers or parasites: if a man does no work, he ought not to eat. Everyone is to work with his own hands, and what is more, everyone's work is to produce something good: there will be no manufacture of silly luxuries and then of sillier advertisements to persuade us to buy them. And there is to be no 'swank' or 'side', no putting on airs. To that extent a Christian society would be what we now call leftist. On the other hand, it is always insisting on obedience-obedience(and outward marks of respect) from all of us to properly appointed magistrates, from children to parents and(I am afraid this is going to be very unpopular) from wives to husbands. Thirdly, it is to be a cheerful society: full of singing and rejoicing, and regarding worry or anxiety as wrong. Courtesy is the one of the Christian virtues; and the New Testament hates what it calls 'busybodies'. If there were such a society in existence and you or I visited it, I think we should come away with a curious impression. We should feel that its economic life was very socialistic and, in that sense, 'advanced', but that its family life and its code of manners were rather old-fashioned-perhaps even ceremonious and aristocratic. Each of us would like some bits of it, but I am afraid very few of us would like the whole thing. That is just what one would expect if Christianity is the total plan for the human machine. We have all departed from the total plan in different ways, and each of us wants to make out that his own modification of the original plan is the plan itself. You will find this again and again about anything that is really Christian: everyone is attracted by bits if it and wants to pick out those bits and leave the rest. That is why we do not get much further: and that is why people who are fighting for quite opposite things can both say they are fighting for Christianity"

Introduction

2004-09-22T01:23:00.000-07:00

The subject for this blog has been cooking on the inside of me for some time now. Every time I read "A Christmas Carol", and when I have read books like "Nickel and Dimed" and other books about the poor, I find myself trying to reconcile the viewpoint of the Republican Party and that of historical Christianity. I haven't been able to put it reconcile the two, but I'm going to try to figure it out, and thats what this blog is for.

Let me tell you a little bit about myself. I was raised a conservative Christian, and even went to seminary for a couple of years. My folks were both rich and poor. Their prosperous business failed during the Reagan years, and then they ended up declaring bankruptcy. I had Christmases where I got everything I wanted, and at least one where I got nothing. They were good people and did the best they could. They never blamed the government, or Reagan's policies. Politics was not spoken about, but I was taught what was right and wrong.

In my own life, I've worked in almost every kind of "Joe Job" imaginable. Fast food, factories, delivery truck driver, and now work in a call center (click here for that blog). As long as I have voted, I have voted Republican, because of their stance on certain social and military issues. But I am starting to have my doubts lately, if they are the party that really has a plan to help the working poor. Tax cuts can't be the answer for all of our society's problems.

I think the fact that I have been indoctrinated in the Christian Right, and am trying to find the truth beyond the party line seems like a good foundation.

Thanks for reading.

AC