Posts
Thankfully, we are in a much more enlightened time where we don't put our poor in prisons or force them into labor. But consider this...instead of giving money to charity, Scrooge gave a VERY interesting fall back. Society already had devices in place to take care of the poor. The government was already involved and there were already things in place to take care of the poor. What need was there for Scrooge to have even the involvement of giving money to charity? What good does the charity do that the government doesn't already do? After all, didn't Scrooge already pay his taxes? "I help to support the establishments I have mentioned--they cost enough; and those who are badly off must go there." Why did he need to give MORE money? Isn't he giving enough?
How much different is this from today? The government has welfare checks, unemployment checks, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, food stamps, WIC (Women, Infants and Children for those of you who don't know), CHiP, public housing, public school, veterans affairs, government subsidized elderly care, government subsidized child-care...man, the list just keeps on going. I mean, really, is there ANYTHING the government does NOT provide in some way? Even those today who are in the unemployment roles have a hope from the government. I believe that I heard that the ONLY sector that actually saw an INCREASE in jobs was the public sector, meaning government jobs. As a charity minded Christian, what more is there for me to do? All I have to do is sit back, relax, pay my taxes, and the government will take care of everything. I no longer need to get involved, get my hands dirty, or anything like that.
Now, don't get me wrong. I agree totally with those believers who say that we should rejoice that the government is actually doing something for social justice. After all, if we are supposed to be the conscience of society, we should feel good when the government actually listens and does something. But the problem we face is the same problem that condemned Scrooge. We are no longer involved. There is no relationship. The poor and oppressed are a faceless mass that we are distanced from with no need for us to do anything.
Somehow, I don't think this is what Christ meant by saying
35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.' (Matthew 25:35-36)
Every instance there is of Christ doing these things, he was actually there and involved. There is something to be said about the word "incarnation" as refers to Christ. God putting on flesh was more than just a means to the cross. By becoming a man, Christ showed us what it meant to be the hands and feet of God, living out justice in his every moment of his life. He probably did pay taxes, yes, and temple tithes for sure. But he was out there amongst the poor, the needy, the hungry, the lost and he was flesh. He put meat around the love.
We are called to be like Christ. We are called to do those things that "incarnate" the love of God. As James says
18 But someone will say, "You have faith; I have deeds." Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by what I do. 19 You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder. (James 2:18-19)
Our faith has to be lived out as more than a belief that God is good and that there is a God. We need to be doing something. Yes, socialistic ideals ARE God's ideals. We are called to take care of those who cannot take care of themselves. But that does not mean at a distance. Let's get meaty. Let's do as Scrooge did when he finally "got it". Instead putting the poor at a distance, he actually got involved with Cratchett and his family. How much better was life for EVERYONE when Scrooge actually got involved? As Marley said, "Mankind is [our] business".
Put meat on the bones of your love and let's get out there and do our business.
