pudge's Journal: Christianity and Charity, revisited

Following the election, there was a discussion on PBS NewsHour which prompted me to write a journal entry about Christianity and Charity.

I don't have much to add, but one of the participants I referenced, Jim Wallis of Sojourners Magazine, was on The Daily Show this week, so I looked up the entry, and thought others might wish to do the same.

more on Wallis

[capoccia]

To get an idea of more where Wallis is coming from, read the 1973 Chicago Declaration of Social Concern [esa-online.org]. The ESA (Evangelicals for Social Action) [esa-online.org] was formed at this Thanksgiving meeting. Jim Wallis was one of this group, and started Sojourners [sojo.net] in 1975.

wallis

[JDizzy]

I watched that show and I think that Wallis was a very agreeable person. After seeing the Dailly show, I had to google for this guy because my GF was currious who he was, and we found a few books he wrote.

Re:wallis

[pudge]

Yeah, I do not in any way want to come off as anti-Wallis. I just have a fundamental disagreement with him, and I only mention it because my perspective on the issue is often lost in the discussion. It becomes "should Christians help the poor, or not?" instead of "how should Christians help the poor?"

Re:wallis

[JDizzy]

Yea... I guess I didn't internalize any anti-Wallis'ism in your blog. Rather, you perked my sensors because my G/F really took notice to his apparent stream of comments in terms of his views, or whatever. I'm reading linkage right now. =)

I watched that

[stoolpigeon]

I saw the PBS interview when it was aired. I had just visited Saddleback [saddleback.com] a couple weeks earlier-- and I'm pretty interested in what Rick Warren has to say anyway. I think he is a great representative for the 'religious right' because he's pretty sane and knows how to speak his mind without trying to push things that don't need to be pushed.

He and Wallis seemed to be on the same page for the most part, Wallis is just pushing a side of things that the dems should have pointed out in the election. Abort

Re:I watched that

[pudge]

I felt like his push was not for the government to be more involved in social aid

I'll disagree with you there. For example, he acts like the right doesn't care about poor people, even though they give a lot in charity, and Bush strongly encourages charitable giving; what else could he mean when he says that it should be more of a political issue?

Re:I watched that

[stoolpigeon]

I guess my perspective colors what I see. To me the whole interview was more about how Christians should approach politics and perceptions of how they do so now. I thought the whole social action was just kind of an undercurrent to the broader picture of judging candidates on moral issues.

I think Kerry really got hammered because he was percieved as not upholding values- because of the abortion and gay marriage stuff. But I think Wallis raises valid points (and I've seen a lot of other people bring thi

Re:I watched that

[pudge]

I thought the whole social action was just kind of an undercurrent to the broader picture of judging candidates on moral issues.

Am I not allowed to comment on Wallis unless it is in reference to his main point?

But I think Wallis raises valid points (and I've seen a lot of other people bring this up) that Kerry had other issues that could have been approraced from a moral perspective.

But now you're making my argument for me. In all the issues he was referring to where Kerry could have framed them as m

Re:I watched that

[stoolpigeon]

Let me first say that written exchanges like this are difficult for me - as I often misjudge the tone of posts. It seems you may have your hackles up a bit in your reply above and if so -- I assure you it is because I came across incorrectly. I certainly am not trying to question what you are 'allowed' to comment on-- just trying to talk it over. I'm not trying to argue your point as much as I am trying to discuss it with you in order to better understand it. I wasn't really 'getting' what you were sayi

Re:I watched that

[pudge]

the biggest issue he brought up, in my mind, as a moral issue-- was the war in Iraq

Yes, but that's also a weird one, because it WAS brought up as a moral issue, over and over and over, by the Democrats, so it was the one issue where his point was largely moot.

Now I'm not trying to argue the issue of Iraq- but I am stunned that Kerry did not present it as a moral issue

I am stunned people think he didn't. :-)

Finally- the government getting out of the way may be the best thing that it can do to help pe

Re:I watched that

[stoolpigeon]

I think I've got a good grasp on what you are saying now. I appreciate your patience in laying it out.

I think you are right that Kerry did bring up the war as a moral issue but I think he didn't do it directly enough. When the Catholic Church said it was wrong to vote for a pro-abortion candidate unless there were over-riding ethical considerations, he should have jumped on that. Now maybe he did and I never heard it. I think he lost a lot of hispanic votes because he did not directly argue that the w

Re:I watched that

[pudge]

When the Catholic Church said it was wrong to vote for a pro-abortion candidate unless there were over-riding ethical considerations, he should have jumped on that. Now maybe he did and I never heard it.

He didn't jump on it, but he did address it, and tried to say his was the moral position. But he was not going to convince anyone who didn't already agree with him, so he didn't dwell on it.

I think he lost a lot of hispanic votes because he did not directly argue that the war was as bad or worse than ab

Re:I watched that

[jdavidb]

But I think that it could very well be argued to any Christian person-- liberal or conservative, that they ought to seek out what helps others.

Yes, but remember that the government is funded through mandatory taxation. Helping others through the government, whether it works or not, can be viewed (and is viewed by some) as stealing from some people to help others. Many Christians I know do in fact view it this way. Arguments that Christians should look at whether a candidate's policies will help peopl

Re:I watched that

[stoolpigeon]

I'd be interested to see how this line of thinking is reconciled with Christ's statement 'render unto caesar...' I would sum up the intent there that a Christian should comply with a governmental authority whether or not it is moral. Paul did so and instructed others to do the same.

I realize that compliance and advocacy are different. My other question would be-- is it stealing from people if they willingly contribute? No one in America pays income taxes that does not want to. They can leave the co

Re:I watched that

[pudge]

I realize that compliance and advocacy are different. My other question would be-- is it stealing from people if they willingly contribute? No one in America pays income taxes that does not want to. They can leave the country if it bothers them that much. No one is stopping them.

It's not stealing if a crook takes your wallet at gunpoint. You didn't have to walk down that street, and you don't have to be in that city.

That it is approved of by the people doesn't make it not theft. What if the majority of

Re:I watched that

[jdavidb]

I would sum up the intent there that a Christian should comply with a governmental authority whether or not it is moral. Paul did so and instructed others to do the same.

I fully agree. That's not incompatible with me saying that it's wrong for people to take money from other people against their will. Christ taught His early followers to submit to the Roman soldier prerogative of compelling any many to carry his load one mile for him. That did not make it right for the Roman soldier to oppress the ma

Re:I watched that

[stoolpigeon]

I'm not coming across correctly. I realize that there are many people who not only pay all their taxes -- but they give. They give sacraficially. I know that a lot of taxes are wasted. I am not a big proponent of welfare as it exists in the U.S. today.

I wouldn't say that anyone who holds these opinions is greedy. But I have met and I am willing to bet that there are groups of people - of some size who latch on to this reasoning to avoid helping others and to focus on their main priority-- taking care

Re:I watched that

[jdavidb]

I don't dispute that there are those who twist the words of God to selfish ends. There always have been, and always will be.

The message I'm trying to convey boils down to the fact that there are some who sincerely (with no selfish motivation, as described above), believe all forms of coercion are incompatible with Christianity. Coercion to bring about selfish ends, as well as coercion to bring about selfless, godly ends.

Given that you're not asserting that everyone who would oppose a well-meant govern