Snyder Than You

Just previously, I posted a reply to a Christian article about Occupy Wall Street. Here, I am continuing in a slightly different vein.

I had said that, as Christians, we are required by God to care for the poor. I listed several links to various Bible passages that spoke of caring for or neglecting the responsibility to care for the poor, the widow, the orphan, the homeless, and the immigrant.

All in all, doing a simple search for “poor” in the popular Message paraphrase garners 161 mentions of the word “poor.” For those of you who think the Message paraphrase is apostacy or whatever, the KJV has 199. Chew on that for a bit. Some of those 199 are from James 2. Read and ponder that for a bit. (You’re welcome to choose your own translation.)

Now, we can argue about government welfare or church welfare. I completely agree and vouch that the Christian church (and, reading the Old Testament links in the searches, I’d add Jews to this as well) should be the primary caregivers of the poor, the homeless, the widow, the infirm, and the orphan.

This only adds to the sad irony that so many Christians are so diametrically opposed to welfare and stingy in their charity. Note, I said “so many” and did not say “all.” There are several Christians and Christian organizations that give and do what they can to care for neglected peoples. There are even several people who would give the modern-day equivalent of the widow’s mites. Sadly, though, this is not the majority, let alone all. As we all know, there are millions who claim Christ as their savior yet disregard or blatantly ignore the words and mandates of Christ (let alone simple common decency).

I also do feel, though, especially given the freedom of governmental religious establishment, that we as a political entity (AKA, nation) must recognize the social contract. (This is actually a funny thing, considering the strong impetus toward scientific evolution and social Darwinism and “survival of the fittest,” but that’s another matter for another time.)

Am I advocating exorbitant taxes on the rich and unmitigated handouts to those who willfully do nothing to take care of themselves?

No.

While I would prefer that welfare would totally be a dictum of the church and the synagogue (and the mosque? I do not know the Quran that well.), I also feel the government, as representative of the general public and as part of its taxation of the public, should have programs in place to care for the poor. Corporations, as well, as part of their community programs, should be hands-on helping the poor.

What is this care?

It is not merely handouts and should not be unlimited and lifelong without question. While continuing food stamp, unemployment, income assistance, Medicaid, and such need-based programs, there should be better funding for educational programs and opportunities for people to gain and practice skills. Better funding and staffing for job search and interviewing programs. Access to clothes for interviews and professional dress and shavers and soaps to clean up.

And checks and balances to confirm that people are doing this. There should some evidence on the part of the receiver that they are doing what they can to find what they can.

Now I know what you’ll say: “Most of these programs are in place!” and/or “There are too many people abusing these programs to their own advantage without giving back or seriously working at getting a job.”

My responses would be as such:

• Yes, there are several such programs, but I would argue that they are not well funded, they are not well staffed, what staff there is is not well trained, and they are not well marketed.
• Yes, there are several people who abuse welfare and job training and other such programs. We’ve all heard the anecdotes of families on food stamps driving new Cadillacs to their pedicures while leaving their children to watch the big screen HDTV at home. These, though, are not the majority and they harken back to the argument I mentioned in my previous post: Do we stop wishing for a better future simply because it cannot be perfect? Do we give up on all such services simply because a few are abusing it? I seriously hope not. or else the church should just shut down and reject the Gospel right now.

This, I think, is yet one more reason we need to fund better training and better staffing. Initial investment will create a better and more affordable long-term.

What it will all really take it a complete mind-set change. Of so many people in so many classes and walks of life in so many aspects on so many levels. And that is what is disheartening.

And I think the disheartening aspect of the revolution needed in everyone is what causes people to argue against speaking out for it.

This article (which I did not clearly know was from a Christian website) seemed at first to be trying objectivity, but I have to wonder about some of the “profound” thoughts:

Economic uncertainty has inspired thousands of protesters globally to take a stance against capitalism. Their alternative is yet to be defined.

I don’t think all of the 99 percent or the protests is against capitalism itself, solely or totally. I think its strongest stance is against unjust unchecked capitalist greed at the expense of human beings. That quite a distinction.

“From Seattle to Sydney, protesters have taken to the streets,” The Economist reported.

Really, The Economist? Your poetic device is to point out all the protests in the Pacific Ocean? You could have done a better job.

The movement, a copy of Egypt’s and Tunisia’s uprisings, maintains it is dedicated to the “power of the people.”

Um… I don’t quite think it’s on the level of Egypt and Tunisia in scope, number, or violence. Seriously hyperbolic, no?

It considers itself a “leaderless democracy,” stating on its website, “Decisions are made democratically, without voting, by general assent.”

Knocking on the protestors here, but exactly how do you measure “general assent” in a democracy if not by vote?

Ask: why were there not mass protests against the 1 percent in the 1980s or the 1990s?

The answer: few were concerned with greedy business practices when economic times were good and the rank-and-file were unaffected.

This kind of thing has been seen in many things. This logic is great: Separate but equal went unimpeded for many years, why did they have to raise a fuss in the 1960s? Duh? just because nobody’s saying anything doesn’t make it right. Or maybe they should just set Jerry Sandusky free?

The unbridled desire to get more, whether power or money, is the real reason people are camped near Wall Street, in front of leading banks, and in cities across the world. But the protesters are not the only ones. This attitude runs deeper: everyone, from out-of-work single mothers drowning in bills to CEOs of Fortune 500 companies, is driven by some form of covetousness.

And so this article jumps from a seemingly objective (if a bit hyperbolic) look at two arguments about the Occupy movements to outright rejection of said movement to Biblical philosophy on covetousness.

And this is a newsflash? It wasn’t already obvious the protestors wanted something? We have to go all cynical about motives and claim that calls for just economic practices and more equitable distribution of wealth is really just people wanting power and money?

And so we come to the crux of the matter for David C. York: 

The Old Testament book of Jeremiah hits the problem on the nose: “For from the least of them even unto the greatest of them every one is given to covetousness…” (6:13).

How true! Politicians covet their positions of power and promise the populace whatever their hearts desire, and citizens come to expect the government to provide for them—demanding more and more each time. It is a system that is doomed to fail as the prophet Jeremiah explains, “It is not in man that walks to direct his steps” (Jer. 10:23).

Just these two passages show manmade governments, no matter the ideals they are based upon, will fail. Why? Because they are based upon a desire to get.

…

The Bible also paints a picture of character breakdown in these times: “For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent [unrestrained], fierce, despisers of those that are good” (II Tim. 3:2-3) [emphasis as quoted].

So, I guess Occupiers are just wasting their time hoping for a better government and better economic policy just because we can never have the perfect government and perfect economic policy. Oh, and protestors are not only lazy unemployed welfare moochers merely trying to mooch even more without actually working, they are unthankful, unrestrained, and fierce.

Unrestrained and fierce quite unlike the police, of course.

And never mind these scripture concerning the poor (and widows and immigrants):

Exodus 23:10

Leviticus 19:9-10

Leviticus 23:22

Deuteronomy 15:4

Deuteronomy 15:10-11

Job 31:13-28 (read further, too)

Job 34:16-20

Proverbs 14:21

Proverbs 14:31

Proverbs 16:8

Proverbs, 17:5

Proverbs 21:13

Proverbs 22:16

Proverbs 28:27

Isaiah 3:13

Jeremiah and Ezekiel mention “exploiting the poor” several times (as do Isaiah, Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes).

Matthew 19:21: Funny that I never hear the Bible-quoting defenders of the rich quoting this verse.

Matthew 25:34-45: This should be all any Christian needs to understand when it comes to money and people. You’re not a Christian without Jesus and these are the words of Jesus as quoted in the only text completely tied to Christianity. Are you seriously going to tell me we are not to take care of the poor?

Luke 1:46-53

Luke 11:37-41

Acts 6:1: It honestly seems a bit odd to me that they decide they’re too busy preaching to go to the poor, but at least they recognize the need and delegated responsibility to those they trust, wanting to make sure needs were met. (As said elsewhere, taking care of the poor is a ministry and preached a good message of its own.)

This list is not exhaustive, and I tried to focus on those passages that commanded people to give to and care for the poor, the homeless, the immigrant, the widow, and the orphan. There are also passages stating not to give rich or poor special treatment in legal matters, passages stating that the poor will always be here and will always be mistreated, passages saying not to be lazy and not to borrow money or you’ll wind up poor.

So basically, don’t do anything to become poor. Yet, also, if you are rich, you are required by God to care for the poor.

More to come in my next post.

“Funny,” but sad: Wild throngs, fights, pepper spray, and fired guns are de riguer for Black Friday

Completely unacceptable: Peaceful gatherings of people in a democracy protesting bailed banks and billionaires while people starve down the street.

The saddest part is that both are the 99 percent.