When the Homily is about Immunology

Eating some of the Crunchy Con chipped a tooth

I've been meaning to blog about this from before I left but just never had the time. My wife got Rod Dreher's book "Crunchy Cons" from the library and I had some opportunities to begin reading it. As many of you know, Mr. Dreher is a convert to Orthodoxy.

A great deal of what Rod Dreher writes I agree with, especially in regard to personal family decisions. But when he starts nationalizing some of these notions I get a little nervous. Perhaps its those few libertarian genes in me?

Case and point: in one part of his book he discusses a family he knew - if memory serves from his Parish. Conservative Catholic Homeschooling Republicans who fell upon hard times and found themselves making use of some form of government assistance from their state. Until the Republicans of that state lowered taxes and the funding for that program dried up. Rod would learn of his friend's plight from the local newspaper. Shocked and concerned he contacted them and offered to assist them financially, but being a "proud" family they declined, insistent that they would somehow find a way to work through it themselves.

Rod - a Republican himself - then went on a public campaign of lambasting his Republican representatives for having this program cut.

I was less intrigued by Rod's response than by his friend's family's proud response in refusing Rod's money, but being more willing to take stranger's money in the form of taxes redistributed to them. Now think about this for a moment, this is indeed a pride issue: to refuse help from someone who offers it out of love and concern, while being willing to accept it anonymously from complete strangers who perhaps begrudge them for having to do it.

Sometimes I think we forget that welfare and other charitable government programs do not come about because the government just prints some extra money. This is, in no uncertain way, forced charity. Yes, the will of the majority of people can be responsible for such forced charity, but we do need to recognize that in some cases it is indeed Sally Struthers marching into homes with the authority of the IRS behind her.

I have been and am the benefactor of both government charity and government tax cuts, so I see both sides of this issue, I think. But money does not grow on trees and I really do see a fundamental Christian disconnect with accepting money pried from the hands of some stranger and rejecting money offered to you in love by a brother or sister in Christ.

To what degree do we ask the government to be the verb of our personal Christian duty? To what degree do we ask the government to be the verb of other people's Christian duty - regardless of whether or not they happen to be Christian? Serious questions here that I do not profess to know the answer too. Helping the poor is - without any doubt - our responsibility - I'm just not convinced, from a political point of view, that the government ought to do it. It's far far easier to cast a vote in the direction of charity than it is to change portions of your life and give. I suppose some few might do both, but I would rather guess that most people - like me - don't do much in the way of self-sacrificial giving and might perhaps sleep well in knowing they helped force rich people to give for them?

What would happen if the government funds dried up tomorrow? Would we...we Christians...step up to the plate and help alleviate the suffering in our own communities? Would we sacrifice to see it happen, knowing we cannot count on the government to force the hand of the wealthy? (ahem...as a side, believe me, while knowing intellectually it to be true, I now know personally that all of you I know are fabulously wealthy.) Would we take our saved taxes and buy big screens or would we help our friends who find themselves in similar straights as did Mr. Dreher's friends? Would they accept our help?

Whether it be Education Grants or outright Welfare, we must remember that no one is entitled to this money. It is a charitable gift to me from someone who may not have had any interest in helping me at all. I guess we feel better receiving it this way not only because it is seemingly anonymous, but also because it is easier not to feel a sense of obligation? I dunno.

Anyway, the "Crunchy Con" and I are going to part ways on issues like this. I believe charity is most rightly (from a Christian moral perspective) and efficiently done on a personal and local level than on a centralized governmental level. At the very least notions of governmentally taking from the rich and giving to the poor should not be wrapped up in ideas of Christian duty - especially if you are like me and you really do not pay much in the way of taxes. Taking that stance, I am forced to look inward as opposed to outward with regard to helping others...a decidedly Christian notion I should think.