Loading...QUESTION:
Don’t you think that being raised in Christianity makes it more likely that you will make decent contributions to others like you do with your charity contributions? I know that one does not have to be Christian to be decent, but it seems, for many of us, to help increase the odds of being decent at least some of the time.
RESPONSE:
This is a really interesting question. And maybe unanswerable! Why are those of us who are concerned deeply about others and their welfare so … concerned? Is it because we are religious? Or, as in my case, because we used to be religious?
In one of my public debates with Dinesh D’Souza a few years ago, this came out as a point of disagreement. Dinesh believes that only Christianity drives people to be concerned about others who are in need. For him, it is not religion in general, but Christianity in particular, that makes people want to be charitable.
In the debate, I found that view to be a bit outrageous. Really? Only you Christians are concerned about others? No one but Christians are? So I pressed him on the issue. First I raised the fact, it’s an indisputable fact, that there are lots of highly significant charities in the world that are not Christian.
I cited, for instance, one of the amazing organizations that this blog supports, Doctors Without Borders. They do absolutely stunning work out of a sense of common humanity, not because of religious beliefs. Dinesh replied that I was overlooking the fact that the organization originated in France which has historically been a Christian country. So even though the organization itself is not necessarily Christian, it would not exist without Christian roots.
So I pressed him harder: did he mean to say that people who lived in countries where there had never been a significant Christian presence were not interested in relieving pain and suffering, that people in China had no humanitarian impulse at all? Yes, he was quite emphatic, that is what he meant. People in China do not care about human suffering (other than their own).
I found, and still find, this to be absolutely incredible and scandalous. But, frankly, I didn’t know enough about charities in non-Christian countries to be able to pursue it. Maybe someone on the blog does.
The question posed above by a reader on the blog is slightly different in that it is personal, about those of us who are driven by charitable concerns. Is it because of a religious upbringing? Again, I don’t know that there is any way to answer the question, except by looking for studies of charity among those not brought up religiously. But again, Dinesh would respond that all the people we could study in our context were in some sense deeply influenced by the Christian tradition.
Maybe one response to *that* would be that one of the reasons the Christian tradition has always succeeded as well as it has is that it appeals to the better side of human nature and the deeply rooted sense, in most people, that we should help others in need.
But the question has made me think about myself a bit more, and about what drives my own charitable interests.
The first thing that comes to mind is an issue that I’ve pondered a lot over the past few years, which is why everyone doesn’t share the same concerns for helping out others. I’d be interested in knowing your personal response to that question. On one level, I guess I’m always puzzled that other people aren’t like me in all sorts of ways – in their political views, their religious views, their ethical views, and so on. Like most people, I think my views about all such things are just so sensible and clear, and yet on every issue I, like everyone else, is in the minority! Necessarily, every view we have about everything – even the most important issues in our lives — is a minority view. Go figure….
But it seems especially odd to me when it comes to charity. I know lots of very good and humane people who simply, at the end of the day, are not interested in helping out others in need. People who are very well off and living in luxury who think they are doing a great thing if they occasionally will give a hundred bucks to charity. The idea of giving a lot – even if it wouldn’t affect them or their lifestyles an iota – is simply beyond the realm of possibility for them. I have trouble getting my mind around that.
On the other hand, I know others who dedicate their lives to helping out others – living on much less themselves so as to give what they can for others, or spending the majority of their waking lives working to help those in need. I tend to “get” that approach to life better, and I stand in awe before it. I’m not like that either, though I often wish I were.
But my main puzzlement remains the first group, those who really just don’t care much if others are suffering. Or if they care, they aren’t willing to go out of their way to do anything about it.
It may be that my religious past did elevate those kinds of concerns for me personally. When I was a late teenager and became born again, I came to believe it was my religious obligation to give a tithe – a literal 10% — of my income to the church (or to missionary work, etc.). I did that even as a dead-poor college student struggling to make enough money to get by on. My religious communities supported and advocated that level of giving. Maybe that’s how it all got rooted in me.
I still believe in giving a serious percentage of my income to charity. And I do this blog, as you know, not for the jollies of it but to raise funds for charity. That is a different commitment, one involving lots of my time and effort. But the pay off, for me, is worth it.
Do I do it because of a deeply rooted religious sense of duty for others? I don’t know! Do I think others should do comparable things? Yes! Do they feel driven to do so? Some do some don’t. Some do far, far, far more. Some do almost nothing. Why is that? I really don’t know!
It seems to me that I get more and more charitable each year the longer I’ve NOT been a Christian. I’m that way with both humans and animals.It seems to me that I do it because I realize that once we’re dead, we’re dead. There is no hereafter. If we care about anyone at all then we need to do something about it now because we’re not going to be sitting around singing Kumbayah in heaven when we die. Otherwise, everyone could just say “it’s God’s will” and let suffering and people in poverty continue on their path without trying to improve anything.
I can honestly say I’ve known more caring, giving non-Christians that I’ve known caring, giving Christians. Sure, there are plenty of the latter I’m not saying there aren’t, but I think the majority of Christians who think they’re caring and giving are shining beacons of morality on Sundays, but not the rest of the week. They think “giving” is something you do only in the collection plate on Sunday when everyone can see you, but when no one is looking they could care less.
Im sorry please explain exactly what you do to combat poverty? Do you house homeless or cook meals? I wasn’t clear.
I rigorously and enthusiastically support local and international charities.
I saw a television program last winter about a very rich (millionaire) who spent a lot of time recruiting other millionaires give large amounts of their wealth to charities of their choice….not because they were religious but because they wanted to share some of their wealth doing charitable work. I thought the program was very good. I’m not sure but I think the program was called “The Millionaire’ Club”…anyhow this millionaire had this huge dinner every year and invited all the millionaires he knew. Then he did a pitch for them to share their wealth. Had you heard of this man?
Nope!
The $600 billion challenge (Fortune 6/16/2010). Bill and Melinda Gates and Warren Buffett’s New York City dinner hosted (among others) by David Rockefeller to begin a drive to have the nation’s wealthiest donate half of their net worth to charity in their lifetimes or at death. The campaign started with the Forbes list of four hundred wealthiest Americans.
Tim Cook is the most recent to join.
You couldn’t really study this any more than prayer helping the sick because there’s no way to establish a control group. I do know hat I give more to charities as an ex-Christian than I ever did when I professed that as my faith. The big difference I notice is that I know now when I give it’s because something good inside me wants to give-not because I’m trying to earn “Jesus-Bucks” in a heaven-bank.
You raise an interesting point regarding our religious upbringing resulting in us feeling the need to tithe. Apparently you think, as do most people in the US, that contributions to religious institutions are charitable contributions. After all, when we file our taxes we list those contributions on schedule A under the heading “Gifts to Charity”. Perhaps many of those church contributors feel that they are doing their part to help others in need. However, not all “charities” are equal in the percent of contributions that actually go to helping those in need. The churches I have been affiliated with in my life spend most of their income on supporting and increasing their congregations. They seem to spend but a small portion of their income actually helping the needy. If a person is interested in actually helping those in need and wants to maximize the bang for the charitable contribution buck, perhaps they need to consider reallocating some of their tithe to more efficient charities such as those supported by this blog.
Some of us who are relatively well-fixed financially now, and make what you might think only modest contributions to charities, have known economic hardship, and other kinds of misery, in our lives…and don’t want to go there again. Protecting one’s assets may mean the difference between spending one’s last years in an assisted living facility or in a nursing home (on Medicaid). There’s a big difference, which may affect both length and quality of life.
Bart,
China’s not-for-profit sector has for some time consisted of social organizations (SOs) (shehui tuanti), foundations (jijinhui), and private non-enterprise units (PNUs) (minban fei qiye danwei.) From a Western perspective, these would collectively be called not-for-profit organizations or NPOs. According to a World Bank report back in 2004, China would like to move some social programs from government to private administration. Contributions to designated entities were reported to already be tax-deductible in China. So, to Dinesh’s comment, it’s not just Christians that understand the need for helping the needy. However, he would likely argue that these initiatives in China stem primarily from pragmatic socialist mechanisms and that anything there that looks like real charity is a product of Christian missionary influences over the years. However, one charity operating in China, Muslim Hands – United for the Needy is a non-Christian international non-governmental organization working in China (and elsewhere) to help those affected by natural disasters, conflict and poverty. It seems to be well-regarded as a legitimate charity. There are also indigenous Chinese charities. Despite the government’s nominal atheist stance, most people in China follow Confucius. That means “shi-she” (alms giving) is an important part of their lives.
Interesting issue…I think some give because of the ‘…there but for the grace of God go I…” and hope that if things ever go sideways for themselves that others will assist in some way. I say this in the secular sense. Others because they feel an impulse to give those who need a leg up – directly (to the individual) or indirectly (via a third party like the Salvation Army). I think that giving to charitable causes normal and at the very least provides a bit of a connection to the wider world outside one’s own little bubble, particularly if you are comfortable in your own financial circumstances.
As for those who don’t, I think there are a couple of reasons. None of them terribly attractive or reflect well on such individuals. One reason is that people blame those in need for their situation and that such folks will never learn anything if they get a ‘freebie’. In other words, ‘you made your bed now lie in it’. A second reason is self-absorbtion – that is, sheer disinterest in anything that is going on outside their world. “Not my problem, bud”, would sum it up. Finally, some, I think, feel that the issues and scale are so daunting that there is nothing to be done and so do nothing.
For me, we are social creatures and we need to look after all of us. Kicking people to the curb is just not right. Basically, for me, we are interdependent, no one gets all they get without social investment, public infrastructure, and support from family, friends and colleagues. Charitable giving falls into the category of social investment and those who need assistance to get by should get it. Statistically, relatively few who do receive assistance stay on it for longer than they have to. It is humiliating and shameful for most who accept charity and, from what I understand, the majority of recipients pick themselves up, dust themselves off and get going again. The permanent welfare recipients are the ones in the news or what people point to. They exist, but represent a minority. Wealthy societies such as ours can be judged on how we deal with our less well off, the marginalised and the ill-educated. I am not convinced we come out of this assessment well.
As a short follow up…are my views on this due to living in a Western Christian culture? I don’t know enough about other cultures to discuss this with any great depth of knowledge. There are certainly deplorable practices in the wider world that various societies have adopted, but I hesitate to go further than just acknowledge the fact (e.g. the Hindu caste system and the ‘untouchables’). And, of course, there were in past centuries cultural practices within my own tradition that scarcely suggest compassion for one’s fellows. We seem to evolve in these matters.
I always try to approach such questions from the counterpoint.
Is it not likely that those who end up being “religious” have a predisposition to thinking beyond themselves? Isn’t selfishness, at the core, the primary thing that Jesus rails against? Thus, those who are selfish by nature won’t give that up to become “Christian” except for the fringe benefit of self-preservation (from a torturous afterlife), and often “join-up” later in life. Even within religious communities, it’s not too hard to spot those who are “committed” versus those who are more interested in the perks.
As such, I’d say that Mr. D’Souza might actually be right to a certain extent. The actual cause of the effect, however, might not be “spiritual,” but more cultural, i.e., a learned behavior.
Yes, I’ve wondered that too.
Interesting thoughts Bart and there are many reasons why some give and others don’t. I don’t think its a religious thing at all and just that people have different reasonings. First though you need to define what are ‘needs’ and ‘wants’? Its essential that people, particularly children, have food and clean water and have treatment for disease etc. And we cannot blame the kids for being born BUT the adults have responsibility for ensuring their families are not too big so there is enough to go around. This is an obvious problem in Africa and eslewhere and so giving massive aid needs matching with birth control measures that most western cultures have come to terms with. eg IF every family in the West had ten kids, would you not think that would cause some issues? Yet the dim wits in the Vatican preach using Condoms are an afront to God. So that is one issue where people will give aid but also want contraception addressed at the same time. But it never seems to.
Now I see you contribute to the homeless and needy in NC and you see it first hand and so will know why that is. But is there any need to support youngish men and women who are fit and able to work to be given free handouts as a way of life? That is not to say a temporary hand up is not a good thing. We in the UK have a social security system that should mean that nobody goes hungry and certainly no kids and yet a million people turn up at food banks, many in cars too. Most people will turn up for a freebee. So is there a difference between Third world charity giving and elsewhere? I was born when there was no social security system support in the UK and yet people claim millions live in poverty today because their household income only reaches 60% of the average industrial wage? I don’t go with that at all.
Some people give massive aid for repairs to Churches and Cathedrals which is nuts. Knock em all down and build houses and flats for the homeless is a better way imo. We have hundreds of beggars on our city streets, you must have the same and these are fit young men mostly who could easily get a job in a pub or something and some will claim they get hundreds of pounds a day by doing it, I used to give lots to the Salvation Army but no more when I realised it was going on free houses, pensions and pay for idle ministers. Same with any other church. We do know that the millions raised after Tsunamies and Earthquakes are kept either by the governments or by the charities themselves many who led by people on huge salaries.
So most of my money is going to animal charites which most people find that appalling. But someone has to. People may find my views ‘uncharitable’ but next time you give to your local charity in NC Bart, make sure the people there too are doing something for themselves so they don’t need it and In the richest nation in the world, they really shouldn’t. How many of all these people would work the hours you do to make a living. People may say that is making a judgement on the poor and needy and I will say as one child that was raised in these circumstances in post war Britain in large family, damn right, I do! 😉
It seems to me that some of the Greek philosophers (Plato and Aristotle at least) encouraged the virtues of generosity and friendliness, among other virtues. Also, I believe the Confucian notion of “ren” – love of humans/humanity/people? – is like the golden rule of the Bible. Though the Greeks are somewhat contemporaneous to, and geographically near ancient Israel, I think both references predate Christianity, and find their source in human beings and not anyone’s Christian religious tradition.
Could it be that empathy is a trait that has to be developed early? Sunday school and church provide endless ways for helping others and instilling an awareness of the good fortune to not need such help. That leads to gratitude and an inclination to do what we can for those less fortunate. The result is a connection to a wider world and joy in being useful beyond ourselves.
In the Quran, “establish prayer and give charity” is a common phrasing for converting to Islam. D’Souza, however, might just interpret that as a development from the Christian background, and then see the Christian influence on Islam as influencing Sikhism and the Bahai Faith.
In dharmic religions, however, the cultivation of generosity (dana) is an important spiritual discipline. Beyond that, those religions which embrace social hierarchy, Hinduism and Confucianism, also have traditions of noblesse oblige which the elites are supposed to follow.
Well…if I were to get theological here for a second, consider the following: If Jesus is the Word and the Word was with God and all things were created through Him, then that makes Jesus the Cosmic “Inscriber” of ALL hearts regardless of religious affiliation. That’s the only bone I can throw D’Souza from a purely “Christian” standpoint! Personally, I can read the Bhagavad Gita, the Koran, and Talmud and hear a lot of the same messages I hear in the Gospels about humility and selfless service. Not sure what compels a person to be more or less charitable…a softened heart helps, but I think that is to be gained with any sincere/deep belief system (for the good) whether it’s religious in nature or not. I believe it is far more righteous and compassionate to do good for the sake of the good without having to be thumped upside the head with a Holy book to do it! But, maybe that’s just me…
As also a long time student of Buddhism (in addition to Yoga) and specifically Dzogchen Buddhism, the ONLY way and it is very specific, the ONLY way Higher Levels of Consciousness can be attained is through Compassion and the enactment of that Compassion on behalf of others. So strongly is this embedded into the intimate experience of the stages of Realization/Rigpa that FROM the all essential View and Meditation states automatically spring Compassion and from Compassion, the final stage Action. One dedicates ones life and all that goes with it to helping others. I want to stress that compassion is not something imposed from the mind (duty although whatever works ok); it DOES spring naturally and emphatically from the heart as one progresses in one’s practice for reasons I cannot explain/it just does … one of those undefineable mysteries. Again for spiritual progress to be authentic, it is intimately experienced and acted upon. I find Dinesh’s opinions (I have not listened to this video) ethnocentric to the point of ignorance.
And the first group … under the influence of selfishness combined with laziness … and both “illnesses” are thick barriers to any advanced state of Consciousness and a permanent and independent kind of Joy.
There are Ashrams throughout India which have established free hospitals as well as “soup kitchens” … one of the most respected is the Sivananda Ashram, Rishikesh India founded by the late Swami Sivananda Radha, so revered that the country issued a stamp honoring him.
Wow! A terrific blog. I certainly know what it feels like to have a “minority” view on most every meaningful issue. It makes me truly wonder about whether or not my views are correct.
In my case, even though Christianity no longer makes as much historical sense to me as I would like, I think my childhood emotional experience of the Christian faith has resulted in my having more concern for others than I would have had without that upbringing. I, however, disagree with D’Souza about Christianity being the “only” path to such humanism. I am also repulsed by some of the fruits of that Christian faith with regard to the widespread opposition to gay rights and women’s rights (at least in Fundamentalist churches), and so on and so forth, including the promotion of slavery in the past..
Dr. Ehrman,
I used empathy instead of compassion because I should think a developed sense of empathy would lead to compassion. There but by the grace of God….
I have also given a lot of thought into the same question. I went through the ‘born again’ experience one Sunday evening at the age of 14 and I remeber vividly my thoughts around that experience. I was drawn by the story of the man Jesus who was full of love for me and laid his life down for me. Amazingly, he was at the church waiting to come into my heart. It was a love story so strongly presented that it hit all the buttons within my emotions and I was swept away into rapsody. Another reality hit me Monday morning at school when I realised I would lose all my friends if I confessed that I was one of those ‘goody 2 shoes’ boys. I struggled with that dilemma for the next two years and, unable to lose my mates, I eventually left the church but never the forgot the experience of this pure love. Later in life I began to make large amounts of money producing TV commercials but always felt an emptiness inside. I knew I no longer believed in the dogma of Christianity but somehow I was driven to give something to others who were suffering. With the talents that I had i began to produce social documentaries and discovered love and peace within myself again. I do not think that my desire was innate but rather it was passed on to me from my mother. She always cared about others in the church and I projected that love into the story of Jesus. Perhaps at 14 years of age I needed to transfer this love to a male role model? If one is romantically inclined I can’t think of a better narrative than the story of Jesus, particularly from Mathew and Luke, to invoke strong emotion. In my experience, most other religions appear to present a very interllectual approach in their narrative.
Trust this might throw some light on the subject!
Many openly religious people in our country are the most outspoken about closing our borders to suffering immigrants, or denying Medicaid or other aid to the poor. I have seen people who spent a lifetime in the church be indifferent to others, while some people who never set foot in a church are generous. Many of the “Christian” countries that D’Souza would refer to had no qualms about colonizing and looting areas they considered pagan without regard for those people. And in some cases making slaves of them. Let’s remember that the Holocaust arose in a country that was the very birthplace of the Protestant Reformation. I’m not convinced that religion makes anyone better or more moral but religion is so entrenched in world history that at this point it is impossible to know how the world would have turned out without it.
Maybe there is just a hint of, “I’ll show them damn Christians how to really give.” I don’t know Bart. Although, it seems to me that you let ring, very loudly, your philanthropic efforts and just how much of a sacrifice it is for you.
Seems to me that none of us, religious God fearing Christians or Atheists like me, are able to escape human nature. The brighter ones are just able to hide it a bit better behind clouds of self-justified righteousness. Ah the motives behind the motives. I usually find a hint of truth about myself there.
Ha, ha, you seem like a wise man. Well said.
When any of my christian friends hint around that maybe they have the corner on love and compassion I simply remind them of the story of the “Good Samaritan”. If we don’t know anything else about this person we know one thing -he wasn’t a christian because it hadn’t been invented yet!
DR Ehrman:
People give for many reasons. Some do it honestly others do it for show and some are not able to give even if they wanted to. Either way giving in itself alone does not make you a better person nor does it mean you have Love of in you.
When reading this blog what comes to my mind is the following words from 1 Corinthians 13:3
3-And if I give all my possessions to feed the poor, and if I surrender my body to be burned, but do not have love, it profits me nothing…
Bart,
As a former Middle School teacher, born and raised Missouri Synod Lutheran, who taught the rise of the world’s great religions, I had numerous opportunities to compare/ponder religious beliefs (albeit at a fairly simplistic level). Is a possible answer to your question the response that all major religion traditions have a “golden rule”? In Islam, one of the 5 Pillars of the faith is the giving of alms, in Buddhism:
“Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in you religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it.” Gautama Buddha
Surely treating others the way we want to be treated is a moral imperative that includes all mankind, religious or not.
As a Christian, I think that D’Souza position is untenable and it’s also an insult to all those non-Christian people who feel the need of helping others.
There are many non-Christians who help, there are many Christians who don’t. Anyone think we can count them?
We may say that the Gospels are extraordinarily plenty of accounts and parables from Jesus regarding the poor, the widow, the hungry, the afflicted, the sick, the prisoners, the stranger.. It seems that this is at the core of the practices preached by Jesus (who is, for Christians, God ), a direct God’s command on which Jesus apparently insisted a lot. I have no idea if this is the same for other religions/scriptures.
But this is not a competition and I don’t believe anyone can make any inference on the “level of personal attitude” to charity.
Dr. Ehrman, I first wanted to take a moment to tell you that I think you are a wonderful scholar and enjoy reading your work. You are always fair. Similar to your questions above about charity, I’ve always wondered why scholars in particular, people in general, can’t be fair to others’ opinions.
In answer to your question, I fall back on something C.S. Lewis said in his Mere Christianity. It was something like – all people know that being loving to others is the way to go, the only difference is who we choose to include in our circle. It seems to me that religion just helps us widen our circle. I would venture to say that travel and exposure to other peoples and cultures do that same thing.
So folks, exactly what did Jesus and Paul do for the needy, the poor, the widows and orphans they preached what OTHERS should do? Did they work an 12 hour shift in a vineyard to do above or even to pay for their own wants? No they relied the whole time in OTHERS doing it for them. Its easy to talk the talk!
Jesus knew John the Baptist was in Prison and yet didn’t think of visiting him or praying with him? This we are told was the man who baptised him at the River Jordan etc.
Take it all with a pinch of salt and do what you think you should do and treat scripture with suspicious and contempt! There is little in there of value!
Didn’t know there were visitation rights back then.
There is an old saying in Asia that goes something like: “Wiser you get, your head lowers more”, meaning older and wiser you get, you become more humble and thankful that you lower yourself.
I thought it meant you got wiser and your brain got heavier making it harder to hold up with your existing neck muscles 🙂
Charity (at 2.5%) is one of the Pillars of Islam. I am sure that D’Souza would claim that they got that from Christianity .
I would say that disentangling giving to “church” and giving to “charity” is very difficult. How much of person’s tithe to their church actually pays for services they receive in the form of comfortable and entertaining Sunday services, youth groups for their kids, basketball games in the Family Life Center, etc…? How much of those facilities help members of the congregation (say, the elderly) have a better life? How much helps those in the community?
My sense is that the charity of the faithful and that of non-believers is much closer in scale after the self-serving fluff of church budgets is accounted for.
Personally, my partner and I have striven to “tithe” to various charities each year. I do a recap at tax time. Sadly, we fall short almost every year of what we “should” be giving back. However, the impulse is firmly ingrained in us.
From my own point of view, I have come to recognize the many lucky breaks I have had and to realize that many don’t have those advantages through no fault of their own. That is what drives me. I would consider that outside of Christian influence but, like memory, my motivations can be falsified without my awareness.
How would Dinesh know that people in China had no humanitarian impulse at all? There are any number of factors
involved. If we look at China during the cultural revolution we might be inclined to draw one sort of conclusion as
opposed to looking at China today.The Chinese may be more anonymous or secretive with acts of charity.
Having worked with someone from Taiwan, I can say he was painfully polite and generous. Generosity is certainly part of charity. I can’t recall any instances of charity specifically and also I have to admit he was a Christian of sorts
I think locally he was not, but on a larger civil level he was. Village versus city or state.
Finally if one doesn’t have the impulse then no amount of preaching will make it appear. Although one can’t ignore
A Christian tendency to enforce certain institutions and works of charity, but how would you go about comparing
traditions and institutions in the West with those in China? What would the metrics look like?.
One other thing to consider across countries and cultures is how supportive the inhabitant are of alternate arrangements for supporting the underprivileged and vulnerable. For instance, does support of social programs in liberal European countries demonstrate an equivalent or even superior charitable impulse versus personal charitable efforts in the individualistic US? What about social arrangements in which multi-generation households ensure the well-being of widows versus relying on food pantries down at the Baptist church?
It may be that western Christians are mistaking style for substance and not recognizing that other cultures have committed themselves just as strongly to the welfare of others but have selected different (and some would say more effective) means to achieve the goal.
Late to the party here, but this is something I’ve read philosophical musings on (as well as musing on myself): The extent to which the moral values of atheists/secular organizations could nevertheless be considered to be based on religion. People generally hold the moral values of their culture, and the moral values of Western culture are I think influenced quite heavily by the Abrahamic religions.
Being raised a Methodist had no additional bearing as to whether I helped people or not. My parents raised my siblings and me to help anyone, anyway you can. Do not not turn away…Help.
Pink Floyd’s song about “The turning away” sheds volumes on this subject.
So… nobody cared before Christianity was invented?
Apparently.
the history of Doctors without Borders was a response to a call to action to doctors from The French Red Cross. The Red Cross was the Vision of the son of Christian parents who stressed charitable giving and practiced it. Point being is that the chain of custody for charity reaches back to Christianity. Unless we look back we can no loner see it
Yes indeed, you can trace every organization in the Western world back to some kind of Christian. That’s because the Western world used to be made up of almost entirely Christians. That doesn’t mean that people participating in those organizations have any personal ties to Christianity themselves.
“The more important religion is to a person, the more likely that person is to give to a charity of any kind, according to new research released today.
Among Americans who claim a religious affiliation, the study said, 65 percent give to charity. Among those who do not identify a religious creed, 56 percent make charitable gifts.
About 75 percent of people who frequently attend religious services gave to congregations, and 60 percent gave to religious charities or nonreligious ones. By comparison, fewer than half of people who said they didn’t attend faith services regularly supported any charity, even a even secular one.”
https://philanthropy.com/article/Religious-Americans-Give-More/153973
http://connectedtogive.org/
Interesting….
I give both in Christian setting and non-Christian setting (I attend churches to maintain harmony of my family), and I have to tell you, giving in a non-Christian setting was more rewarding and freer, mainly because I gave without some ministers telling me I should give. In fact, I donated some money to Doctors Without Borders because of Ebola outbreak and what they were doing.
I have nothing against atheists and Christians (and I sympathize with both camps), but if I am pressed, my answer is “I would not be surprised either way if God exists or doesn’t exist. I honestly don’t know.” I am not one of those atheists who thinks science will set men free or anything like that.
Delighted to learn that this blog supports Doctors Without Borders. In war zones, news organizations routinely learn what’s happening in the horror by talking to MSF doctors on the ground — where most people would evacuate if possible. Kudos to them, and thanks to you for helping us support them!!!
I think there is something to the underlying civilizational argument (Judeo-Christian culture) that is more relevant than individuals in that culture’s current (or past) particular religiosity.
I don’t know Judeo-Christianity has any kind of monopoly, but I could readily believe that it was further along the charity spectrum than say the pre-colonial Hindu caste system or law-and-order Confucianism. While Western monasteries or holy orders (like the Franciscans) at their best were at least ostensibly founded in part at least on charity (despite frequent failures of their actual memberships over time), Bhuddist monastaries, I believe, are traditionallyu founded for different purposes, perhaps admirable, but I’ve never heard charity to the poor was a principle one.
Islam does have “alms giving” as one of its main pillars, so you’d have to lump them in with “the west” in this regard, but then again it stems from a common root.
There might very well be Hottentot cultures that but Western Civilization to shame in this regard.
It is interesting how often people refer to Eastern traditions to compare to Christian traditions of charity but never mention Judaism. If it pleases Dinesh D’Souza to think that, if it isn’t because of Christianity directly, it is so indirectly, then perhaps one should say that, if it weren’t for the Jewish teachings Jesus was raised with, he would have been less likely to teach what he taught. It was Jesus the Jew who taught love of others, not Jesus the Christian who never existed. It is a prejudiced cliche to characterize the Old Testament and Judaism as teaching of the wrathful, angry, jealous God and the New Testament and Christianity as teaching the loving, forgiving, compassionate God of charity. Also, Judaism didn’t teach that all non-Jews will burn eternally. That is NT and Christianity. On helping the poor, the stranger, the hungry, and the widow, see In the Tanakh, for example:
Leviticus 25:35 If any of your kin fall into difficulty and become dependent on you, you shall support them; they shall live with you as though resident aliens.
It’s interesting how often people will refer to certain Eastern traditions and never to Judaism.
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.
Proverbs 21:13 If you close your ear to the cry of the poor, you will cry out and not be heard.
Deuteronomy 24:19 When you reap your harvest in your field and forget a sheaf in the field, you shall not go back to get it; it shall be left for the alien, the orphan, and the widow, so that the Lord your God may bless you in all your undertakings.
it just comes down to personality. to answer yr question more specifically empathy, or chemical reactions in the brain. some people see another in pain and that results in distress, others not. its just how ones brain is wired, cause and effect. if yr brain is wired to be high in empathy youll wanna give lots to charities ect. if you dont get that reaction youll have no desire to give much. bit like a computer.
This is a good question. Why are some more charitable with either time or money or effort than others? There is no easy answer. Some people have more empathy than others and feel compelled to help those who more in need. Perhaps the reason why I am a Democrat is because there are people who simply need the help when circumstances in life just bring them to their knees. I have seen the variation in the types of people who are more likely to give than to take. I am acutely aware of those who just take. It is those that give that I am more familiar with. Perhaps these people have bigger hearts, are kinder, are of a more gentle spirit, have circumstances in life that make them want to do more for those less fortunate. I am a twin, an identical twin. I have earned my retirement with 37 years of teaching and my twin is penniless. He has borrowed money from people his entire life, and I am one of his top victims. I have a hard time saying no. But when I became the bad guy, I stopped giving to him—I give to charities and to the homeless, and to others. I have helped every member of my family ( 5 brothers and sisters) over the years. That’s just me. Some were much more appreciative of it than others. I think that giving people are born that way–with varying degrees of the willingness to give. It has nothing to do with religion–I give to charities that are not religious, and some that are. Like most things with a person, it is how they were wired. Your effort to do this blog for charity is one of the most noble things I have ever seen a professor do. I greatly admire you for that effort.
I haven’t read nor have the time to read every response on this topic. I can say from my own experience, through observation, discussion and such that Christians are not alone in their concern for and willingness to help others. In fact, in my own experience, those in the Jewish faith far outdo their Christian brethren in giving back to the community, in helping those in need, etc. I was raised in a Christian household, am an atheist and new virtually nothing of the Jewish faith until I was well in my 20’s. But, with what I have seen and learned, the Christian lot has a long way to go if to catch up to the Jewish followers in this area. Just my 2 cents.
You can only give so much. We are not at all wealthy but give to some charities. My wife is a Buddhist and I am a mild-mannered atheist.When faced with a choice between a charity that might proselytize the Gospel and one that won’t, we always choose the latter. We give to non-religious charities.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/04/30/shechen-monastery-nepal-earthquake_n_7181860.html?utm_hp_ref=world&ir=WorldPost
Charity and the Nepal Earthquake … when East and West Join in “Giving Hands”
I thought of this blog while reading.
As one whose education and professional experience revolves around the social sciences, I would have to reluctantly admit that the socialization that happens within groups of people for whom religion is a large part of their lives results in a deeper sense of obligation for the welfare of one’s fellow human being. But of course the reasons for this are about social learning and a person’s reaction to the environments they find themselves in. We are all genomes reacting within environments. What we are is largely determined by what we experience. Certain physiological differences certainly contribute, but none of us can take as much credit for choosing who we are as we would like to think we can. Our genes receive messages from the environment and express themselves in ways intended to deal with the reality of the situations we find ourselves in. Is it coincidence that most violence is expressed among those who have themselves been forced to deal with violence? Ah…but this challenges our conditioned beliefs regarding social justice and “meritocracy”. If what I’m stating is true, then solving social issues is not so much about reacting to social deprivation, but preventing it by changing the underlying conditions that produce violent and socially unstable people. In other words…eradicate poverty. Ha…then we actually have to take some responsibility for these things because of our inaction. We have to look at our inaction as an act of violence. As Gandhi said at different times and in different forms, “Poverty is the worst form of violence”. But most of us are convinced that anyone can succeed if they just “work hard enough” and “persevere”. Unfortunately, that is not the reality in which we live. Why are some people more generous than others? Because they have been influenced by the values of the groups to which they have belonged. As hard to admit as it is…you and I are more generous because of our religious background, even though we are no longer a part of those groups.
Here’s an interesting article from the LA Times that suggests children raised in secular homes turn out better that children raised in religious homes ( http://touch.latimes.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-82535717/ ). It also says countries that are more secular have lower crime rates. So any slight difference in charitable giving between the groups is outweighed by other more positive outcomes in a secular society.
I can’t claim to have ever been much of a cheerful giver, Bart. But, your lovely work here did induce me to part with a little of my lucre at least, lol.
Many thanks! 🙂
Ha! I know what you mean. And many thanks!