Charity story/question

[Ivy]

They also said they didn't donate to charities because they paid taxes for the poor already.

Oh, that's good!! I haven't heard the cofc using that one yet.

[Cootie Brown]

The c of C is an example of unrestrained legalism. They end up eating their own.

[agricola]

The c of C is an example of unrestrained legalism. They end up eating their own.

I second that opinion.

[gordie91]

The only thing I can add here is that my parents, when I was growing up, did not donate to any charities or do any volunteer work (except church work). I realize now it was part of the influence of their religion, C of C. They also said they didn't donate to charities because they paid taxes for the poor already.

I have witnessed the above as well and the next logical outcome of that thinking. So glad those arguments are not argued any more.

In recent years during flood and storm season, I have heard my sibling discuss "business meeting" conversation about other congregations needing help because of flooding. He told me someone actually factored in insurance, welfare and emergency help from the government when considering how much to send and help people (Sound Members) that had suffered flood damage and loss.

Also, when members are in dire straits and need help paying bills, one business meeting member referred the group to welfare and was only willing to help for a month until the government benefits kick in. If that ain't a real punch in the gut, what about all those years griping about government welfare programs and then a member needs help - that poor member as just been stigmatized. Pure and unadulterated brotherly love, give them enough to make it but make them feel like crap while doing it. I guess Jesus' admonition to give your goods without expectation of getting it back doesn't really mean what it says. " I love my brother, here is some money for the light bill, you loser."

[Ivy]

So, that's interesting. Since many cofc people are now conservatives of some type (either GOP, independent, "constitutional conservative", libertarian, whatever), they won't generally believe in public assistance, but will figure it in when considering how much aid to give to a struggling brother so as "conserving" the coffers of the church for more important things...like trying to convert other christians to the cofc.

I have also seen brethren take up a collection instead of taking funds from the coffers for benevolence.

[Ivy]

The c of C is an example of unrestrained legalism. They end up eating their own.

I second that opinion.

I agree with Cootie's assessment.

Also, someone mentioned somewhere in another thread that cofc reveres its elderly / aged members of the faith. Perhaps it is somewhat true, but I have also seen elderly preachers thrown under the bus when as they matured they veered slightly from NICOFC doctrine. For example, the venerated old preacher, whose name I will not mention here out of respect, who changed his views on MDR (Marriage, Divorce, and Remarriage). Thrown under the bus. From what little I heard, though, he didn't care, and said that he would not discuss it further. Good for him, and may he rest in peace. I am sure he found his home in glory, if there is such.

[HamBiscuit]

Wow. Wish I was on yesterday so I could have replied to everything posted. I really appreciate all the replies and everything is making a lot of sense (as far as their "logic" goes)

It's always been so insane to me how they take a few words and analyze it so much that it comes out as the most un-christian thing possible. They take things so literally, but somehow it comes out so un-christian. "Jesus said...but then PAUL said...but when you put them together then...add what MATTHEW said and..." It's like some crazy algebra equation.

My grandmother, who was the most amazing person I've ever known (she was known to have an attitude and argue a lot), asked the same question after she saw how much money was going to the preacher. I mean of course she got shut down, we were the half that didn't want to give to charity. I don't remember exactly how much the preacher was making (bunch of rich people in that church), but I do remember counting the money on Sunday morning so they could put it on the little board and brag. There were checks for hundreds. Even a few from time to time for a thousand. And most of it was going in his pocket.

I went to a poor black baptist church one Sunday and it was "half of what you gives go to a local cancer charity". I probably got the most confused look on my face

[B.H.]

In Islam we have zakat which is a certain percent we are required to give as poor relief. It is obligatory. We can give more and that is considered charity. It also says in the Quran when you help people do not give them stuff you would use reluctantly. Give them good stuff,not necessarily the most expensive but stuff you would not be ashamed to wear or eat

[agricola]

Well Jews would give any legalistic Christian the queen and both rooks, and STILL win the game of 'who is most legalistic?' but still - it's the LAW to 'give ten percent'. Doesn't matter how you feel about it.

That ten percent is the minimum (and 20% is the max, by the way - people are not expected to beggar themselves to help others) and where you direct it is basically donor's choice.

SOME people consider synagogue dues (we pay dues, we don't collect weekly donations) part of their ten percent. Others don't. (And of course, not everybody meets that 'ten percent' goal either. Still - it is understood that we are SUPPOSED to, at least).

BUT in every case I know of or have heard of, the synagogue dues structure sets the budget (which is visible to all members) and ten percent of THAT budget goes to charity. It would be genuinely weird if it didn't. It baffles me, in fact, that some churches collect money and DON'T donate to SOMETHING.

I mean, it's the LAW (Jewish law).

There's a cute story in the Talmud about a desperately poor rabbi who was (shall we say) OVERLY generous, routinely shorting his own family by giving to EVERY opportunity that came his way. To the point where the charity collectors used to RUN AWAY from him and hide, and if they couldn't get away from him, they'd secretly redirect his donations back to his family - as a donation!

Also, even people who are on the public welfare roles are expected to donate. It is an 'everybody in, no exceptions' kind of deal.

I think the basic idea behind it - or one of them - is the concept that everyone in the community is mutually responsible for the whole community. Period.

So we'd see nothing at all wrong in using funds solely or only to support community members who need assistance - but at the same time, those members would absolutely GET assistance, and wouldn't be told to run along to the public welfare first and maybe we'll make up the difference, or something like that.

And it is considered to be desirable to donate to the LARGER community as well, Jewish or not - but 'donations begin at home', so to speak. If you don't take care of yourself, how can you be fit to care for others?

Although the religious community 'needs' are a priority, a very close second is education, for everyone in the city/region. Medical causes are also very popular.

The synagogue I go to has a Social Justice committee - really a very loose gathering of like minded people - which donates to various local (city wide/state wide) initiatives. Each committee member can really pretty much do what they want, but the synagogue does support some of the activities - mostly a low key nationwide network of aid for the homeless which a lot of churches and synagogue collaborate on - housing and feeding families while assisting with training and aid in finding jobs and housing. It's a good program, and I thought about getting involved with it but shrank back from actually talking to strangers, HOWEVER, I am one of the support crew supplying meals a couple of times a year.

My next interest related to a synagogue activity is the PJ Library, which donates books to children.

[HamBiscuit]

Well Jews would give any legalistic Christian the queen and both rooks, and STILL win the game of 'who is most legalistic?' but still - it's the LAW to 'give ten percent'. Doesn't matter how you feel about it.

That ten percent is the minimum (and 20% is the max, by the way - people are not expected to beggar themselves to help others) and where you direct it is basically donor's choice.

SOME people consider synagogue dues (we pay dues, we don't collect weekly donations) part of their ten percent. Others don't. (And of course, not everybody meets that 'ten percent' goal either. Still - it is understood that we are SUPPOSED to, at least).

BUT in every case I know of or have heard of, the synagogue dues structure sets the budget (which is visible to all members) and ten percent of THAT budget goes to charity. It would be genuinely weird if it didn't. It baffles me, in fact, that some churches collect money and DON'T donate to SOMETHING.

I mean, it's the LAW (Jewish law).

In my old CoC they always talked about how you had to give 10% each Sunday.
I don't know much about Judaism (I don't know anything about it), but seems like they've got that in common. Interesting. In Judaism, what scripture does that come from? Or is it just some sort of tradition?