Charity is defined as an act of giving, not coerced and not expecting anything in return; an act motivated by the desire to help those less fortunate than yourself.
Awhile back, there was an article on this blog by a guest author who explained why he avoids making charitable contributions. Unfortunately, it’s for reasons that are completely opposite to the idea and spirit of giving!
Allow me to address the flaws in each of his points:
1. “I give to charity indirectly through my taxes.” Taxes are required by law, paid out of an individual’s responsibility to live within the law. One may only choose to disobey the law and live with the consequences. Paying tax has nothing to do with charity; it is the responsibility of a person who lives in a civil society. In fact, there would be no such thing as “charitable needs” if the taxes paid covered all needs in our society.
2. “Charity adds up over time.” The idea that one should not give to charity until one has taken care of oneself is contradictory to the idea of helping others. The human condition rarely is satisfied with enough. Under the writer’s theory on this point, those in need would rarely receive help from charity as the “givers” could first have to decide they have “enough.”
3. “Charity promotes dependency.” This is an interesting rationalization of why this individual does not want to help others. I believe he is trying to say I will help those in need by doing nothing. He is suggesting everyone in need is somehow just taking advantage of those who help them. There is no doubt that may be true of some people, however, if one has a heart for his fellow man, one would look for areas of need and would help.
4. “The money I spend on charity may not be wisely spent by the recipient.” I agree, however, once again this is the author’s own rationalization for his desire to keep it all for himself. Considering even the poorest American is wealthy on a global scale I would challenge the writer to find ways to assist his fellow man and not judge whether the recipient must be perfect in the writer’s eyes before he becomes worthy of the writer’s assistance.
5. “I am not the only one who does not donate to charity.” Once again, the writer is so determined to keep everything for himself he has chosen the lowest common denominator. I would challenge him to seek loftier things for himself and his fellow man who may be in need.
6. “Charity may not be there when I need it.” Another interesting reason to not help others. Is the paraphrase of his position, “I would consider charity if it has a guaranteed return for me?” I challenge the writer to go back to the beginning and review the definition of charity.
7. “It makes sense to donate my time instead.” As the saying goes, time is money. Clearly, the author has spent a lot of time to come up with the positions he holds on charity. Charity should be considered as a way to help others with their basic needs and not as a challenge to protecting one’s basic wants.
8. “I won’t be rewarded in the after life for helping others.” Wow. Charity is not an investment that is supposed to have a guaranteed financial return. This particular point seems to say that even if there was an earthly guarantee for him, that would not be enough; before he lets go of that hard-earned money of his he needs some kind of contract granting him a reward in the after life. I know there are many different religions; we’re all free to believe whatever we wish in this regard. As a Christian, I submit that Christianity is not the same as Santa — it doesn’t reward goodness. Instead, its premise is we’re all imperfect compared to a perfect God and, as a result, can never be good enough on our own merits to warrant an after life with God. God in his own wisdom gave us the free will to make mistakes, but at the same time offers us an after life with Him if we only admit our mistakes and believe Christ is the only Son of God.
In summary, these reasons aren’t a list of why one shouldn’t give to charity — they’re reasons why one shouldn’t be a charitable person!
There’s A Better Way of Looking at Charity
There is a better way of approaching charity. Consider that everything you have is not of your own making: You did not choose your family, you did not choose the country you were born in, you did not choose the neighborhood you grew up in and you did not choose the opportunities and circumstances that came your way.
Certainly we can all look with some satisfaction to things we personally accomplished including responsible decisions and hard work we may have done, but we should all keep in mind none of us are solely responsible for our success.
I would encourage the writer to do the following: Discover a real need outside of himself that he is passionate about, find a way to give directly to that need, and stop thinking that if he cannot personally solve that need in its entirety, then he should not lift a finger to help.
Photo Credit: stevendepolo
All good points. Anyone who counts on #1 as an argument completely misses the difference between voluntary and coerced.
The author of the first Humbug post is wrong when he says there will be no reward in the afterlife, if he’s talking about the Heaven described in the Bible. According to that description, Heaven will be a place where there is work to be done, buildings to be designed, art to be produced – but on a much grander level, as each person there will be perfect, there will be no greed, no shoddy work, etc. The projects and programs and organizations of heaven will need managers and leaders, and those who have been responsible with little on Earth will be made responsible of much in Heaven, and those who have been responsible with much on Earth will be responsible for even more in Heaven.
Is keeping all your $$$ the best management of your resources here? Biblically speaking, no, giving away everything is – but that’s a large pill to swallow for most people, even for me.
Great expository on Heaven is a book called Surprised by Hope by N.T. Wright – it blows our misconceptions of Heaven as a place where we float on clouds with tiny wings and harps out of the water.
Great job, Antonio! 🙂 I think you blew away every point from the original misguided article. When we can afford it, I feel giving at least a little to charity is an important obligation we all have to society.
This article did little to refute the points of the Humbug article. In fact, Antonio does not provide any contradictory information at all. He simply says that while the original point may be true, it’s not the “correct” way to look at things. Who is to decide what is “correct”? Seems pretty subjective to me. While I appreciate that this is simply his opinion, I would have preferred a factual discussion of the benefits of charity. This did nothing to sway my opinion on the matter.
“…the article is not a list of why one should not give to charity, but is instead a list of why the author chooses to not be a charitable person.”
Excellent point, Antonio!
Also, as pointed out, not one of us is where we are solely because of our own efforts – or lack thereof. We did not choose our family, country, neighbourhood, opportunities or circumstances, all of which Antonio listed. We did not choose our talents, our IQ, our time in history, or our health – physical or mental or emotional.
All of these things significantly affect our ability to succeed in life, and at the time of our birth, we can’t claim credit for a single one of them.
It’s almost impossible to have some kind of accountability when you give to charities. I may or may not give to organized charity (I usually don’t) but coming from a third world country, I am of the opinion to give directly to the individual recipient.
This rebuttal makes more sense to me.
I have a small number of charitable organizations that are near and dear to my heart, and do give to my employer’s fall campaign (The United Way) as well, as it supports a lot of good work in the community, though the pressure exerted through the campaign is heavy, and quite competitive. (see today’s post)
Just curious what your thoughts are on giving to charity when in a massive amount of debt (student loans). I am stopped giving money to charities and started dedicating my time as I really want to be debt free (two year goal)
How can you say, “Paying tax has nothing to do with charity; it is the responsibility of a person who lives in a civil society.”
Much of my tax burden now goes to covering things that used to be done by volunteer giving to charitable organizations but now are done by the gov’t. My $ is now forcibly taken and then given in ways and to people that I would never choose to give my money to. The gov’t now is in the business of helping the poor, jobless, elderly, disaster victims, environmental groups, etc . . . People used to be able to choose when and how to give to these groups. Now the gov’t takes an ever growing % of my pay and gives it to these groups. Perhaps if I wasn’t taxed 30% or more of my pay I would have more money left to give to charities that I actually support.
Just because the gov’t does a terrible job @ giving this money out efficiently and effectively does not mean I should feel bad that I don’t give even more. Especially if my heavy tax burden causes me to live paycheck to paycheck.
Great article. Giving to charities are tax deductible and a very good way of getting out of being taxed heavily.
I love how you countered all the points made by the previous writer. Charity should all be part of our lives.
Thanks for nice articel..