CHARITY AND COMPASSION: A LEGACY OF CHRIST

Charity did not have its origin in the world of antiquity:

• Plato (427-327 BC) said that a poor man (usually a slave) was who was no longer able to work because of sickness should be left to die. He even praised Aesculapius, the famous Greek physician, for not prescribing medicine to those he knew were preoccupied with their illness (Republic 3.406d – 410a). The Roman philosopher Plautus (254 – 184 BC) argued, “You do a beggar bad service by giving him food and drink; you lose what you give and prolong his life for more misery” (Trinummus 2.338-39) Thucydides (ca. 460-44 BC), the honored historian of ancient Greece, cites an example of the plague that struck Athens during the Peloponnesian War in 430 BC. Many of the sick and dying of the Athenians were deserted. (Alvin Schmidt, How Christianity Changed the World, 128-29)

The Romans did the same until they were shamed into changing their ways by Christians who took in the Roman sick. This inspired their enemy, Emperor Julian the Apostate to say:

• The impious Galileans relieve both their own poor and ours…It is shameful that ours should be so destitute of assistance. (Epistles of Julian 49)

The Christian faith was characterized by the other-centered-ness of Christ-followers. According to B.B. Warfield, Christians built:

• Hospitals and asylums and refuges for the sick, the miserable and the afflicted grow like heaven-bedewed blossoms in its path. Woman, whose equality with man Plato considered a sure mark of social disorganization, has been elevated; slavery has been driven from civilized ground; literacy has been given by Christian missionaries, under the influence of the Bible. (“The Works of Benjamin B. Warfield”)

Forgetfulness, regarding the difference that Christ has made, has dulled our confidence and worldview. Schmidt reveals that:

• In the United States the spirit of charity in voluntary associations is greater among church members than among those who are not. According to a nationwide study conducted in 1987. Those belonging to Christian churches also give more financially to nonchurch charities, and they give a higher proportion of their income to such charities. (137)

Schmidt claims that this is the heritage of several hundred years of vigorous church preaching on charity:

• With these early American precedents, it is not surprising that astute foreign observers noted that the United States has, virtually from its inception, been a shining example of a charity-minded country…When Alexis de Tocqueville visited the United States in 1831, he astutely observed: “If an accident happens on the highway, everybody hastens to help the sufferer; if some great and sudden calamity befalls a family, the purses of a thousand strangers are at once willingly opened and small but numerous donations pour in to relieve their distress.” (138)

In the 1890’s, Amos Warner identified the churches as “the most powerful agent in inducing people to give.” Even as late as the 1940’s, Gunnar Myrdal remarked:

• “No country has so many cheerful givers as America.” He attributed this cheerful giving, or “Christian neighborliness,” as he called it, to the “influence of the churches.” (138)

Historically, charity and Jesus are inseparable. In The Charity Organization Movement in the United States, Frank Dekker Watson concluded that:

• It is difficult to understand the great influence that charity exerted on the acts of man unless one realizes how religion, especially Christianity, has reinforced by its teachings the instinct of sympathy and altruism. (12)

Schmidt claims that this “cheerful giving” is still among us to some degree:

• The amount that they gave to the poor and needy in 1991 amounted to $650 per American household. And in 1998 American church members contributed more than $24 billion to their churches, amounting to $408 per member.

What has given the West its incredible vision and vitality? Carlton Hayes states,

• From the wellsprings of Christian compassion our Western civilization has drawn its inspiration, and its sense of duty, for feeding the poor, giving drink to the thirsty, looking after the homeless… (Christianity and Western Civilization, 56)

Schmidt writes that before the advent of Christianity there were “no established medical institutions for nursing and ministering to the general populace”:

• As the growth of hospitals spread across the nation, it was predominantly local churches and Christian denominations that built them…[However], the Christian identity and background of many American hospitals is now being erased.

• The physician and medical historian Fielding Garrison once remarked, “The chief glory of medieval medicine was undoubtedly in the organization of hospitals and sick nursing, which had its organization in the teachings of Christ.” Thus, whether it was establish hospitals, creating mental institutions, professionalizing medical nursing, or founding the Red Cross, the teachings of Christ lie behind all of these humanitarian achievements. It is an astonishing mystery that the Greeks, who built large temples…never built any hospitals. (166-67)

The same was true for Rome, prompting historian Philip Schaff to assert that , “The old Roman world was a world without charity.” Schmidt therefore concludes:

• Every time that charity and compassion are seen in operation, the credit goes to Jesus Christ. It is he who inspired his early followers to give and to help the unfortunate, regardless of their race, religion, class or nationality. (148)

Historian and physician Fielding Garrison recognized that “the credit of ministering to human suffering on an extended scale belongs to Christianity.” (An Introduction of the History of Medicine, 118).

Today, we credit secularists with compassion, even though they have replaced joyful and empowering giving with enforced “giving” in the form of impersonal entitlement programs. However, Sociologist Alvin Schmidt reminds us that they “had grown up under the two-thousand-year-old umbrella of Christianity’s compassionate influence” (131). Had they instead been Romans, their sentiments would have been very different. Likewise, Josiah Stamp claims:

• Christian ideals have permeated society until non-Christians, who claim to live a “decent life” without religion, have forgotten the origin of the very content and context of their “decency.” (Christianity and Economics, 69)

Secularists are quick to claim credit for these advancements. However, historian Rodney Stark contradicts their claim:

• Rather, the West is said to have surged ahead precisely as it overcame religious barriers…Nonsense, The success of the West, including the rise of science, rested entirely on religious foundations, and the people who brought it about were devout Christians.” (“The Victory of Reason: How Christianity Led to Freedom, Capitalism, and Western Success,” xi)

Indeed, we find a direct connection between the moral and material rise of the West and the teachings of the Bible:

• Therefore, as God's chosen people, holy and dearly loved, clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience. Bear with each other and forgive whatever grievances you may have against one another. Forgive as the Lord forgave you. (Col. 3:12-13)

What we believe matters. Vishal Mangalwadi’s observations about his native India demonstrate the truth of the adage – “the way we think is the way we live.” Our philosophies and worldviews are the foundations upon which we build our houses, whether of caring, chaos, or confusion. This very apparent truth can be demonstrated in any area of human endeavor. To illustrate the causal power of our philosophies, let’s just take the area of medicine.

Mangalwadi states that India had pioneered a number of ancient medical advances including cataract surgery and plastic surgery. However, the study and practice of medicine enjoyed only a brief duration in India. Mangalwadi explains that medicine and even compassion lacked an adequate rationale in his India. This is partially because India’s doctors were also regarded as “gurus” who couldn’t be questioned:

• This attitude toward knowledge could not create and sustain an academic culture where peers and students could challenge, reject, and improve the medical techniques they had received. Thus, India had intellectual giants but our religious tradition failed to build academic communities. Individual genius, knowledge, and excellence in technology are insufficient to build a medical center. (The Book that Made Your World, 311)

Mangalwadi also claims that Indian religions couldn’t provide an adequate rationale for compassion – a necessary pre-condition for the practice of medicine:

• A person’s suffering was believed to be a result of her or his karma (deeds) in a previous life. In other words, suffering was cosmic justice. To interfere with cosmic justice is like breaking into a jail and setting a prisoner free. If you cut short someone’s suffering, you would actually add to his suffering because he would need to come back to complete his due quota of suffering. (312)

Although Buddhism says a lot about compassion, according to Magalwadi, its message is conflicted:

• The Buddha had to renounce his own wife and son to find enlightenment. He saw attachment as a cause of suffering. Detachment, therefore, became an important religious virtue…Those whose commitment was to their own spiritual enlightenment did not have the motivation to develop a scientific medical tradition. (312)

The Buddhist understanding of “detachment” also led them to detach from the sufferings of others. Our ideas have wings, and the Biblical ideas flew the highest, according to Magalwadi:

• The idea that the state should pay surgeons to serve the poor came to India with the Bible. Secularism hijacked the biblical idea, but it provides only the form, not the spirit. It is possible to bring a mango plant from India and grow it in Minnesota. One might even get a few crops. But under normal circumstances, the tree will not survive and certainly not reproduce. (314)

Secularism might be able to grow a mango tree in its own soil, but will it survive for long? Will compassion survive without its Christian roots? Indian medicine wasn’t able to survive in its cognitive climate. Secularism claims to promote compassion, but will it survive once its other-centered Christian underpinning is removed?

It doesn’t seem that secularism has a firm enough basis for compassion. For one thing, it doesn’t have a high view of humanity. Materialism and naturalism – components of today’s secularism – regard humanity as just another animal, albeit more intelligent. However, some of us – babies, the mentally handicapped, and the delusional - aren’t as intelligent as some animals. Consequently, these are becoming increasingly expendable in the West. Who else will then become expendable! Inevitably, materialism will breed elitism.

Besides, if we are regarded as no more than cosmically-purposeless animals, then there remains no reason to treat us as more than animals. Consequently, in secular societies, there was little hesitation to exterminate dissidents and “malignant elements” as we would a mosquito.

Moral relativism, the child of materialism, eliminates the possible existence of any human or unalienable rights. Morals simply become human inventions which are granted and rescinded at will, according to the agenda of the secular State.

Secular multi-culturalism is born out of moral relativism. It maintains that we have no rock-solid basis upon which to judge other cultures or even to defend our own. Therefore, in contradiction to its purported values, the secular West has allowed the establishment of Sharia courts, which render judgments against the very rights the West has committed itself to uphold.

Such moral confusion can provide no adequate foundation for the rights that we enjoy – the rights that have promoted the West.

Malcolm Muggeridge, the late British journalist and former secular humanist, observed:

• “I’ve spent a number of years in India and Africa where I found much righteous endeavor undertaken by Christians of all denominations; but I’ve never, as it happens, came across a hospital or orphanage run by the Fabian [communist] society, or a humanist leper colony.” (314)

Why not? Their undergirding philosophy/religion fails to support such structures, unless they are politically expedient. Why is it that Christianity embodies the very values that promote human welfare? Perhaps they came from Above.

As we watch Christian values continue to erode, we should also expect to see the erosion of everything that is based upon these values – relationships, trust, cooperation, diligence, business, and even science. The crimes and financial scandals of today will come to look like nursery games compared to those of tomorrow.