Tragedy begets kindness

o7The Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University recently reported

that charitable giving after Hurricane Katrina totaled $602 million

just 10 days after the hurricane struck the Gulf Coast. In addition,

it said charitable giving has increased from $202 billion in 2001 to

$249 billion in 2004. At the same time, however, giving to social

service groups such as food pantries and legal aid services declined

during that same stretch. Are such figures an indication that

monetary giving is increasingly being directed to victims of

circumstance, rather than those who have made “bad choices?” Should

giving be based on such criteria?f7

When Dr. Samuel Johnson suggested a visit to an inmate about to

receive capital punishment, James Boswell demurred, saying that a man

in such a position would hardly be able to conduct a lucid

conversation. Johnson countered, “Depend upon it, Sir. When a man is

to be hung in a fortnight, it concentrates his mind wonderfully.”

Extreme situations do focus our minds and channel our energies. We

tend to rise to the occasion. Whereas lethargy and inertia, concern

for self and preoccupation with living our own lives, blunt our

awareness of the daily plight of those living nearby -- let alone at

the remove of many miles -- we are roused to action when the

extraordinary befalls others.

Nations that are otherwise beset internally by culture wars unite

to confront common danger. Families put aside their ill will toward

relatives when illness or calamity strikes.

It is as though our willingness to respond lies dormant until

awakened by threat or disaster, and then we respond rapidly and

generously. We circle the wagons with instinctive protectiveness. We

tire of problems that are prolonged and too much with us. It seems

that only dramatic events call forth our dramatic efforts.

Before Katrina, I had not given a thought to the people of New

Orleans, their struggles and their pain. They were remote from my

consideration.

Even if I had known New Orleans was the crime capital of the

South, beset by the highest number of homicides per capita in the

United States; even if I had known the extent of its pandemic

criminal and drug culture, the fact that it has the highest child

poverty rate in the nation and an education system best described as

moribund; even if I had known that much of the city is an urban

blight, dilapidated, decrepit and decayed, I would not have thought

to respond to the residents’ daily hardship and suffering, to the

concentrated neglect the city personifies.

It took unbelievable devastation, unprecedented disaster and the

ferocity of Mother Nature to concentrate my mind wonderfully on what

needed to be done and highlight what I must do. After all, a heroic

burst of effort in the aftermath of a storm is easier than tending to

the long-term micro-details and strategic planning necessary to avert

it.

The shelf life of concern is short. We are quickly prone to

compassion-fatigue. We reel from the Oklahoma City bombing to the

World Trade Center to the tsunami to Katrina. Each evokes an

outpouring of energetic response ... until the next calamity.

And when the next assault strikes -- be it an act of genocide, a

terrorist attack or a natural disaster -- I will no doubt be diverted

from the plight of New Orleans and stirred up to confront that new

adversity.

Yes, my mind is concentrated when the blows of misfortune rain

down. I only wish it could be concentrated longer. The truth is that

the next “worst” gets my “best.”

RABBI MARK S. MILLER

Temple Bat Yahm

Newport Beach

The very nature of life involves both giving and receiving. Each

person must take responsibility for how important service to others

will be in his or her life -- whether through family, career or

vocation, volunteerism or financial donations.

Spiritual traditions help us to mature beyond self-gratification.

We better understand our place in the universe, and grow to have a

genuine concern for others, for all people and the planet. In

Buddhism, the traditional term “dana” refers to the spirit and act of

generosity, but its deeper meaning is the practice of universal

harmony.

It is our nature to try to ease suffering if we can. In Zen, we

often use the example of a child stepping off a curb in front of a

bus. We don’t deliberate, we just reach out to grab the child.

When people saw the magnitude of the suffering in New Orleans,

they reached for their checkbooks, went online and searched for ways

to help.

It is also our nature to have fears about giving, and to find

excuses and rationalizations to curb our generous heart. Greed and

ignorance cause us to hoard our material wealth, and naive arrogance

convinces us we are entitled to what we have.

The American dream includes belief in equal opportunity, an

assurance that with determination and hard work, everyone can obtain

what is needed for survival with dignity. But for every rags to

riches story, there are other stories of broken families, abandoned

children, malnutrition, inadequate health care, domestic violence,

racism, sexual abuse, addiction, sexism, untreated mental illness and

poor schools.

Whether we give direct aid (for example, a bed for the night at a

shelter) or support those who are working for systemic change

(identifying the various causes leading to homelessness and solutions

overall within a community), we know that most people do not “choose”

to live in misery.

In poor nations, beggars display their disabilities to tourists.

Mothers holding babies sit in the streets filled with exhaust and

send their children out to sell Chiclets. Here at home, old men shout

to themselves, their skin like leather from living outdoors, and

sleep in our doorway.

Middle class security can be shattered by one serious car crash.

The idea that we are more fortunate due to our superior character and

talents, and that others deserve their suffering due to “bad choices”

is a cruel illusion.

There are always trustworthy people who are doing good work and

are in need of funding to continue it. There is no excuse for not

finding them and giving as generously as you can.

REV. DR. DEBORAH BARRETT

Zen Center of Orange County

Costa Mesa

Rainbows in our sky last week prompted 11-year-old Don Haynes to

respond, “God must be especially happy today!”

Natural beauties like rainbows and devastations of natural

disasters have less to do with God’s will than does our response to

them. Childlike responses, like our son’s, please God as much as do

hearts moved to open wallets and purses; both have everything to do

with God’s will.

It takes nature’s motivations for some of us to realize that life

itself is God’s gift. For all who have given in such gratitude,

“Hooray!”

It is true that giving to institutions like churches by

individuals and families as a percentage of personal or household

income has been declining. In this Parish Church, it was just over --

and is now just under -- 2%. And, of course, the Biblical standard is

10%! Some have increased the amount of dollars they give over the

past decade, but often not at the same rate that their incomes have

grown.

I suspect many are not aware of what percentage of their incomes

they are actually giving and I hope that if they did, they would

increase the percentage of their giving. When inflation is taken into

consideration, as it must be, such groups’ financial power to serve

has declined.

Natural disasters force us to put aside our usual “bootstrap

theologies” and our cynicism about others’ behavior, as I wrote here

earlier this month. Why are we self-righteous about others’ “bad

choices” and blind to our own? Would we do better to be as ready to

forgive others, as we are to seek forgiveness for ourselves? Isn’t

pride the base of our difficulty in doing either? What will it take

to knock us off of our self-centeredness?

God loves givers! Acts 20:35 has Jesus saying, essentially,

“Givers get! Takers don’t.”

We’d do well to leave judgments of others’ choices to God and

remember that when we stand before God’s great throne of grace, the

“account” we will be asked to show is our open checkbook.

(THE VERY REV’D CANON) PETER D. HAYNES

Saint Michael & All Angels

Episcopal Church

Corona del Mar

If money is being given to other causes, then the statistics about

Katrina can’t be used to support the argument cited by the Center of

Philanthropy.

Yesterday, I met two secular friends from out of town who just

returned from doing relief work in New Orleans. After hearing tales

of and seeing the lifestyle in New Orleans and how quickly people

returned to it, they both concluded Katrina was a “judgment of God”

upon “sin city.”

I don’t concur with them. These two secular people decided the

hurricane was the result of “bad choices” on the part of the people

in that region.

Again, let me say clearly I do not agree.

The point I want to make is that if there is a feeling in the

public that this was a judgment of God, yet people are giving in a

powerful way, then that does not support the contention of the Center

on Philanthropy. If its conclusion was correct, then there would have

only been a trickle of a response to the crisis.

People seem to be giving regardless of the race, creed, beliefs,

economic status or the “sinfulness” of the people of the region.

We have found that even when we are not meeting our own budget

needs, our people are very generous in giving to others in crisis. In

times when we have had to tighten our belts, our congregation has

demanded that no cuts be made to our charitable ministries.

I do think that the giving trends of people are changing, but not

in the way the university is speculating. I believe people are

becoming less likely to give to big welfare-type organizations with

CEOs earning salaries higher than the American president. They prefer

to give to organizations that help people become self-sufficient and

succeed in the long term.

SENIOR ASSOCIATE PASTOR RIC OLSEN

Harbor Trinity

Costa Mesa