Relationships Not Resolutions

Comment by: Ir

Wow, Siamang, those are very thoughtful comments! (Not that I expected otherwise from you)

May I disagree slightly in places even though it’s your birthday?

Giving money seemed so empty an experience. Everyone wanted to have a way to contribute in a way that actually felt like they were doing something.

I have mixed feelings about this - I know that people like affirmation and that we get more affirmation when we help someone we can see and then we can see them smile and say ‘thank you’. But isn’t that a bit of a selfish motivation for wanting to help someone face to face?

Giving money generally means being part of a team - we’re the part that gives money and others get the money to those who need it, or use the money on their behalf. It can actually be an efficient use of resources in a collective sense if the others are the ones who can go there and we are the ones who can give money. Perhaps the problem is that we don’t always ‘feel’ like we’re on a team when we write out the check and mail it. Really we are, though.

People are physical beings too. And we need to feel our arms and legs and backs moving in a way to help people. Not by calling in a donation or clicking on Paypal. But by really doing something.

Again, giving money is doing something - and you yourself said ‘we need’ - is it actually about our need more than it is about theirs? (I’m trying to be challenging rather than accusing people of being selfish)

And the sermon for that week was “Relationships, Not Resolutions.” And I thought about that a lot. I felt like I had RESOLVED to do more to help people. But I hadn’t done anything worthwhile.

How do you know your money wasn’t used in a worthwhile way? It might have been (I hope it was)

As I connected that phrase to my life, and to the empty experience of giving money, it meant this to me. It meant that involving your life with others, having a relationship with them, that was more important than merely resolving to help. Rather than emptily giving money, I needed to get involved.

When you can, I think that’s fine. But is it fair to your 2 year old to get on a plane to Florida? Could she even begin to understand why Daddy wasn’t around? Where does your first obligation lie?

A person who needs help, will need it in ways that you could never see without knowing them. And you’ll help them in ways you’d never know, if you never knew them.

Aha! I do completely agree with this! When you give money from a distance you do have to trust it is used in worthwhile ways. You don’t get to be there and see what the real needs are or if they’re getting met by your money.

I honestly think you can do far more good for someone if you have a relationship with them.

I think you can know their needs better and be more confident you’re meeting their real needs.

I felt that I was missing an important piece of the puzzle. I know people who turned their churches into shelters. People coordinated places to live and jobs for displaced residents. Churches became community giving machines. People’s arms and legs and backs were set into motion actually helping people. And those relationships will continue, and continue to do good.

I agree. But I don’t think it’s an either/or - most help ends up needing some funding one way or another. Money usually needs to be part of the picture.

As an atheist, I still recognize the parts of church life that I am not connected to. I don’t have faith, and I don’t take time for worship. I think that there are real human needs for community, charity and other parts of church life that I think most atheists fill in other ways.

I agree. Well, in most cases. I think some people have a higher need for relationships than others.

I am interested in the ways that atheists fill those needs. I’m also interested in some aspects of it that maybe don’t have a substitute.

I think most atheists probably have to work harder than Christians to find a way of having the social/personal growth benefits a Christian can get by going to church and Bible study.

And I think atheists often don’t have a substitute for ‘ritual’. Some churches lack ‘ritual’ too, though. I think ritual can provide comfort, stability, a way to pass on values to our children.

Before Katrina and that church sign, I merely thought that giving to charity was an adequate way to fulfill the need in me to do good for others. I am interested in other people’s experience with the community aspect of church. Does it into a feeling of fulfillment, especially in times of crisis? Has anyone discovered a different way for them?

If I can take this in a slightly different direction - I think it feels good to be able to ‘contribute meaningfully’; to ‘be useful’ to ‘have a role’ to be ‘meeting real needs’ and I think it’s profoundly healthy and part of a balanced life that we ‘give back’ as well as taking; that we aren’t just ‘dependents’. Church can facilitate this; so can involvement with people/missions/organizations in many other ways.