Before I go any further, let me just say that the "Sin City" Gram Parsons tribute concert on Saturday was marvelous. The LA Times has a decent review (email me if you want an LA Times access code) by Robert Hilburn today, complete with this photo of Keith Richards and Norah Jones singing a duet on the classic "Love Hurts." (Just to see those two together was more than worth the hefty admission price.) Dwight Yoakam made a brilliant surprise appearance; Steve Earle was sublime; I was in tears of joy through the last forty minutes of the show.
On to money. I'm refinancing my condo. I bought it in April 2003, and it's easily appreciated 25% since then. I'm pulling out equity to spend on various important things. But I've been thinking a lot lately about money, and especially after reading this Wendell Berry interview in Sojourners. Here is the excerpt that resonates with me:
Any religion has to have a practice. When you let it go so far from practice that it just becomes a matter of talk something bad happens. If you don't have an economic practice, you don't have a practice. Christians conventionally think they've done enough when they've gone to the store and shopped. But that isn't an economic life. It isn't an economic practice. If you take seriously those passages in the scripture that say that we live by God's spirit and his breath, that we live, move, and have our being in God, the implications for the present economy are just devastating. Those passages call for an entirely generous and careful economic life.
Berry has always been one of our finest anti-capitalist prophetic voices (and he will make an appearance in a future Thursday Poem). But this little paragraph is making me uncomfortable on this morning, a morning where I am awaiting a call from my mortgage broker.
I split my major contributions between the two churches to which I belong. I give in much smaller amounts to a variety of other charities (I'll post a list one of these days), and yes, I give to various political candidates. (Twice so far this summer to John Kerry). But is giving a certain percentage of my income the same as having a spiritual relationship with money? I suspect not. Indeed, I find that the more I give to church and charity, the more I begin to feel that what remains is mine to spend entirely as I will.
One of the great areas of my life where I still need growth is in my sense of entitlement! I am, like far too many Americans, fond of the language of "earning and deserving". I say things like this to myself all the time:
"I've worked hard, I deserve a vacation." (Uh, yes, tenured profs do work hard. I teach seven classes a semester, thank you.)
"I'd look really good in that shirt (those shoes, those jeans, with that belt). It's a bit much, but I can afford it."
"I need this." (Said about everything from a remodeled kitchen to a road bike to concert tickets.)
How does that jive with Berry's statement that "If you take seriously those passages in the scripture that say that we live by God's spirit and his breath, that we live, move, and have our being in God, the implications for the present economy are just devastating."???
I realize that when it comes to charity and tithing, I tend to "pay God to go away." That's hard to admit, but it is what I do. If I give a certain amount away, I reason, then I am free from the moral burden of having to share any further. Then I can leave the lights on at home all day, buy expensive clothes, go out to expensive meals, lease a new car every three years, take several vacations annually, and, yes, despite my income, run up credit card debt because I struggle to live within my already ample means! The disconnect between the gospel and my spending habits is "just devastating."
Heck, maybe this is one reason why I'm a liberal. I like the idea of raising taxes to pay for social programs. I like the fact that taxes (unlike the modern tithe) are not voluntary -- because I know that I tend to avoid that which is voluntary! I'll only give a truly just amount of my income if it is taken from me. I'm only half-serious, but it's a fairly serious half. Hugo is often at his most virtuous when virtue is mandatory. Am I the only one?
Seven classes a semester??!! Wow. Can't imagine how you have time for this blog, or Church, or a pet, or running, or eating.....
Posted by: DJW | July 12, 2004 at 12:43 PM
I am always trying to find something that will inspire me to do what I know I should. This is an attempt to remove my need to make a choice for good. Put a gun to my head or dangle a prize and I will act. Leave me to choose for myself and I will stall until the choice is made for me.
Posted by: Tim | July 12, 2004 at 04:49 PM
good post. i'd like to think that if i had the extra money, i'd donate like yourself--even if only in small amounts.
but hugo, don't you like the option of giving to those you choose? don't you think you could make a better choice, then say the government, on where you would like to make your money count?
Posted by: joe | July 12, 2004 at 04:57 PM
"But is giving a certain percentage of my income the same as having a spiritual relationship with money?" This sentence must be the clearest, most succinct query on giving I have ever read or heard. Gives me lots to think about as I am in the process of re-doing our budget in the spirit of the law, not the letter.
Posted by: anj | July 13, 2004 at 08:25 AM