“Faith” and Fundraising Part 3

Continuing with our thread from the past two days, which do you think comes first: the chicken or the egg?

Is it necessary that the myths, dogma and theology involving the afterlife necessarily precede doing good and loving humankind? Is it only the myths and dogma, then, that gives people faith, so that then they can be productive and be self-giving and have many positive relationships?

Or can people live lives that are productive, self-giving, self-assured, mature, reasonable, responsible and full of many positive relationships just by their own discernment and through their own nature? Is the only way we can achieve personal and societal charity, then, necessarily the result of priests deciding to invent the myths, dogma and theology involving the afterlife as a way to get people to conform their behavior in ways that ultimately can move society along in positive ways?

Question: Do we only get productive, self-aware, self-giving, positively relational human beings IF there is some sort of myth that they can believe about the afterlife? Is that the only source of grace and peace? Clearly, if we look at what has been produced by some of our world’s religions, this seems not to be the case. Far from giving us impetus to be kind and generous to others, religion with its myths and theologies has produced people who are going around bombing each other because of this belief in an afterlife. And, as I say, we've been doing the equivalent for centuries.

Or is there some natural state of being human, when all the factors come together just in the right way, that promotes health and maturity, and that includes productivity, self-awareness, self-giving and positive relationships all on its own without the myths?

I am inclined to think that the sort of being who breeds generosity and love of humankind occurs naturally, without benefit of religion or "faith," though perhaps not as often as we might wish. Or else that loving and caring come from other than religious roots.

It seems that the priests have attempted to manipulate people through the myths and dogma and theology in order to foster a "faith" kind of answer to life's Big Question that satisfies enough to permit human beings having this "faith" to set aside their baser nature and let their natural love and generosity come through.

Many people have had satisfying, productive, happy, healthy lives, full of good relationships, etc. and yet have not been people who "believed" the myths of religion. They simply developed a kind of "faith" in the world at large and in the "way things are," quite aside from any particular religious myth and dogma. Perhaps one can lead a moral, helpful, responsive life without religion.

We see throughout history how religious dogma, the myths and the theologies have repeatedly disintegrated into racial, class, gender, economic or political power wars and genocide. The mythical and dogmatic produce of the priests is used by the priests themselves and by believing persons, to bring about mob violence against unbelievers, economic wars, political power plays and other manifestations of greed, anxiety, fear, hostility and warlike nature.

So we now have, and have had for centuries, the Christians against the Muslims, the Muslims against the Hindus and Buddhists, and everyone against the Jews. And this is in response not only to humankind's essentially "sinful" or “baser” nature, if you want to use a Christian term, but also as a response to belief in the myths and dogma concerning an afterlife.

Consequently, now, we have people running around killing the guy next door because he has a different myth of the afterlife by which he lives. What kind of sanity is that? The very myth that was designed to help people be satisfied enough to feel nurtured and cared for has for centuries erupted as the basis for being out there killing and maiming and raping the people from the neighboring family, tribe, clan, village, state or country next door.

But one thing that we can see here in this country is that the myth about the afterlife, in all its various manifestations, has permitted also a kind self-giving of one's substance to help others who are needy, and this we call “philanthropy:”: the "love of humankind." Why do we love humans? Is it just because we have come to believe there is an afterlife, in which we can all feel secure, IF we do the "right things;" and we have been taught to understand this includes being self-giving and helping the poor, etc. called “giving back to the community?”

Many people have demonstrated that it is possible to figure out for one's self, quite apart from religious myths and dogma and theology, that such giving, right along with being productive, having will-power for the long haul, having a vision for the future, seeking well-rounded, mutually satisfying relationships, etc. will have a positive affect on the ability of humankind to grow and develop in positive ways. That being the case, we really don't need artificial insemination of the priests' myths, dogma and theology in order to make good things happen for the people around us.

But there's yet another aspect of this thread that we must explore. That is the fact that even when we know (from whatever source or impulse) what we need to do to help another person achieve his/her best personal goals or values, making the decision to do that -- at whatever small or large cost to ourselves -- is one of the most difficult decisions to make.

Regardless of our best intentions, the extent of our education and understanding of the human predicament, the height of our belief in the myths and theologies, or the fact that we know how to make moral decisions, making that decision to help the other person, or give them what they need for survival and enhancement, is still the most difficult of decisions.

So we'll hopefully see you on Monday with more on this theme. Have a great weekend -- and be kind to someone, give a little. If you can bring yourself to do that, it will be internally rewarding.

“Faith” and Fundraising Part 2

Back somewhere in the mists of time, someone at the dawn of the human age must have noticed that very few people around him/her had what we called in the previous post "natural faith." Those who did have this quality seemed to be extra-ordinarily productive, were self-giving, self-motivated, self-assured, maybe even self-actualizing people. They probably had the kind of relationships that were nurturing, mutually fulfilling and well-rounded. These people seemed to be able to put away the baser elements of human nature and let more positive qualities predominate.

Other people in the family, tribe or clan – in fact, probably the great majority of people observed by our long-ago sage -- seemed to let all the qualities of greed, fear, anxiety, and a warlike nature supersede any more peaceful inclinations. Whenever an incident would happen, most of the people would give in to these emotions. An opportunity for food or shelter would trigger greed; the mastodon triggered fear; the lack of resources would occasion anxiety; an aggressive move by a neighboring clan would provide the opportunity to make war on them and beat them into submission.

So this person somewhere in the dim dark past figured out that one of the most perplexing questions a human being can have is the question, "Isn't there anything after this life? Is all we get just one go-around at this existence? Does it have to be this mean and ugly, so absent of grace, beauty and peace?"

So, being very creative, our lone individual decided to invent a scenario for human existence in which there was an after-life, and he/she began to tell friends and neighbors all about it; how great life will be in the time beyond death, how the streets will be paved with gold, or whatever. This probably relieved the fears of our sage, personally, because the more she/he talked about this view the more belief in the scenario seemed to come alive. Not only that, but family, tribe or clan members gradually got the hang of it, and they too started to believe.

The "priests" of whatever religion this made-up story was about to become, came immediately to the fore. They, too, were motivated by greed, fear, anger and anxiety. They saw the opportunity available in other people’s fear and saw that they could cash in on this phenomenon, this new view of the universe that included an after-life. They saw ways to use this scenario to make a more secure life for themselves than those around them had. They did this by taking on the "duties and responsibilities" of perpetuating the set of beliefs, rituals and rites that came to be in vogue or dominant at any given time, and their work tended to satisfy the question about life after death, relieved the general anxiety of the population, and gave them some comfort. So people did what the priests of this new phenomenon called "religion" said to do in order to have their fears calmed and their lives made a little easier -- at least in their minds. So religions of one kind or another have been perpetuating this idea of an after-life ever since.

This has also turned out to be something of a civilizing agent, although the history of the various religions still has in it a lot of war and skulduggery. It became a way to get people to put down, put away, or at least to discipline their baser nature of greed, fear, anxiety and warlike nature somewhat so that they can be productive and have good relationships.

So the religions that developed served three purposes: First, it helped people to act in more socially appropriate ways that allowed civilization to grow and develop a more materially and emotionally comfortable existence. Secondly, it did so by relieving peoples' fears about this life being all there is to human existence, and giving some meaning and purpose to the daily drudge, helping people overlook the really rotten conditions they lived in, and the oppression of the greediest ones that, over time, robbed the other people of all they had, including their dignity and self-respect. Third, religions helped the priestly class develop a life for themselves that extended their own greed and fear through the power they developed over the people. It became intoxicating, self-aggrandizing, as they now had the power of even the rulers in their hands to manipulate.

Now, we need to link how faith and, ultimately, philanthropy grow out of the situation. It gets even more interesting, if you’re into this kind of thing. The next post will take a look at this.

“Faith” and Fundraising

Here's a train of thought having to do with religion as a stimulus for philanthropy and a motivation for engaging in the various activities of fundraising.

This was occasioned by attendance at the memorial service of a friend. During the service those assembled heard statements such as: "He was a true father to me; he had pride in what I did and let me know how proud he was of what I ended up becoming." We heard friends of the deceased say, "He didn't need to 'find himself.' He already knew who he was. He had faith, family and friends in his corner at the end." Another speaker said, "He had faith that everything would turn out all right."

Faith seems necessary for living a life that has the attributes of productivity, an ability to give of self and many, well-rounded, mutually-fulfilling relationships with fellow human beings. But is it religious belief, or the religious community's infrastructure and marketing mechanisms that are responsible for the giving of those who are religiously active?

What is "faith" in the context of making charitable gifts?

"Faith," as observed in those who claim to have it, seems to consist of a person's ability to “see” the future, envision the possibilities that can happen, gain a sense of the circumstances and the concomitant actions that can bring about those possibilities.

"Faith" might also involve, the ability to dig in and work for those possibilities with a vigor and strength that makes them happen. "Faith" is often said to help its believers meet adversity head-on, overcome the blocks and barriers in one's path, while believing, knowing, "having faith" that the outcome will be positive and we have results somewhat along the lines envisioned, even though one is in the midst of the unknown.

"Faith," then, seems to be the ability to keep applying one's better nature throughout life, to the various problems and situations of life, without dissembling, and without letting one's baser nature (fear, anger, greed, anxiety, warlike nature) have sway over one's thoughts and actions. And here we might ask the question, "What motivates atheists to be good, or to give to charity?"

Those who have this quality of "faith" in a natural way seem to be rare. By “natural,” I mean not stimulated by religious dogma and training. If one is prompted by dogmatic proclamations that come from other peoples’ heads and by training that inculcates someone else’s thoughts, then that person’s “faith” is simply letting someone else do one’s thinking.

Having a sense of security in an unknown future that comes from observation of the present, tempered by the internally generated understanding that the future can be better and the intuitional “guessing” that points to the probable characteristics of that future is what I mean here by “faith.”. Some of the other factors that affect one’s “faith view” might include nurturing and supportive parents, a leadership personality forged by trying and failing/succeeding at leadership, a strong self-will or self-discipline able to be applied in a positive direction rather than for war and mayhem.

The quality of "faith" seems to vary with the extent of one’s ability to look ahead and see the possibilities as well as the time, effort and resources it will take to realize them. This also demands a certain quality of persistence of the vision of faith. This is the understanding of the amount of hard work it’s going to take to bring the future into being, even in the face of personal or professional opposition, many blocks and barriers, and frequent events that seem to defeat the vision.

Let’s pause to think this over, and we’ll continue in the next post.