From: SECBH@cunyvm.bitnet
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: re: the problem of pain - query
Date: 16 Aug 92 05:42:41 GMT
Organization: City University of New York/ University Computer Center

In article <Aug.12.03.39.40.1992.25604@dartagnan.rutgers.edu>
ptfarre@afterlife.ncsc.mil (Peter Farrell) writes:

>From what I have seen of the underclass in this country, two things are
>true:
>        a) We have the cushiest underclass of any nation in the world;
>        our beggars push old shopping carts and listen to discarded
>        Sony walkmans. Those of other nations (and I have seen some)
>        set abjectly in the street with their heads bowed, their
>        hands cupped, and often literally in rags.

That the U.S. has a "cushy" underclass - as defined by Mr. Farrell
above - may be explained I would think in large measure by the fact
that we are perhaps the most wasteful nation on earth.  We routinely
throw away large quanities of edible food, usable clothing and all
manner of gadgetry.  That the lower classes scavange these rather
luxious discards and pick what is finest and most usable doesn't
seem to me to be blameworthy.

Seeing the poor and homeless picking through the public trash cans on
the corners or the garbage bins in front of apartment buildings is
a commonplace part of the public scene here in NYC.  What they pull
out in many cases, and I mean _many_, is luxury-quality goods.

I find it peculiar, to say the least, that our underclass seems to
be being compared unfavorbaly to the poor of other nations because
they are not sitting abjectly in rags with hands outstretched in
supplication.  I can assure Mr. Farrell that they do sleep on the
concrete sidewalks in the winter, they do eat from public garbage
cans from which they separate the food from the dog excrement, and
entire families (with small children) have been ejected from living
in the subway stations in the winter.

I think we should be asking more questions about
the level of self-indulgence many of us routinely
practice and the problem of what I would term "overabundance".

>        Ours accost you
>        and taunt you for not feeling sorry for them, or they
>        spit at you and laugh behind your back if you do give them
>        money.

This is certainly an ugly experience.  However, is the point of giving
to get the reward gratitude? If we are looking for stroking aren't we
tryly just buying something with our "gift"?  Isn't it quite simply
a commercial transaction?

>        b) In our country especially, more than any other, most
>        downtrodden and oppressed people volunteered for the position.
>        Therefore, I take much of the suffering I see among our
>        "homeless" with a grain of salt. It doesn't make one happy
>        to see this lousy choice these people have made, and I do
>        not wish it upon anyone.  But it sure ain't MY fault...

I would be very interested in having Mr. Farrell explain what he
means in the first sentence above when he says "volunteered".  In
some Asian countries people rural people can become imporverished
through borrowing money for such purposes as providing for a
daughter's dowry and wedding and lose their land and become
wandering beggars.  In this country the poor are often tempted
by the prevalence of drug use and destroy their ability to work and
ultimately die from the habit itself or associated diseases.
And in any country we find those persons who through accident and
illness lose their possessions and the ability to earn a living.

Who has volunteered?  Is there a "True" poor and homeless class
composed only of those persons who appear to be victims of illness
or accident?  Mr. Farrell states, "But it sure ain't MY fault..."

Are we responsible for the flood which sweeps across Bangladesh?

And is responsibility for judging the origins of someone's poverty
or homelessness what loving-kindness is about?  Isn't the first
focus on alleviating the condition of suffering which is before us?

As to "It sure ain't MY fault", one of the salutary points of
contemplating ourselves is the eventual discovery of how much we
are like our fellows in our faults, if not our circumstances.

I found this posting quite jarring and inconsistent when compared
with Mr. Farrell's previous postings on this topic, and examined
as a stand-alone it seems to speak from a seat of judgement quite
at odds with what I would expect the Christian context to be.

Jack Carroll