On Overlooking the Obviously Poor
There is an episode in the Gospel of Luke which is found only in that Gospel. It says that Jesus was invited into a Pharisee’s home for dinner. While he was there a prostitute came in with a jar of expensive ointment to pour over Jesus’ feet as an expression of her devotion to him, a devotion about which no explanation is given. The Pharisee and the other guests were scandalized that Jesus would allow such a bizarre act to be done for him by a woman of such disreputable character. Jesus could see the disapproval written all over their faces, so he told them a parable about a man who had two debtors. The debt of the one was ten times that of the other, but the man forgave both debtors their debts. Jesus asked the Pharisee which debtor would be more grateful for what had been done. The Pharisee reluctantly, if also guardedly, said it was probably the debtor with the far more serious debt.
Jesus then said to Simon the Pharisee, “Do you see this woman?” Then Jesus noted what even the most oblivious Middle Eastern Jew could instantly see, that Simon had not shown Jesus the courtesies which every proper person would feel obligated to offer. Nevertheless the prostitute had shown him great and costly courtesy by pouring the very expensive ointment over his feet. Jesus forgave her for her sins, and witheringly told Simon, “Her sins, which are many, are forgiven, for she loved much; but he who is forgiven little, loves little.” Think about that, little sinner, seems to be Jesus’ implication to his imperiously judgmental host.
I do not want to comment further on this story, except to highlight something Jesus said to the Pharisee: “Do you see this woman?” Did Simon see her? He looked at her, but did he see her? Presumably she was a practitioner of the world’s oldest profession, and everyone in town, including Simon, knew who she was. But for all the times through the years that Simon had looked in contempt at this woman, had he ever really seen her?
There are many issues we may deliberately prevent ourselves from seeing: malaria or ebola in tropical countries, rapidly advancing desertification in the American West and sub-Saharan Africa, physical abuse of women and children, a steadily if also slowly rising sea level. What we don’t like to think about we can conveniently erase from our vision and our minds.
There also may be people we all look at, but may never truly see: black people, Latinos, children (if we are W.C. Fields types), the elderly (if we are worshipers solely of perpetual youth), and so on. We may look at them, but do we see them? “Simon, do you see this woman?”
This morning I want to suggest that for middle and upper-middle class people, the poor are people we far too seldom allow ourselves to see. We may look at them, but do we see them?
According to American census data from 2010, the net worth of the average black household is $6,314, whereas the average white household has $110,500 in net worth. The gap widened from the previous decade, until now the US has a greater gap in wealth between whites and blacks than exists in South Africa. The black-white wealth gap is 47% greater now than it was in 1967. On average, Latinos have more wealth than blacks, but much less than whites.
Black students are significantly less likely than whites to attend high schools that offer advanced math or science courses. Blacks are also three times more likely to be suspended or expelled from school than whites. A black man in his 20s without a high school diploma is more likely to be in jail than to be employed. The National Bureau of Economic Research reports that 70% of middle-aged black men without a diploma have been imprisoned.
Now of course all that may be a specific illustration of incipient racism rather than a general societal overlooking of the obviously poor. And blacks are far more likely to be poor than whites. But similar outcomes occur for poor whites without sufficient education. As a nation, we don’t like to focus very long on the problems of the poor. But then, the poor are always with us; didn’t Jesus himself say that? Indeed he did, in three Gospels no less. But before you take consolation in that statement, sometime look up its context. It doesn’t mean what it seems to imply, which is true of many misapplied biblical texts, and that is one of the most misapplied of all scriptural verses.
In Fiddler on the Roof, Nachem the village beggar in Anatevka is given only one kopeck by a leading citizen. Ruefully Nachem notes that normally he gets two kopecks. “I had a bad week,” says the affluent donor. “Well, if you had a bad week,” says Nachem, “why should I suffer?”
Why, indeed? But it happens all the time. When times are tough, the poor suffer relatively far more than the affluent. Perhaps that is only natural. But is it natural for a nation which proudly claims to be primarily Christian? Only now we are beginning to emerge from the Great Recession, the most drastic economic downturn since the Great Depression. Once again the poor are falling further behind than when times were better and more productive several years ago.
The killing of the teenage boy by the policeman in Ferguson, Missouri and its aftermath uncovered some fascinating and fearsome facts. The city’s second-highest source of income results from fines and court fees charged against citizens unfortunate enough to be arrested. The fines are for traffic violations, but also for such terribly egregious societal infractions as jaywalking or spitting. If the offenders don’t pay up, they may end up in jail.
It is not only poor people in Ferguson who face this dilemma, however. People in many municipalities, especially the poor, experience the same kinds of hassle. The people least able to afford these fines and court fees are the ones who are paying the highest percentage of the costs, and not necessarily because they are more likely than others to commit the offenses. But they are politically and socially much easier to arrest and prosecute than other, more well-heeled citizens.
I have a friend here on the island who is intent on being very aware of what is going on in the world and in our country. Therefore I was amazed to hear him say with absolute conviction that there are no homeless people on Hilton Head Island. There are; as a percentage not many, but certainly some. We don’t see them, because they don’t live in cardboard boxes or under bridges, as in large cities, but they’re here. Our congregation participates with Congregation Beth Yam and All Saints Episcopal Church in the Family Promise program. It provides temporary housing and food at All Saints for local homeless families with young children. Last night there were six mothers and fathers and eight children as guests next door in All Saints Episcopal Church. It is hard to observe the homeless in this community, but they are here nonetheless.
On Friday an expert on world food production spoke at the World Affairs Council of Hilton Head Island. He said that in India 24% of Indian families go totally without food every other day. Since India has 1.2 billion people, that means 300,000,000 very hungry people. That represents the total population of the USA. Do we see those hungry people?
The Fall of the House of Dixie is a book by Bruce Levine about the effects of the abolition of slavery as a result of the Civil War. It depicts a society which had deluded itself for generations into thinking that slaves were happy and content with their lot in life. No doubt many masters were very kind to their slaves, but they were still slaves, not hired servants, and that makes an enormous difference. The author claimed that the ownership of slaves represented the second greatest concentration of wealth in the USA up until the war started. Few Southerners owned slaves, but many of those who didn’t also chose to ignore the moral ramifications of that particular type of ownership.
Jesus talked a great deal about money and wealth. Some people claim he talked more about that than any other single subject. In the 16th chapter of Luke, Jesus was at it again. Luke writes, “The Pharisees, who were lovers of money, heard all this, and they scoffed at him” (16:14). So Jesus, trying to break through the high wall which many wealthy people tend to build between themselves and the poor, told a parable. He said, “There was a rich man, who was clothed in purple and fine linen and who feasted sumptuously every day. And at his gate lay a poor man named Lazarus, full or sores, who desired to be fed with what fell from the rich man’s table; moreover the dogs came and licked his sores.”
In a very few words, the scene is set. Purple is, of course, the color of royalty. The rich man “ate sumptuously.” Maybe he was like Kim Jong Un, who maybe eats too much rich food (he does look like it, after all), and thus gets gout or wobbly ankles, but we’ll probably never know, because North Korea is such a closed book. Anyway, just outside the rich man’s back door, by the large plastic dumpster placed there, a poor man named Lazarus regularly perched. This is very interesting, because Lazarus is the only person given a name in any of Jesus’ many parables. Did he know an actual poor man with the actual name of Lazarus who hung out behind a rich man’s house? We don’t know. But Lazarus had sores all over his body, and the dogs would come and lick his sores. First-century Jews didn’t like dogs. Nobody back then kept dogs as pets. Dogs were dangerous scavengers. So poor Lazarus, the epitome of poverty, had fearsome dogs come up and lick his skin. This is, altogether, a pretty grim picture of a pretty grim situation.
About the rest of the parable I shall make no comments, because it makes a different point from the one I am attempting to make. My point is this: The rich man never really saw Lazarus outside his door. He looked at him many times, but he never saw him. He was like Simon the Pharisee earlier in Luke’s Gospel; he had looked at the “woman who was a sinner” many times on the village street, but he never truly saw her. I suspect that extremely few prostitutes go into that line of work because they like it or because they think they will get rich; they do it to keep from falling even further down the social ladder or from starving to death. Very poor women fall into a very dangerous occupation to avoid even worse circumstances, if there are such.
Why do we, all of whom are relatively affluent, tend usually to overlook the obviously poor? We do it because they make us uncomfortable. “There, but for the grace of God, go I.” We do it because we think there is little if anything we can do to eradicate poverty, either for individuals or for all the world’s poor. We do it because their low status may make us feel queasy about our relatively high status. Some of us ignore the poor because we think they deserve it.
Attitude, in other words, is critical in how we think about the poor. Do we deliberately try to ignore them, or do we try to see their plight, and to put ourselves in their shoes --- if they are sufficiently fortunate to have shoes? Attitude is what Jesus was referring to when he addressed the Pharisees, as reported in Luke 16 and Matthew 23. “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! You shut the kingdom of heaven against men, for you neither enter it yourselves, nor allow those who would enter to go in….Which is greater, the gold or the temple that has made the gold sacred? …Woe to you, for you give a tithe even of the most insignificant commodities, but you have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faith.”
There is always a tendency to overlook the obviously poor, but in politically difficult times, it is especially likely that the political process will overlook them. And these are very difficult times, politically. How many candidates are talking about more government assistance for the economically marginalized? Almost none! It is political suicide to promote Obamacare or increased welfare payments or aid to dependent children. In a non-Presidential election year, any President with a hint of social liberality is treated as though he has ebola. And most people didn’t even know what ebola was until the past few weeks, because it was a disease confined to poor people in West Africa, and who keeps close track of what goes on there, for heaven’s sake?
You may wonder why I subject you to my periodic liberal ethical rants. It is because you’re the only victims I have to whom I can rant. Supply me with other people and I’ll victimize them. But I won’t let you or me overlook the poor. We can’t be Christians and do that.
Statistically, poverty is not a major issue in southern Beaufort County. But nationally it is not only a big problem, but also a rapidly growing one. How we vote has a direct bearing on what federal and state governments shall likely do to address the needs of the poor. It is something in which we can and should personally participate. There are many factors to consider when casting a ballot, but the stated or ignored thoughts of politicians concerning the poor are among the most important of issues. Do candidates see the poor, or not? Do they even look at them, or not?
Locally, however, there many things we can do personally. We can volunteer in organizations whose main purpose is to assist low-income people. Hold a hammer for Habitat. Habitat for Humanity is an outstanding organization which enlists volunteers and less affluent people collectively to construct homes for families who need homes. The Deep Well Project can always use more volunteers in its warehouse, as can Bluffton Self-Help or the Bargain Box or the Hospice Thrift Store. Volunteers in Medicine is geared mainly to serve less affluent people, and it couldn’t operate without volunteers, many of whom have no medical background. There is also Meals on Wheels and Friends with Wheels. Look them all up in the first few pages in the phone book. And if you can’t or won’t volunteer, at least send money. Everyone can do that.
Did the rich man see Lazarus --- really? Did Simon the Pharisee see the disreputable lady --- really? Do we see the poor in our community or state or nation or world --- really? If so, what, if anything, do we do once we have actually seen them?