Race And Charity — A friend asked me a question recently…
On one hand, you have a friend whose son wants to go to college who is white and a poor black kid who also wants to go to college. Who do you give the money to?
I have to admit that I was a bit surprised by the question.
In a sense, this is really two questions: It is a question about racial justice and poverty, but also a question about helping a friend as opposed to helping a stranger who is in need.
Checking Our Premises
It seemed like a lot of this question was motivated by the premise that white Americans have to make up for the very real racial injustices of the past.
The very real tragedy is that these injustices continue to this day. The main difference is that those who are persecuting black Americans in the 2020’s pretend to be friends to black Americans.
As economists Dr. Walter Williams and Dr. Thomas Sowell point out, minimum wage laws are the strongest weapon in the arsenal of racists all over the world.
Slavery and Jim Crow Segregation were incredibly evil institutions, but that is not why a large portion of black Americans are poor today.
So what does explain this phenomenon, and how can it be fixed???…
It is important to recognize the past injustices against black Americans, but there are laws and practices in place today that are causing more harm to black Americans than Jim Crow segregation could have ever hoped to accomplish.
Impartiality
A few things immediately come to mind with my friend’s question. First off, the Bible teaches a principle of impartiality.
While black and white was not a primary concern in ancient times, a Christian can apply this principle to modern ethnic biases: meaning that we should not favor one person over another based on ethnic ancestry.
Hebrews and Gentiles were to have equal standing in the Israelite legal courts, and both Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians had equality before God in the New Testament.
Also, the Bible teaches that all human beings belong to one race, the human race. This is why Bible-believing Christians have historically been at the forefront of movements to eliminate slavery and segregation.
These points are common knowledge to those familiar with the Bible, but the links provide a more in-depth analysis that will benefit even advanced students of God’s Word.
Love VS Altruism
If a man is your friend and in need, you should generally favor your friend whom you know over a stranger whom you do not know. Presumably, this friend has added value to your life, and this relationship has been one of mutual benefit.
Many people seem to think that an act is more moral if done for a stranger, as opposed to a friend, with no benefit to yourself. This largely traces to Kant’s philosophy of Altruism. But why should this be the case? Why would it be more moral to give to a stranger than to a friend whom you love?
What did Jesus say was the greatest act of love? Not to lay down your life blindly and “recklessly” for a generic “others” but to lay down your life for the sake of a friend.
Our modern Kantian-derived mindset is very different from what Christ actually taught.
Disciples’ Relation to Each Other
12 “This is My commandment, that you love one another, just as I have loved you. 13 Greater love has no one than this, that one lay down his life for his friends. 14 You are My friends if you do what I command you. 15 No longer do I call you slaves, for the slave does not know what his master is doing; but I have called you friends, for all things that I have heard from My Father I have made known to you. 16 You did not choose Me but I chose you, and appointed you that you would go and bear fruit, and that your fruit would remain, so that whatever you ask of the Father in My name He may give to you. 17 This I command you, that you love one another.
Imagine telling your friend that instead of giving aid to his son, you gave it to the son of a stranger because of skin tone.
Now, imagine you are in your greatest time of need. You lost your job, and your house and car are being repossessed. You need $10,000 to pay the bank so that your family can stay in your home, until you start your new job next month.
Your best friend, knowing your situation, then tells you that he gave $10,000 to a homeless stranger whom he felt sorry for.
Your friend tells you that he knows nothing of the stranger’s situation or why the stranger was “in need,” but he tells you that the greatest moral value is to sacrifice from yourself, with no benefit to yourself, for the sake of “others.”
If this doesn’t bother you, it should. Charity should be done carefully and rationally. Consider the many Bible passages that talk about when and when not to give to charity.
As C.S. Lewis said, this idea of “unselfishness” is no part of the Christian faith.
If you asked twenty good men today what they thought the highest of the virtues, nineteen of them would reply, Unselfishness. But if you had asked almost any of the great Christians of old, he would have replied, Love. You see what has happened? A negative term has been substituted for a positive, and this is of more than philological importance. The negative idea of Unselfishness carries with it the suggestion not primarily of securing good things for others, but of going without them ourselves, as if our abstinence and not their happiness was the important point. I do not think this is the Christian virtue of Love. The New Testament has lots to say about self-denial, but not about self-denial as an end in itself. We are told to deny ourselves and to take up our crosses in order that we may follow Christ; and nearly every description of what we shall ultimately find if we do so contains an appeal to desire. If there lurks in most modern minds the notion that to desire our own good and earnestly to hope for the enjoyment of it is a bad thing, I submit that this notion has crept in from Kant and the Stoics and is no part of the Christian faith. Indeed, if we consider the unblushing promises of reward and the staggering nature of the rewards promised in the Gospels, it would seem that Our Lord finds our desires not too strong, but too weak. We are half-hearted creatures, fooling about with drink and sex and ambition when infinite joy is offered us, like an ignorant child who wants to go on making mud pies in a slum because he cannot imagine what is meant by an offer of a holiday at the sea. We are far too easily pleased.
Poverty And Demographics
Now flip the original question around, imagine that the friend whose son wants to go to college is wealthy and black and the stranger’s son is from a family that has been impoverished for generations and is from one of the poorest communities in America.
Dr. Thomas Sowell, the famous economist, pointed out that it is a myth to say that poverty lines are solidly defined along ethnic boundaries. Of the poorest counties in America, most of them are predominantly white. [Sowell discusses this in his book Social Justice Fallacies.]
Sowell also pointed out that even decades ago, two-parent black households where both parents were college-educated, had slightly more income than white households of the same description.
The problem with the poverty stats among black Americans is that many black households are single-mother households dependent on welfare. This was not the case before the 1960’s, when Leftist Democrats brought in the welfare state, and intentionally destroyed the black family. Sadly, many black Americans went along with this evil.
Before the 1960s Black American households were slightly more intact than White American households. The single-motherhood phenomenon we are seeing now was intentionally created by the Democrats to keep poor people poor.
In other words, the reason so many black Americans are poor… is because of the liberal welfare state.
Oppression of black Americans has gone from Slavery to Jim Crow to the Liberal Welfare State — a system that is designed to keep poor people poor and punish people who try to advance.
The main difference in these poverty statistics is not black vs white, but single-parent vs two-parent households. A black two-parent household is generally better off than a single white woman raising children.
Yet there is hope for kids living in the ghetto. Charter schools and school choice are the one type of program proven to break the cycle of poverty for inner-city black families.
I often hear people talking about “Social Justice,” and the plight of black Americans. Yet these same “Social Justice Warriors” so often either do not understand or refuse to understand that in order for kids to have a future, these kids have to learn how to read.
Rational Self-Interest and Charity
In one of my earliest articles, I argued that Christian charity should focus on bringing individuals to a place where they can stand on their own two feet. Buying bags of rice for a village is one thing, but buying a tractor for a farmer has the potential to feed people indefinitely, while creating jobs that allow people to begin to pull themselves out of poverty.
This was also a theme in The Wisdom Tree.
So if you have to decide between a tractor and bags of rice, choose the tractor. As the old saying goes, “Give a man a fish, and he will eat for a day. Teach a man how to fish and he will eat for a lifetime.” Sadly, most charities focus on giving people fish, when they should be establishing fish farms connected to crop fields and factories, next to schools and universities.
Charity should be wise and effective! As we see in the parable of the Good Samaritan, the Samaritan was very calculated with his actions, even though it cost him. The focus was on helping another self, not on self-sacrifice.
The same principle applies to the above question. As a Christian steward of God’s resources, I am not to simply throw money at the poor. Instead, I should be asking which of these two young men has demonstrated the most responsibility over his life and is the most likely to have a positive impact for the Kingdom of God in his career.
While I stand by the belief that you should generally favor a friend over a stranger, this is ultimately a business decision with the finances God has given you to steward. Much like a job opening, this scholarship should go to the most qualified recipient.
Ask of each young man:
What are his grades like?
What are his study habits like?
Is he disciplined?
Is he a young man of strong moral character?
What is his work ethic like?
Playing favorites based on feeling sorry for someone or based on skin tone is not good here. God’s money should be used without socioeconomic partiality.
Charity is an investment in creating a better world, and like a stock purchase, should not be driven by emotional whims. It may turn out that the rich young white man is the better steward, while it may turn out that the former stranger, once you get to know him, excels in his academics, work ethic, and potential.
Keep in mind, what Jesus said when the woman put perfume on his feet. Also keep in mind what the Apostles said when they were asked to wait on tables.
Mary Anoints Jesus
12 Jesus, therefore, six days before the Passover, came to Bethany where Lazarus was, whom Jesus had raised from the dead. 2 So they made Him a supper there, and Martha was serving; but Lazarus was one of those reclining at the table with Him. 3 Mary then took a pound of very costly perfume of pure nard, and anointed the feet of Jesus and wiped His feet with her hair; and the house was filled with the fragrance of the perfume. 4 But Judas Iscariot, one of His disciples, who was intending to betray Him, *said, 5 “Why was this perfume not sold for three hundred denarii and given to poor people?” 6 Now he said this, not because he was concerned about the poor, but because he was a thief, and as he had the money box, he used to pilfer what was put into it. 7 Therefore Jesus said, “Let her alone, so that she may keep it for the day of My burial. 8 For you always have the poor with you, but you do not always have Me.”
Choosing of the Seven
6 Now at this time while the disciples were increasing in number, a complaint arose on the part of the Hellenistic Jews against the native Hebrews, because their widows were being overlooked in the daily serving of food. 2 So the twelve summoned the congregation of the disciples and said, “It is not desirable for us to neglect the word of God in order to serve tables. 3 Therefore, brethren, select from among you seven men of good reputation, full of the Spirit and of wisdom, whom we may put in charge of this task. 4 But we will devote ourselves to prayer and to the ministry of the word.” 5 The statement found approval with the whole congregation; and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Spirit, and Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas and Nicolas, a proselyte from Antioch. 6 And these they brought before the apostles; and after praying, they laid their hands on them.
All other things being equal, it is better to honor my friend than to give to the poor, simply because he is poor. But ultimately, God’s money should be used wisely to benefit His Kingdom.
Now, bringing this back to the obvious…
This question, although an interesting hypothetical, seems to be a false dichotomy… (as so many moral dillemmas are.)
There are numerous other considerations here.
Each young man should apply for financial aid, and one or the other may be able to work while in school.
Also, are there cheaper colleges?
I took my first computer programming class on EdX. It was from Harvard and cost me $42. Could something like this be an option for each young man?
What major does each young man want to take, and what are the job prospects? This is the most important question.
Say the black kid wants to be an engineer and the white kid wants to double major in African American Studies and Women’s Literature. (Yes, I had the white kid majoring in “Studies” and “Literature” on purpose.)
I often tell people that there are too many activists in the world and not enough engineers. An activist can whine about poverty, while an engineer can actually do something to alleviate poverty. The activist protests a lack of clean water, while the engineer designs a new, affordable system for filtering dirty water.
Children of African and Caribbean immigrants tend to do very well for themselves in America. Likewise, Indian Americans and Japanese Americans tend to do better than any other demographic. (Stats like these can vary somewhat from list to list.) A lot of this has to do with work ethic, values such as sexual monogamy and the importance of education, and the choice of major in college, such as a STEM major or a social sciences major.
Today’s income disparities have little to do with past injustices and a lot to do with choices of profession and major in college.
Bringing the question back around: Should I give money to a stranger, as opposed to my friend who is in need, simply because the stranger is a stranger, because the stranger is poor, and because the stranger is black?
No.
Both the Bible and reason do not allow for that.
Each candidate should be judged based on merit, with a reasonable level of favor given to a friend.
Matters like this should be judged based on reason (i.e. wisdom) not based on emotions or whims.
As with any business matter, matters of charity should be evaluated with the mind and with wisdom towards proper stewardship of God’s resources.
A few more thoughts…
Clearly, both young men are poor enough, or the question would not be raised. This means that favoring one or the other based solely on skin tone would be wrong. A white poor kid has just as much value as a black poor kid and vice-versa.
Also, I think the question is a false dichotomy (as previously mentioned). In other words, I don’t think the “one or the other” framing is legitimate. There are almost always more than two options in life. We are never told in this question why the only option is to give money to one young man OR the other.
Why does this have to be a charity-based scholarship? Perhaps one of these young men could be hired to mow your lawn or paint your house. Or perhaps both could be hired to help you start a company.
Charity should be driven by individualism. Charity should be designed to bring a man to independence and an ability to stand on his own two feet. To put things another way, charity should be focused on uplifting people. Sending a young man to college to become an engineer allows him to take care of himself and his family, but also gives him the ability to financially extend his hand to the needy (see Proverbs 31).
But even beyond taking care of himself, his family, and extending his hand to the needy, the engineer also has the ability to create new technologies to help other people around the world. This latter, especially, the mere activist cannot do.
Give a man a fish, or teach him how to fish and build a fish farm. Judge for yourself which of these is better.
Thank you for reading my article. Be sure to sign up for my email newsletter for exclusive subscriber-only content, and so that you never miss an update:
Also, while we are on the topic of charity, I have a friend who is very much in need and is helping to make the world a better place. I respect your right to say “no,” but should you say “yes” I will be very grateful.
