Proportionate to What?

After World War II members of a new, highly intentional congregation in Washington D.C., the Church of the Saviour in Washington D.C. were discussing what common discipline of giving they might follow. Was tithing enough? Other options? So they sought the advice of theologian Reinhold Niebuhr. His suggestion - "proportionate giving, with tithing as an economic floor beneath which you will not go, unless there are some compelling reasons." 

That approach prompted more questions for one member. “Proportion to what,” she asked. “Proportionate to the accumulated wealth of the family? Proportionate to one’s income and the demands upon it, which vary from family to family? Proportionate to one’s sense of security and to the degree of anxiety with which one lives? Proportionate to the keenness of our awareness of those who suffer? Proportionate to our sense of justice...?  The answer, of course, is in proportion to all of these things.”

But which of these five questions should come first in our own reflections? Which is the least important? Are these the most helpful questions to ask about “fair share” giving?

---

How Do We Give in a Way That Encourages Equality?

“We can best begin with the Talmudic maxim that the poor be helped in proportion to their need. That is common sense, I suppose, but it has an important negative thrust: not in proportion to any personal quality – physical attractiveness, say, or religious orthodoxy. One of the persistent efforts of Jewish communal organizations, never entirely successful, was the elimination of beggary.” (Michael Walzer)

“Fair share” giving should result in marginal people receiving their “fair share.” It is not only a matter of how much we give out of our resources but how much the poor receive out of our resources. As Pope John Paul II said on his 1980s trip to Brazil: If you have a lot . . . you must give a lot . . . in such a way that it will tend to bring equality between people rather than a yawning gap between them.”

Responses? How do we give “in such a way that it will tend to bring equality between people rather than a yawning gap between them?”

---

Has “Progressivity Had Its Day?”

Amity Shlaes, former member of The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board recently declared: “We’ve learned that a tax system that punishes the rich also punishes the rest of us . . ..  Progressivity has had its day. Let us move on to a tax system that is more worthy of us.”

The recent trend toward a “flat” tax system prompts questions about the future of “fair share” giving. Does this movement in the “public” sphere suggest a corresponding shift in the “private” sector? Will we be even less open to the claim that we should give in proportion to our resources? The phrase – “Give according to our capacity” – clearly reflects a “progressive” understanding of giving. So has “progressivity had its day” in influencing American givers? Maybe Shlaes is right in her prediction. The gap between the poor and rich grows apace. But what should we do?

---

What is My "Fair Share"?

For years the notion of a “fair share” was the characteristic plea of the Community Chest or United Way. For many Americans, therefore, the question of what is “fair” and what is “my share” was asked by a secular source and answered in the context of the workplace. Pledge cards and giving tables encouraged donors to calculate their own responsibilities for the well being of their communities. Employers conducted workplace “campaigns” to achieve each year’s goal and ensure 100% participation.

In the 1950s some commentators noted: “The religious mandate to ‘charity’ becomes the civic duty to ‘bear your fair share’ and the problem for the private conscience - Let not thy right hand know...’ - becomes a matter of published performance and group ‘standards.’ The collection plate or the beggar’s extended hand - or it’s written equivalent, the “subscription list” - is succeeded by a virtual private tax with social penalties not only for the miserly who do not give at all but for the non-conformist who wish to give otherwise or to some other cause.”

Has the close association between “fair share” and federated fund-raising shaped your own views of giving? To what extent is your giving a matter of “civic duty?” And what does our civic duty require of us?