Saturday, July 26, 2014

the little red hen revisited.

An example of the problem we face is this written
by usually excellent Berit Kjos. When it comes to
religious issues such as in her book "Under the Spell
of Mother Earth," she is pretty good. However, her
article shows a simplistic and unbiblical analysis, a
failure caused by the right left paradigm. Yes, the
teacher in this story is WRONG, but not for the
reason Kjos says.

"We all know the story of the Little Red Hen
who wanted some bread to eat. She asked 
some of her barnyard friends to help make 
it. But the cat, the dog, and the goat all 
said "no." Finally she did all the work 
herself. Yet, when the bread was done and 
its fragrance spread throughout the farm, 
her unwilling neighbors were more than 
willing to help her eat it.
"Won't you share with us?" they begged.
"No," she answered. "Since you didn't help, 
you don't get anything."

In the context of  traditional values, the 
moral of the story is: you get what you 
work for. But those who have learned to 
think and see from the new global 
perspective are led to another conclusion. 
Listen to the kinds of questions the 
first grade teacher asked her class: 
"Why was the Little Red Hen so stingy? Isn't it only right that everyone gets to eat? Why wouldn't she share what she had with some who had none?" [5]
The concerned mother who heard and 
reported this story asked, "What kinds 
of values were the children taught?"  

The new interpretation emphasizes 
love and sharing, but what is missing? 
How might it confuse a child's values?   
The answers are obvious. The children 
were taught socialist values. The new 
interpretation vilified values that had 
motivated Americans to be diligent, 
responsible and fair. The teacher's 
questions were actually strategic 
suggestions prompting the group to 
ridicule traditional values, to see reality 
and society from the new politically 
correct perspective, and to intimidate and 
shame anyone who dared to disagree. "

Now, the real problem is this. The other animals
were not starving, they were not in the situation of 
nothing to eat, obviously. If they were, they probably
would have helped being desperate.

Not sharing with the needy is not the issue. Demanding
that people contribute and share IS the issue, and the
contributing and SHARING needs to be done by the
others, not just the producers who yes, need to share.

Jesus taught to "give to him who asks of you" without
seeking it back. To be like The Father in Heaven Who
gives generously to all, even those who are not His 

However, we are finite, limited beings. Jesus never said
to strip yourself of all resources and be starving and 
freezing and homeless as a result (though some might be
as individuals called to such a radical renunciation of 
the world as a counterbalance to be too relying on these
and tending to ignore God, here comes monasticism, 
but that is another matter).

St. John the Baptist didn't say, give away your only cloak
which you need to wrap yourself in at night to keep warm,
but if you have two cloaks, give one to someone who has

Theoretically, you could argue that 
a. the little red hen was right to do this, even in terms of 
thinking charity and the needs of others, because it taught
them to be more proactive, 
b. she could also have given them a little and said you want
more you are going to have to help me, you see it tastes as
good as it smells, but I am only giving you a little bit because
you didn't help me, do better nexr time. 
c. the often quoted by "conservatives" from St. Paul that 
who will not work shall not eat, is obviously about freeloaders
not those whose only options are place of work that are full
of temptations and persecutions and who are willing to help
around the churches or help individuals, or for that matter,
who are unable to work full time or more than intermittently
or at all. These conditions can vary, and it is not good to 
adopt someone and take care of everything on the one hand,
or to ignore them altogether, people do need help to get on
their feet and sometimes to stay on their feet. 

NEVER should you be doing charity as an act of grandeur,
feeling above others, the test of this is, would you accept 
charity yourself or are you too proud? Pride is a SIN.

Caution about what demands might come with or after 
help is given is another matter.

No comments:

Post a Comment