King of the Universe

Psalm 23
Matthew 25:31-46

We often use the word charity to characterize helping the poor, needy and vulnerable by offering time, money and talent. David’s Shepherd-King Lord in Psalm 23 is not charitable. He is portrayed as a gracious and lavish host who gives in excess (6)…cups overflow with wine and a bountiful feast is laid upon the table. He is beyond charitable! In other words, the word charity does not inspire the over-the-top, extravagant, limitless generosity and love which scripture invites us into.

We would not call a king loving just because he takes care of his subjects, but to refer to care-taking tasks as obligation or duty would also be misleading. He is being who he was born to be, fulfilling his destiny. Perhaps we too, are born to be open-hand and open-hearted: perhaps compassion is a characteristic of human genetics. Maybe urging someone to be lavishly selfless and kind is as silly as urging a bald man to be bald.

The joy and delight we find in bestowing gifts and favors on others suggests to me, generosity is a characteristic of being human. We may not always witness such an over-flow of love, sociologists and psychologists offer many explanations as to the why not. This, however, does not mean it is not inherent to humanity.

While David is talking about the Shepherd-King Lord who cares for him, Jesus is speaking to His disciples about taking care of others. Characterized as sheep and goats, they ask the when have we done this question repeatedly. This implies they are unaware of their own behavior, whether commendable or condemnable. They could be being characteristically dim, but maybe the words describing an observable good deed did not match the internal, benevolent, overwhelming compassion which compelled such behavior.

Perhaps, sweeping and all-encompassing love, with its attending generosity, are components of our autonomic spiritual systems, which, like breathing, changes in character when attention is called to it.

In Jane Austen’s Persuasion, when thanked for caring for Louisa after her accident, Mrs. Harville responds, “It is not kindness to do what we are happy to do.” Likewise, Colonel Brandon (Sense and Sensibility) dismisses expressions of gratitude after helping the Miss Dashwoods by replying, “I am embarrassed to be thanked for what was a great privilege.” In being loving and caring, Mrs. Harville and Colonel Brandon, King and Shepherd, disciples and Church are being who they were born to be.

Naming a compassionate deed as such may accidentally serve to separate the compassion from its whole, as if it is removable from a person, as if it’s a component of, but not integral to, human nature. Such identification may alter its character. In noticing and naming selfless, instinctual, boundless love, we have given it shape, form and consciousness which makes it other than what it was prior to the identification.

A dilemma… if we notice and name generosity and mercy as such, we change them into something else altogether: from something sublime and spiritual into something chunky and clunky resembling charity. We strip the generosity of its the divine, limitless, lavish love… the love scripture invites us into. But if we don’t notice and name it, we miss the open-hand and open-hearted goodness and generosity woven into genetic make-up of the people we encounter every day. A divine paradox and puzzle indeed; one that is a privilege and happiness to ponder!

Journal questions:

How do I thank the Lord for the privilege and happiness of having opportunities to fulfill my autonomic, genetic disposition towards generosity and compassion?
Not all global citizens have the opportunity to fulfill this genetic propensity towards generous, benevolent care of others. How do we help others find opportunities to do so?

References: Refer to blog post entitled Resources

Related