Widows Mite.

Widows Mite.

Some time ago, there was a preacher who was known locally as a bit of a firebrand, hurling sermons from the pulpit to the attending congregation, which at that time was often large in number and diligent in attending services. This attendance had a lot to do with the power of the church impacting the local populace, which still had strong links with  the tradition of ‘church going’ that stemmed from the historic Irish diasporas and associated family located around the parish. The name Father Toomey will not mean anything to anyone outside the capture area of the parish in which he operated but he was a strong personality and seemingly, influential in his church and associated church schools. His sermons were often constructed to guide his flock onto the path of rigorousness, at least that what his sermons were often about with some of them possibly too erudite for the young with no life experience to make sense of them, with many given at full volume without the aid of electronic amplification.

In the 1950s, church going was a much stronger pursuit on Sunday, the day of rest, without the distraction of TV or 'open all hours' shops of any description. Sunday was the day of rest for many people that worked the rest of the 6-day week, or a bit less at five and a half, with an early finish, on Saturday afternoons for some but the norm was the full 6-day working week. The point is that Sunday was ‘the day of rest’. Albeit that the decades of 50-60 were austere in there own way, still struggling forward after the war, it was a period without the artifice of much of modern attractions and disposable resources, that many are used to today; it was for some time  enshrined as a special day that offered little entertainment other than church, pub or public space. With little in the way of large disposable income, the lack of entertainment balanced the lack of cash, it was a make do day. Never the less, despite the lack of ‘modern’ alternative entertainment on a Sunday, churches were in a strong influential position, primarily with the working class and in this respect if not exactly pious, they were probably predisposed to give more attention to their spiritual needs than the developing middle class’s. Pleas of a sobriety life style of affordability then, was matched with constantly being asked for donation to church funds and they were probably meet with greater commitment from the congregation, as a proportion of their income, than now.

One sermon related to the state of the fabric of the church buildings in general and as it was the representation of the house of god, it required upkeep, which cost. As most of the congregation did not own a house, paying for the up keep of property was not something that had immediate meaning; the council up-kept their rented accommodation so paying for church property was a difficult sell. This was obviously something that the priest knew and in extolling the virtue of giving to the collection box, his strength of persuasion was pushed to the limits of his address with his verbal entreaties verging on the histrionic. However to make the point in spiritual terms he bought in the story of the widow’s mite, Mark 12:38-44, Mathew 23:14 Luke 20:47.

There are interpretation of these section and in two situation these parables describe the actual mite as a gift although miniscule and the damnation of those that offer protestation of understanding and sympathetic concern while doing nothing to alleviate the (un) acceptable situation.   

And to emphasis the point, he used the phrase “give until it hurts”.

Now that phrase in interesting and can take one down a path of philosophic discourse examining the merits or otherwise of each participant in the situations that are portrayed. The conclusion for now, although out of its direct context, is that it has, I would say, relevance today in the age of looming austerity, such that has not been experience by the bulk of the population, pursuant in an endeavour to roll back the damage of the credit crisis.

There is much hope in evidence that austerity will be bearable by most, even though the process of a “progressive” budget restraint is one designed to divide and conquer public opinion. Hurt the public sector, the spongers, the layabouts, the undeserving poor but not the hardworking private sector voter. There is no doubt that many people will be hurt with lost jobs, housing defaults, reduced services and growing dilapidation of infrastructure etc. However, within this retrenchment period there will be those that have befitted from the boom years and particular those that are most to blame for the crises leading to the new austerity period; the Politian, banks, financiers, rich etc. they will not really be hurt, to any great extent.

Picking this theme of the widows mite, is just a constructed elaboration to draw relevance to what is occurring now, and is that with to days unravelling of the social wellbeing, the rich have and will continue to get off lightly from the payment of the austerity bill. It brings to mind the protestation that they have all been claiming, it is not their fault, it is the global economy etc. at the same time heaping soothing verbal emoluments, tokens of understanding and concern, onto those that will be hurt to boost assurance in a defunct system that will allow confidence to be constructed and maintained. Yet at the same time let the masters carry on gluttonous feeding at the trough. So just now, half of the cabinet, which is in the process of driving through its “progressive” policies, are millionaires, are acting without any real democratic mandate and are forcing through economic stringent affects that will eventually manipulate most of the working class to believe these clearly regressive policies as something that has to done for the country’s good. The effect will be so perverse that one need not be a widow to fall by the wayside but also all that foolishly fall for the protestation of these ministers of austerity measures.   “So you also outwardly appear righteous to others, but within you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness”

The pain of those affected by the forthcoming cuts will not be pain felt by the affluent.

Expressions of concern and understanding for the least well off does not transmute into pain the affluent can feel, until it does we are not “all in this together” as Cameron, Clegg et al would have it. Therefore the phrase ‘give until it hurts’ will have little meaning for this cabinet cadre. It is not that it is expected, that these people will suffer an actual pain but to know that they will be unlikely to be in torment over the decisions they have made, should make some uneasy and yet to still be voluble with anxiety for the afflicted that is patently vapid.

In monetary terms, it is not perhaps just the amount that matters it is the intention, the worth, the feeling that is attached to the amount that may have greater worth. The same could be said of words and deeds that do not match. Therefore, a rich person, giving a large donation without thought, may not be as valuable as a small amount from another that cannot afford it but gives anyway. Alternatively, a small amount from a rich person who is trapped by its greed to feel the pain of giving anything, to the poorest that gives in carelessness, may be equally unworthy.

All of which brings me a point, does being resentful or careless in giving a gift undo the magnanimous nature of the pain of giving or not?  However, The anger of widows (in this context i use ‘widows’ as  a metaphor for the disfranchised, dispossessed and impoverished) being squeezed for their mite to save the economy for the benefit of the rogues that suckered them, is unlikely to diminish. Individual anger may be initially ineffective but the might of numbers of them will and perhaps must, eventually be wilful. The Widow’s Mite will then be Mighty indeed. 

© Renot 2010

18111014000