(In reading different reflections Fr. Giussani wrote, I sometimes dialogue with his text, as a way of getting at the truth his thoughts contain. Often this process illuminates his meaning for me, and awakens more questions. No matter what, it always gets me thinking in a fresh, new way. The Italic print is my musing and questioning, the bold print is Fr. Giussani's reflection.)
Fr. Giussani, what is the root meaning of charity? I know Christ commands us to love God above all, and neighbors as ourselves, but what does that mean for me concretely?
I am able to understand the word "charity" when I remember that the Son of God, loving us did not send us His riches (as He was able to do), and revolutionize our situation: instead He became poor like one of us. He "shared" our nothingness. We do charitable work in order to live like Christ.
Your last sentence makes me sit up and take notice: "We do charitable work in order to live like Christ". I know that Christ "shares our nothingness", as you put it. But I am used to thinking of charity as caring about another, or doing good to another, or fixing situations and making them better. I would never have come up with the conclusion you did, namely that in order to live like Christ we have to do charitable work. I would have concluded we have to go out and start caring for people.
What about all the needs people have, what about the obvious need to fix society, to make things better, to eliminate poverty and injustice? Why not start addressing all those needs, instead of living like Christ?
Consequences 1.Charity is the law of being and comes before natural likes and dislikes, and feelings. Therefore we can "do for others" while lacking any enthusiasm. There may very well be no so-called concrete result. For us the only "concrete" attitude is attention to the person, that is, love for him. All the rest can come as a consequence: like Jesus who only after He manifested his love, performed miracles and fed the hungry.
Again, you surprise me. I always thought of charity as the "law of doing", not as the "law of being", as you put it. I probably think that way because we can "be" but not "love". In us humans, being and loving are not one and the same thing. But yes, in Christ being and loving are one and the same. In Him, the act of being, the act of being with us as a man, the act of being present with us in the Eucharist, - is all an act of love. By being present with us he is loving us, even before He reaches out and does something.
The rest of your sentence also jolts me: " 'charity' comes before natural likes, dislikes, and feelings". That's a statement I would never have been able to formulate, and yet it makes so much sense to me once I see it written there. God's charity comes to us, and is with us and in us, even before our natural likes and dislikes, because our existence is a gift of his love, just as our sustenance is. Our lives are tangible, visible, manifestations of his love, even if we are not always capable of "feeling" that way.
I can operate on the basis of my "natural likes and dislikes", or my "feelings" of the moment. They are usually what move me to do, or not do, something for others. But you are saying that these natural inclinations don't matter, my moods don't matter, because these things are not the starting point. Christ is our starting point. I am faithful to Him when I love no matter how I feel.
We must note two initial points which are not usually clear regarding our openness to others:
a. Meeting the needs of others:
This is an insufficient starting point and motive. What is the real need of another? This way of viewing things is unclear, because it depends on what we believe to be others' needs. But what if that which I bring is not truly what the other needs? I do not know what the other truly needs, nor can I measure or possess it. It is a measure I do not possess, measure that is in God. Therefore laws and systems of justice can be oppressive, if they forget or attempt to substitute for the only concrete reality that exists: the person, and love for that person.
Again, the way you formulate your thought is fresh and new: The real need of the other is something I cannot measure, because the measure is not in me but in God. What I have to do is be open and present to the person instead of imposing my ideology or system on him as a solution to his problems.
b. Friendship
Using friendship as one's point of departure and as the final goal of one's action, with all the ambiguity this encompasses, is also incomplete. Friendship is a correspondence that one may or may not find: it becomes the road to our destiny, but not the end in itself.
Again, a startling formulation. Friendship is not the origin of my charity, nor its goal, living like Christ is. Being open to and present to others may or may not result in friendship. That doesn't matter, because my "success", if that is the word I should use, is not in getting others to be my friend, but live with them as Christ did.
No comments:
Post a Comment