lalaland vs. LALALand

They're not all that different, you know, and it's not necessarily a good thing.

Definitions:
lalaland - The world that I think many traditional conservative rightwing Christians like to live. Nothing is wrong, we live in a bubble, life is good. We give to the church because it's the only thing worth giving to. Our church as great programs, a really nice looking building and a well-paid pastor. But no real life change actually happens.

LALALand - The world of the celebrity. Bucu bucks are made here. Millions, billions even. But yet, even with the tax credits and the many financial benefits, we'd rather spend our cash on yachts, cars and thousands of acres of land in the Hamptons or Aspen. Lots of money gained - not much impact happening in the future.

It's interesting how I came across this observation/rant/whatever it turns into. A friend and I were watching VH1's "A Fabulous Life" and looking at some of America's biggest spenders. Did you know that Howard Stern spent $660,000 for a one month rental in the Hamptons because he didn't want to wait for the house to be built on the land THAT HE PAID $20 million FOR? That's just the land? So we are watching this in somewhat awe, and I asked my friend how he'd spend his money if we were that loaded. Would we give it away? Would we spend it all? How would we do it? (It sure would take the 'ole charity golf tournament as a tithe to a whole new level).

So my friend busts out a 20/20 episode from TIVO that recently aired on ABC. It was a Stossel report on how the rich give away their cash.

Did you know the following?

• Of the top 25 states where people give an above average percent of their income, 24 were red states in the last presidential election (in the face of those who say that liberals are all about charity).
• Conservatives give on average 30% more AND make less money than their liberal counterparts.
• people at the lower end of the income scale give almost 30 percent more of their income than their wealthy counterparts.
• the single biggest predictor of whether someone will be charitable is their religious participation.

Ok great, finally something to latch onto - the final bullet point. BUT how about this. I looked up Business Week's list of the top 50 philanthropists in America. They gave away tons of cash - but guess how many of them listed 'religious organizations' in their top charities? ONE, count 'em one -Jewish causes

In fact in 2004 there were 3 'religous causes listed' 1: Jewish causes 2: Jewish causes 3:Israeli charities.

Nowadays folks are focused on things such as Science "about life's big questions", Individual self-empowerment and athletics.

Not kidding. Of the top 50 giving philanthropists in America, who have earned from between 48 billion and 75 million dollars, NONE of them have given to overt Christian causes.

No obviously as someone who raises a budget to do a Christian work for a living - this leaves me a little preturbed. But what really leaves me preturbed is the end result of my conversation with my friend.

As we were watching the 20/20 episode I mentioned to him "you know it's people like you and me that really make a difference. The majority of my support comes from folks that give less than $100 to the ministry, but do it in multiple places." So we are feeling good about ourselves, then this from 20/20 -

"...while the rich do give more in overall dollars, according to the Social Capital Community Benchmark Survey, people at the lower end of the income scale give almost 30 percent more of their income....middle-income Americans are generous compared to people in other countries, compared to the rich and the working poor, they give less. "The two most generous groups in America are the rich and the working poor," says Brooks. "The middle class give the least."

Ouch. The middle class - those of us with perhaps the greatest capacity to enact change in our socieity - give the least. Now hopefully we give of our time and energies more than our money, but the fact remains....we are not a very giving culture. Of course I don't think a bit about this everytime I have a hankering for a venti non-fat vanilla latte at Starbucks - 4 bucks which sits well in my stomach on in my soul for about 15 minutes, but could last a lifetime in the harlem slums or the streets of zimbabwe.

So what is the point of all this? I don't know really. Maybe to create a healthy discussion about what the heck we are doing. Maybe to facilitate change among readers. Maybe just to engage in healthy banter about what is ok and what isn't ok in the grand scheme of giving - since really the giving statistics don't cover it all do they? Afterall, if my wife and I truly desire to have a great house with a pool in the backyard so our kids can have over their friends who's parent's can't necessarily provide that for them - isn't that at it's core charity - even though it will never show up in the 'boxscore' so to speak.

And who really cares - afterall isn't God the ultimate judge of things like this? Aren't we storing up crowns in heaven - not here afterall? So while the rest of the world ponders what Bill & Melinda will do with the $40 billion that Warren gave them to change the world, I hope we wonder what God will do with what little we give to Him and how we can best use that.