Snobbishness Of Success
I recall the adage, “Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.” Usually I apply this to the political arena. The recent fall from power, of the Republican Party, is a clear example. In my opinion, Democrats did not win majorities in the House and Senate because of their promising agenda, but because of the dismal performance of the party in power. Republicans did not earn the right to re-election. They became focused upon power and forgot to serve. Thank God the American electorate understood and rejected the haughtiness of such self-absorbed, drunk-on-power elected officials. I am conservative to the core, but I would rather be represented by an earnest Democrat than a lying Republican. And so would the majority of Americans.
There is a snobbishness of success that can creep into any of us, if we are not careful, myself included. Since January I have been making a concerted effort to be more physically healthy. For two months I have been eating right and exercising with diligence. The results have been encouraging: I have lost 21 pounds, and my clothes have been fitting much better. Others have begun to notice and give compliments, which does wonders for my effort and ego. But I have been here before. I know it is as much of a challenge to maintain good health as to obtain it. Unless I am careful, at this moment of success with my diet and exercise, it is easy for me to look around at others and judge them in these matters. In the moment of success, I forget that weight is a constant struggle for me. I find myself proclaiming that the health problems of most people can be traced to poor diet and lack of exercise. I start looking at overweight people and judging them as lazy or undisciplined. There creeps within me an attitude, that usually I will not admit, that I am better than these people. And of course such is absolutely unfair, totally judgmental, and outside the attitude of a follower of Christ.
I will share another example of how quickly the snobbishness of success can take over our hearts. Last Thursday, as I came to the office, a man met me at the steps of the church. He was highly troubled with tears in his eyes. We sat down together and he poured out his story. He moved here from Michigan about six months ago, and has been unable to find work. He has no friends. He is lonely, tired, broke and absolutely defeated. I thought about him for a few moments, and decided to take a gamble and try to help. We had a good meal. We got him a prepaid cell phone, so interested employers could call back. We went to the Hands of Christ to obtain a couple of weeks of food, and then to DFACS to sign up for food stamps and other assistance. Next, we went to the Department of Labour so he could get some assistance in finding a job. Last, we rode around his neighbourhood as I pointed out places where he could make applications for work. All along I encouraged, and at the end of the day he was pumped up. On Sunday he came to church, where we all sought to be further encouraging. He spoke with great conviction about how much he was trusting the Lord and how very much he wanted to be a part of our church. Then, on Monday he called with great news- “I’ve got a job!” Both of us were quite excited.
Now, it is Thursday. I have not heard from him in several days. I wonder if I will see or hear from him again, now that things are looking up. I have seen it before: it is easier to seek God, speak eloquently of matters of faith, and be humble when life is tough. And it is just as easy to forget all of those billowy intentions when matters start going well. Unfortunately, such seems to be the general trend instead of the exception. This particular experiment is not yet finished.
I could look into the dictionary and find a good definition of humility. I know it is the opposite of snobbishness. It is a quality we all need. And life has a wonderful and painful way of impressing such lesson upon us. Better than to define it is to recognize it. Humility is to see an innate quality in the other human being that makes him your equal, no matter his level of accomplishment, appearance, or power. A humble person busies self in service toward others. Somewhere along the way he has learned to set aside the requirement for personal recognition and power. And this is parcel to the Christian message. I like I Peter 5:5, “All of you, clothe yourselves with humility toward one another, because, ‘God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble.’" Jesus Christ has displayed for us the very embodiment of humility, from his incarnation, to his message, to his lifestyle. “Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be your slave-- just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.” – Matthew 20:26-28.
Success is to breed humility.
03.01.07 (11:57 am) [
edit]
posted by:
LadyG (
reply)
post date:
03.01.07 (10:02 am)
PastorDave, what a beautiful post, really touched me.God bless you for being the leader that you are.
posted by:
bawdy (
reply)
post date:
03.01.07 (10:58 am)
Oh Lord it's hard to be humble
when you're perfect in every way.
I can't wait to look in the mirror
cause I get better loking each day.
To know me is to love me
I must be a hell of a man.
Oh Lord it's hard to be humble
but I'm doing the best that I can.
I used to have a girlfriend
but she just couldn't compete
with all of these love starved women
who keep clamoring at my feet.
Well I prob'ly could find me another
but I guess they're all in awe of me.
Who cares, I never get lonesome
cause I treasure my own company.
Oh Lord it's hard to be humble
when you're perfect in every way,
I can't wait to look in the mirror
cause I get better looking each day
To know me is to love me
I must be a hell of a man.
Oh Lord it's hard to be humble
but I'm doing the best that I can.
I guess you could say I'm a loner,
a cowboy outlaw tough and proud.
I could have lots of friends if I want to
but then I wouldn't stand out from the crowd.
Some folks say that I'm egotistical.
Hell, I don't even know what that means.
I guess it has something to do with the way that I
fill out my skin tight blue jeans.
Oh Lord it's hard to be humble
when you're perfect in every way,
I can't wait to look in the mirror
cause I get better looking each day
To know me is to love me
I must be a hell of a man.
Oh Lord it's hard to be humble
but I'm doing the best that I can.
We're doing the best that we can
posted by:
heavyarms (
reply)
post date:
03.01.07 (12:50 pm)
"I am conservative to the core, but I would rather be represented by an earnest Democrat than a lying Republican."
I'd rather be represented by a quadriplegic, deaf, mute rhinoceros than either one of those. The lying Republican will eventually be found out. The earnest Democrat is still a Democrat and wants to take from those that have and earned it and give to those that don't and didn't. At least the Rhino can't hide when he screws up.
Outstanding post. Maybe the guy's just busy trying to get his life back together.
posted by:
surrogate (
reply)
post date:
03.01.07 (7:03 pm)
Reply to: heavyarms
"The earnest Democrat is still a Democrat and wants to take from those that have and earned it and give to those that don't and didn't."
Are you one of those people out there who earned everything you have on your own? A rugged individualist? No stepping on the backs of those who came before you to set up the system? Please. Show me a "self made man." I'll show you a either a fibber or someone who doesn't understand the help he's received that was, in fact, taken from others - whether he realizes it or not.
Great post Dave. Like heavyarms, I hope the guy is just busy. It would be nice to at least hear he's doing well just to ease the minds of those who stepped up.
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
03.01.07 (8:48 pm)
Reply to: LadyG
A leader? Sometimes I look around and wonder if anybody is following! Oh well.
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
03.01.07 (8:49 pm)
Reply to: bawdy
So, you have the same problem as I. It really is not easy being so perfect. Yeah, right.
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
03.01.07 (8:57 pm)
Reply to: heavyarms
I'm encouraged by the fact it seems we've gained some Democrats who are fiscally conservative, and even socially moderate. They seemed to mostly disappear with the emergence of the far right, but are coming back. I know the Macon area of Georgia is represented by a conservative Democrat, Jim Marshall. And Zell Miller was my kind of Democrat, deserving of my vote I believed.
I'm highly irritated that so many of our elected officials simply say whatever is necessary to be elected, with little heart and soul. I truly would prefer a liberal with the courage of her convictions to a so-called conservative who would lie simply to be elected. But, I'm looking for some conservatives for whom I can vote in 2008. I'm intrigued by Giuliani, but he will have to convince me he will appoint judges intent upon interpreting and not changing the law and the constitution, which is true judicial conservatism. I do not have any problem with his stand with homosexuality. And I believe his stand with abortion is simply a man being honest, whereas so many of our Republicans talk pro-life only when elections are near and then do little or nothing when in office. So, I begrudgingly admire the man's honesty. I'm not ready to throw my support behind him, but I'm finding him to be very interesting.
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
03.01.07 (9:01 pm)
Reply to: surrogate
I'll get in touch with him on Saturday, to see what is going on. He really needs to go to the dentist, and I can get him into the dental clinic of our church association. And I'm really wanting to see a continued, diligent effort to better himself. I'm cautiously optimistic.
posted by:
heavyarms (
reply)
post date:
03.02.07 (7:42 am)
Reply to: surrogate
See, this is the problem I have with liberals. I say that I don't believe that those who earned it should be FORCED to give to those who didn't, and you ask me if I'm one of those people who have achieved everything on my own with no outside assitance. OF COURSE NOT! I've certainly relied on help from others, I'd be a fool to shun the outside world and say "I'll make it on my own." I am all for charity.
What I am against is the government FORCING me to give to others. One way this is done is by seizing a portion of my income, money that I worked for and earned, in the form of income tax. Some of this money is used for essential government functions like defense, maintaining interstates, etc. i.e. things that can benefit us ALL. But some of this income is given to those who didn't earn it in various forms of welfare (not just the kinds that the single mother of eight gets, but also in the form of tax credits where people get back more tax money than they actually paid.)
I'm not against charity. I will be the first in line to lend my fellow man a hand. I AM against FORCED "charity." Both parties are certainly guilty on this, but the majority of Democrats seem to operate on some sort of socialist philosophy where they ALLOW you to keep a portion of your income (or a company to keep a portion of their profits), but the rest of it belongs to the government to do with as they please. I want to have CHOICE in helping those less fortunate. I want EVERYONE to have a choice. The Democrat Party, for the most part, doesn't.
"Many of you are well enough off that ... the tax cuts may have helped you. We're saying that for America to get back on track, we're probably going to cut that short and not give it to you. We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good." - Sen. Hillary Clinton 6/28/04
posted by:
surrogate (
reply)
post date:
03.02.07 (8:09 am)
Reply to: heavyarms
There are very good reasons that we are "forced" to help out. Let's just say, for instance, that you're one who would gladly give to those people and or organizations YOU consider worthy. That's great. You and I both know that many many people wouldn't. Plus, when you consider that you wouldn't have ANY of what you have if it were not for the entirety of the marketplace, you and I owe to help out those who may have contributed to our sucsess that we aren't able to identify including, in many cases those individulas, groups and/or organizations we might see as worthless and as "takers." Is there waste? Sure. Is there corruption? Of course. Should those things be rooted out and done away with? Who doesn't want that to happen?
As for the quote from Hillary, that scares you? What's so wrong with that statement? Smack as socialism to you or something? Ever hear the sort of things we did during WWII? There IS a common good, and it's worth more than your bank account, or mine for that matter, even if we screw up while trying, along the way, to bolster its worth.
posted by:
heavyarms (
reply)
post date:
03.02.07 (10:57 am)
Reply to: surrogate
Yeah, the sort of things we did during WWII were called War Bond Drives where people were asked to VOLUNTARILY support the war effort with their money buy purchasing war bonds. The income tax rate also ballooned during WWII. War Bonds went away, the high income tax rate remained for 20 years.
You ask if there is "waste" and "corruption." For me, the VERY fact that those things exist are reason enough to do away with forced "charity." The US government has essentially a bottomless pit of money to deal with rather than a finite supply. If an individual or a family or a business finds itself with a limited supply of money, it must find a way to reduce the amount of money it spends. If Uncle Sam finds himself in the same quandry, no problem, he'll just take more. Now if I were to do that, walk into my boss's office and FORCE him to give me more money, I go to jail. If your Friendly Neighborhood Federal Government does it, it justifies it with "its for the common good."
Does the idea that some people in a position power feel that they have a right to take your personal property "for the common good" scare me? You're DAMN right it does. If a private individual felt they had a right to my property, even if it was "for the common good," and took it, we'd label him a thief and put him in jail. But because Hillary Clinton feels that way, I'm supposed to accept it? The mere fact that Hillary Clinton and others feel that they have a right to take your property for "the common good" out to scare the HELL out of any rational individual. Before I accept your argument that "the common good" is worth more than my personal property, I want a clear definition on the definition of "the common good." If "the common good" means to provide the country with a means of defense against an agressor, I'll accept that. If "the common good" means my personal property is distributed to some crackwhore who has five children and can't afford to feed them, then screw that. If "the common good" means that we should have our money redistributed to failing businesses and government programs that are not able to provide a service people would be willing to pay for, screw that, too.
I'll accept that I owe people who have helped me out. In fact, I've tried to repay them when I can and I've helped others out when I can. I've already stated that I believe in charity and "helping my fellow man." I just don't believe it should be compulsory.
Your statement that if it were not forced to give, then a great many people would not is bullcrap. You see how much charity is given freely in this nation. Look at the amount of money given to the Red Cross or United Way every year. I'd like to see what would happen if people were able to keep more of their money rather than being forced to pump it into failing government programs. The important point, for me, is that individuals have the freedom and the ability to choose. There is NEVER a good reason to "force" someone to help out unless it is a form of punishment.
posted by:
surrogate (
reply)
post date:
03.02.07 (12:13 pm)
"I'll accept that I owe people who have helped me out. In fact, I've tried to repay them when I can and I've helped others out when I can. I've already stated that I believe in charity and "helping my fellow man." I just don't believe it should be compulsory."
And about the millions who have helped you out that you can't directly point to and identify? Screw them, huh?
You seem to think you "deserve" what you have, and that those that haven't fared as well all "deserve" their fate as well... Nothing new there. Absurd as it's ever been, but, nothing new.
It's why we have such systems: to protect the whole from the few who just refuse to even acknowledge they're part of "it." What you have isn't JUST yours. Never has been, never will be, whether you're aware enough of the world to realize it or not. For instance, I'll just bet you that if you'd had your money in an S & L that failed (usually because it was run by people who think exactly like you,) you'd have been first in line to get your money back from the government, shouting the loudest and whining annoyingly.
posted by:
bronwynj (
reply)
post date:
03.06.07 (6:47 pm)
Reply to: PastorDave
So the gift of your assistance was not given without strings PastorDave?
The man you helped could be embarrassed to have had to turn to charity, & be trying to put that behind him.
However, it's only been a few days, & of course he's been busy.
Plus: we may not be able to see into another's heart. He may carry with him throughout his life the quiet gratitude he has felt towards you & the charities who have helped him.
He may even be planning to "pay it forward" when he is able to, in future.
Best not to judge.
