| 
 enlarge | Author: Marvin Olasky
Creator: Amy L. Sherman
Publisher: Crossway Books
Category: Book
List Price: $27.00
Buy New: $16.86
You Save: $10.14 (38%)
New (15) Used (6) from $16.86
Avg. Customer Rating:  27 reviews
Sales Rank: 300707
Media: Paperback
Number Of Items: 1
Pages: 320
Shipping Weight (lbs): 1
Dimensions (in): 8.8 x 5.9 x 1
ISBN: 1433501104
Dewey Decimal Number: 261
EAN: 9781433501104
ASIN: 1433501104
Publication Date: March 31, 2008
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
Shipping: International shipping available
Condition: Brand New, Perfect Condition, Please allow 4-14 business days for delivery. 100% Money Back Guarantee, Over 1,000,000 customers served.
|
| Customer Reviews:
 The Heart of the Matter April 16, 2007
One does not necessarily have to buy into every one of Olasky's political presuppositions in order to seriously consider the crucial question of this book. The question is: "Are we offering . . . our lives?" (233). Are we willing to give of ourselves and not just out of our overflow? Are we not only willing to practice compassion (to "suffer with") the suffering in our society -- but are we actually living as compassionate people?
These are important questions. Whether government-sponsored welfare is seen as an abysmal failure or a raving success, or a mixture of the two, there is no harm in each of us seriously asking ourselves: What about me? What am I doing with who I am and what I have to help my neighbor? Olasky provides plenty of stories that show us what "suffering-with" compassion has looked like in the past. Stories have a way of getting inside our heads -- and sometimes even changing our hearts, our perspectives, our ways of being and doing.
The story of American compassion is still being written. I have a part to play in that story. Each of of does. As for me, I want to be able to look back over the course of my life and say that I truly gave of myself. Not in a do-gooder fashion. Not driven by guilt or pride. And not with the near-sighted belief that individual compassion is all that is needed. No, I fully realize that society-at-large must tackle the problems and rise to the opportunities of society. Yet I cannot help but think that as individuals and families, organizations and communities, begin, more and more, to give of themselves, to suffer-with, and to personally and compassionately treat people the way they want to be treated, that we will see a change for the better in our society.
 A roadmap for social polidy. January 10, 2007
Dr. Olasky's book outlines the history of what he calls "outside relief"...in other words, providing assistance to people outside our own family or circle of friends. The debate over whether outside relief is a good thing swung back and forth through history, and, in our day, the pendulum has been about as far towards "in favor" as it could be. I fear that those who favor such policy see other points of view as heartless. Dr. Olasky makes it plain that there is another way of helping others that is better for all concerned. It requires more of all concerned and it involves making some decisions. But in the long run, the way our ancestors chose would do more to help more people and give us a better society. His research is impeccable and his argument is persuasive.
 Great Ideas Hurt by Execution October 15, 2006
4 out of 4 found this review helpful
Politically and spiritually I would love to have given this book 5 stars, but I could not bring myself to do so. I was interested in Olasky and this book, but found it an unpleasing read.
Politically, I give it 5 stars. I think Olasky's main thesis is a challenging one, yet one that all Americans need to hear. Simply writing a check, feeling good about it, then driving by with our windows rolled up and our doors locked is not "compassion". Personal involvement - getting dirty with people who are hard to love - that is compassion. The more "checks" we write - individuals, churches, or government - the more need will grow. It is a tragic consequence of our fallen nature. Moral guidance and coaching must go hand-in-hand with material assistance. Olasky is right.
For literary value, the book only merits 1 star. It hurts me to do so because this message is an important one, that many should read. Strunck and White do not have this on their nightstand in heaven. I struggled to finish this book, and skimmed 30-40 pages in the middle.
The volume of anecdotes (see research section below)was overwhelming. They could have been summarized in a more pleasing way, or some of them could simply have been left out. Also, the overuse of quotes was very distracting. As a reader, you could never get up a "head of steam". Three sentences of narration would be interupted by a phrase quoting one of the characters. Two more sentences of narration would then be interrupted by a very long, indented quote from a character. This went on-and-on for long sections of the book. It is not visually pleasing, to turn the page and see all these broken sections of text. Instead of floating down a smooth river of text, you must climb over rocky piles of anecdotes and slog through lengthy quotes to get to the the next idea. Also, there are way too many numbers, used to describe the volume of services provided to the needy in the 19th century. He seemed to make his point...and then make his point again...and then make his point again.
The research deserves 3 stars. The anecdotes and statistics are so overwhelming concerning a truly compassionate approach, you would think that they could have been summarized somehow and compared in some way to contemporary efforts, which Marvin (and I) are critical of. He has obviously done a great deal of research. I wish that, in addition to the massive anecdotes, quotes, and numbers, he could have made some sort of scholarly presentation of all his evidence.
There did not seem much of an effort to confront what other scholars have said about American compassion and charity. He does talk a lot about what people on the front line, whether Social Darwinist, Social Universalist, or people following his prescriptions believed. But what have other scholars observed? Even if Marvin believes they are wrong, I and other readers would be interested in what they have said.
So, reluctantly, I give it 3 stars overall.
Amazing mostly apolitical book that shifts the focus on the real problem, Compassion August 15, 2006
1 out of 3 found this review helpful
This book is quite different from what modern economists and others state about the underprivileged/unemployed of the country, he provides ample anedoctal evidence indicating how the poor were taken care of privately, and even when government was involved, it was supporting charities that already existed. Olasky chronicles history of American compassion and how it helps the poor and lifts them out of pauperism and into American life. This book is for the most part, apolitical, yet some people who have an axe to grind about the evil "right-wing conspiracy" create strawman arguments from Olasky's book.
Professor Mitchell's review was focused on numbers, while Olasky views the consequences of when the view of the nature of man changes, the "responsibility" of how to take care of the poor. What heroic conclusions does he find, that charities without the help of the government cared for the poor because they used a-g affiliation, bonding, categorization, discernment, employment, freedom, and God. He contrasts it with the programs instituted by the federal government that came into prominence in the 1930s, and even moreso in the 1960s and Johnson's "Great Society." This is not an economics textbook, it is more of a chronological history of American compassion and how it changed from, hands-on training to throwing money at a problem and actually exacerbating it because they subsidized both those that can't work, and those that can but won't and didn't. What good would it do to have median incomes, statistics on absolute populations (which can easily be looked up online.) Prof. Mitchell doesn't realize that he is fulfilling what Olasky wrote when the focus was shifted from inidividually helping people to helping the "whole world" in a sense. Yes, there were an innumberable amount of charities actively helping people overcome pauperism and bonding with the people they help, not as social workers viewing their clients as just another number with an endless amount of paperwork to do, but changing the person's disposition, and classifying whether they are able to work or not, and if they do, instituting work tests so that they actually work for their food, and those that couldn't work were cared for, probably more so than now since they categorized who could work and who couldn't, thus an equitable distribution of finances would not have worked since different people had different abilities and dispositions.
Olasky's book is not about the government, he chronicles the change in theology (from placing the blame on laziness to society), the shift in view from helping individuals to helping the masses and thus de-personalizing compassion, and the right to entitlement and how this radically decreased the amount of private charities, and increased governmental assistance, while it did have good intentions did not categorize or discern who needed help. In chapter 3 Olasky discusses Mrs. Capetillo and how she had to pinch her pennies, she was receiving governmental assistance, but when the government found that she saved $3000 over three years she was asked to pay back $15,545 to the government for the three years she was receiving assistance. Thus government was keeping her dependent, decreasing social mobility, all which are vividly described in innumerable anecdotes.
When Olasky does arrive at the present he blames the homelessness on people not being compassionate, but being stingy, yes the homeless were given food, clothes, etc., but people weren't compassionate, they didn't take time to affiliate, bond, categorize, discern, and help employ these homeless, but gave them things, thus they were subsidizing poverty and letting people stay there. Olasky himself became a homeless person and was surprised that he was just given assistance without any personal questions about where he came from, and when he went to a charitable event at a church, he asked for a Bible the church didn't even have one. Olasky isn't placing the blame on government, the only blame he places on it is that "bad charity drives out good charity" those that could work, but don't can easily get governmental assistance, and while some private charities can be just as bad as government (Olasky also states this in his book) private assistance has a higher track record of filling the need where there truly is one, while society as a whole has been stingy.
Olasky writes: "Nelson bell predicted in Christianity today that poverty's politicization would create a 'grave danger...its alleviation will become motivated by other than compassion, and its victims will be pawns in a sociological experiment that can cost billions in waste and bureaucratic management while it destroys initiative and breeds dependence on others.'"
Olasky even criticizes conservatives "It is easy for conservatives to criticize government, especially since the increase in governmental cash flow contributed greatly to our current problem. But at this point, the corruption is general, not just governmental. A stingy temperament slowly, and somewhat insidiously has taken over our entire society, including the many points of light."
"Social Universalism: anything that is not universal is antisocial." Sums up the way society deals with the poor/homeless/less well off.
This book is not about how "evil" government it, it is how the Judeo-Christian community and American society have failed to demonstrate compassion. However, Olasky details how current programs are helping people such as "House of His creation" which helps teenage pregnant mothers and how that launched the Christian Maternity Home which housed pregnant women, and helps women to realize that they should adopt since they need a father figure. The Jewish Beth Shalom in Lancaster Pennsylvania also helps pregnant women. Olasky isn't arguing for a laissez-faire approach of the government to poverty, but to support programs that works. Olasky even mentioned the WPA (Works Progress Administration) which worked within and didn't "change American values toward work and dependency; it consciously worked within them.)
The last chapter sums up that we, regular citizens need to change this, are we willing to take pregnant teenagers into our home, are we willing to help the homeless get out of their homelessness? Are we willing to stop being stingy, not with our money, but with our time, our willingness to help in both physical and spiritual parts of human beings?
S. Potter didn't read the book October 28, 2005
8 out of 11 found this review helpful
S. Potter didn't read this book. Instead, he just read the overview and made a comment.
Had he read this book, he would realize that while they focused on changing the soul, they feed the body at the same time.
Even more, they used duty to have people who didn't have, to earn more. Men would get food, but would have to chop enough wood to heat the stoves of single mothers. They would also have to take skill classes so they could become employable.
Single Women in the same charity had to mend men's jackets so they could have warmth in the summer for this they would receive training of skills that were employable and food. Also their children would be educated, when education was not a right, but a privilege.
This is just one example. There are others, like how urban orphans in New York were adopted by farmers, and while a few used them only for labor, how the overwhelming majority of them brought them in as family. Presently adoption in the US is so hard it is just better to let the state deal with them. We now regularly have kids who are unwanted by both society and the state. There is no love or foundation for them to use as a starting point. Many of these end up on welfare, in AZ they make it easier for them to get cash assistance after their 18thg B-day and it becomes a life long trap for them.
|
|
|
