Generosity

In the summer I applied for a grant to help two groups of people Farmers who participate in our Farmers Market and seniors who had food security problems. I was able to get the grant and as a result, 77 people were helped with a food security issue and several farmers were able to sell more products. It was a win-win situation.

What surprised me is the response from others to the act, they thought it was an especially important thing to do and I received accolades from many sources. I was surprised because generosity or the act of being kind and giving is important to me and I thought it was an important part of what people did in our society.

I wondered why this act was viewed as generous by others and why that act of applying for a grant deserved accolades. I have a friend who loves the etymology of words. So, I asked him for some background. He told me that the modern English word generosity derives from the Latin word generōsus, which means “of noble birth,” which itself was passed down to English through the Old French word Genereux. The same root gives us the words genesis, gentry, gender, genital, gentile, genealogy, and genius, among others. Most recorded English uses of the word generous” up to and during the Sixteenth Century reflects an aristocratic sense of being of noble lineage or high birth. To be generous was literally a way of saying “to belong to the nobility.

During the 17th Century, however, the meaning and use of the word began to change. Generosity came increasingly to identify not literal family heritage but nobility of spirit thought to be associated with high birth that is, with various admirable qualities such as the ideals of actual nobility: gallantry, courage, strength, richness, gentleness, and fairness.

The thinking about the nature of generosity has changed over time and it is now in danger. Most thinking of “generosity” often involve fundamental religious questions concerning the nature of humanity, God, and the human-divine relationship.

The Arab/Islamic tradition emphasizes that the faithful have a duty to God to show generous hospitality towards the stranger, offering them shelter and the best food and drink available. This virtue has deep historical roots, as is witnessed by the Hebrew Bible. It is exemplified in Abraham’s eagerness to host the three strangers who approach his tent in the wilderness, strangers whom the text identifies as Yahweh appearing to Abraham.

Aliens, together with widows, orphans, and the poor, are pointed out for special moral attention, and the Israelites are repeatedly reminded that “you were strangers in the land of Egypt.” Thus, care for those marginal to the community and thus in danger of being excluded from basic resources is mandated both as a response to the needs of those persons and as a response to God’s salvific care for the people of Israel.

For Christians, to be generous is to be confirmed not just to Christ but also to the loving divine parent, whose sacrificial self-gift into the world makes possible human fellowship in the divine life. For Paul, this love is exemplified by Christ who, “though he was rich, yet for your sake he became poor” (2 Corinth. 8.9). Generosity involves giving beyond one's means, though Paul also notes that those now giving out of their abundance may at some point be in need and be the recipients of the generosity of others.

Generosity was also a virtue in the classical context. It is the third of the virtues of character discussed by Aristotle, following on the heels of courage and temperance. The generous person, for Aristotle is one who gives of his or her wealth in a way that achieves a mean between wastefulness and greed. The generous person does not give indiscriminately but seeks to give in a way that is good and fine. This, in turn, requires giving to the right people, in the right amounts, at the right time, with pleasure, and without looking out for oneself.

Thomas Aquinas, treatment focuses on the way that freedom from attachment to money and possessions makes possible the good use of these external goods. Like Aristotle, Aquinas suggests that there are more and less fitting ways in which to give one’s wealth. The heart of Aquinas’ account of giving, though, is found in his discussion of the outward acts of charity, notably beneficence and the giving of alms to the poor. 

To give simply to receive a return is not charity but greed, a form of selfishness. Aquinas insists that these acts of charity should in principle extend to all, in the sense that we should be ready to do good to anyone at all, including strangers and enemies.

Today, we associate the word “charity” primarily with charitable giving to the poor. Care for the poor, together with widow and orphan and prisoner, have always been central activities of Christian churches. An influential strand of contemporary philosophy has argued that the dominant conceptions of generosity in the West are insufficiently unconditional and betray expectations of reciprocity.

In our society as soon as something is recognized as a gift, the receiver becomes indebted and obliged to offer a return; gift thus collapses into an economic exchange. A gift can only exist so long as it remains unrecognized by both the giver and receiver.

The intense interest and response that my act aroused is an indication of the fact that generosity is endangered in today’s world, a world dominated by contract or economic exchange, which is indeed strictly conditional which I find sad.