When I was about 17 years old a family member passed away in Tennessee, a cousin of my Grandmother. My Grandmother was not healthy at the time so she sent my mother and I to represent her at the funeral. The cousin lived across the street from the local church she was very involved with. Her house was a beautiful southern home, with a large garden complete with porch swings and such. Being in and around that house I was absolutely in heaven. It was so beautiful; not large or pretentious, more lived in and full of love. I would have loved to live there.
It shocked me to find out that when she passed away she donated the house to the church. That was the first time I'd heard of that being done.
I have since come to know that it is commonplace for people to leave their belongings to the church of their choice after they pass on. I understand this practice; it is a way to assure the particular church can continue on and do well even though the person is no longer alive to pursue that cause in person.
But how many of us have thought to leave our belongings to the government; local government especially. Why is the church’s ability to continue on and do well more important than the local government who provide safety and security to the area where the church is located?
Or what about leaving your house to a local school? In this time of budget concerns this might help to provide better leadership for the future to assure both the Church and the Government perservere as well. It is obvious we can not count on taxes alone to help these entities do well.
I speak, of course, about those who either have no family to leave their things to, or whose family is already well cared for. Religious houses have always been known to be dependent on the charity of others. Maybe it is time we look at who else might need that charity too.
No comments:
Post a Comment