Философские науки / 2. Социальная философия.

Ст. преп. Шарков И.Г., к.ф.н. Руденко А.М., к.ф.н. Родионова В.И.

Южно-Российский Государственный университет экономики и сервиса, Россия

Charity as a socio-cultural phenomenal.

Today, with the growing of economical crisis we have a necessity of studying all the changes in social sphere of Russian society, we need to reveal the tendency of development of social relations and factors, which favour the achievement of social stability and dynamism of social life. Nowadays all over the world forgotten terms, which show social support are recollected. Such words as “charity”, “philanthropy”, “humanity” and “mercy” are heard again. Social philosophy today has such tasks as to express the nature of private charity, social voluntary organizations, rebirth of social Church and other religion organizations service.

During the post-perestroika changes in our country happened a revolutionary rearrangement of the system of social protection. Nowadays Russian government guarantees its citizens only a minimal level of social welfare, social protection and medical care.

The development of modern Russian society is characterized by the important changes in political, socio-economic and cultural spheres. Unemployment, growth of needy, shortage of culture, science and education financing by the government are up-to-date actuals.

It all leads to the search and upgrading of the private forms of supporting of the social sphere. And in the light of these, we should pay attention to such phenomenon of Russian society as charity.

We need to provide prognostication of social policy, followed by the government, and of the policy of private social institutions (religion organizations, private charity foundations, voluntary social organizations). The necessity of scientific description of socio-philosophical traditions, basic forms and perspectives of development is blewing.

Philosophical understanding of the charity institution, which is constantly appeared in society, has a large meaning for the supporting of stability of social development and the rise of efficiency of social institutions. The adequate understanding of the essence of changes in the social sphere is necessary for a man looking for his place on the society and for the implicating social groups as conscious subjects to this process.

Charity develops in different forms. Some of them exited in pre-revolutionary Russia: religion (church) charity and private charity (sponsorship). Other forms are more typical for modern western society and are actively propagandized by the supporters of western culture. We are talking about volunteer organizations, humanitarian aid and branches of different internationality and spirituality in an atmosphere of social differentiation and moral degradation.

One of the first approaches to the shedding of charity is the philosophical substantiation of mercy, charity, which has such religion and socio-ethical aspects. The reason is that charity has an old historical tradition in philosophical and religions ideals of the mankind.

The phenomenon of charity is found in the sphere of professional interests of philosophers, culture experts, lawyers, economists, etc. The majority of analysts consider charity as an inherent pert of the society.

The scientific interest to this topic is constantly growing - the necessity of scientific description of socio-philosophical phenomenon of charity, its rich historical tradition, basic forms and perspectives of development. Charity phenomenon touches upon the foundation of existence of human society.

Charity in its historical development gained a lot of philosophical senses and different shades of social meaning from mercy up to the system of government legislative acts. Social phenomenon of charity with bowels of mercies and love in its basics has a rich metaphysical discourse, explaining its essence and purpose. The necessity of charity research expansion is obvious nowadays.

Charity as the expression of philanthropy is interpreted in different philosophical traditions in different ways under the influence of historical and cultural evolution.

We must say that the fundamental aim of charity is the deliverance from the misery. It may be achieved only with large social changes. And charity will always be necessary, even in an ideal society. In this case it won’t be the way of making society better, but the help to the concrete people.

The world is becoming better not by means of rise in the standard of living but by means of presence in our life such things as mercy and charity as the moral values. But charitable activity needs an object. “As there are sick people in the hospital for doctors learning how to treat, so in the Old Russian society there are poor people for the training of people’s love to each other.” [1] And this idea is popular in all the times.

The age of charity is the age of the mankind. It’s a pity, but it’s also the age of pathologic processes in the society.

Charity is aimed at the weakening of the social antagonisms. Social (government and private) institutions are intended for the easing of conflicts and charity as one of them has been doing it since the ancient time.

Very often critics speak about hypocrisy, in sincerity and duality of the philanthropically activity. But dual nature isn’t inherent to the charity. And we should also remember that the dual nature is typical practically for all the social phenomenon. Sometimes charity is need for the disguise of private interests of the organizations of the charity actions. But true charity isn’t the camouflage of the corporative interests.

The philanthropy specialist N.N. Nepluev compared charity with the patch, which is put on the old dress by the kind people.

But critic of different social senses of charity is rather rational. It helps to understand that charity isn’t a medicine from the social and moral defects.

Let’s pay attention to some other conceptions, which are connected with the world “charity”. “Making good” is kindred to the help “to the poor, decrepit, sick and indigent”. [2] Kind, compassionate, lenient, tender and benevolent man used to be called charitable. The closest words are compassion and altruism. The Dale’s Dictionary gives such definition “compassion is a feeling of distress and pity for the suffering or misfortune of another, often including the desire to alleviate it”.

The etymological explanation of mercy and charity is the love, based on kindness. This is consonant with the famous gospel commandments about love and mercy. The theme of mercy and charity is one of the main themes of the Sermon of the Mount (the Gospel According to St. Mathew 5,7; 5,42; 6,1-3)

The Fathers of the Church were the hot apologists of charity in all of its ways. There was a necessary of the Christian love to the neighbor everywhere. The early Christian apocryphal writing “Pastor” by St. Herman shows the duty of Christian to share everything with the needy [5], “to serve widows, to take care of orphans and poor people, to save from poverty the servants of God”. [6] And the “Pastor” calls to do good and to give alms to all pleaders. The priest-martyr Clement of Rome praises hospitality and speaks about it in his first epistle to the Christians of Corinth as about their main merit. [7] He tells that many of the Christians voluntarily go to prison to set the others free, and many of them become slaves ransoming the others. In the letter of St. Ignatius to the Polycarp there are some words about the buyout of slaves on the money of the community. The Apostolic canons advice to spent earned money to the buyout of slaves.

The Church practiced charity. The church members were the indirect participants of these actions. The Church thought that all its property is the property of poor people. But church members and clerical donated to the bishop in the aims of charity. St. Justin martyr in his first apology gives us the following picture of Church’s charity: “The well-off church members give what they want and the raised is kept by the primate, and he takes care of orphans and widow, of all over the prisoners, of pilgrims and of all who needs”. [8] And then speaking about newly converted Christians: “Before we were caring of gaining riches and property and now all we have we share with all needy”. [9]

Tertullian speaks about social serving of the early Church in his famous “Apologistics”. He describes the order of Christian divine services: the head of the community is the presbyter, he keeps the money. The offerings are voluntary. This is the alms. These money are spent to the daily bread and funerals of needy, to the supporting of orphans (boys and girls), helpless old men, who cannot leave their homes, to the helping the shipwrecked persons, to the prisoners if they suffer for the Christianity. All this is typical for the Christians. So, money serves as a means of building brotherhood for the real Christians, at the same time money often make brothers enemies. [10] “Quite often zealous love to the neighbor brings the Christians the imputation of wastefulness. But wastefulness caused by the love is worthy of the better name…” [11]

Afterwards the philanthropically activities of the Church were admitted by the Christian Roman emperors. The Byzantine Emperors and Russian Grand Princes, tsars and emperors were thinking that charity is their sacral duty.

In the 19^th century V.S. Solovjow proved relation of such words as ‘compassion’, ‘mercy’ and ‘altruism’, relying on the conception of Schopenhauer. “As shame marks a man out of the nature and set him off against other animals, so compassion unites him with all living. Only compassion or mercy can be the inherent basic of moral relations, but not the common gladness or enjoyment. In the main demonstration of compassion – in the maternal instinct of the animals we can see the closest connection between the compassionating and the compassionated”. [12] That was marked by V.V. Rozanov and V.O. Kluchevskiy, who thought that beggary, which was the institute of Christian charity, is one of the moral educations.

The mercy presupposes justice needs mercy. These are the two parts of one phenomenon. The unity of them is the foundation of correlation of law and morality, politics and spiritual life of the society. The principles of mercy, marked by V.S. Solovjow are consonant with the common principles of respecting human dignity irrespective of religion, age, sex or social position. These principles are written to the modern codes of social policy in all the civilized countries.

Speaking about this countries, we should remember that Western European culture is the synthesis of heathen and Christian elements. Kireevskiy says that the origins of trust to the nous and thinking appear in the synthesis of Western European Christianity and Roman scholarship. Thanks to the antiquity Western Europe got a large experience of philosophizing. Is it good or no?

Kireevskiy comes to the conclusion that roman scholarship fixed the character of Western European. Christianity and determined the appearance of rationalism inside of the Christianity. Greeks were thinkers, philosophers and metaphysicians. Romans didn’t take the best parts of Greek culture. They needed logic and nationality. Romans were the founders of law, architecture, roads, etc. They gave a little to the philosophy. They brought it to the comments. But national spirit has spread over all the culture. Religion in Rome had the legal relations. Roman asked the God to help him, and if the God didn’t do it, Roman could resent. The rational spirit has spread over all the areas of social life: politics, culture, philosophy, art, etc. Everything was logical there. There was no any mysticism.

It’s easy to understand yourself in comparison. I.V. Kireevskiy finds that integrity prevails in Russian culture. He finds the origin of integrity in Eastern orthodoxy, in Russian way of life. But V.S. Solovjow criticizes him, saying that Kireevskiy anticipates history of Russian culture. Solovjow, supports Kireevskiy, in criticism of Western European culture.

But it is not all. Kireevskiy finds something that causes the mentality of Russians. The main sources of his theory are patristic writings. On the other hand, it’s Western European classical philosophy (Hegel and Shelling) and German romanticists.

First of all, Kireevskiy speaks about the integrity of spirit. We can find it in his anthropology. The origin of anthropology is the idea of Kireevskiy’s anthropology is the idea of differentiation of a man. There is either intrinsic or superficial man – is an empirical man (with instincts, biological and social needs and functions), he is living in society. But it’s not a real man. There is an inner self too. This is a spiritual strength. They can be unwired by the person. According to the Christian anthropology Man is an image and likeness of God, he is free (he has the mind and the will) and man has the old Adam, which distort the freedom of a man. This is the reason oh his suffering.

Purport of man’s life is to be convicted of sin, to overcome it. It can be expressed by the theological term theosis. A little people studied Christian patristic traditions. The Church has been taken as the ceremony. Russia of the 19^th century was too far from the patristic traditions. The Church has been taken as the ceremony. Russia took its cue from the liberal freedom, pecuniary level of Europe (especially France), and rationalism.

There by, there were few people, such as Kireevskiy, who were really interested in new philosophy at the time when Europe was so popular. A new development appeared in Russian culture. Kireevskiy, relying on the patristic writings, found the ideas, which he expressed to find the truth of purport of life (from the paint of view of the Christian orthodoxy. This is the main object of the new philosophy – to explain the main problems of man’s life and culture. Kireevskiy speaks about thinking which includes all man’s peculiarities. It’s a condition, when all parts of the spirit are closely connected. Such spirit has all chances to face the underlying features of being, all the truth, but not its parts. That is why western philosophers don’t accept Russian philosophy.

Speaking about the Christian morality N.A. Berdyaev says: “the Christian morality is the morality of values, the creative growth of life, but not the morality of people’s wellbeing, not an altruistic morality. Christianity is a religion of love, but not of the altruism”. [13]

Good as a moral love is incarnated by the mercy and save the life of any society from the destruction. The common mercy is the condition of the charity actions of the concrete social subjects.

On inactive love is an illusion, by the thoughts of V.S. Solovjow. And if the beginning of the moral activity is the love and its aim is a common advantage, than culture is a system of all the necessary conditions for the demonstration of love as the moral base and for the achievement of the common advantage. The actuality of Solovjow’s ideas is evident. The love to the neighbors isn’t only an appeal, but it’s also a way to the survival, saving of society by means of the sense actions.

According to the rich heritage of Russian culture, history and philosophy we can see the heightened interest of the Russian authors to the idea of mercy in the structure of Russian culture and national Russian character. And the special feature of our civilization is conditioned by the gospel proclamation of the Church.

The hope for the conversion of the society to the universal values, attention to the seek and unprotected is justified by the mercy, understanding as the main value of the modern civilization.

The presence of the majority of social defects in the world history finds the response in the spiritual intention of mercy and charity. This is a charity conditioned by the socio-political circumstances and a patronage of art. The motives of charity were various during the ages: philanthropy, religiousness, repentance, love to the art or to the science and ambition.

The best representatives of the Russian philosophy (V.S. Solovjow, N.A. Berdyaev and a priest P.A. Phlorenskiy) personified the culmination of the high spirituality in the idea of the conciliarism. This idea goes beyond the confessional church bounds and becomes the universal phenomenon of the truth moral.

Notes

1. Kluchevskiy V.O. Kind people of Ancient Russia / V.O. Kluchevskiy – Sergiev Posad, 1892. – 20p. – p.5

2. Dale V.I. Lexicon of living great Russian language / V.I. Dale 4v. – V.1 – Moscow, the State publication of foreign and national dictionaries, 1955. – 699p. – p. 94

3. Dale V.I. Lexicon of living great Russian language / V.I. Dale 4v. – V.2 – Moscow, the State publication of foreign and national dictionaries, 1955. – 779p. – p. 326-327

4. Dale V.I. Lexicon of living great Russian language / V.I. Dale 4v. – V.1 – Moscow, the State publication of foreign and national dictionaries, 1955. – 699p. – p. 525

5. The Hagiography of the Apostolic Fathers: Russian translating with notes / portieres P. Preobrazhenskiy – Kiev, the Society of Orthodox literature lovers, Publication by St. Leo, Pope of Rome, 2001. – 328p. – p. 174

6. The Hagiography of the Apostolic Fathers: Russian translating with notes / portieres P. Preobrazhenskiy – Kiev, the Society of Orthodox literature lovers, Publication by St. Leo, Pope of Rome, 2001. – 328p. – p. 191

7. The Hagiography of the Apostolic Fathers: Russian translating with notes / portieres P. Preobrazhenskiy – Kiev, the Society of Orthodox literature lovers, Publication by St. Leo, Pope of Rome, 2001. – 328p. – p. 74

8. The Apologists the Protectors of the Christianity. Lectures of prof. I.P. Reversov with the original texts of apologists of the early Church / I.P. Reversov – St. Petersburg, Satis, 2002. – 190p. – p.43

9. The Apologists the Protectors of the Christianity. Lectures of prof. I.P. Reversov with the original texts of apologists of the early Church / I.P. Reversov – St. Petersburg, Satis, 2002. – 190p. – p.46

10. The Apologists the Protectors of the Christianity. Lectures of prof. I.P. Reversov with the original texts of apologists of the early Church / I.P. Reversov – St. Petersburg, Satis, 2002. – 190p. – p.164

11. Zeipel I. Economico-ethical views of the Fathers of the Church / I. Zeipel – Moscow, 1913. – 342p. – p. 265

12. Solovjov V.S. The Compositions. 2v. – V. 2. Ed.: A.P. Losev, A.V. Guligi – Moscow, Misl, 1990. – 892p. – p. 53-54

13. Berdyaev N.A. The Philosophy of Freedom. The sense of the creation / N.A. Berdyaev – Moscow, Pravda, 1989. – 607p. – p. 468