Shankar Vedantam tells a disturbing story about a dog at sea to raise a serious question about how we humans prioritize our charitable endeavors.

A fire broke out in the engine room of the Insiko 1907, an unregistered tanker, as it passed about 800 miles south of the Hawaiian Islands. The fire swept through the ship so quickly that the crew wasn’t even able to radio for help.

When the fire subsided, 11 men and the captain’s dog found themselves safe, with good supplies of food and water, in the ship’s forward quarters. But they had no engines, no radio, and no means for contacting the outside world.

So the ship drifted aimlessly for days, eventually coming within 220 miles of Hawaii–at which point a cruise ship picked up the crew. Hokget, the dog, however, was left behind.

One of the cruise ship passengers who heard Hokget barking called the Hawaiian Humane Society to see if they would do something to rescue him. The Society alerted fishing boats, but the operation seemed hopeless.

As Vedantam explains,

The problem . . . was that no one knew where the Insiko was. The U.S. Coast Guard estimated it could be anywhere in an area measuring 360,000 square miles.

I don’t need to tell the whole story. A month and a half after the fire broke out, and over $300,000 of private and public taxpayer money later, Hokget was finally rescued.

In the meantime, letters and contributions had poured into the Humane Society from 39 states and four foreign countries. One was a check for $5,000. The notes expressed deep anguish and concern:

“This check is in memory of the little dog lost at sea.”

“Thank you for pulling my heartstrings and for reminding me of all the hope there is left in this world.”

And so forth.

This episode raises a series of disturbing questions, however, writes Vedantam. Read the rest of this entry »

Growing up, my mom taught me a song to be sung to the tune most of us know as “Jingle Bells”:

J-O-Y. J-O-Y. J-O-Y spells joy.
Jesus first, Yourself last, and Others in between.

The priorities and values certainly appear correct according to most Scriptures of which I am aware:

Mathew 6:33 – [S]eek first [God']s kingdom and His righteousness, and all [the food, drink, clothing, etc., you need] will be added to you.

Philippians 2:3 – Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit, but in humility consider others better than yourselves.

And so forth.

But then Jay Link comes along and says this advice is all screwy when it comes to legacy planning. Certainly when it comes to the O and the Y. Indeed, he says, the first priority in estate planning/legacy planning is–it has to be–to ensure the physical and financial needs of the benefactors are met. The second priority is to meet their heirs’ needs. And then–and only then–is it legitimate to consider the needs of others.

If any legacy planner were to attempt any other order–”Others before Yourself”–you can be confident, Link says: “The plan won’t be implemented.” And an unimplemented plan is no better than no plan.

“Oh! Horrors!” I thought when I first came across Link’s suggested priority order a year and a half ago or so. “It’s so . . . selfish!” (So opposite what my mom’s song taught!)

But over time I have come to realize how wise Link really is.

1. It is not “unrighteous,” “ungodly” or “unbiblical” to make sure your own needs are taken care of.

   According to 1 Timothy 5:8, “[I]f anyone does not provide for his own, and especially for those of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.” –So by making sure you have taken care of your own and your heirs’ needs, you are actually fulfilling the “law of Christ.” You are ensuring you do avoid becoming an unnecessary burden to those around you.
    

2. As far as placing yourself before your heirs, Jay made a comment about how most parents love their children very much but are unwilling to forego their own comfort in order to increase their children’s at some unknown future date.

   I was going to quote him to that effect and leave it there, but it just struck me: that attitude may be neither biblical nor true.

   I know a lot of parents through the years who have made tremendous sacrifices in behalf of their children. They do this when their children are infants. They do it when their children are growing up. They do it again when their children have children of their own.

   I’m not saying such attitudes are ubiquitous. But many, many parents–I think of immigrant parents, especially, but lots and lots of moms, too–make all kinds of sacrifices in behalf of their children and grandchildren.

   Still. And, I’d say, especially for parents who are concerned not to place a burden upon their children, there is something to be said for making sure your own needs are taken care of so you don’t place an unnecessary burden upon your children.
    

3. As far as Jesus being first, I thought Link’s company mission statement said it well. He quotes 1 Timothy 6:17-19:
   

   Command those who are rich in this present world not to be arrogant nor to put their hope in wealth, which is so uncertain, but to put their hope in God, who richly provides us with everything for our enjoyment. Command them to do good, to be rich in good deeds, and to be generous and willing to share. In this way they will lay up treasure for themselves as a firm foundation for the coming age, so that they may take hold of the life that is truly life.