Holy policy
It’s a tough row to hoe, making the case that Jesus is a capitalist. For example, there is the fact that the first church appears to have adopted voluntary socialism. And that business about seeking not the treasures of this world—that hasn’t stopped conservatives from spilling gallons of ink to refine our understanding about the camel, the eye of the needle, and the rich man until that discomforting verse almost seems to cry out for leveraged buyouts and complex derivatives. When we put our minds to it, we can work the Bible around to supporting just about anything we like.
This is all to say that it’s a bit unseemly to use religion to justify one’s policy preferences. This observation would have been less welcome at the height of the Christian Coalition’s power. After all, isn’t a believer in the flat tax and a strong missile defense a believer in truth, which is another way of saying a follower of the Truth? It requires a bit of smug self-assurance, this logic, but let’s be honest: We conservatives know we’re right. And while Jesus never released a comprehensive economic plan, we can be pretty sure he didn’t favor self-delusional economic thinking and the waste of resources.
Still, we have to admit He has more important things on his mind. Whether or not we get global warming legislation is probably toward the bottom of the list. This isn’t stopping a new coalition of leftist organizations from taking their case to the pulpit, arguing that failure to enact sweeping environmental regulations is an act of poor stewardship, i.e., sin.
It’s hard to imagine, inside the echo chamber of the right, how global warming could be a real phenomenon. I mean, we all just know it’s junk science. Likewise, it’s hard for anyone inside the left’s echo chamber to imagine how global warming could be anything other than a dire emergency. We know, of course, that we’re right and they’re wrong, that we’ve considered the matter objectively while they’ve just listened to Al Gore. But still, it’s hard to fault them for making a biblical case out of this and other policy matters, given the precedent conservatives have set over the past 30 years. When prominent self-styled Christian leaders opine on everything from health care reform to “taking out” Venezuelan thug Hugo Chavez, it’s hard to put the genie back into the bottle now that liberals want to get in on the if-Jesus-were-a-presidential-cabinet-member routine.
All of which, I think, serves the name of Christ poorly. By bringing policy disputes into the faith arena, we bolster the notion that Christianity is just a bunch of self-interested talkers using the Bible to get what they want. We create divisions among brothers and sisters who ought not to be divided. This is evidenced in our affinity for political comrades over faith comrades. By way of illustration, consider whether conservative Christians you know are more favorably disposed toward Ann Coulter or Jimmy Carter. Nothing in Coulter’s behavior suggests Christian love, whereas Carter endeavors to live it out, even when this means giving a hug to every tin-pot dictator he can reach by chartered flight. When politics get elevated to the level of faith, it’s no wonder that we begin to forget who are our real brothers and sisters.
All this is not to say that Christians should be silent about public policy, especially those policies where there is a strong case for biblical guidance (e.g., protecting life, treating prisoners with humanity, caring for the elderly). In fact, maybe it’s a good thing that leftists are coming out now to argue that Christian ethics demand this or that policy prescription. It would be nice, however, if we could all do so with a bit more reverence for the flaming sword that is the Word of God, and with a good deal more charity toward people who are, after all, striving toward the same home as we.














Click to Print
Include Comments











back to top19 Comments to “Holy policy”
“By bringing policy disputes into the faith arena, we bolster the notion that Christianity is just a bunch of self-interested talkers using the Bible to get what they want. ”
This happens too often. However, I do believe there is economic policy which Christians can and should learn from the Bible. Even if Jesus didn’t come as as economics professor, He came as The Word. And the Word, after all, includes the Old Testament.
Report comment to moderator
I would dispute that the early church adopted voluntary socialism. I’d call it charity. And that charity was to be performed by indiviudals not the government. It still is. Jesus challenged people, not governments. He spoke to individuals, not governments.
Jesus didn’t come as an economics professor or a politician, but rather to reconcile each and every one of us with God the Father.
Report comment to moderator
“the first church appears to have adopted voluntary socialism”. There is no such thing as “voluntary socialism”. That’s an oxymoron. You lost your mind on this one. What the church did was voluntary sharing determined by each individual driven by personal connections. Socialism is forced via taxation decided by politicians who don’t know anyone personally.
Do you recall any parables by Jesus talking about a master giving out resources to stewards to do business to make a profit for the owner? I think I do. Could this anymore closely describe capitalism?
Wikipedia: Capitalism is an economic and social system in which trade and industry are privately controlled (instead of state-controlled) for profit.[1][2] The means of production (also known as capital), are owned, operated, and traded for the purpose of generating profits by private individuals, either singly or jointly.
Report comment to moderator
But the parable to which you refer isn’t really about capitalism, either. Jesus took something everyone was already familiar with and tailored it to explain his spiritual point. He was not commenting on or endorsing any sort of economic system.
Report comment to moderator
I think what the first church practiced could be rightly called communalism, which is generally voluntary and does not require state involvement. There was no coercion, though there may have been some “peer pressure” to which Ananias and Sapphira succumbed in a desire to look as though they were fully with the program.
It is common for groups expecting the world to end very soon to give away their possessions. There’s no indication the early Christians expected that communalism to be the norm, and when the end did not come they continued to share with one another but not in the same communal manner.
Report comment to moderator
Well, I don’t want either Jimmy Carter or Ann Coulter on my side. And Jimmy Carter has hardly been an example of a good Christian, methinks, beneath the smile.
Report comment to moderator
Implicit in Tony’s essay is the way that policy ends up creating personal barriers. I don’t want Tony to cease being a political conservative, but I do treasure his acknowledgment of the ways of partisan policy. One of the gifts we can give each other is the recognition of the other’s viewpoint, not our agreement, but recognition (here, the biblical prohibition of uttering “fool” at a sister or brother comes into play).
As a matter of actual persuasion, this recognition of the other can often be one of the most important tools for getting our own thoughts heard.
Thanks Tony.
Report comment to moderator
This is a tremendously wise column that I think illustrates how power and the pursuit thereof can easily become an idol that distracts us from loving, cherishing, worshiping, and glorifying Jesus Christ and proclaiming His kingdom in the the world today. The political right and the political left are both eager to use Christians for their votes and money, but oftentimes when the church accepts power & influence in return (or, Lord help us, chases these things) we must compromise. Conservative Christians allowed compromises on war, torture, & care for the poor while liberal Christians are backsliding fast on abortion and other important issues. It is important that we deal lovingly and thoughtfully with opponents in the political arena– especially those who are our brothers & sisters.
Report comment to moderator
NJLAWYER
Jesus is descibing the Fathers expectations of his servants. He expects a return on investment to bring Him profit both in spiritual and financial issues. How we handle money is a spiritual thing. If God operates this way, don’t you think it makes sence for us to consider this is a highly intelligent way to operate? Does it make sense to ignore the way God says He operates and make up our own ways and call it good?
We don’t need specific commands from God such as “Thou shalt only do business in capitolist ways” to know how God wants us to operate. He has given us a brain to figure it out. We also have thousands of years of history showing the shabby way of life that results from the state having all control & power and man having no reason to excel for personal and public gain.
Tony’s statement: “All this is not to say that Christians should be silent about public policy, especially those policies where there is a strong case for biblical guidance (e.g., protecting life, treating prisoners with humanity, caring for the elderly).”
If believers give up on free enterprise and take on socialism they will have to “be silent about public policy”. We will have no say. Free enterprise and representative government both go out the door together.
Report comment to moderator
Excellent post Tony. Though I agree with others here that there is nothing voluntary about socialism. Voluntary charitable giving is individualism and liberty. Rather than tithing 10%, they gave it all. If one chooses to support a collective of one’s own free will, then that is the opposite of socialism.
“By bringing policy disputes into the faith arena, we bolster the notion that Christianity is just a bunch of self-interested talkers using the Bible to get what they want.
Here is the problem. Many Christians have a problem separating church and state. They look at their faith holistically and think that the kingdom of this world somehow should foreshadow the heavenly one.
Whether one’s politics is left or right or from outer space, it has nothing to do with the gospel or the mission of the church. One cannot use Christianity to justify any political party.
The American forefathers, strongly influenced by the Judeo-Christian ethic chose a government which governs least as best. I concur. The smaller the government the less corrupt. And the better it is for free expression of religious belief. And the freer the speech, the more likely that truth will be heard.
But politics has nothing to do with the Kingdom of Heaven. Obama and Carter believe otherwise. As for Coulter, she is an entertainer who sometimes brings up good points. To make more of it than that is to miss the point.
Report comment to moderator
Good points, Tony.
Jesus is not a Republican, nor a Democrat. He’s not even an American.
He had one reason for living: to glorify God.
Report comment to moderator
Democratic capitalism diffuses power and reduces the harm done by potential (and inevitable) tyrants, internal and external. The sin nature of man, the most well documented of Christian doctrines, gives ample reason for Christians to hope, pray, and act for the preservation of these institutions.
In this country, all public resources taken by government proceed through a secular filter. It is appropriate for Christians to wish that this filter be minimized and the size and influence of government be restrained.
Christians should be neither neutral nor silent regarding political or cultural issues. We are obliged to express our conscience and obliged to have that conscience formed by the Word of God.
Report comment to moderator
We live near the Shaker Village in NH. The Shakers or “Shaking Quakers” were one of many radical Christian sects who tried to form utopian societies. They instituted communalism or religious communism. Now they are gone. You will notice one thing about all communistic societies. They all fail in the end.
My concern with the soft fascism of Obama’s policies has nothing to do with religion. It has to do with the fact that they will ultimately fail. From a religious perspective I really don’t care what the kingdoms of this world do. They are ultimately all going to burn up. My religious concern is for people and their souls.
If I were to ask “What Would Jesus Do” in regard to debating politics, then I would be silent about it like he was. It was a subject he almost completely avoided. His concern was with the Kingdom of Heaven and providing the way for mankind to get there.
But the Bible makes it clear that Christians are to be good citizens. And so I see nothing wrong with being involved and trying to influence our communities and country for good. But I suppose I should be careful to not allow that to become a distraction.
Liberal Christians view this differently. They follow a social gospel. Their religion is their good works. They and their secular counterparts want to use government to affect social change. They want to create heaven on earth, as Obama says, by using the power of the almighty government. I prefer relying on the power of Almighty God instead.
Report comment to moderator
Good point PrHean. “In this country, all public resources taken by government proceed through a secular filter.
Due to the twisted inverted interpretation of the 1st Amendment, freedom of speech and religion has come to mean its polar opposite, namely censorship of speech and religion lest someone be offended.
It is now interpreted to mean that religious speech and free expression of beliefs is disallowed in any institution touched by public money. And so, as the government gobbles up more and more power and money to pay for everything there will be no place left where its insidious influence won’t strangle freedom of thought.
Report comment to moderator
Thank you Michelle. God isn’t a Republican, Democrat, American but he is the God who inspired the Scriptures which most Republicans, Democrats and Americans seem to ignore.
Report comment to moderator
Jesus might not have been an economist but the God of the Hebrew Bible has a lot to say about how we are to handle money (as did Jesus who spoke of him). We certainly are to have and respect private property, as we are to be responsible for our own. We are also supposed to provide charity for those in need. Israel also had laws restricting the actions of the poor as it mandated certain aspects of charity into civil law. Taxation certainly seems to be a part of Israel’s civil policy.
What I think Jesus clearly does is remind us that the laws are there for the good of all and if we as a nation don’t act well we will be judged for it. If capitalism moves us to a state where we become slaves to finance for instance we have missed the mark. The year of jubilee and the prohibition against interest for instance suggest that our banking system was designed for disaster (as we have now realized). The creation of easy credit and societies devoted to perpetual indebtedness is far more anti Christian than Socialism. We are taught that we are responsible to God for what we do with the skills and goods God gave us. We are also responsible to God for ensuring that every generation gets a shot at living to their full potential and that every now and again debts must be wiped clean and the burden of credit should not be used to enslave us.
Report comment to moderator
This post sounds like the Reader’s Digest version of some Ron Sider or Tony Campolo book!
Report comment to moderator
My brother and I have been reading economic classics. Last summer we finished Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations and this summer we’re working on Michael Novak’s The Spirit of Democratic Capitalism.
We’ve both noticed the emphasis on the “system” and it’s “virtues” both of which are lackingany sort of comprehensive exegesis.
We’re also both a bit taken aback by Smith and Novak’s use of “self interest”. From what each writer has said of it, one would conclude that self interest has a transcendent quality to it.
Both texts are remarkably vague when it comes to the Christian faith. There are more philosophical justifications for capitalism in each text than Scripture.
When you posit any one particular earthly “system” above the Gospel, as Tony here has pointed out, the natural result is a diminished view of Scripture. Satan tempted Jesus with such a view. How much more so shall he attempt such recourse with us?
Report comment to moderator
Tony, you are completely forgetting the concept of a complete Christian worldview. Christianity is a robust enough religion to encompass ALL of life, every molecule of it. As such, there is no such thing as a distinction between the “moral” issues (ie, abortion) vs “neutral” issues (such as economics). Socialism is completely antagonistic to the Christian worldview. The Bible advocates personal responsibility, voluntary giving, and ultimate reverence to God – all of which are opposed by liberal politics. As Christians, we need to point out to our fellow Liberal believers their inconsistencies in voting for people who adovacate abortion, fiscal liberalism, and limited personal freedom.
This bifurcation of the realms of “moral” matters vs (supposedly) neatural matters reeks of Kantian philosophy and is repungant to the Christian believer who sees the ENTIRE creation as God’s creation. Nothing falls outside his domain. We need to strive to have consistent Christian wordlviews, not secualr humanism with Christianity sprinkled on top.
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDonTheWeb.com to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!