Christianity not only does not condemn capitalism, it COMMANDS capitalism. For the civil magistrate to go beyond his role as God's minister of justice according to His Word (including the stoning statutes), and become a redistribution center is considered tyrannous and sinful by God. God's ministers are not to go beyond their appointed roles. While I would certainly agree we must be generous to the poor, to declare that capitalism as a system is evil is simply far flung and false. Capitalism properly applied with voluntary charity is thoroughly christian.
Christianity not only does not condemn capitalism, it COMMANDS capitalism. For the civil magistrate to go beyond his role as God's minister of justice according to His Word (including the stoning statutes), and become a redistribution center is considered tyrannous and sinful by God.
I agree. Christianity does not command us to give to the government so it can give to the poor; it does not command us to give to the church so it can take care of the needy; it commands _us_ as individuals. "Give to all those who beg from you" does not invoke any civil magistrate; it is a direct command to each of us.
God's ministers are not to go beyond their appointed roles. While I would certainly agree we must be generous to the poor, to declare that capitalism as a system is evil is simply far flung and false. Capitalism properly applied with voluntary charity is thoroughly christian.
What I perceive in capitalist society is a philosophy of social darwinism; each man for himself; trade secrets, hoarding, a flat out "no" to requests not accompanied with a credit card. Are the airlines voluntarily charitable? the supermarkets? the gas stations? the software makers? Some small proprietors, yes, but the overwhelming majority of social institutions, both business and government, seem to me to reject charity, unless someone else is giving it.
Christianity into effect in every aspect of our daily lives… voluntarily.
My friends and I have been actively trying to reconcile Christianity with the ideals of socialism and capitalism for the past several weeks. Your essay shed some valuable light on the subject and was a very pleasant read. In your attempt to define capitalism for the sake of your essay, you assert that you "in fact reject socialism completely." Aside from the facts that Marx patently rejected religion, and socialism under both Stalin and Mao had a particularly bad flavor, what is it about the fundamental ideas of socialism that you find unworthy of pursuit by the Christian church?
First and foremost, the socialist rejection of religion. Rejecting man's spiritual existence leads directly to materialism, and materialism quickly turns into brutal expediency. Communism, for example, trumpeted a "worker's paradise" and talked about "from each according to his means, to each according to his needs", but this was just propaganda. The truth? Read the last six (or so) paragraphs of the Communist Manifesto. Armed revolution – that's communism. Stick AK-47s into the hands of the peasants, shoot up the country, take over the government, install this brutal dictatorship of the proletariat – that's the communist solution to all the world's problems.
Next, the political nature of socialism. Christianity is a pretty non-political philosophy. That doesn't mean it can't be applied to worldly leadership, but it doesn't prescribe any system of government. In my opinion, there are several reasons for this. First, government is about coercion; if people would do things voluntarily, there'd be no need for government. Jesus didn't let himself get manipulated into a position where he'd have to coerce others by force. He spoke; he taught; he never forced. Also, his teachings speak directly to us as individuals. He doesn't tell us to give our money to the government so they can take care of the needy, or to give our money to the church so it can operate charities. He tells us, directly, as individuals – "Give to all those who beg from you". Christianity is, first and foremost, a personal spiritual philosophy that each of us can put into effect in our own lives, while political philosophies tend to be collectivist and coercive by nature.
Finally, my perception of socialism as a "rational" force. The trend seems to be that reason and science have worked wonders through technology, and given us almost unimagined control over the natural world. Perhaps the same techniques can be applied to men? Perhaps we can design human society the way an engineer designs a bridge? So, for the last two hundred years or so, political philosophers have been trying to devise some "system" to run peoples lives. Socialism, with its appeal to scientific thought and rational management, plays right into this. Yet I believe that the way to live our lives was taught 2000 years ago by Jesus, and it's not based on reason – it's based on faith. Reason presupposes that men can figure their own solutions to our problems, and we've seen the results of that! The basis of Christianity is the belief that Jesus came here to teach us the path to righteousness and God, that we wouldn't have found by reason alone.
One of the beauties of Christianity is that after rejecting force and coercion as tactics, just about the only thing you're left with are real solutions to the problems.
Communism was Christina in origin, coming form how men like Gerrard Winstanly interpreted The bible. Later Frenchman started secularizing it and then Marx corrupted it further.
" "from each according to his means, to each according to his needs"" Comes from Acts 4:32-35.
Now a quick comment on your essay.I think that you see capitalism and Christianity as two opposing ideologies.I do not think that this is a correct view.I see capitalism as a by product ,or extension even of a larger Christian worldview.Comunism,since we are talking about economic systems,in the same way,is an extension or by product of a humanistic,materialistic worldview.Capitalism grew out of a system that has respect for the rights of the individual,and therefore allows the individual to pursue its own destiny economically or otherwise.Capitalism is not evil in itself,but merely the result of a certain way of thinking.Capitalism must be like every thing else couched in a larger right view of the world,man and God. A tool is a good or bad thing only in the context of whose holding it.
Capitalism as a government policy of "laissez-faire"; i.e, give people the freedom to choose how they spend their money and time.
We don't do things because they're nice. We're capitalists, and we do things because they benefit ourselves and our shareholders.
It's capitalism(2) that I take such exception to, and discuss at length in my essay. Let me elaborate on capitalism(1), which obviously is what comes to your mind when you think of capitalism.
I have no objection to a laissez-faire government policy. Government is by nature coercive; if it were not, there'd be no need for government. But a hands-off government doesn't mean a dog-eat-dog world, and this is what is so often advocated in the name of "capitalism". You reason well when you compare capitalism(1), in the sense of laissez-faire government, to a tool that can be used for either good or bad. My concern is the advocacy of selfish ends in the name of "freedom", and how capitalism(1) is quietly converted into capitalism(2).
Note the transition from "complete separation of economy and state" to "pursuit of self-interest" with nary a whisper. This, to me, is typical of capitalists. They start talking about freedom, then as quickly and quietly as possible shift gears into self-interest. In fact, it's two different things. What I advocate is a society featuring complete seperation of economy and state, with "social harmony" through the pursuit of God, Christianity, and self-sacrifice for the sake of others.
In regards to morality, capitalism is the only moral (meaning pro-human-life) social system because it safeguards a human's primary means of survival: his mind.
Notice the curious definition of morality. I don't think morality is pro-human-life; morality is a function of religion. Jesus taught us what morality is when he stated "Love God with all your heart and all your mind; love your neighbor as yourself". "Give to all those who beg from you; and if anyone asks to borrow, lend to him without expecting anything in return" is moral; "social harmony through the pursuit of self-interest" is amoral.
all accusations that are made against capitalism rest upon a flawed moral theory or an economic fallacy, or in other words, to condemn capitalism is to misrepresent capitalism.
I hope I'm not misrepresenting capitalism or Mr. Shadab, in fact, I'll be sure to send him a copy of this email, and solicit his response. I contend that it's capitalism itself that rests upon a "flawed moral theory", to wit, that men don't need God and that we've now got a better way to live our lives that what Jesus taught us 2000 years ago.
I wonder as I read your essay and responses regarding it, if maybe the point is missed. Is capitalism compatible with christianity , is communism? Is anything? Thats what I wonder. Did Christ set his thought beside others or above? Did He say "render to ceaser" because he was copacetic to taxation? Did he buy food at market with money he earned or did he usually create it out of nothing? Would He be strenuosly opposed to marx while rubbing eldows with adam smith? Wasn't our lord a sublime and ironic contrast to the daily hubbub of premodern economic life and by 'economic' I mean any monetary system existing as a guide for disrtibuting wealth between a particular society's consumers. Did He care that the money always migrated to the top of the food chain. Did he care that the Romans overtaxed his people? Was it proper for Christ to pay his taxes with 'fishey-money' or did he live outside this system of commerce to lay bare the kings new duds? As you have properly perceived already I do consider Christ as the eternal outsider. Why? Why sould He not accept the way we run buisness, why do I suspect He is mightily ashamed with His laodicean namesakes? He was different, unique, weird, unruly at times, Jesus was God out of our box! Well you may say that through his blood and your faith you have houdini'd the box yourself. But wait, define the box please. As you will soon see you have escaped your sinful chains but all people people christian or non are bound by the system that locks up their food. In the former soviet russia they waited in line for food and life's amenities in 'God's' star spangled America we trade our best (in labor and self-effort) for money which we take to Giant Eagle and wait in the same line for our food. Is it just me or did Lenin simplify it. Hey were not communists or captialists were Christians. That's right as opposed to every other system of man. Not unlike the amish who never left the bronx. You never heard of them, you know its sad neither have I.
I wonder as I read your essay and responses regarding it, if maybe the point is missed. Is capitalism compatible with christianity , is communism? Is anything?
Good point. I do think that part of capitalism (the freedom aspect) is salvageable, but I don't make this clear enough in the essay. I'm working on a revised essay that will more clearly address the points that have caused confusion by my readers.
I do think that "anything" is a bit strong. Freedom is compatible with christianity, if people use freedom to pursue Christian goals. Democracy/monarchy may be compatible with christianity, if the majority/king pursue Christian goals. Yet some things (selfishness) are incompatible with Christianity, and I'm still attempting myself to draw these lines – thus the essay, the follow-ups, and the revision I've got in the works.
Thats what I wonder. Did Christ set his thought beside others or above? Did He say "render to ceaser" because he was copacetic to taxation? Did he buy food at market with money he earned or did he usually create it out of nothing? Would He be strenuosly opposed to marx while rubbing eldows with adam smith? Wasn't our lord a sublime and ironic contrast to the daily hubbub of premodern economic life and by 'economic' I mean any monetary system existing as a guide for disrtibuting wealth between a particular society's consumers. Did He care that the money always migrated to the top of the food chain. Did he care that the Romans overtaxed his people? Was it proper for Christ to pay his taxes with 'fishey-money' or did he live outside this system of commerce to lay bare the kings new duds?
Excellent points. I suspect he cared about all these things, but what's interesting is that he didn't prescribe political solutions – his solutions were personal and spiritual in nature.
I recall a memorable sermon whose basic premise was that if you could ever justify a campaign of political liberation, it was 2000 years when Rome was the terror of the Mediterranean, the Israelites served the emperor, slavery was as commonly accepted as money, idolatry was practically a state religion, etc, etc. Yet Jesus didn't organize a single protest march, and given his powers, he could have conquered Rome. Some people (Simon Peter) were looking for a political messiah, and had to be convinced otherwise. The sermon stuck in my mind, because I, like Peter, have a tendency to look for political solutions.
One of my great questions is, how would Jesus react to democracy? 2000 years ago it was a moot point, but what happens when Caesar invites everyone to take part in the government? How do we chose leaders in a Christian way, and can a true Christian be a politician? I don't know.
As you have properly perceived already I do consider Christ as the eternal outsider. Why? Why sould He not accept the way we run buisness, why do I suspect He is mightily ashamed with His laodicean namesakes? He was different, unique, weird, unruly at times, Jesus was God out of our box! Well you may say that through his blood and your faith you have houdini'd the box yourself. But wait, define the box please. As you will soon see you have escaped your sinful chains but all people people christian or non are bound by the system that locks up their food.
Amen to that, brother. Note that at the end of John, Jesus makes a point to tell Peter three times – "feed my lambs", "tend my sheep", "feed my sheep". The emphasis on food is significant. If we could feed ourselves, it might mean more than all the other freedoms put together. See my essay on Robotics for some rudimentary thoughts on how we might achieve such a goal using technology. I really want to pursue the ideas in that essay; I think it would be such a wonderful thing if people didn't need money in order to eat.
In the former soviet russia they waited in line for food and life's amenities in 'God's' star spangled America we trade our best (in labor and self-effort) for money which we take to Giant Eagle and wait in the same line for our food.
Q: What's the difference between capitalism and communism?
A: In communism, you stand in line to get into the store.
In capitalism, you stand in line to get out.
Is it just me or did Lenin simplify it. Hey were not communists or captialists were Christians. That's right as opposed to every other system of man. Not unlike the amish who never left the bronx. You never heard of them, you know its sad neither have I.
My dread terror – becoming the Amish who never leaves the Bronx. Thanks for your wonderful comments, and sorry it took me a week to get back to you. Keep me in your prayers; I'll do the same for you.
Mr. Baccala has written an interesting essay. I disagree very much with his reasoning, but I like his conclusions.
You may find it interesting to consider an alternate perspective on the moral instructions given in the Gospels.
For a moment, consider Jesus as a teacher, teaching a technical subject like computer science. First he reviews elementary discrete math. Then he teaches basic programming in a beginner's language — perhaps Modula-2. Then he teach real-world programming in C++. Then he covers software engineering.
During the software engineering class, he does not refer to discrete math at all. None of the lessons are meant as absolute truth — all are dependent on the condition of the students.
Later, some of the students compile a fragmentary collection of lecture notes. Those are the Gospels. All of them are certainly true teachings, but they are so incomplete that one cannot get an accurate sense of the teaching process. As a result, the lecture notes allow for a certain, narrow approach to computer science, but they are vastly inferior to actual instruction by a competent teacher.
I would just like to comment that I am seriously impressed by the quality of works here. Mr. Baccala's essays on capitalism vs. Christianity found more than a few notes of resonance within me. He echoes things that I had been thinking about, but never had the guts to openly express, let alone frame so completely and succinctly.
How much will the net revolutionize the process of revolution itself?
'I have come that you might have life, and have it to the full.' Yet also 'I am the Alpha and the Omega.' What is the limit of 'having life to the full,' when it bumps up against the Omega?
How far short have we fallen from that in our assembly-line thinking?
Odd. As an engineer I abhor inefficiencies and breakdowns. Yet they may be the one thing that saves us from systematizing ourselves.
This is one of the most lucid descriptions of capitalism-as-pseudo-religion I've read. I've long held that capitalism *is* a (false) religion insofar as it usurps the authority of religion in the domains of ethics and morality in our modern world.
As for myself, I realized years ago that capitalism has appropriated Christian holidays such as Christmas in much the same way that Christianity appropriated many primitive pagan holidays. Though not a Christian myself, I no longer celebrate Christmas because I don't feel that the acquisition of material goods is an appropriate way to commemorate the birth of a revered Master, regardless of denomination.
I've also realized for some time that capitalism and communism are simply two "sects" of the *same* pseudo-religion, competing for mindshare in much the same way as the Sadducees and Pharisees did in ancient times. Edward Edinger, the Jungian analyst, makes the distinction thusly: "free enterprise" is *private* capitalism, whereas communism is *public* capitalism. The only real difference lies in *who* controls the capital. But, as you correctly pointed out, the government will eventually control it all in either case.
Thank you so very much for this essay. I will visit these pages often to see what others have to say about this fascinating subject.
Is starting a business not in the best interests of Christ's teachings? How are we suppose to support our families by not going out into society and making a decent living?
I am a Christian and liked your article. I am in the process of starting a consulting business and managed service business. I will have to check my motives.