Christian economics and basic human needs
Note: an economic policy white paper has been drafted by Frank Cocozelli. 26 pages in length, well footnoted, it is an excellently written piece. It is now being reviewed by IPC Board members and being revised by Frank. Once this process is complete it will be made available for comments and input from others.
I've read the many comments on economics posted here. I am very impressed with the level of knowledge displayed here. Yet I feel the need to go deeper, to get down to the basics.
So to get down to basics I offer the following. From my knowledge of life the very most basic need of humans, in fact all of Our Creators creation, is survival of the species. From this the next two needs are safety and security, safety in the immediate short term (from attack etc.) and security in the longer term, (insurance at some level that existence is assured).
So how do Christians, or people of any faith, assure that short term safety and long term security are achieved? I believe it is from adhering to the Golden Rule, to treat others and you wish to be treated. This is also known as The Ethic of Reciprocity. Stated in either a negative or positive manner, it is basic to all major religions. The non-religious can embrace the Ethic of Reciprocity
The GR is more than a nice goal, it is a basic necessity. As science tells us we live in an intimately, interconnected, interactive and interdependent universe. Survival of our species, and all those we impact, is dependent upon our understanding of our place and our role in the great web of life of our global home, this blue marble orb. A prime current example are the Olympic Games set to open in 5 days. Due to the truly unhealthy air quality in which Beijing exists, the Chinese government has been shutting down hundreds of factories, construction sites and removing hundreds of thousands of cars from the streets in an effort to reduce air pollution. One of the impacts we are beginning to see here is one the company I work for is now experiencing. We need an important office supply product. It is not available due to the shut down of the Chinese manufacturer. Apparently both Staples and the Office Depot use the same source so neither has the product and isn't sure when it may finally become available again. Very unsettling, realizing how dependent American commerce has become on China, let alone our huge foreign debt to China and other foreign nations.
So Chinese and American publics are now becoming very aware of their interdependence. Poorly made or outright dangerously produced Chinese products are giving the Chinese business community a rude awakening re: it's place in the global economy. For those familiar with sailing craft, they are giving another definition to the term "Chinese Junk".
IMO, in order for this progressive Christian community to make a significant impact on our current economic policies we must author an economic policy paper that addresses 2 audiences; the first being the presidential campaign leadership councils and second the larger general public. Frank has authored an excellent draft that very well addresses itself to the presidential candidates. To be effective I believe it also must be readily understandable to the public, if for no other reason that to offer sound bits that can be easily digested by John Q. Public.
I advocate use of biblical references to counter those of the neo-conservatives, such as 1 Timothy 6:9&10, wherein Paul warns that the love of money is the root of all evil. It is the love that is the source. One one hand love is that recreative force that re-creates the species, brings beauty and comfort into our lives. On the other love can become possessive; greed and power are examples of the posessiveness of love. It becomes addictive as in money, sex, drugs etc. As Paul stated it in 1 Timothy 6:9, "For those who desire to be rich fall into many temptations and snares, and into many foolish and hurtful lusts which drown men in degeneration and destruction."
Here the neo-cons have been seduced by the love of money, become greedy and fallen prey to the siren song of power. I would delve deeper into the nature of the Power Elite. Frank tells us that the 3 pillars of neo-conservatism are; corporatism, religious orthodoxy and nationalism. Thus they advocate a plutocracy, (government of the wealthy), advance the notion that what is good for business is good for the country and that our foreign policies should advance the needs of the business community, to protect it by all means available, including the highly destructive principle of Pre-emptive War. The failure of these selfish, self centered policies is quite evident today. Why do they not understand the interconnectedness of the global community? Like the Pharoahs of Egypt, the Emperors of China, the French Sun King, they see themselves as the sole source of power, immune to the needs of the rest of the human family, become insulated to the needs of others.
By basing our economic policies on the Golden Rule we gain the attention, support, and assistance of the global religious community. By citing The Ethic of Reciprocity we draw support from humanists, secularists, agnostics and atheists. We can develop policies of fairness and equity that benefit all members of the global human family, stated in simple, easy to understand and implement programs that avoid citing the old tired philosophies of both capitalism and socialism.
This is my stand. What's yours?
Rich
- anElder's blog
- Login or register to post comments
What are the Basics of Christian Economic Values?
Thanks much for this interesting and well-thought-out statement, Rich. I strongly agree with you with the need to get down to basics. As a Catholic, there are two sources of basic Christian doctrine, the Bible first of all and then the teachings of the Fathers and Doctors of the Church, primarily Saint Thomas Aquinas. So I'll use these sources to try and define what I think the basics are.
The foundation, I believe, is the Golden Rule, as you say. But the Bible actually has much to say about how to implement the Golden Rule in economic life. But before I get to that, I would also like to say I agree with the first poster. I think Christianity is about communion with God. Economic life should promote communion with God by creating conditions that allow us to produce the goods we need for life in a way that promotes solidarity, sharing and compassion for the poor and weak.
The fundamental principle, IMHO, is stated by St. Ambrose, one of the Fathers of the Church, and mentor to St. Augustine, "God has ordered all things to be produced so that there should be food in common for all, and that the earth should be the common possession of all. Nature, therefore, has produced a common right for all, but greed has made it a right for few." St. Ambrose, Duties of the Clergy, 1. 132. The implications of this teaching which is echoed in the most recent Catholic Catechism are very rich. "The right to private property, acquired by work or received from others by inheritance or gift, does not do away with the original gift of the earth to the whole of mankind. The universal destination of goods remains primordial, even if the promotion of the common good requires respect for the right to private property and its exercise." Catechism 2403.
Notice that the emphasis is on production for sharing rather than survival and security. Of course, these are very important values, but the teaching seems to be that if we produce in order to share then survival, security and many other such goods will be ours in abundance.
I would like to draw out the full implications of this, but perhaps a more appropriate forum would be a blog post, so I'll leave it at this for now.
Excellent points
Collinsbo,
Thank you for your insights. Once Frank and the IPC Board gets the white paper ready for sharing amongst a wider audience, I think you'll find it very satisfying to read. Frank, being a progressive Catholic, cites sources of which I, being born and raised a Protestant am not familiar, yet am thrilled to read. I can agree with much of that which the Roman Catholic hierarchy has written about good Christian economic ethics and policies.
Yes an ethic of reciprocity is, IMO, the best way to insure survival. I will add here, that survival has four planes; physical, emotional, mental and spiritual. As we are by birth and divine edict, first spiritual beings, all we need to is get the spiritual right and the other three are assured.
Blessings,
Rich
An Invitation
I'd be very interested in your reactions to the Biblical passages and quotes from the Fathers of the Church about economic justice.
one or two nits to pick
This is good stuff...but I want to push things a little bit with a couple of questions.
1. Is Christianity really about survival of the species? I think it's about communion with God. Survivalism doesn't even come close to this. And though I know that we are seeking language that helps to bridge gaps, I am not sure that this doesn't under-represent Christianity somehow.
2. Is it possible that the government is not the best way to implement such economic practice? Are there other better avenues than the government's policies?
I'm not much of an economist, so I would love to know y'all's thoughts on this.
Peace!
Tripp
Union with God
Tripp,
Well you do raise 2 good points.
First I believe it is more than communion with Our Creator, with God. It's union. Realizing we are one with Our Creator. As science shows we are an intimately, interconnected, interactive and thus interdependent part of the whole fabric of that which we call life. In this way we are made in the image of Our Creator. To commune with our source is to realize our union with it, that we are a holy part of the whole. We were sent a divine example of this holy union with the source in Jesus of Nazareth. He sets the bar high, but not so high that we can not achieve it. Tough yes, impossible no.
Second, having said the first kind of answers your second point. If we were to emulate Jesus, to follow His example, we could of our own volition, implement an economics of reciprocity, to practice equalism as I call it. As a boy I saw farmers help one another, to trade fairly with one another. Our oldest form of economics is barter and trade. With the re-emergence of community gardens as I recently saw in Bill Peltz's backyard encourages me to think that maybe we can get back to some of the basics. As the price of food rises I see the re-emergence of local farm markets, of locally grown food, of organically grown foodstuffs. Yesterday we visited the unofficial opening of a local organic market. What a thrill it was to walk down the aisles and see a vast assortment of non-dairy, gluten free, organically grown foods from many sources.
Yes Tripp I think we can do much of this ourselves. To use an older term this is Capitalism at it's best. Yet there still is a role here for government in that we need someone to assure us that the food we eat is safe, that it is fairly priced in the global market, and the like. We need an social agent that employs the combined efforts of individuals to provide that which we can not provide solely on our own, a fair and equal market place.
Rich
The long way back
Your mention of the power-elite and their love of money as well as what Paul says in 1Tim.6:9 bring me full circle to the conclusion that eventually the love of money and false gods leads only to misery.
Many of the rich people I know are the best at covering up the truth that sits just under the surface. They feel as though what they convey to others is most important, not their own well being of the soul. There is also a disconnection with the reality of the life they live and the lives of others taking place in front of them. Misery loves company, they say, and that could be at the root of why the elite so often are found to be the greatest oppressors.
In the worst case scenario, the rich are inadvertently oppressing others. They have stared at themselves in the mirror for so long, they truly believe the world is theirs and that they are the only ones who hurt, therefore ignoring the needs of others. Not maliciously, but inadvertently through deep-seeded selfishness.
On the opposite end of the spectrum, we often see a despising/resentful view from the poor toward those who have an abundance of what they themselves lack. This is a problem as well because, although their perceptions of those who are well off may at times be correct, this will lead to a disillusioned, judgmental life that keeps them from escaping the poverty they are in.
On the extremes of both sides, there is a large risk of cancerous growth of sin in the individual that could have been avoided by applying the golden rule.
If someone knows absolutely nothing about Jesus Christ, let it be that He is our God who made Himself man so that we would know that He truly understands our pain as fallen humanity and He desires for us to love Him, ourselves, and others. Everything Jesus did can fit in the category of Love. He Loved us so much that He made Himself human to show us how to live our time on earth as we were created to live. Through living as Jesus did (seemingly never speaking or taking action without asking Himself if it shows love) we begin to discover we were made to be in relationship with our God and others.
The golden rule centers on love as well, and I think that your analysis of how living that way could benefit everyone economically is right on target. I'd even go so far as to say that a widespread application of the golden rule would reverse, if not fully eliminate, most of the problems we see in our lives and around the globe.
Well another elder?
Steve_elder,
Thank you. We seem to be on the same wave link. I am developing the Golden Rule/Ethic of Reciprocity (GR/EOR) into a more detailed economic theory I tentatively call Equalism. I've heard enuf about capitialism and socialism in my life time. Both have strong points and weak points. IMO, it's time to move on from these old out moded concepts into something that all people can embrace.
Based on the GR/EOR I think we can build a more just humane economic policy that not only serves the whole of the human family but preserves Mother Earth simulaneously.
And one that Jesus might more fully embrace as well.
More on this in a day or two.
Welcome to CrossLeft. I look forward to more wisdom from you. BTW can we assume that the hyphen between Steve and Elder means that you are a self described elder?
Rich
If someone knows absolutely nothing about Jesus Christ...
"If someone knows absolutely nothing about Jesus Christ, let it be that He is our God who made Himself man so that we would know that He truly understands our pain as fallen humanity and He desires for us to love Him, ourselves, and others."
Nicely put. Thank you Steve Elder.
KISS: Ethic of Reciprocity
Nice. Thanks for that Rich! :-)
Christian tax policy
I would like to add that I also believe a sound Christian tax policy should simply be, "Those who benefit the most, should pay the most." As the wealthy benefit from publically supported protection such as, in the case of Iraq, our military, then they via their tax returns, should pay higher tax levy. This would make Halliburton et. al. pay their full share of the tax burden for payment of the military bills.
The wealthy, along with the rest of us, benefit from the taxes we pay for public safety such as police, fire and medical services, public infrastructure such as water, sewage, highways, schools and the like. What the Democrats have always been unable to do, IMO, is make a clear simple to understand case for higher taxes based on public value return. You pay this and get this in return. Yes, we do need higher taxes, to repair our public infrasture. When interstate highway bridges fail, such as the one in Minnesota did last year, there is no question in the public's mind about the need to replace that one. Now we hear that 50% of the interstate bridge system is in need of immediate repair or replacement.
Wealthy companies benefit from ue of public facilities, The challenge is to figure out how much they benefit and assess their tax levy accordingly. I'm an advocate of the KISS system. Keep It Simple Sammy. A tough challenge in this highly complicated economic systems.
As I age I try to cut thru the crap and get to the basics. So based upon the Ethic of Reciprocity, what shoud we all pay and what should we all get in return?