I have been very much shocked by what I am seeing concerning attitudes of the poor by some conservative Christians. This comes up particularly when it comes to healthcare for the poor. I have no problem with people having issues with a particular plan for health care, nor do I think it is bad that people are hesitant to pay higher taxes. What I find surprising is that some Christians see healthcare provided for the poor as anti-Christian. The issue seems to be that taxes equal socialism and are a redistribution of wealth, just a shade away from communism. Let me make things clear, I am a capitalist and not a communist. I am all for private property and I am not interested in all income being collected and then redistributed according to the government’s whims. At the same time, I do not begrudge the fact that some of my tax money goes to help provide cancer care for my fellow Canadians. While I have been reflecting on this, I thought I would revise one of Jesus’ teachings according to what I am hearing from some circles.
“Then the Pharisees went and plotted how to entangle him in his words. And they sent their disciples to him, along with the Herodians, saying, “Teacher, we know that you are true and teach the way of God truthfully, and you do not care about anyone’s opinion, for you are not swayed by appearances.Tell us, then, what you think. Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, or not?” Jesus replied, “It depends on what the taxes are used for.” Jesus explained, “I have no problem paying taxes to build roads and for funding military expeditions, but I cannot condone tax money being used to help the poor. Capitalism is the premier virtue in the kingdom of God and I am sickened by the idea of the rich having to sacrifice their comfort to help the poor. The poor are welcome to their blessings in heaven, but helping the poor through government involvement is unacceptable. I would rather the poor suffer than the government get involved.”
I hear two main objections to Christians being open to the government’s care of the poor. One is that it is too high a price to pay knowing that taxes are also being used for purposes that we find immoral. In Matthew 17:24-27, we see Jesus paid taxes. Should we assume that those taxes were used only for righteous purposes? Surely Jesus understood how they would be used and yet paid them anyway. We should put pressure on the government to be selective in what they provide in health care, but that is a separate conversation from whether or not poor people should have affordable healthcare.
The second objection is that Christians are already very generous in giving to charities and that is how care for the poor should take place. I agree that Christians are big givers and I am thankful for that. But where do most Christians give their money to? They would give to their local church, to missionaries and to relief organizations working overseas. How much of our charity dollars go to that poor family with a child struggling with cancer? If the Canadian government stopped providing healthcare, I would not even know how to begin supporting the poor burdened by huge medical bills. If the church stepped up to the plate, funding hospitals, doctors and healthcare, then the government should not do it. But I don’t see the church doing that any time soon.
I understand that people feel very strongly about this subject. I hesitate to talk about it because I feel like a minority among evangelicals with my position. My frustration is when conservatives talk as if the clear and important message of the Bible is that of capitalism and that if care for the poor appears all, it is a minor issue for the real spiritual to give if they feel led to. I truly believe that if we understood what the Bible says about the poor and had a glimpse of God’s heart for the poor, we would do whatever we needed to make a difference, even if that meant paying higher taxes. How shall we respond when we stand before God with what we did with our lives? Shall we boldly proclaim that we made sure those poor people did not get any of their desperate hands on the rich’s money? I pray not.
I am divided on this, which is made all the more problematic because I am VERY weary of politicizing the Gospel and the message of Christianity, either on the right or left.
It is an excellent entry and I pray for the brother or sister who posted it and pray for illumination for everyone reading all this.
Some thoughts are that while Christ spoke often of compassion, many on the contemporary left automatically assume that compassion must come from a state welfare system. When the Lord Jesus directed his message about changing our way of thinking and helping others it was often directed to individuals.
Even the passages about the Rich Man being told to sell all of his possessions has been re-interpreted in a modern political way to mean it is wrong to be rich and some think it means we must all give away all our possessions.
As Christians, I think we should not be attached to worldly possessions and should be ready to give up everything for Him, whether we are rich or poor. The point of the Rich Man scenario is he was too attached to his things like many wealthy people. But, it was not a message against wealth per se.
As believers, we should give what we have to the Kingdom and to others liberally. that is quite clear from Scripture.
But, Jesus did not say the system of owning property, paying for things, working and earning a wage were wrong. In fact, he accepted these things.
i don’t think there is a single christian ‘position’ on health care. I think that is uup to the individual believer to figure out. We know from Romans that the government as an institution is of God and is for upholding the law, but it doesn’t mention a wide range of govt services to ‘re-distribute’ wealth. The story of the Good Samaritan is about good service from one individual to another. It’s not about having the govt take care of the sick and needy.
The main thing is as believers we ought NOT to judge other believers on the basis of their views on this. i am more on the lower government side of things, but that is also because I have an empirically-grounded belief that govt services often make poverty situations worse not better. There is this assumption in the above entry that govt aid actually will help the poor, but this idea is quite debatable.
i will also say that most of the judgmentalism I see is from the left side of Christianity which is always trying to cast aspersions on conservative christians, esp. on economic issues. They assume Jesus came here with a social gospel. i don’t believe that’s true. He came with a vision for us to change our thinking and behaviour which will necessarily impact how we see the poor and needy and help them, but it’s not a roadmap politically.
Finally to end my reply, I think what God, drawing largely from the Old Testament, is interested in is ensuring the poor are not oppressed or used. i think that much is clear. Exorbitant interest rates, fixing weights and scales, denying proper wages– these are all things I think Scripture is clearer on and we ought to act on them. Then again, can we import an OT system of govt to modern times? We shouldn’t, but from the OT we know where God’s Heart is.
Caring for the poor is critical to Christianity. I suspect Jesus doesn’t mind if we do it through the government, directly, or both.
How much time do we spend gathering treasure here on earth? How excited am I about my new car or house? How excited am I about going to the prayer meeting?
Lets not be judgemental, but lets judge ourselves “For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.”
Simon: To counter-reply, but not in a snarky way, I think perhaps the Lord may care if we rely exclusively on the government for charity and compassion when it should be us as believers or the Church doing that.
It’s interesting if you look at countries with larger welfare states and high government spending and how that affects personal private charitable giving. Places like the US have a much higher rate of individual charity than places like Europe where it is assumed the govt will take care of people so why should we..
I think as believers if we depend only on the government it might have an effect like that where we give less as individuals.
Thanks for this post. It is refreshing to hear a Christian put the Gospel message into terms that focuses on the poor. I think you might like my blog, Rhymes and Reasons. It is a series of interviews with hip-hop heads who discuss their lives in the context of a few songs that matter to them. The interviews tend to focus on questions of justice like racism, sexism, sexual violence, white privilege, etc. I hope you enjoy it.
http://thisisrhymesandreasons.wordpress.com/
Joseph Quesnel is correct, “from the OT we know where God’s heart is” and throughout the OT we see that God seems to assume that the poor need to be protected, while the rich can look after themselves. The Biblical standard of a just society is how it treats the widow, orphan and foreigner in their midst (those with no access to resources) not how it protects the assets of those who have resources. Much of the problem is that Western society (and the US in particular) have been shaped by the thought of John Locke who saw property rights as foundational for society. Many Western Christians have simply baptised Lockean thought without reflecting on how antithetical it is to Biblical thought. Here’s an example from our staff meeting this morning. A person in our congregation is facing 3 years in prison for robbing a variety store. (I pastor an inner city church.) He was arrested because he went back to apologise and see if he could make restitution. No deal. (The prosecutor had asked for 7-10 years!) Then we heard of a Catholic priest in Quebec who sexually assaulted 13 boys and was sentenced to… 3 years. The same sentence for robbing a till and ruining 13 lives! Biblically speaking, crimes against persons are much more serious than crimes against property, but our justice system, like our culture, reflects Lockean values much more than Biblical ones.
I disagree about the Good Samaritan though. Jesus is not primarily teaching about “good service from one individual to another”. The question was “what must I do to inherit eternal life?” The question was “What is the mark of authentic faith?” And the answer is “loving your neighbour.” The question then becomes, “What is the best way to love my neighbour?” It’s all very well to talk about individual benevolence, but I don’t see many comfortable suburban Christians down my neck of the woods caring for poor single mothers trying to make ends meet while working two jobs. Until that happens on a huge scale then I’m afraid the best way for me to love my neighbour is by providing them with the services they need through government.
Robin: thank you for the engagement, but I take issue with this statement you made: “It’s all very well to talk about individual benevolence, but I don’t see many comfortable suburban Christians down my neck of the woods caring for poor single mothers trying to make ends meet while working two jobs. Until that happens on a huge scale then I’m afraid the best way for me to love my neighbour is by providing them with the services they need through government.”
What stops YOU from taking care of single mothers on the other side of town? It starts with your efforts and you working with others to help others. Just because you don’t see these ‘comfortable suburban Christians’ doing these things is no excuse for you to abdicate your response to the government.
i believe in basic social supports politically, but I don’t necessarily see that stemming from my Scriptural understanding, although not allowing others to be oppressed could be interpreted to allow minimal state supports.
On the other hand, Robin, if you accept the OT on these things, what about the OT passages and the NT ones for that matter that say if one doesn’t work they should not eat and passages condemning laziness? i want to ensure state supports don’t enable unscriptural laziness or ‘working the system.” God also through His Word says He hates those things too.
Nothing is stopping me from helping single moms. Our congregation does a lot to help people in our neighbourhood. In fact we’re known for it. But part of the problem is that we are a neighbourhood church and we reflect the neighbourhood, i.e. many of my people are living on the margins themselves. And my experience is that the poor are, in general, more generous than the middle class or wealthy, certainly if you judge by Jesus’ standard of the widow’s mite. But all the individual generosity in the world is not going to provide acces to cancer surgery or any number of other services for them.
As for abuse… Granted that it happens, but the folks I deal with in general are not lazy. Many are unable to hold downa job for physical or mental health reasons. They dream of being “normal folks” but can’t make it happen. Should they be penalised because of some abusers?
“Places like the US have a much higher rate of individual charity than places like Europe where it is assumed the govt will take care of people so why should we..” Those places also don’t give tax credits for charitable giving, so there is no benefit to the giver. (It is true benevolence. The taxes are refunded not to the giver but to the beneficiary.) I suspect that if the US had no tax benefits attached to charitable giving we would see a significant reduction in giving.
I support political diversity within evangelical communities. One should not associate the People of God with one political movement. That is making Christ out to be a political figure, which He was not.
However, I am very worried that evangelical Christians on the left side and some of the so-called “Red Letter Christians” are creating political litmus tests within the faith and politicizing it, like what has happened with so many mainline Protestant denominations. It becomes all social gospel and no spiritual content.
Evangelical Christians, particularly in the US, had become associated with certain politics in the past on the Right. I identify with the Right on certain levels politically, but as a Christian observing this in Canada I saw the potential for harm to the church.. Thankfully, some on the so-called “Progressive” side (that is a loaded term that I reject, but that’s another issue) began to protest and tried to re-capture the faith from political agendas.
But, the answer is not to allow the Christian Left to capture it and politicize it either.
The answer is to allow everyone their political convictions because both have elements of the Truth in them.
We can all bring our Scripture-based convictions to the table and discuss how things look in real life.
What is clear to me is the Lord, as expressed in both the OT and the New, calls us to help the disadavantaged, the marginalized, and the opppressed. That means first and foremost we as believers, starting as individuals, need to reach out and get the Church to make them primary to our ministries.
We don’t have to agree on where the state always comes in on this, but what we should not do is judge other Christians in a self-righteous smug way on how they interpret things.
I personally refuse to accept charity and benevolenece as commended by the Lord to be about enlarging social welfare. You may believe that it is but please do not confuse your own convictions with the word of God as binding on me. I will face my Maker on this issue on my own behalf, not through you.
I appreciate everyone’s comments and the charitable tone (pun intended). One of the concerns I have as an apologist is that I am not sure people have thought through the non-Christians reaction when they see evangelicals more zealous for capitalism than for the poor. Again, don’t get me wrong. I am a capitalist, but I am a capitalist that does not mind some of my tax money going to help the poor.