Church, Government, and Redistribution of Wealth
While preparing to preach acts 2:42-47, I've been studying this idea that the early Christian church "shared all things in common." There is some language that would appear to be almost communistic in the New Testament about how they held all things in common and distributed money and possessions to any who had need.
But clearly it is NOT communism, as it was not mandatory and private ownership is seen throughout the book of Acts. It was voluntary in response to the need of the people. As well, later in chapter 5 we see that Peter's beef with Ananias and Saphira was not greed but deceit. The problem wasn't that they were required to sell their possessions, but that they lied to God about how much they gave. Peter tells them very clearly that even after they sold their land, the money was theirs to do what they wanted with it, so why did they feel the pressure to lie? Bummer, because that ended badly.
Back to my point...it got me thinking about the church's role in caring for the poor among us, and the governments role in caring for the poor among us. Without attempting to make a huge political statement, and understanding there are many sophisticated economic formulas for and against the benefits of "redistributing wealth" (as well as many tangled ethical and moral issues), I must say that I heartily agree with the below statement by United States President Grover Cleveland.
In an explanation to Congress why he vetoed an expenditure that would have given drought-stricken Texas $10,000 in federal aid, he wrote:
I can find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution; and I do not believe that the power and duty of the General Government ought to be extended to the relief of individual suffering which is in no manner properly related to the public service or benefit. A prevalent tendency to disregard the limited mission of this power and duty should, I think, be steadily resisted, to the end that the lesson should be constantly enforced that, though the people support the Government, the Government should not support the people. ... The friendliness and charity of our fellow countrymen can always be relied on to relieve their fellow citizens in misfortune. This has been repeatedly and quite lately demonstrated. Federal aid in such cases encourages the expectation of paternal care on the part of the Government and weakens the sturdiness of our national character, while it prevents the indulgence among our people of that kindly sentiment and conduct which strengthens the bonds of a common brotherhood.
Well said!
Comments for this post have been disabled
