By Rudy Barnes, Jr.
There
has been much political commentary on how the increasing wealth of the richest Americans
and the stagnation of wealth in the middle class are creating disparities that
raise issues of economic justice, but little has been said about the role of
religion on those issues. The stories of
Jesus and the rich man and the poor widow relate to faith and economic justice,
but they predate concepts of capitalism and democracy that have since complicated
those issues.
The
rich man was a devout Jew who came to Jesus seeking eternal life. By his account he had obeyed Mosaic Law since
he was a boy and he undoubtedly considered his wealth and power God’s reward
for his obedience; but Jesus told him that if he wanted to find eternal life he
should give up his wealth and follow him.
The rich man could not part with his wealth and sadly turned away from
Jesus, who then told his disciples: “How
hard it is for the rich to enter the kingdom of God!” (Mark 10:17-27)
Later
Jesus was watching people putting their money in the temple treasury. While the rich contributed large sums a poor
widow put only a few coins in the temple treasury. Jesus said, “I tell you the truth, this poor widow has put more in the treasury
than all the others. They all gave out
of their wealth; but she, out of her poverty, put in everything—all she had to
live on.” (Mark 12:41-44)
Moses,
Jesus and Muhammad all taught that economic justice required the wealthy to
care for the poor. The Qur’an requires
Muslims to give a zakat (2.5% of
one’s wealth each year) to the poor. The
Hebrew Bible mandates support for widows, orphans and the poor, but the Jewish tithe (10% of wealth produced each year)
was to support Jewish priests, not the poor.
The
teachings of Jesus did not provide a specific standard of giving to the poor
but instead emphasized that his followers make a total commitment of their resources
to doing God’s will, as in the story of the rich man and the poor widow. Jesus called his disciples to leave
everything—family, jobs and wealth—to follow him, and the early church
experimented with voluntary communism (Acts 4:32-37), but that did not last
long. Committing all of one’s wealth to
the common good is a standard that few can accept.
Neither
Jesus nor Muhammad considered it a sin to have wealth and power. The sin is to love wealth and power, and that is a form of idolatry that separates
a person from the love of God.
Capitalism is driven by the desire for wealth and power, and objectivism
is the religion of capitalism that makes greed a virtue, even as Jesus
condemned it as a vice (Mark 7:20-23). Even
so, capitalism has proven compatible with democracy and essential to economic
prosperity, while political Communism has failed as an alternative system of
governance.
Authoritarian
regimes governed during the ancient times of Moses, Jesus and Muhammad. Until the 19th century there was
no libertarian democracy to protect individual freedoms and give people a voice
in shaping their own governments. Since
then democracies have provided for the common good, including social welfare
programs for the poor, but often wealth and power have become secular idols in libertarian
materialistic and hedonistic cultures.
Judaism
and Christianity have embraced the libertarian values of the Enlightenment and
capitalism, but most Muslim cultures have not, and Muslims view the materialism
and hedonism of Western democracies as decadent. Decadence is an undesirable by-product of
freedom, but it does not justify denying individual freedom. It requires laws to restrain the excesses of
freedom and to provide for the common good with social welfare programs for the
poor and needy.
Since
the economic crisis of 2008 the middle class has diminished and the disparity
between it and the wealthy has increased dramatically. A strong middle class is necessary for
political stability in any democracy, and any further erosion of the middle
class by the wealthiest 10% of Americans could threaten political and economic
stability.
The
challenge for America is to balance individual political and economic freedom
with providing for the common good, and that requires government regulation of
big business to prevent the unfair exploitation of the middle class as well as providing
adequate assistance for the poor. But
true economic justice requires more than coercive laws and welfare programs. It also requires charity: the volunteer sharing
of resources with the poor and needy.
Today
the self-centered objectivism of Ayn Rand seems more prevalent than the altruistic
values of traditional Judaism, Christianity and Islam. But unless growing economic disparities are
reversed, the stability of libertarian democracy will be threatened by a
majority of have-nots that could elect populist demagogues who would sabotage democracy
and human rights.
The
accumulation of wealth is a fundamental right of political and economic freedom,
but greed and great disparities in wealth are a threat to political stability
and economic justice. In authoritarian Islamic
nations like Egypt vast disparities in wealth have not been corrected with the zakat or by government welfare programs;
the only Islamic nations that have mitigated poverty are oil-rich nations like
Saudi Arabia. While there are worrying
economic disparities in democracies like America, their hybrid religious,
libertarian and capitalist ideals continue to produce more prosperity, freedom
and economic justice than do authoritarian Islamic regimes.
Notes
and References to Resources:
This topic is related to Lesson
#8, Riches and salvation (Mark
10:17-27), and Lesson #9, the Widow’s
mite (Mark 12:41-44), at pages 45-50 in the J&M Book.
On the relationship between faith
and wealth, see Treasures and the heart
(Luke 12:33-34) at pages 235-238 of the J&M Book, and the commentary
of Waleed El-Ansary at page 237 distinguishing the zakat (2.5% of one’s wealth) from voluntary alms (sadaqah).
On Faith and freedom, see blog posted on December 15, 2014.
On Ayn Rand’s self-centered objectivism compared to the selfless
love for others advocated by Jesus, see https://www.aynrand.org/ideas/overview.
As you mention, there was no such thing as capitalism in Jesus' day, but Christians now nevertheless need to figure out how the gospel bears upon economic life in advanced economies. This is where Catholic social teaching is very strong, demonstrating the relevance of ancient teachings for present-day problems.
ReplyDeleteBy what measures are you saying that wealth disparity is a bigger problem in countries like Egypt, compared with countries like the US? In terms of Gini coefficient, the US has greater income inequality than Egypt and about the same level of income inequality as Qatar. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_equality.) The US is also more unequal than all but the three poorest OECD members: Mexico, Chile, and Turkey. Now, the typical American is materially better off than the typical resident of any of those countries. But I want to say that poverty in America is a greater point of national shame, considering that we have all the wealth we would need to eliminate poverty here; we just don't have the will to actually do so. Mexico does not have the wealth it would need to eliminate poverty in its borders.
Thanks for your comments, Jon.
DeleteI admire the strength of Catholic social teaching and programs to alleviate poverty, and I emphasized that disparities in wealth represent a serious problem in the U.S. But aside from the disparity in wealth, poverty in the U.S. doesn't appear to be as severe as in countries like Egypt when based on access to essentials such as food, clothing, shelter and education (not to mention cell phones).