A blog of a former pastor of mine reflects thinking that tends toward a more liberal slant than that with which I am comfortable. Unfortunately for me the problem I find in his thinking is more related to my comfort level than with the biblical veracity of his thoughts. What he says does not reflect traditional, strict capitalist leanings nor does it support a government hands-off style of social provision. His words do reflect a great deal of the radical thought of a Person known as Jesus.
If we are to evaluate our work as churches in 21st century society, then how is our proclamation, both from the pulpit and in our individual lifestyle witnessing, to be compared to the proclamation content and style of Jesus? Is he to be our role model? Is his content to be our content both as churches and as individual Christians? Since it is so easy for us sinful human beings to be distracted by personal agendas, the regular evaluation of who we are and what we represent in the eyes of God is an absolute necessity.
Jesus never mentioned savings accounts or insurance policies. Of course we have to recognize savings accounts were matters of investment with bankers in the days of Jesus. Insurance policies under Jewish tradition consisted of faithful and caring family members. Planning ahead was more a matter of "casting your bread upon the waters" and having it come back to you when you needed it through the generosity of family and friends. We have the social support systems today primarily because we can no longer count on sufficient help coming from family and friends for what society has said we need.
In my reading of scripture I do not remember Jesus ever preaching a sermon or telling a parable that would be either critical or supportive of the occupying Roman administration. He told his listeners that if they were required to carry a Roman soldier's pack one mile, they should volunteer to carry it an extra mile (Matt. 5:41). He healed a centurion's servant and praised his faith (Matt. 8:5ff). He told Pilate that the Roman governor would have no power if it were not allowed from above (John 19:11). These were far more related to revealing the presence of the Spirit of God in this world than to serve as any kind of a political or religious commentary on government.
Trying to give an objective view of a Christian's role in sinful society while being a member of it is at best difficult and at worst self-deceptive leading to destructive conclusions. Trying to apply the teachings of Jesus while both being a sinful human and dealing with sinful humanity brings on the frustration of knowing what's right but having that influenced by a fallen nature.
What shall we preach from the teachings of Jesus? Pray for your enemy. Give food and water to those who are hungry and thirsty. Do not worry about your own physical needs. Be blessed as you give all that you have to the religious (spiritual?) institution. Take in the homeless and stranger. Give without asking to receive. Turn the other cheek when injustice strikes you. Depend in all ways upon your heavenly Father and give all glory to him. Make the Kingdom of God your highest priority.
Yet though we preach these, we must admit that we are not taking care of our neighbors, the homeless, and the stranger. Do we then provide for a government to do that? We do not take care of our poor, our elderly, our exceptionally challenged? Do we then provide for a government to do that? We do not cover the costs of medical care or basic classroom needs? Do we provide for a government to do that?
In all of these we recognize the limitations of the family institution. We need something bigger than our family to insure that loved ones and strangers receive what they need. Call it a city council, county social services, state departments of human resources, or the Department of Health and Human Resources. They all represent attempts to provide what we as individuals or as nuclear families cannot.
For me as an individual my questions arise, not in the areas of what people need, but in the areas of defining what they need in contrast to what they want. The Apostle Paul said not to provide food for those who refused to work according to their capabilities (I Thess. 4:11-12; II Thess. 3:10-13). Is that contrary to the teachings of Jesus or an extension of them? We already provide a reasonably free general education from kindergarten through high school. Do we owe our youth more than that at a price that would allow everyone to attend a tech school, two-year, or four-year college? Do we include graduate school?
A socialized medicine program must be seen in the same light. What is the equivalent in medical care when compared to a public education? What is the medical care equivalent to a college degree? Do we offer need-based grants or special interest funding for particular cases? If you cannot afford to go to college but your academics say you deserve to go, we offer scholarships. How do you translate that into long term disease or rehab treatments or organ transplants or highly specialized neurosurgery? Do only those we deem most capable of giving back to society get the enhanced medical care?
It will always be easy for the right wingers to say that we are a free country, and we are only required to give everyone an equal chance to make it on their own. Give them a chance to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps. The left wingers will say such a perspective is living in a fantasy world. No matter what we do, we cannot guarantee that everyone will have an equal chance. A compassionate government is the only hope we have of trying to level the playing field.
Jesus in a broad sense said that you do the best you can with what you have in this world while you're here. He might have asked if you are using what you've been given, great or small as it may be, to reflect your relationship with the Creator of all as you prepare for the eternity that is coming. The answer to that question is up to each individual and can only be evaluated in purity by the Holy One Himself.
