Jefferson Review
"Your Liberty is Our Interest"
Home/ Archives/ Search /Links / Quotes / Book Reviews/ Advertise /Contact us/ Calendar
|
Jefferson Review |
|
|
"Your Liberty is Our Interest" |
December 24, 2001 | |
|
Home/ Archives/ Search /Links / Quotes / Book Reviews/ Advertise /Contact us/ Calendar |
||
Commentaries by:
|
Two Articles from FFF on Why Christians Should Oppose Government "Charity" 1. Christian Charity vs. Government Welfare by Thomas L. Johnson The idea that government-sponsored welfare programs to assist the needy are compatible with, and justified by, Christian philosophy is probably the most widespread erroneous belief that permeates American society, and is hastening the destruction of freedom in the United States. This tragic flaw in the thinking of both well-educated and uneducated Christians has already brought misery to millions, and if this thinking persists in this country, it will result in economic chaos followed by political totalitarianism. Government welfare programs, even those providing temporary relief, are in complete opposition to, and destructive of, acts of Christian charity and are totally inconsistent with Christian tradition. One of the fundamental tenets of the Christian church is that the human is a creature possessing free will. It is because of the Christian recognition that man has control over his actions by means of his own will, that he is considered responsible for all his actions. (Our system of jurisprudence is built upon this foundation.) It is also held that for a Christian to perform an act of charity and to gain the spiritual rewards for this act, it must be performed by the deliberate intent of the individual. An act of charity -- an act of helping those in need -- can only be a Christian act when it involves the application of free will. It is the concept of free will that is absent from all forms of government welfare. A government, by its nature, can only act by means of force. The first act of a government is a legislative one -- the passing of laws -- followed by the carrying out of these rules of social behavior by the executive and judicial branches. The government possesses a legal monopoly in the use of force in executing its duty of seeing that citizens obey the law, and in punishing them if they do not. Thus, the essence of government is coercion. Force and free will are opposites. Government welfare programs which are executed by means of law and the enforcement of this law, i.e., by the threat or application of force, are diametrically opposed to Christian acts of charity which must be performed by an act of the individual will. Many Christians consider the support of government welfare programs to be consonant with the tenet of free will, and one often hears the expression: "I am a taxpayer, and therefore I think that such and such a program should be supported by tax money." Such individuals forget the fact that taxation is not a matter of individual choice and that all men are bound by law to pay taxes. They also forget that although they should have the right to designate how their own property is dispensed in charitable ventures, that they do not have the right to make this choice for other men. A majority voting for a welfare program supported by tax money is inconsistent with Christian behavior, for it abolishes the act of choice (free will) of all those who voted against the program. (Such matters should never be brought to a vote for no man has the right to force others to support a welfare project.) True charity, without choice, is an impossibility, and when attempted, negates the concept of Christian love. Every Christian realizes that he does not have the right to perform an act of charity at the forced expense of his neighbors -- that he does not have the right to enter another's home and steal property that he intends to use in a charitable venture. But when the act of stealing is impersonalized by authorizing, by way of a vote, an established agency (government) to perform the confiscation for him, he loses a conscious awareness of the immorality of this practice. As government welfare activity continues to expand at a phenomenal rate of speed, greater sums of money are required to support this "charity-by-force" undertaking. Taxation thus remains at a high level, with more of the tax dollars diverted to welfare programs, leaving little money in private circulation which can be used for Christian charity. Government welfare action is, of necessity, destructive to Christian giving and will almost completely stifle voluntary acts of benevolence if the present trend continues. Because of a lack of understanding of one of the basic premises of Christian belief -- that of free will -- and its application to acts of charity (welfare), most well-meaning, but misguided, Christians have vigorously or silently supported government welfare programs. Others, observing the disastrous consequences of legalized welfare -- the demeaning of the human spirit and the creation of parasitical degeneration, as well as the enslavement of the productive members of society who are required, by law, to provide support for welfare recipients do not wish to continue to uphold the cause of this evil (government welfare legislation). But they feel a strong sense of guilt if they do not do so, and fear that if they oppose government welfare they will be considered as unchristian. In reality, nothing could be further from the truth. Any Christian who does not openly and vehemently denounce all forms of government welfare, cannot, in truth, call himself a Christian, for government welfare is the antithesis of Christian charity. Government welfare operates on the premise of force, whereas Christian charity can only exist where there is freedom of choice -- where there is an act of the individual will. Since government welfare programs are outside the control of the individual, and thus outside the realm of free will, they are outside the province of Christian morality and are consequently evil, and must be condemned by all moral men. It is not only the right, but the duty, of every Christian to actively seek the demise of all government welfare programs, for they are in total conflict with the Christian doctrine which recognizes man as a being possessing free will -- the fundamental premise upon which all Christian morality is based. Dr. Johnson was associate professor of biology at Mary Washington College of the University of Virginia when this article appeared in the April 1970 issue of The Freeman , published by The Foundation for Economic Education, 30 South Broadway, Irvington-on-Hudson, New York 10533. 2. Charity: Biblical and Political by Russell J. Clinchy Charity is defined as an "act of loving all men as brothers because they are sons of God." This is a purely personal matter; an act voluntarily performed by one person for another; an act of faith in God and His commandments for governing our relationships with our fellow men. When we keep this concept in mind, it becomes a simple matter to distinguish between true charity and the spurious schemes that now masquerade under its name.... There is no Christianity in the concept that pressure groups, desiring material benefits, have the right to use the power of the state to take property from some individuals for the material gain of those who have the political power. That is plunder, and it is still plunder even if Robin Hood declares that he is robbing the rich to help the poor.... I write as a minister, and I want to attest that through an experience of thirty years I have never seen a church member fail to respond to an authentic case of human need. And from those who could and did help when I have described such a case, I have invariably received expressions of gratitude that the opportunity was presented. It is that faith which we need restored today. If we will only believe that such is the spirit of man we will not only be believing more in God, but we shall receive a response from the people of God that no one has yet dreamed of. We act as though the opposite were true -- that men are not really like God and are unable and reluctant to be moved by Him. If we need laws to make people treat men of other faiths and races as friends; if we need the police power of the secular state to take money from men for human need; if it is believed that the only hope of a city of God is to seek the alternative of a collectivized mass leveled to the lowest common denominator of mentality and ability -- if all this be the limit of our hope for mankind, then even such activity is sheer futility, for even if such an effort could be achieved it would have no meaning at all for mankind.... The concept that the community is a moral object which can accept ... responsibility is utterly absurd. Only persons are moral or immoral; responsible or irresponsible. Society and community are secular in form and substance; they are terms describing social units which are without moral significance at all. There is no more of a moral sense, good or bad, about a state or a community than there is about a crowd at a game. One would not dream of saying that he could give over his responsibility for himself, or for his brother, to the crowd in the bleachers. And no more can a Christian believe that he can do so with the state.... In defense of their acts, some of these legislators point out that they -- like Christ -- have distributed food to those who were hungry, and clothed those who were naked, and housed those who were cold. This is a true statement. But, nevertheless, they have rejected Christ in the process. They have introduced the evil principle of force into an arrangement that should be voluntary. They have made a Roman holiday out of a responsibility that is essentially spiritual, both for the giver and the receiver. These rulers of men have rejected the spiritual, and have made this stated or implied compact with their supporters: Elect me to a position of power and I will then reward you -- or others designated by you -- with special privileges and the money that I will legally take from others. Robbery is thus legalized. Equality before the law is thus denied. Personal responsibility is thus rejected. Freedom is thus destroyed. This political approach to charity may or may not be effective strategy for winning elections, but let us never inject the name of Christ or the principles of Christianity into this sordid bargain. Rather let us hang our heads in shame at the evil we have done or tolerated in the name of charity -- especially to the very ones we have claimed to be helping. Let us search for the lesson to be found in this statement by the Apostle Paul: "And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor ... and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing." Let us render unto the state that which belongs to the state, and unto God that which belongs to God. It is God's commandment that there must be a personal concern, as well as a .personal sharing, with those in need. The use of the force of government in this area of compassion and charity precludes any personal expression of Christianity. It becomes a mechanistic and secular thing, devoid of feeling. So let us return to the teachings of the Gospels, and render unto God our willing response to those of His children who need our help and ourselves. Russell J. Clinchy (1893-1981) was a minister in the Congregational Church in Connecticut. This is an excerpt from his essay, "Charity: Biblical and Political," which appeared in Volume I, Essays on Liberty, published in 1952 by The Foundation for Economic Education, Irvington, New York. SUBSCRIBE AND SUPPORT FREEDOM DAILY. This is our monthly journal of libertarian essays on current events. For a one-year print subscription (12 monthly issues), send $18 (or $10 for the e-mail version). Check, VISA, or MasterCard accepted. Or order directly from the Subscribe and Support section of our website: http://www.fff.org. SUPPORT: Our work is funded through (tax-deductible) donations from our supporters. If you would like to support our efforts to advance liberty, including the continuous maintenance and upgrades of our website, please send your donation (check, VISA, or MasterCard) to the address below or through the Subscribe and Support section of our website: http://www.fff.org. You will receive a written acknowledgement and appreciation for your support. FFF E-MAIL UPDATE is provided free of charge by The Future of Freedom Foundation. Please feel free to forward it to others. To subscribe, please go to FFF web site: www.fff.org. To unsubscribe, please respond with "remove" or "unsubscribe." The Future of Freedom Foundation 11350 Random Hills Road Suite 800 Fairfax VA 22030 Tel. (703) 934-6101 Fax (703) 352-8678 E-mail: fff@fff.org www.fff.org
|
 |
|
Weather (Louisville)/ Mapquest / White Pages / CNN / Dictionary / E-card / MSN |
