Lasting Lessons from Living Off the Land

During my growing-up years on the farm, I learned important moral and ethical lessons that became a foundation for my adult life.  As I explained in an earlier blog (Click HERE.), I was enlightened morally and ethically by the discipline of loving parents who pointed me on my path to God.  At first, I frequently needed the application of force to my back-end, both at home and at school.  Gradually, my growing respect for human authority led me to recognize my responsibility to an even higher Authority-- the God of all creation.

As I advanced in education, I learned that God reveals His dominion over creation in ways that are obvious to all.  For example, the existence of the Law of Gravity became obvious after several painful encounters.  Less obvious are laws of creation discoverable through scientific inquiry (e.g. laws of heredity and genetics).  These understandings eventually led me to recognize and adopt the principle of stewardship of my God-given gifts of time, talents, and treasures. 

At age 61, I became a blogger and named my blog, “Oikonomia.”  This odd word comes from the Greek word for stewardship, οἰκονομία, pronounced oy-kon-om-ee'-ah which combines oikos (Greek, “house”) and nomos (“to manage”).  This derivation gives us our English word, “economy,” suggesting that every “house” or “system” functions according to an “economy” based on certain laws or rules of order.  The “house” can be any system that requires management such as a farm, any private corporation, or civil government.

The concept of stewardship offers an ideal picture or model of how we ought to think and act; namely, as servant stewards and managers of God’s creation in keeping with His revelation in the Bible, and His natural revelation within the created order (Romans 1: 20).   Since 2008, Oikonomia has been addressing topics of science, faith, and culture based on the Christian stewardship model.  Here in this blog, we will consider whether principles of stewardship and free market capitalism are adequate to address what appear to be a widening gap between the materially rich and the poor.  Or, is it time for us to try another economic system, such as socialism and communism?

Back to my early life, what better place is there than a farm to learn that we are stewards within a “system” that operates by certain laws which require our respect in order to live and flourish?   Using the farm as our example, we will now enumerate some of the principles and values that should characterize good stewardship of any “house:”
1)  My Father’s World
2)  Hand of God’s Providence
3)  Respect for the Order of Creation
4)  Merit-based Privileges
5)  No Free Lunch
6)  Delayed Gratification
7)  Rewards of a Fruitful Harvest
8)  Responsibility to Share with Others

My Father’s World
When I was a young preschool farm boy, my physical world was the farm.  To me, my father was the “lord of the farm.”  He urged me politely and, if necessary, by “persuasion,” to join in the discipline of completing my farm chores responsibly.  My father taught me to work hard and live responsibly.  I was motivated by his example as I worked with him.  He was strong but he also worked with considerable arthritic pain which motivated me all the more to help him “carry the load” of farm work.

When Sunday came, we refrained as much as possible from our labor and our family worshiped God with other people of faith.  My father was accustomed to teach and pray within our assembly, and he tried to live a godly life during the week.  I now realize that my parents’ choice to lead us in faithfully attending church and serving God was a valuable example for me as I eventually married and established priorities in my family.

Among other things, my father taught me the necessary skills of feeding and caring for our large flock of chickens; and gathering, washing, grading, and boxing eggs to sell.  I kept meticulous records from day to day and tallied the income from each dozen sold either at our home or in local grocery stores.  Our farm also produced young Holstein heifers which we sold to dairy farmers; and we grew wheat, corn, oats, and cantaloupes which we sold either in town or at our roadside market.

Hand of God’s Providence
Gradually, I learned that while our family depended upon the income from our work on the farm, our farm in turn was part of the much larger world beyond our 200 acres of land.  Our income from the sale of the products of our labor depended upon the willingness and financial means of our buyers to purchase them.  Our buyers in turn were subjects of the conditions in the larger economy and policies within which they had to operate.  I was humbled to think of the complexity of the market economy and even more humbled to realize that my Father and our farm was only a tiny speck in the larger oikos operating under the providential hand of our Heavenly Father.

The concept of stewardship has no basis without a foundation of faith and recognition of our dependence upon a providential God who owns and sustains His creation.  He is the “Giver of every good and perfect gift that comes down from above” (James 1: 17).  It is this benevolent God who has appointed us to be good stewards of the Earth (Genesis 2: 15).  Psalm 65: 9 declares: 
You visit the earth and cause it to overflow;
   You greatly enrich it;
The stream of God is full of water;
   You prepare their grain, for thus You prepare the earth.

Respect for the Order of Creation
As we have discussed elsewhere [Click HERE.], God’s call to Adam was to till (serve) and keep (preserve) the Garden.  Even before I learned the Hebrew meaning of “till and keep,” I was privileged to be part of tilling and keeping the soil of our farm.  We practiced contour farming, crop rotation, and application of livestock and “green manure,” all of these in keeping with the created order and sound ecological principles.  By practicing sustainable farming as it is now called, we were blessed to receive a bountiful harvest during most years.

Reflecting back on my adolescent development as a farm boy under the influence of my father, I am thankful for how he respected the natural order as relates to what is fitting at each stage of my growth and development.  He refrained from requiring too much of me as an elementary school age laborer whether it be pacing my involvement in handling farm machinery or in my understanding of sexuality.  For example, during my pre-adolescent years, my father would assign chores to direct me away from the stable area where our prize Holstein bull was called into action to service a receptive heifer.  Part of my maturing as a young man was to be invited to help in this process as well as to have conversations about gender and sexuality. I now realize the importance of the family unit as God’s plan for helping young lives understand their identity and purpose.

Merit-Based Privileges
Most of the advancements that I experienced as I grew older on the farm were privileges afforded based on my being responsible for lesser assignments.  Today, we hear much about “merit-based” employment, pay, and promotion; and we also hear of the tragic consequences of employing unqualified or inexperienced individuals.  Jesus said, He who is faithful in a very little thing is faithful also in much; and he who is unrighteous in a very little thing is unrighteous also in much (Luke 16: 10). 

Expectations placed upon me as a farm boy served in the development of my moral and ethical conscience.  When I shirked my duties or did not give my best effort, I was not afraid of physical punishment as much as dreading the sense that I had disappointed my father.  Since those days, I have come to believe that “the fear of the Lord” above all means to “fear causing grief to my Lord” by my moral failings without repentance.  “Working out our salvation” (Philippians 2: 12) does not mean that salvation is merit-based; Christ has already paid the price for our justification (Romans 5: 1).  He has set us free to walk in the power of His Spirit so that “His commands are not burdensome” and we can do those things pleasing in His sight (1 John 3: 22).

No Free Lunch
We have already cited Genesis 2: 15 which contains God’s command that humans are to “till and keep” the Garden.  Already in Genesis 1 we see God Himself working and then resting from His work.  The Judeo-Christian faith does not condone lazy or slothful behavior.  The Apostle Paul warned the Thessalonian church, if anyone is not willing to work, then he is not to eat (1 Thessalonians 3: 10b).

There was always work to do on our farm.  While we trusted God to provide the sunshine and rain for our crops, it was our responsibility to plow the soil, plant the seed, and provide the necessary nutrients and cultivation necessary for a successful harvest.  Our survival as a farm family depended upon the annual income from our harvests.  We were reminded of our daily dependence because our fields and garden provided much of the food for our kitchen table and income to purchase the rest.

I learned from farm life that there is no “free lunch” in this life.  I also learned this principle from a classic story, The Little Red Hen, which has been told and retold in different versions.  What follows is similar to the version I read as a boy:

“Once upon a time, there was a little red hen who scratched about the barnyard until she uncovered some grains of wheat.

She called her neighbors and said, "If we plant this wheat, we shall have bread to eat. Who will help me plant it?"

"Not I," said the cow.
"Not I," said the duck.
"Not I," said the pig.
"Not I," said the goose.
"Then I will," said the little red hen, and she did.

The wheat grew tall and ripened into golden grain. "Who will help me reap my wheat?" asked the little red hen.

"Not I," said the cow.
"Not I," said the duck.
"Not I," said the pig.
"Not I," said the goose.
"Then I will," said the little red hen, and she did.

At last, it came time to bake the bread. "Who will help me bake the bread?" asked the little red hen.

"Not I," said the cow.
"Not I," said the duck.
"Not I," said the pig.
"Not I," said the goose.
"Then I will," said the little red hen, and she did.

She baked five loaves and held them up for her neighbors to see. Then, the little red hen as was her habit said,

"Who will help me eat the Bread?"
"I will," said the cow.
"I will," said the duck.
"I will," said the pig.
"I will," said the goose.
"I will," said the little red hen, but you will NOT!

The fundamental importance of being a diligent worker is realized not only on farm and factory; but it is also evident throughout the natural order of creation as we observe the creatures great and small.   Proverbs 6: 6 and following points us to the ant as a revelation of a “work ethic” in non-human creatures (see quote on Right):

Delayed Gratification
The farm is also a great place to learn the virtue of patience.  The Apostle James used a farm analogy to teach patience: The farmer waits for the precious produce of the soil, being patient about it, until it gets the early and late rains (James 5: 7).  The Middle Eastern farmer has to wait for the “early rains” to soften the soil for planting; then patiently wait for the “late rains” in the Spring to mature the crop.

When my farm chores were finished, I loved to read, so I loved to collect books.  I was thrilled when a local grocery chain began to sell The Golden Book Encyclopedia (Western Printing and Lithographing Company, 1960).  One volume was made available each week.  So, I had to patiently wait (sometimes straining to my limit) to get home from school to learn whether mom and dad had brought the next volume home.  My weekly wait was well worth it in the short-term and has taught me the blessing of delayed gratification in many areas of my marriage and professional life.  Indeed, now that I am old, my anticipation of Heaven’s glory has become my greatest joy.

Rewards of a Fruitful Harvest
Patiently waiting for gratification is a major part of crop farming.  For example, raising 4 acres of cantaloupes each year employed us in planting, thinning, hoeing and weeding from the time school ended in the spring until the harvest in August.  When we were tempted to sample a cantaloupe without waiting until it had ripened, we were greeted with a flat, unpleasant taste.  But when the melons were ripe, my cousin and I would whip out our pocket knives and feast on any delicious melon that was not perfect enough for market.  All of the blood, sweat, and tears of our summer labor in the fields was richly rewarded by the harvest.

When I married Abby, God blessed us with a family, and eventually after patiently waiting, we were able to own enough land to have a large garden.  We were able to teach our children, Bradley and Melinda, some of the lessons we had learned from our farm backgrounds.  While digging potatoes and snapping beans were not their favorite chores, the rewards of fresh green beans, corn on the cob, and fried okra on our dinner table reminded us of God’s bountiful provision and reward for our labors.

Responsibility to Share with Others
The Christian faith calls us not only to be thankful for the bounty of God’s provision whether from the farm or from a garden in the city.  In rural communities like ours, it was common for neighbors to share the harvest of fruits, vegetables, etc. with one another or even pay for services with products from farm or garden.

In recent times, churches in our experience offer a harvest table where members can share from their bounty with others in the Body of Christ.  The account of the early church in the Book of Acts describes how the believers were together and had all things in common; and they began selling their property and possessions and were sharing them with all, as anyone might have need (Acts 2: 44-45).  These believers faced considerable rejection and persecution but their selfless, voluntary generosity became a powerful testimony to unbelievers and the Lord was adding to their number day by day those who were being saved (v. 47).

Christianity and Capitalism
I have shared eight (8) stewardship principles contained within the lessons that I began to learn during my experience on the farm.  I am still learning from such character-building experiences.  These principles have followed me into my old age and into a culture that is vastly different from that of my growing-up years.  Our family farm was nested in an agrarian community in which the majority of families at least professed faith in God and loved the freedoms and opportunities offered in our country.  I have explained how important our faith in God’s providence was to our family values, worship, and work ethic.

Many of these truths are among those our Founding Fathers considered “self-evident truths” which are famously listed in the Declaration of Independence; namely “that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of happiness.”  Our Founders understood that it is God who established the created order and desires that each person flourish by practicing personal initiative and good stewardship of their time, talents, and treasures in order to benefit from the opportunities they receive from the hand of Providence and from caring people serving in various capacities.  When these stewardship qualities are exercised, they have resulted in an economy based on free market capitalism—an economy based on individual freedom of choice, right to hold private property, advancement based on merit, profit motive, competition, and justice and the rule of law.

Christianity Counterfeited?
God has revealed in His Word that we are created in His image (Genesis 1: 27) with the capacity to express love toward Him and to our neighbor.  But Genesis 3 reveals that we are fallen creatures who although professing to be wise, act like fools (Romans 1:  22).  We are capable of loving God and others, and we discern when there is injustice and inequity among us.  But our efforts to solve our problems often ignore our need for transformation of heart and mind (Romans 12: 1-3).  Our well-meaning intentions lead us into a godless, humanistic approach to solving perceived social injustices.  One consequence of excluding God’s truth from the equation is to focus on the material world as expressed in an atheistic, materialistic worldview.   

Those who aspire to a materialistic worldview point to free market capitalism as the cause of the widening gap between the rich and the poor.  They propose to close the gap and remove class distinctions by replacing private ownership of goods and services with a collective ownership and means of production.  The principles of stewardship which I learned from the farm no longer apply:
1)  NOT My Father’s World:  Far from being “lord” or owner of our farm, my father is just a worker of land that is part of a collective; family members are workers, or “comrades.”
2)  NOT the Providential Hand of God:  Rather, we must look to the economic planners who decide what is best based on a supposed scientific understanding of Earth’s climate and weather.
3)  NO Respect for the Order of Creation:   There is no Creator; human needs and behaviors are understood as instincts that have evolved to favor survival.
4)  “NO Free Lunch” is replaced with “Free Lunch” for those who are deemed the oppressed and who deserve special “help” and, retribution if deemed necessary.
5)  NO Delayed Gratification as long as the collective can supply our material wants “now.”
6)  NO Merit-based Privileges:  they are the cause of unwanted class distinctions
7)  Rewards of a Fruitful Harvest consist of equal returns for all regardless of the labor invested.
8)  Responsibility to Share with Others – NOT from generous hearts, but enforced by the collective

Ben Shapiro has pointed out that socialism has its own moral flaws: “Socialism violates at least three of the Ten Commandments: It turns government into God, it legalizes thievery, and it elevates covetousness.  Discussions of income inequality, after all, aren't about prosperity but about petty spite. Why should you care how much money I make, so long as you are happy?”

But Hasn’t Capitalism Failed?
In spite of known failings of socialism and communism, many today have lost faith in free market capitalism.  After all, the rich seem to get richer while affordability of housing and other basic needs seem more and more a distant dream.  Many who profess faith in God condemn the wealthy and corporations while calling for a more just distribution of wealth.  How can a sincere Christ-follower believe in capitalism?  Where is the church of Christ in the face of so much inequity in our society and around the world?

We have addressed the strengths and weaknesses of capitalism and socialism in an earlier blog entitled “There’s No Such Thing as Private Property” [Click HERE.]  However, we believe it is correct to say that God’s purpose for His Church through Christ’s death and resurrection is His best and only plan for redemption of fallen man.  Likewise, there is no better economic system than capitalism to allow the freedom in which humans can respond to their calling to steward their God-given abilities in creative and cooperative ways for the betterment of others and their own livelihood.  But like the church, capitalism can become corrupt and fall into ill repute when the principles of God's Word are ignored and selfishness rules.

John R.W. Stott, in writing about authentic Christianity, gave this example: 

"There was a Hindu professor in India who once identified one of his students as a Christian and said to him: “If you Christians lived like Jesus Christ, India would be at your feet tomorrow.” I think India would be at their feet today if we Christians lived like Christ.  From the Islamic world, the Reverend Iskandar Jadeed, a former Arab Muslim, has said “If all Christians were Christians—that is, Christlike—there would be no more Islam today.”²

 Perhaps we could add, “If all Christians were Christians—that is, Christlike, there would be no need for government welfare programs and no fascination toward socialism or communism."

Today, relatively few boys and girls have the opportunity to grow up on a farm where they can learn the basic principles I have outlined in this blog.  However, if children are introduced to Jesus Christ and their faith is nurtured in a Christian home with the aid of a healthy local church, they will have opportunity to mature in like manner regardless of their culture.  May we who profess Christ be truly Christlike in our needy world.

Reference:
¹ The Little Red Hen, An Old English Folk Tale was modified from The Project Gutenberg EBook of The Little Red Hen, by Florence White Williams

² Stott, John R.W. 2009.  “Becoming More Like Christ.”   C.S. Lewis Institute.  Click HERE.

    Read or listen to a more expanded version of The Little Red Hen.  Click HERE.

Pope Francis, the Christian Life, and Social Justice

Pope Francis used his Vatican radio address from the Feb. 23 Mass to express his concern about the “fakeness” of so many Christians.  The Pope’s rebuke was harsh and was intended to cause Catholics and evangelicals to seriously reflect on the genuineness of their faith.  At least some listeners ought to be asking themselves, “What makes a ‘good Catholic’?” Or, “What does it mean to be a ‘real Christian’?”  As one of the Pope’s evangelical listeners, I am now reflecting on Pope Francis’ broadcast while also being aware of the “gulf” between the faith of my Catholic friends and that of evangelicals like myself.

Speaking from in the chapel of the Domus Sanctae Marthae, Pope Francis said,

The Lord teaches us the way of doing: and how many times we find people – ourselves included – so often in the Church, who say, ‘Oh, we are very Catholic.’ ‘But what do you do?’ How many parents say they are Catholics, but never have time to talk to their children, to play with their children, to listen to their children.  Perhaps they have their parents in a nursing home, but always are busy and cannot go and visit them and so leave them there, abandoned. ‘But I am very Catholic: I belong to that association,’ [they say]. This is the religion of saying: I say it is so, but I do according to the ways of the world.

Pope Francis supported his challenge to the Catholic Church by referring to Jesus’ scathing rebuke of the Jewish leaders recorded in Matthew 23: 3-5.  Jesus encouraged his listeners to 

do all that they tell you to do and observe, but do not do according to their deeds; for they say things and do not do them.  They tie up heavy burdens and lay them on men's shoulders, but they themselves are unwilling to move them with so much as a finger.  But they do all their deeds to be noticed by men…

In perhaps his sharpest rebuke, the Pope applies the teaching of Christ when he declares, “Being Christian means doing — doing God’s will.”  On judgment day, he said, “what will the Lord ask us?  Will he say to us: ‘What have you said about me?’ No!  He will ask about the things we have done.”

Although evangelical readers will likely agree that there is a theological “gulf” between evangelicalism and Catholicism, it is hard to ignore Pope Francis’ solid Scripture-based rebuke—one that recognizes the authority of Scripture and that attempts to define the “true Christian.”   The Apostle James gives us his definition of the genuine, saving, Christian faith (emphasis mine):

What use is it, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but he has no works? Can that faith save him?

If a brother or sister is without clothing and in need of daily food, and one of you says to them, "Go in peace, be warmed and be filled," and yet you do not give them what is necessary for their body, what use is that? Even so faith, if it has no works, is dead, being by itself.   – James 2: 14-17

From my perspective, Pope Francis has chosen a humble, uncluttered lifestyle and has a compassionate commitment toward the poor and needy of the world.  Therefore, unlike the Jewish Pharisees, the Pope has a legitimate right to challenge Christians to put their profession of faith into works that benefit others—family, neighbor, and all of those within their ability to assist.

Readers who are familiar with Pope Francis’ past homilies, encyclicals (letters on Catholic doctrine), and actions that promote social justice for the poor and the disenfranchised will notice the connection between the “faith that shows through works” and the Pope’s emphasis on social justice.  It is here that I believe both Catholics and evangelicals should be asking about the role of “good works” and “justice” in God’s plan of salvation.  I say this while emphasizing that whether or not my Catholic friends, or evangelical friends for that matter, have been saved is for God to Judge.  But at the same time, if the Bible is God’s revelation of the way to salvation by faith in Christ, and if Christ has commissioned believers to be His evangelists (evangel = “give the Good News,” the Gospel) (Matthew 28: 19-20), then it is essential that Christians know how to use the Bible to “point the way” to saving faith in Christ.

Thankfully, there are several fundamental core beliefs that evangelicals and Catholics share, including respect for the authority of Scripture and the claim to basic faith and trust in Christ as Savior as expressed in the historic creeds and confessions of the church.  Out of these common beliefs, evangelicals and Catholics now stand side by side to defend biblical marriage and the sanctity of human life.  However, as Albert Mohler writes in “Standing Together, Standing Apart: Cultural Co-belligerence Without Theological Compromise,” (Touchstone Magazine, July-August, 2003), “Evangelicals, Catholics, and the Orthodox do not share a common understanding of how the work of Christ accomplishes our salvation—and this is the heart of the gospel.”

It is beyond my theological knowledge and beyond the scope of this article to go into detail concerning the differences between evangelical and Catholic theology.  I refer the reader to Mohler’s article for an excellent discussion of these differences.  Suffice it to say here that evangelicals have historically recognized Christ alone as the Head of the Church (Colossians 1: 18).  And, salvation is through faith alone by grace alone through Christ alone (Galatians 3: 6-11; Ephesians 2: 8-9).  Although the sacraments of baptism and communion are important in the life of both the evangelical and the Catholic Church, they are not recognized as saving acts by evangelicals no matter in what church they are offered.

Having recognized key theological differences between evangelicalism and Catholicism, we can now revisit Pope Francis’ challenge to Christians to “prove their faith by their good works.”  On the surface, it appears that both the Pope and the Apostle James would agree…faith, if it has no works, is dead (James 2: 17).  But, the Scriptural view of the role of faith in salvation taught in the Book of James and elsewhere reveals that salvation is not merited by any works of the sinner.  Salvation is granted through saving faith alone which merits God’s grace alone through Christ alone. 

Every unsaved sinner on the way to eternal judgment is regarded as dead spiritually (Ephesians 2:1) and considered darkness (Ephesians 5: 8) and an enemy of God (Romans 5: 10).  This fact is very clear, and can be very unsettling!  Corpses cannot partake in holy sacraments.  Nor can the spiritually dead perform any good works.  Until salvation of the sinner by faith and God’s grace alone, each person is like a spiritual zombie.  But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved) (Ephesians 2: 4-5). While we were still sinners, (and enemies), Christ died for us (Romans 5: 8, 10), and He brought us forth by the word of truth, so that we would be a kind of first fruits among His creatures (James 1: 18).

Demonstrating faith in God's love and mercy

Christians are saved by faith alone, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy…(Titus 3: 5).  What then is God’s purpose for good works?  Once again, just as evangelicals differ from Catholics in our understanding of saving faith, so also we differ in understanding of the purpose of good works.  Both James and the Apostle Paul would disagree with Pope Francis regarding both the nature of good works and God’s intention for good works. 

James (James 2: 18-24) and Paul (Romans 4: 1-5) refer to the great patriarch of the faith, Abraham, to teach the intertwining roles of saving faith and good works.  Abraham’s saving faith was pleasing to God because Abraham was obediently willing to complete the good work of sacrificing his beloved son, Isaac (Genesis 22).  And, the “work” that Abraham did as he bound Isaac on the sacrificial altar and prepared to plunge the knife was regarded as a “work of faith” because Abraham believed God would raise Isaac from the dead (Genesis 22: 5).  His faith was focused on God’s mercy, power, and grace alone.

From Abraham, we learn that works acceptable to God must be performed in faith and out of love for God, not primarily out of a perceived human need.  Paul states in 1 Corinthians 13 that any work we do is worthless if it is not performed out of unconditional love for His Son, Jesus Christ.  Oswald Chambers says, “If we are devoted to the cause of humanity, we shall soon be crushed and broken-hearted for we shall often meet with more ingratitude from men than we would from a dog…”  Instead, our works must be motivated from what Christ did for us.  Paul wrote, For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though He was rich, yet for your sake He became poor… (2 Corinthians 8: 9). 

The Scripture reveals an unexpected benefit to us when our works are Christ-love-motivated.  Speaking of the generous giving of the church in Macedonia, Paul wrote in 2 Corinthians 8, …their abundance of joy and their deep poverty overflowed in the wealth of their liberality (v. 2) and, …they first gave themselves to the Lord and to us by the will of God (v. 5).

Pope Francis is right to challenge Christians to do good works, but our works must have a Christ-love motivation and a Christ’s-kingdom trajectory.  Although Jesus sees the needs of the downcast, His aim is not an end in itself to meet physical needs, redistribute wealth, and bring social justice.  Instead, Jesus wants our good works to be the means God uses to bring others into His kingdom, the “city of God,” not an “earthly city.”  Hebrews 11: 10 records that Abraham was looking for the city which has foundations, whose architect and builder is God.  In 1 Corinthians 2: 11 we learn that the foundation of this “city” must be Christ, For no man can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

The “kingdom builders” God desires are first of all saved by faith alone, motivated by Christ’s saving grace alone.  Then, as redeemed children of God, they do good works, directed by a focus upon God’s “kingdom ends”—i.e. the reconciliation of our neighbor with God which can be facilitated through the means of generous works in the Name of Christ. 

According to Oswald Chambers, “Jesus Christ out-socialists the socialists.” Bernie Sanders not withstanding, no socialist leader has ever been able to control human values, wants, and aspirations to produce a Utopian state. History records failed attempts that have ended in godless misery and the deaths of millions.  Christ demonstrated that the way up is down.  He came to become the Servant of all, stooping to serve even the poorest.  Toward the end of Matthew 23, the passage used by Pope Francis in his radio broadcast, Jesus is quoted as saying, But the greatest among you shall be your servant (v. 11).  Jesus indeed came to bring “social justice” but not for an earthly, economic kingdom.  He calls His followers not merely to eradicate “income inequality” or to join with those who stir up envy and guilt toward the rich.  Instead, Jesus, the Head of the Church, is building His kingdom with a very different approach:  If anyone wishes to come after Me, he must deny himself, and take up his cross daily and follow Me (Luke 9: 23). 

Pope Francis’ challenge to authentic Christianity invites us to take stock of our own faith.  What words will I hear from Jesus Christ when my life is judged?  It will either be, ‘I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME’ (Matthew 7: 23); or, 'Well done, good and faithful servant’ (Matthew 25: 21).  Out of compassion for all humans, rich and poor, Jesus calls His redeemed followers who hear Him because they too are poor in our spirit (Matthew 5: 3).  We are to emulate Him in becoming what Oswald Chambers describes as “broken bread and poured out wine in the hands of Jesus for others.”  Chambers adds, “When we realize that Jesus Christ has served us to the end of our meanness, our selfishness, and sin, nothing that we meet with from others can exhaust our determination to serve men for His sake.”

How About You? 
Thank you for reading.  I’d be honored to hear from you, particularly if you have a question or if you disagree with anything I’ve written.

Has God provided you with opportunities to share unconditional love in deeds and in words toward another person who may not be able to give you anything of benefit in return except a “Thank You?”

There’s No Such Thing as Private Property

As the title suggests, I am calling for the demise of “private property” as we generally define it.  But you can relax.  I haven’t joined those who are singing the praises of socialism.  Instead, I am offering a biblical definition of private property; one that is essential for a free market, capitalist economy to operate in a just and moral fashion.  But first, let’s consider some context.

Western culture is steadily evolving; or perhaps more accurately, devolving.  At the heart of this devolution is the crumbling moral foundation of institutions that have supported civilization for several millennia.  The institutions of marriage, family, and citizenship are all being redefined based on moral relativism in place of objective truth claims from the Bible.  For purposes of this article, allow me to suggest that the definition of private property has also changed.  And I contend that this change in how we view “private property” explains why many have become disgruntled and critical of capitalism.

Replacing Capitalism with Socialism

During the past decade, the call for social justice has focused attention upon the plight of the poor, the ethnic minorities, and other groups who are considered disenfranchised.  Meanwhile, there has been a growing sense that social justice cannot be complete without major changes in two aspects that form the context of the injustices. 

First, there is the perceived need to change how material wealth is distributed.  Liberal scholars and leaders call for a shift away from free market capitalism toward some form of socialism to assure that each person gets their “fair share.”  Second, there is a perceived need to change the way in which humans interact with the environment of planet Earth.  According to this view, the Earth’s limited natural resources are too overtaxed to support the growing human population.  What’s more, natural resources are being consumed disproportionately by the rich and powerful.  To remedy these perceived duel injustices, one against the disenfranchised and the other against the Earth, the social planners have a solution which is summarized by Ralph Chaplin, (1887–1961), American writer, artist and labor activist:

It seems the most logical thing in the world to believe that the natural resources of the Earth, upon which the race depends for food, clothing and shelter, should be owned collectively by the race instead of being the private property of a few social parasites.  

Chaplin speaks for many today who believe the answer to injustice toward people, animals, and the Earth is to move from individual to collective ownership of property—i.e. to “spread the wealth evenly.”  Never mind that to bring about this massive transition and then to maintain the collective in a just manner would be a difficult task, even with strong coercion and tyranny.  Furthermore, based on the history of socialism, how can we assume that those placed in charge of managing the collective would be any more just and fair toward people, animals, and the Earth than the so-called “social parasites” they now condemn?   Ben Shapiro points out that socialism has its own moral flaws:

Socialism violates at least three of the Ten Commandments: It turns government into God, it legalizes thievery and it elevates covetousness. Discussions of income inequality, after all, aren't about prosperity but about petty spite. Why should you care how much money I make, so long as you are happy?

On the other hand, capitalism offers the promise of freedom, but also a two-edged sword.  It depends upon individuals owning private property which in turn motivates a strong work ethic and entrepreneurial spirit which often paves the road to prosperity.  But there is also the temptation toward greed and unjust practices that earn some capitalists the name “social parasites.”   As Shirley Chisholm states, “When morality comes up against profit, it is seldom that profit loses.”

Although capitalism invites injustice, it is also true that greed and injustice thrive in both the private and public sectors.  It doesn’t matter whether the material resources of Earth are privately or collectively held; corruption has no favorites.  The source of trouble is not the material resources or the sector of the economy in which they are managed.  We must go deeper to find the cause.  The trouble comes from the depraved human heart.  Two writers, one a prophet of God and the other a Russian novelist and historian, expose the truth about the nature of the human heart:

The heart is more deceitful than all else and is desperately sick; Who can understand it?  -- The Prophet Jeremiah (17: 9)

…the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. -- Alexander Solzhenitzyn

Reviving Our Concept of Private Property

Because moral depravity is rooted deep within the heart of man, if free market capitalism is to be moral, I believe we must also dig deep to identify and extract the cause of injustice; and then, revive the heart with a biblical concept of private property.  In Scripture, we discover the basis for the title of this article.  According to Scripture, “There is no such thing as private property.”  Although it is possible in America and some other countries to hold legal title to property, Scripture teaches that we do not own anything.  “The Earth is the Lord’s (Psalm 24: 1) and He has given humans dominion over creation (Genesis 1: 26-28) to manage it on His behalf as His servants or stewards (Genesis 2: 15).  We are stewards but not owners of “private property.”  Therefore, biblically speaking, private property is any portion of the Earth over which an individual has responsibility to God to manage for His glory.  In this definition, “private” refers to our individual responsibility.  And although we may hold temporary legal title, the property belongs to God.

The “stewardship view” of private property is a key by which humans can open the door and allow intimate relationship with God.  We can see this truth throughout Scripture from Adam and Eve all the way to the Apostle John in Revelation.  For example, Abel’s offering was a pleasing aroma to God, but Cain’s wasn’t (Genesis 4: 3-5).  This distinction rested at least partly on how these two men submitted themselves and their “property” in their worship of God.  Later, Noah worshipped and obeyed God; and God gave him dominion over the living creatures resulting in their salvation from the flood by means of the ark he had built (Genesis 6-9).  Abraham, the father of the Jewish nation, was a nomad.  Although he had great wealth, Abraham’s grasp upon it, even upon his beloved son Isaac, was very loose compared to his tenacious pursuit of God (Genesis 12-25). 

Remembering God Is Our Provider

Four centuries after Abraham, King David typified the same stewardship view that he learned from the patriarchs, but adds an additional principle.  King David not only understood that his kingship or dominion was a stewardship granted by God, but he also understood that even his ability to acquire material wealth was from God.  Listen as David prays before the people at the dedication of the material resources for the temple that Solomon would later build (1 Chronicles 29: 11b-14):

Yours is the dominion, O LORD,
and You exalt Yourself as head over all.
Both riches and honor come from You,
and You rule over all, and in Your hand is power and might;
and it lies in Your hand to make great and to strengthen everyone.
Now therefore, our God, we thank You, and praise Your glorious name.
But who am I and who are my people that we should be able
to offer as generously as this?
For all things come from You,
and from Your hand we have given You.

King David wanted his worship of God to be a picture of how all God’s people ought to exercise stewardship of the material resources of Earth day in and day out—managing “property” as that which comes from God’s hand and which, by God’s grace, He enables us to give back to Him or to our neighbor.  The Apostle Paul reiterates this principle in 1 Corinthians 4: 7:

For who regards you as superior?
What do you have that you did not receive?
And if you did receive it,
why do you boast as if you had not received it?

The Scriptural view of private property means we view the “property” as God’s, the “private” as our individual responsibility to work and manage it as unto Him, seasoned with an attitude of humility that recognizes all we have is ultimately a gift from God.   Elsewhere, in 1 Corinthians 7: 29-31, Paul teaches us that having a continual awareness of the eminence of Christ’s return will help us to “possess property as though we didn’t possess it” (emphasis mine):

But this I say, brethren, the time has been shortened, so that from now on those who have wives should be as though they had none;  and those who weep, as though they did not weep; and those who rejoice, as though they did not rejoice; and those who buy, as though they did not possess;  and those who use the world, as though they did not make full use of it; for the form of this world is passing away.

Notice Paul cites the relationship of husbands to wives, and the relationship of humans toward material property (ultimately the Earth) in a similar sense.  Husbands are responsible to love and nurture their wives as unto the Lord; likewise, those who buy are responsible as stewards to act as “husbandmen” to care for their property as unto the Lord.  Here, Paul teaches that God’s people are to undertake both responsibilities with a “stewardship view”—a view that aims to glorify God as Christ’s return draws near, rather than an “ownership view” that aims to multiply wealth without regard to moral and ethical responsibilities toward God and our neighbor.

Realizing Even Our Bodies Are Not Private Property

But there is a third principle that deepens the biblical meaning of private property even further.  God’s redeemed not only do not own their spouses, cars, houses, and land; they don’t even own their bodies.  The redeemed are bought by Christ’s blood from the slave block of sin.  Paul wrote,” …you are not your own?  For you have been bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body” (1 Corinthians 6: 19b-20).  Paul summarizes the biblical responsibility of the Christian toward God in a comprehensive manner in Colossians 3: 17:

Whatever you do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks through Him to God the Father.

But how do we know whether we are actually “possessing as though we do not possess?”  Thankfully, God has instituted two routine tests by which we can check our attitudes and priorities when it comes to our “property”—our regular responsibility to give back to God our tithes and extra offerings; and, our weekly responsibility to set aside a day in which we celebrate God through our worship and rest from routine labor.  These observances provide a routine check on the tightness of how unselfish we are with material resources and time.

Renewed Hope for the “Free Market?”

I have provided a brief sketch of a biblical definition of private property. Now, if free market capitalists were to adopt this definition of private property, do you think they would still be considered “social parasites” by many who are disgruntled with capitalism?   The second question is, does this “stewardship view” of private property address the accusation by many that capitalism and its biblical roots are to blame for our insensitivity to disenfranchised people and to the deterioration of planet Earth?  I believe the answer to both questions is “yes” based on the account of the early church in Acts 4: 31-35 (emphasis mine):

And when they had prayed, the place where they had gathered together was shaken, and they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak the word of God with boldness.   And the congregation of those who believed were of one heart and soul; and not one of them claimed that anything belonging to him was his own, but all things were common property to them.   And with great power the apostles were giving testimony to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and abundant grace was upon them all.  For there was not a needy person among them, for all who were owners of land or houses would sell them and bring the proceeds of the sales and lay them at the apostles' feet, and they would be distributed to each as any had need.

Although some who advocate social justice and socialism interpret the sharing of property in common by the early church as an advocacy of socialism by Christianity, the passage does not support that notion.  Instead, notice first that these folks were born-again believers on the basis of having trusted in Christ’s redemption from their sins through His death and resurrection.  As “new creatures” in Christ, they submitted their wills in obedience to His Word under the power of the Holy Spirit.  The resultant unity of Spirit enabled them to view their material possessions as “common property to them.”  From their perspective of “possessing as though not possessing,” they were able to see with eyes of compassion the physical needs among their number and therefore to voluntarily share generously.   Many acted upon their concerns by selling their “private property” and making the moneys available to the leadership to distribute funds to those in need.

At the time of the events recorded in Acts, persecution and ostracism often severely impoverished Christian converts and their families.  Therefore, the outpouring of generous sharing among these people of faith was nothing less than an essential, voluntary expression of the compassion of the Risen Christ toward those in need.  The expression of charity (agape love) by the 1^st century church has been reproduced in countless congregations throughout the world, often going unnoticed except by the recipients.  Note also that this “voluntary sharing” distinguishes this biblical economy from a socialist model.

Yet, the Christian church is not immune from selfishness and greed as we have noted previously in “Greed, Charity, and Capitalism.”  Therefore, one of the challenges of today’s evangelical church is to provide the setting in which God’s Word is taught under the direction of His Holy Spirit to believers who are Spirit-filled and receptive to Christ’s example as One Who had “nowhere to lay His head” (Luke 9: 58).   Christ lived as an example of “possessing as though He did not possess” and cautioned against attitudes that would oppose this “stewardship view” of private property.  For example, he warned against the love of money (e.g. Matthew 19: 16-25) and contrasted those who give out of their surplus with the poor widow who freely gave all she had (Mark 12: 38-44). 

Revival by Church and Civic Institutions

The evangelical church must function as a counterculture in which individuals and families learn to implement biblical stewardship of private property.   Local schools and the local community have historically contributed to this lifestyle as I have explained in “Environmental Stewards Are ‘Grown’ within a Moral Community.” Historian Thomas Woods comments on the importance of individual responsibility and other virtues in a free market economy:

One of the market's virtues, and the reason it enables so much peaceful interaction and cooperation among such a great variety of peoples, is that it demands of its participants only that they observe a relatively few basic principles, among them honesty, the sanctity of contracts, and respect for private property. 

Arthur Brooks noted, “what America needs is not less capitalism but better capitalists.”  In my view, better capitalists are those that adopt a “stewardship view” of material possessions, one that is taught in the context of family, church, and community.  But as explained in “Dominion 101 - Spheres of Responsibility” government has the important role of maintaining the rule of law.  Rep. Paul Ryan makes this point well:

We believe that the government has an important role to create the conditions that promote entrepreneurship, upward mobility, and individual responsibility.

Our Founding Fathers understood the depravity of mankind and the danger of power in the hands of one or a few.  Therefore, the U.S. Constitution calls for a system of checks and balances, and includes a justice system to maintain accountability and rule of law.  Today, greed and corruption are common at every level of both public and private sectors.   Many are asking, “Is capitalism moral”?   Arthur Brooks answers, “Of course not. Only people can be moral.  We're not asking the right questions."  Instead, we should ask, “What economic system will most likely encourage moral behavior in us?”  For me, that system is capitalism in which individuals have a “stewardship view” that sees private property as a temporary trust to which God holds title.   As temporary title-holder, the “owner” is responsible to use it for the glory of God and for the benefit of his or her neighbor.  A free market economy in the hands of such responsible stewards will address both of the concerns of social justice advocates—provision of assistance to the poor and disenfranchised that respects the dignity of human beings, and good stewardship of the environment of planet Earth.

I welcome your comments.  The following questions may stimulate your thinking further:

1.   How would the “Rich Young Ruler” in Matthew 19: 16-25 define private property? 
2.   Does Jesus’ condemnation of the “Barn Builder” in Luke 12: 16-21 suggest that it is immoral to be rich?
3.   What does the following quote from Lewis Black tell you about Christianity versus socialism? 
Socialism appeals to me.  It's like imposed Christianity. You've got to share.
4.   In what sense do advocates of socialism express a different view of humankind than advocates of capitalism?
5.   Is a free market economy really a better system to address the needs of the poor and disenfranchised than socialism?   Which one better addresses environmental problems?
6.   How would you grade your attitude toward your “property” based on your material giving and your observance of “Sabbath rest?”