When do we have enough?

I spend a great deal of time working at my desk. Between sermons, research papers, and paying the bills, my office and I are quite familiar. But often, as I have worked on my Sony PC with its flat screen NEC monitor and Xerox laser printer, I have pondered how much is enough. As a Christian called to be meek and humble, do I need an oak desk or two bookcases filled with books? Should I live in a four bedroom house when others are struggling to make the rent for a studio apartment? Can I justify driving a 2006 GMC when so many of my clients could not even afford to pay the insurance premium? When is enough, enough? Or when is it too much? And who decides? Is there a workable Christian ethic of economics that provides hope for the poor and purpose for the comfortable? In the following discussion, these are the questions I would like to consider with a special focus on the role and problem of poverty. In so doing, we will explore the field of economics (the facts and considerations) and evaluate the issues from several different perspectives. We will consider the perspective of the poor and oppressed and I will summarize my thoughts before trying to articulate how the church should address the issue.

The Field of Economic Ethics
In the United States there are more than 38 million people (or roughly the population of California) who live at or below poverty status.[i] That is more than 13% of Americans who do not earn the poverty threshold of about $10,000 per person. Worse still, more than 10% of the residents in our nation’s capital do not earn even half of the poverty threshold.[ii] When compared to someone like Oprah Winfrey who earned $225 million in 2005, the disparity is discouraging.[iii] When compared to the national average income of about $42,000 per person, the disparity is alarming.[iv] Millions of Americans are in such poor straights that they cannot afford health care, child care, private transportation, or safe suitable housing. How did there get to be such a gap between the haves and the have-nots and what ought we Christians do about it?

Although ethics tends to be a prescriptive discipline, economic ethics maintains a large descriptive quality. Unlike other more scientific endeavors, economics is seemingly a pseudo-science in which more than one explanation may describe the lay of the land. This makes it especially difficult because the perceived problem differs with perspective and so theologians must describe an all encompassing problem, such as the pervasiveness of sin, and then work toward a prescriptive solution. Martin Luther’s theology accurately engaged this kind of ethic. In his writings he reflected the prescriptive idea that “economic activity is intrinsically an act in relationship to neighbor, and all relations with neighbor are normed by one thing: the Christian is to serve the neighbor’s well-being, while also meeting the needs of self and household.”[v] The description occurs when we acknowledge the fact that sin limits our ability to live out this norm and instead our society blindly trudges on to the detriment of others.[vi]

Within this example, several considerations are obvious. First, who are the players? Since everyone fits within an economic model, the players are the self, society, rich, poor, and everyone in between. Second, what are our quantifiers? There needs to be a biblical basis for determining when a person has enough or has need. Third, where is the conflict? The conflict, in this case, is rights and responsibility. An effective model needs to balance the rights of all people with the responsibility of caring for the poor.

Various Ethical Positions
In his book Wealth & Poverty, Robert Clouse identifies four basic models for economics. They are (1) Free Market Capitalism, (2) Guided-Market System, (3) Decentralist Economics, and (4) Centralist Economics. In this section, we will consider each model and try to identify where it is working in the world today. We will address the various biblical origins, foundations for ethics and understandings and interpretations of justice.

Free Market Capitalism
It has often been debated whether capitalism is a good thing. The idea that a person or corporation may privately use labor and funds to acquire wealth has left some questions to the integrity of others. However, Gary North sees the American system of free market capitalism as a biblical model. Using Deuteronomy 8, he argues that out of covenantal faithfulness God granted the Israelites life and land, “the two fundamental assets in any economic system. Human labor, combined with natural resources over time, is the foundation of all productivity…If the Hebrew were willing to dig, the land would produce its fruits.”[vii] Essentially, God has already blessed us and the issue at hand is how we will respond to His blessings: will we give him credit or claim our own success. Reflexive of a principle ethic, it is his opinion that the Bible is a “blueprint for economics,”[viii] and it is our task to follow it. Part of following the “blueprint” does, in his estimation, mean limiting taxes. “After all, who can trust a civil government which claims the right to take more of a person’s income than God requires for the support of his kingdom?”[ix] Thus a necessary implication is that charity, welfare, and foreign aide must all be lowered or eliminated. In its place he suggests that we send attitude. “Missionaries should seek to impart a specifically Western way of looking at the world: future-oriented, thrift-oriented, education-oriented, and responsibility-oriented.”[x] This then translates to meritorious justice, as we should be judged on how we have lived out the covenant.

Along those same lines, process theology seems to make similar inferences. God forcesus to be self-determinant, “putting our unique stamp upon what we are given and then making a creative contribution to future possibilities.”[xi] We take responsibility for our own lives following his lead and make right what is wrong and make the most of what we have.[xii] Under this ethic, the poor should pick themselves up by their boot straps and get back in the game.

Guided-Market System
Contrary to North’s assertion that capitalism is the only Biblical model, William Diehl contends, “our Scriptures can be used to support or condemn any economic philosophy.”[xiii] As such, the best approach is to focus on the Biblical themes of freedom, justice, and responsibility as a way to evaluate an ethic of economics. Under the Guided-Market System, freedom is the ability to make one’s own economic choices (capitalism). Justice is concerned with the welfare of all its citizens.[xiv] And, Responsibility demands that we exercise control over our lifestyle, “to reject hedonism, to limit our consumption and to challenge materialism.”[xv] Reflexive of a character ethic, Diehl is an ardent supporter of “trickle-down economics” and he proposes that if society adheres to God’s virtues everyone will benefit.[xvi] Egalitarian in nature, his theology of enough pushes for a modest lifestyle:

We will be modest in the selection of the homes we live in, the cars we drive, the clothes we wear and the food we eat. Of course, we can enjoy good restaurants, good music, the arts, travel and vacation. But for all these things, moderation and modesty should prevail. We live this style not because others have less than we do, but because as stewards of God’s creation we should take only what we need…As a by-product to living a lifestyle of enough, we may well discover that we do have extra money to direct into causes which will help the disadvantaged of the world.[xvii]

Decentralist Economics
On the opposite end of the capitalism spectrum sits Art Gish. A vehement opponent America’s economic structure, he declares, “Adam Smith was wrong. Human egoism is not an adequate basis for economic development because private self-interest is seldom consistent with general social interest.”[xviii] Highly critical of any government that oppresses that poor, he argues from several different passages of scripture (Deut. 7-8, Ezek 16:49-50, Ps. 103:6-7, Prov. 14:31, Mt 25:31-46) that God has a preferential option for the poor. “God wants equality and justice.”[xix] By combining the concepts of koinonia and Jubilee (Lev. 25), he concludes,

The purpose of economic activity in God’s kingdom is not to acquire wealth and power, but to praise God and serve our neighbor. Time is not money but an opportunity to live, love and share. The goal is not profit but supplying people’s needs, supporting a fulfilling lifestyle, and teaching kingdom ways of relating to each other.[xx]

The church is thusly called to lift up the poor. The response of government should be to get out of the way and allow the community to pursue its purpose.

One theologian who echoes this kind of need justice is Gustavo Gutiérrez. For him, sin is defined as “the absence of brotherhood and love in relationships among men.”[xxi] Since poverty is one of the great divisions of mankind, any system that would perpetuate poverty is evil and sinful. Under liberation theology, salvation comes through “the communion of men with God and the communion of men among themselves…[it] embraces all human reality, transforms it, and leads it to its fullness in Christ.”[xxii] This idea of solidarity with the poor is only fueled by the life of Christ himself because as Gutiérrez writes, “he chose to live with the poor. He addressed his gospel by preference to the poor.”[xxiii] Thus the core of this economic is the have-nots.

Centralist Economics
Our final system also focuses on the have-nots, but does so with an emphasis on governmental leadership. John Gladwin’s ethic builds on Romans 13:1-10, “God provides the state for our good…to reinforce good conduct and to make evil conduct unprofitable.”[xxiv] In his system, the state, which is fallen and corruptible, is responsible for caring for all people. Although there is no Biblical blueprint, there are certain principles that can be gleaned from the text to guide the state’s ethic: (1) our communities must be just and mutually supportive, (2) justice involves an equitable provision of resources for all, (3) injustice is a constant threat, and (4) the Old Testament made immediate and long-term provisions to provide relief and ensure justice.[xxv] Gladwin’s solution is to fix the structure, not just patch it.

In a similar vein, James Childs calls businesses to a need justice citing that since they are a part of God’s created orders, “business is in an interactive relationship will all other institutions of God’s providential design…[and] not a law unto themselves.”[xxvi] He holds them accountable to the same standards and Christians and sees it as the duty of the Christian to lead and influence business. Comparing himself to Martin Luther, he writes “Luther spoke, not as an economist with a theory to advance, but as a Christian pastor concerned with justice in the marketplace. He was asking, as I am, doesn’t faith give some guidance even in what are admittedly complex and often ambiguous circumstances of economic life?”[xxvii] His aim is that the principles of the Bible would shape the practices of the economy.

My Observations and Conclusions
With the above perspectives in mind, I set out to observe and experience an ethic of economics within the Harrisburg area. To start, I considered local demographics (Appendix A). Research only revealed what I had already suspected from my own experience: Harrisburg is made up of mostly black, single-adult families that rent. According to most experts, “out-of-wedlock births, and single-parent, female-headed families have enormously negative implications for poverty in the United States.”[xxviii] Missing from these statistics is a number of illegal immigrants who reside in the city. As an insurance agent in a relatively low-income area, I had the unique opportunity of already knowing the area and people I interviewed. Furthermore, since I was already very familiar with the middle and upper classes, I intentionally focused my efforts on the poor, trying to understand what they might be feeling and thinking so that I would then have a base from which to form an appropriate ethic.

As for what I learned, some of it shocked me. It seemed that the majority of people I spoke with were very pessimistic about their financial situation and life in general. Many of them were living from paycheck to paycheck and although they looked forward to catching up on their bills with their tax refunds, there was no real sense that they would ever get out of this mess. Florence, a single-parent resident of a low-income apartment complex, understood the lot that she had been cast in life and saw it as her primary objective to prepare her son Charlie for the “real” world. Lacking any real sense of hope for her son, she believed it was in his best interest to at least understand his role in society and learn to cope with it.

In another encounter, I spoke with Pedro who owned three run-down row-homes right next to each other. Living inside were he and his wife and their sixteen relatives, not all of which were legal (and more are on the way). His strategy was to save money by communal living. Pooling their resources, they could make do with less, allowing them to save-up to buy larger items as needed. Not surprising, he and his family could not benefit from many of the government-funded social programs. His solution to poverty was rooted in the church.

Lastly, in a third encounter with Lillie Mae, she expressed a heartbreaking optimism. Relying mostly on her monthly social security check from the federal government, she embraced a black theology view that saw her as “just passing through.” Sure, her grandkids were stealing from her and her own children were taking advantage of her southern hospitality and inability to say “no”, but they have needs just like she does, and she cannot sit around and wait for someone else to take care of them. God has given her a great many blessings in life and right now she has enough (though it is not much, and next month might be nothing). Her solution was rooted in faith that there was something better beyond this life.

The three people I have mentioned are only a sampling of the clients I interviewed, but what should be obvious is that they all have found a way to “deal” with their poverty. Where as I would be inclined to fight tooth and nail to climb out of poverty, they have been so beaten by the system and the tribulations of life that the only way they could remain sane was to accept it. Though they may have once had hope for the temporal, that hope has shifted to the eternal. Having tried to wait for the government to fix it, they have learned through experience that no solutions are coming. In all, the poor have been left with a deep mistrust for Greeks bearing gifts and they instead have turned to the dog eat dog world that they know and understand.

And so, those comments in mind, I argue that the best economic ethic is a cross between the Guided-Market and Decentralist Economic Ethic. I call it the Community-Market System. Rationally, I think that the guided-market may lack the ability to keep people accountable. For a central government to micro-manage all of its citizens is just unreasonable. Thus we have the role of the decentralist economic. By placing a special emphasis on community no one gets left behind. John Wesley’s ideas regarding small groups are particularly relevant here. When everyone is accounted for within the community or small group, then no one is left out. Where as the guided-market theology of enough will limit the needs and wants of Christians, the decentralist economic will help them properly redirect the extra they may have.

In the case of Florence, this means that Charlie does not have to learn to accept his role in society; he can be part of a group that is making it better. In the case of Pedro, he is already ahead of the game for his understanding of community; his lifestyle will simply be aided by the extra that will help raise him out of poverty. And in the case of Lillie Mae, she will no longer be the victim of extortion by her own family; instead she will be a pillar of faith and hope in the ideals of freedom, justice, and responsibility.

Theologically, the Community-Market System is grounded in the Christian worldview. It is a living example of God’s principles regarding the poor (Deut. 8, Lev. 25, Mt. 25, Rom. 13). Concerned with the good of individuals, the ethical egoism of this system is balanced by the utilitarian nature of koinonia, which brings the greatest good to the greatest number of people (Amos 5:15, Ex. 22:25, Mt. 5:42, Lk 16:13, II Cor. 8:13-15). And of course, these components are rounded out by the ethic of the Christian character through which we are called to live our lives in the image of God, loving one another in the presence of the Lord’s creation (Gen. 1:27, Ps. 24:1, Jn. 15:12). It is here worth noting that the reason we cannot accept the guided-market system apart from the decentralist is because our Christian worldview would not allow it. Our perspective on creation and the fall causes us to realize that man is sinful, and as such the process of sanctification is one done in community, in the body of Christ (Eph 2:10). I agree with Gutiérrez who wrote:

In Christ and through the Spirit, men are becoming one in the very heart of history, as they confront and struggle against all that divides and opposes them...Consequently, when we assert that man fulfills himself by continuing the work of creation by means of his labor, we are saying that he places himself, by this very fact, within an all-embracing salvific process…All this means that building the temporal city is not simply a stage of “humanization” or “pre-evangelization” as was held a few years ago. Rather it is to become part of a saving process which embraces the whole of man and all human history[xxix]

Here he sounds more like a social gospel theologian trumpeting the Kingdom of God and its redemption from bigotry to a reign and expression of love toward a goal of unity.[xxx] But then I propose that this is the heart of a good economic ethic.

Approaches for the Church
Having described the scenario and a possible solution, the church needs to take hold of this prescriptive motif to carry out its role in addressing these issues. Within its own body the church needs to begin inspiring their congregations to live out their faith. “In many high poverty areas, churches are the only form of associational life that is flourishing,”[xxxi] as such they must get the message through to the people that there is hope out there. We have a unique opportunity. We may stand by and allow ourselves to be further alienated from one another, lost in a world of selfishness and sin, or we can be a social ethic. As one writer has argued, “There simply cannot be a Christian theory of justice. There can only be local, particular, ecclesial efforts to be the church, and in so doing to love, serve, respect and embrace the poor whom God has placed in our midst, and we in theirs.”[xxxii] Theory needs to meet praxis and our congregations need to realize their important role in community. Moreover, in light of our new actions, Christians will serve as a teaching example to all of society as to the strength of a Community-Market Economic.

Pastorally, we need to adopt a Christ the Transformer of Culture attitude. Every sermon, Bible study, Sunday-school class, and outreach event must, present a theology of enough, “cast off the spell of the lies protecting our social wrongs, have faith in a higher social order, and realize in ourselves a new type of Christian manhood which seeks to overcome the evil in the present world.”[xxxiii] Every act of the church needs to declare war on social divisions and inequality. We need to live out Paul’s words, “There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”[xxxiv] This can be implemented through Christian Relief, in which we “adopt” low-income families and share our blessing with them. It can be done through Evangelism, in which our after-school child care programs show single-parents that God is still with them. It can be done by Lobbying for minimum-wage legislation and fairer business practices that seek egalitarian justice to bring all people the same rights and opportunities. It can be done through Non-Violent Protest against the gang-bangers and drug dealers who are holding our poor, urban dwelling brothers and sisters hostage. And it can be done through Individual Impact, by which each of us realizes that our vocation and our daily walk has an impact on others. We will not be put down by the immense complexity of our problems. Instead we will stand up to change, shape, and transform our culture and world into a God-pleasing, God-fearing, God-loving, God-believing kingdom. Our ethic of economics can be quite powerful if we let it.

[i] Statistics from Webster, Bruce H., Jr. and Alemayehu Bishaw, U.S. Census Bureau Income, Earnings, and Poverty Data from the 2005 American Community Survey (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 2006), 15.
[ii] Ibid, 21.
[iii] Forbes Top 100 Celebrities online at http://www.forbes.com/lists/2006/53/O0ZT.html on December 9, 2006).
[iv] Webster, 11.
[v] Luther is summarized in Moe-Lobeda, Cynthia “Globalization in Light of Luther’s Eucharistic Economic Ethics” Dialog: A Journal of Theology, Vol 42, No. 3, Fall 2003, 252.
[vi] Ibid, 254.
[vii] Gary North’s argument is found in Clouse, Robert G. ed. Wealth & Poverty: Four Christian View of Economics (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1984), 29.
[viii] Ibid, 34.
[ix] Ibid, 41.
[x] Ibid, 49.
[xi] Copeland, Warren R. And the Poor Get Welfare (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1994), 136.
[xii] Ibid, 138.
[xiii] William Dielh’s argument is found in Clouse, 87.
[xiv] Ibid, 91.
[xv] Ibid, 92.
[xvi] Ibid, 95.
[xvii] Ibid, 107.
[xviii] Art Gish’s argument is found in Clouse, 144.
[xix] Ibid, 135.
[xx] Ibid, 141.
[xxi] Gutiérrez, Gustavo. A Theology of Liberation (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1973), 175.
[xxii] Ibid, 151.
[xxiii] Gutiérrez, Gustavo. The Power of the Poor in History. (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1983), 13.
[xxiv] John Galdwin’s argument is found in Clouse, 182.
[xxv] Ibid, 186.
[xxvi] Childs, James M. Jr. Greed: Economics and Ethics in Conflict. (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2000), 43.
[xxvii] Ibid, 40.
[xxviii] Stephen V. Monsma quoted in Gushee, David P. Toward a Just and Caring Society (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1999), 56.
[xxix] Gutiérrez, A Theology of Liberation, 159-160
[xxx] The summarization is based on Landis, Benson Y. A Rauschenbusch Reader: The Kingdom of God and the Social Gospel (New York: Harper & Brothers Publishers, 1957), 118.
[xxxi] Gushee, 63
[xxxii] Ibid, 143.
[xxxiii] Benson, 22.
[xxxiv] Galatians 3:28 (NIV)