It's sad but that's what flowing from many Christian mouths...
sometimes those that are speaking the loudest.
Once again I'm aware of a Reformed congregation that
advocates (even from the pulpit) political conservatism. Glenn Beck is lauded,
and Obama and all he stands for is openly hated and critiqued.
These folks hate big government and all the 'freebie'
programmes.
The Church will take care of these things. Charities, not
welfare should step in. Eliminate all so-called entitlements. Eliminate Social
Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Food Stamps, Heating Assistance, HUD...all of it.
And yet once again we learn of a broken marriage... a wife
and children separated from their husband and father. The elders support this
move. They believe the separation is justified.
And what do the elders tell her to do about money?
Go get welfare.
What a travesty.
Here we see double hypocrisy. One, the Church has completely
caved on the issue of divorce. In the 1970's it was still barely tolerated in
the Church. The culture changed, Kramer vs. Kramer came out, and divorce was a
hot topic that began to creep into the Church.
But then they pinned their hopes on a divorced actor named
Ronald Reagan. And the Church grew silent and began to tolerate it. I can't pin
it all on the Moral Majority and their push to drop the divorce issue. Largely
it was simply church leaders giving in to a cultural trend.
But among conservative Reformed churches it ought to be
different. They're supposedly standing against the tide... but repeatedly I
have seen them fail regarding divorce. Their hallowed Confession is pretty
clear and yet time after time I see Elders engage in linguistic and logical
gymnastics in order to justify divorces that previous generations would have
declared invalid... and sanction re-marriages that would have been called
adultery.
And when the rubber meets the road as far as congregations
supporting the needy...their own needy... they end driving people away. They
either tyrannize them and their financial choices, seeking to take control of
their lives or they send them to the arms of the government and its programmes
they profess to hate.
This particular incident is taking place in a PCA
congregation, but the OPC is no different. One I was part of long ago even had
homeless people regularly attending. The elders instructed people not to help
them... because they wouldn't do 'exactly' as the elders said.
That's right. That's what Christ did. He said be a good
steward and only help people if they conform to the bureaucracy. Only help them
if they give you a full breakdown of all the details. Only help them if they
allow you to step in and micromanage their lives.
Somehow this conveniently leads to almost no one getting any
help.
The elders usurp powers they are not granted and neglect the
mandates they are given.
The sheep are without shepherds. They are ruled by
hirelings.
...but wisdom is justified by all her children.
Yeah, that's exactly what Jesus did. I recall a friend of mine with a sort of smug response in regards to justification for building programs. He said, look how Jesus rebuked Judas in regards to Mary Magdalene, how her use of the oil was praised over Judas' supposed care for the poor. Therefore the buildings were in the same light. Of course, he's arguing from a Roman perspective, so it's not just the buildings but the gold and art, and all the other hording that is the Vatican vault.
ReplyDeleteBut it's all the same. Thinking they glorify God by their greed, and damning morals. At least the Pharisees, in neglecting the heart of the Torah, acknowledged the minute matters. The churches make up their own law as they go along./
Good points there. I wonder if most Christians understand what would happen to society if these programs disappeared? And do they understand the church could never replace them with all their resources; and in actuality would never try. If you think their building projects are stretched thin now, what if millions of poor, disabled and desperate suddenly came to them all at once? Would they only help those who convert and submit? Or spend on "the heathen"? Or dump them, reasoning that helping them would just be enabling their dependence? Either way, notice this move would put the churches in solid power over the poor as their one meal ticket…? And without needing any legislation to do so.
ReplyDeleteHow can pastors require people on public assistance to tithe? Shouldn't that be against their core principles?
I'm not to keen on tithing at all. Give money yes, but tithing is an OT practice.
ReplyDeleteBut that's nothing to fight about. I just find it boggling that when the rubber meets the road, they show their true colours.
Tithing is OT, but it's practically the lifeblood of Christiandom in America. One brother I've argued extensively on FB is constantly complaining about the abuses of the big government welfare state encouraging dependence and producing oppression so much that he wants to move to Texas with little to no regulations and even encourages it to leave the Union. How he believes the church and private charities would fill such a gap is beyond logic; unless he considers most public assistance recipients to be frauds milking the system who would suddenly find work if their checks were cut off and the churches refused to support them.
ReplyDeleteI find that a lot of people I talk to have no idea how all the poverty-programmes work. They don't actually talk to poor people. I do see a handful of people out using food stamps and driving a nice car etc... but there's often more to the story. People make bad choices. Sure. But there are a lot of people just struggling to get by and the constant squeezing of the programmes just makes it harder.
ReplyDeleteI'd like to turn the argument. I think its largely the Wal-marts of the world that are benefitting from Food Stamps etc.... The wealthy are mooches too....often a far much grander scale. Everyone seems to have some kind of scam going.
As far as Texas....yes, I wish they'd all move to Texas and that it would secede! Good riddance. Texas has always been nothing but trouble.
I'm joking of course....sort of.
I've been thinking the same thing regarding Texas...and I'm not joking.
ReplyDeleteRegarding Divorce - Have you heard John Piper's sermons on it? He seems like the only prominent evangelical who actually sides with the scriptures regarding divorce and remarriage.
I assure you, I'm now in my mid 40's and my parent's divorce 30 years ago is still devastating.
No I haven't heard Piper's sermons.
ReplyDeleteDoes he hold to....adultery/desertion? Or does go further?
I'm right with you. My situation is almost exactly the same. Mine split in '79. It's devastating. I don't think I realized it fully until I was well into adulthood....and had kids of my own.
Sorry to hear that about your parents situation guys. I pray we escape that and live in CHrist as loving families as He intended.
ReplyDeleteConservatives certainly know how to make money, just not how to practice social justice or provide a safety net to the poor. Texas is great for making money, but if you fall onto hard times, you're outta luck.
Question: I've theorized that libertarianism allows greater individual freedoms, but that those freedoms can and often will be misused by whoever is in power to the detriment of others and society as a whole. The establishment group in power can discriminate freely using their ownership in the private sector, and can informally agree among themselvesto create and enforce a culture of exclusion to whatever group they want, and having the resources, can enforce it without any laws being necessary; simply a defacto segregation. For example, remove all or most anti gender discrimination laws and any company can decide they don't want to hire women: they're a liability with maternity leave and being the primary child supervisors, and elderly parent caregivers, and they just plain think women should be at home pregnant with the kids, not out working. Any group of male dominated companies could dump them as a general policy with no legal consequences, and women wouldl have no recourse. Actually, with no legal sanctions, an economic/production efficiency incentive, and a cultural tendency to misogyny, corporate executives in many areas or nationwide could take such steps and it would effectively shut women out of the workforce virtually altogether. They actually hold a defacto legal power over society which would be unleashed to whatever degree they choose, without many regulations they operate under today. This actually was the culture before the 1970's and it served to limit women's roles in every area of society without a single law to do so.
Such a scenario can be applied to anyone or group in power. Remove the minimum wage laws and what would Walmart and McDonald's pay their workforce? Remove child labor laws and public school requirements and what would happen to the children of the poor? The economy would surge forward and grow, and profits of the wealthy would skyrocket, but what would happen to society as a whole? The market is a great tool, but a cruel and sadistic master, which never fixes problems, but creates many as it fills it's belly. I think with the Ron Pauls, Paul Ryans, and Ayn Rands of the nation being so well regarded by the highly politically dedicated, consistently voting religious right wing, this may be a subject we actually have to face soon.
Just wondering what you thought about this theory.
I think that is the tendency. Regulation and restraint keep it from going completely out of control.
ReplyDeleteBut from a political standpoint....do you regulate and hold back the corporate powers?
Or do you give them free reign to let the economy grow and yet run the risk of so alienating large portion of your public that you end up with civil unrest?
This is the dance they're trying to do. Keep it in balance.
The rich don't want to be taxed, so instead their political creatures create social programmes that seek to pacify the lower classes. Its not enough to get them out and on to their feet, but it will make them shut-up. They can squeeze by and eat.
The consumer culture teaches them to dream of things they'll never have... and frankly shouldn't want to begin with.
Look at the 19th century and you'll find a scenario much like what you're talking about. What happened? The lower classes grew very interested in Communism.
Europe has found a good workable balance.... until they got a little too big for their britches and tried to unite all the economies. That didn't go so well. And they've got a system that's based on demographic stability, but instead they've got a demographic implosion.
If the minimum wage laws are removed and all the programmes are taken away, our cities will start to look like Tijuana and Lagos...shanty towns. It's bad now, but it can get worse. Have you ever seen the movie 'City of God'?
Rather than complain about the regulations, the rich should be thankful. Of course they also work contrary to each other. Banks and Insurance companies push for a lot of regulation...enriching their stockholders. Their regulations have nothing to do with morality. Their television adverts are lies. It's purely the bottom line. In their case if the courts weren't used as a populist/democratic tool (at times) they wouldn't push for the regulation. But because we have all the lawyers running riot they have to protect their mountains of cash. To do so, they're going to push for regulations that control what you do.
Sometimes the big companies like this too...it shuts down the little guy. If I have to spend thousands just to get permits and plans put together for a bid... I'm out. There are many contracts and industries that seek to crush the small independent businessman.
Of course Unions do it too....everyone is out to stick it to everyone else. The Unions tried to crush the independents but they in turn got squashed and their own power was turned back on them. The bosses just moved it overseas where domestic law couldn't touch them. The Unions helped to build the middle class, but grabbed for too much.
In the end the morality of the Market makes perfect sense if you believe in Survival of the Fittest. The Strongest survive, the weak serve the strong and are kept down and eradicated. It makes perfect sense if you're a Pagan Materialist.
But if you have a conscience, if you believe in transcendent values it's a rather depraved system. It's perfect for Empires but it's immoral. It affords freedom...but the poor will say that even with some civil rights, they're still not free. They're in bondage and live in fear because without money the system can quickly crush you. You want justice? You had better have money in order to secure it.
The Industrial Revoltion transformed this exploitative system into a Law of Nature reflecting the moral design of God. It was in this context that Marx observed the masses being manipulated by religion. As far as it goes, he wasn't far off was he?
He wasn't far off at all on that point. That was an attack on the man centered racket of organized, institutionalized religion which is quite legitimate.
DeleteYou're right about the balance of regulation; it's a shame that laws are needed at all, but the manifest corruption of man is so ubiquitous, it's sheer insanity not to take precautions against it; which is why it's almost laughable that people want to de-regulate so much, thinking their god "the market" will solve all of society's problems. Yet they're not to quick to ask for repeal of insider trading laws, are they?
This question has been a concern to me, because while I'd like to favor live and let live freedoms for all, the reality is that many will abuse it to the detriment of others, and have throughout history. I had no idea women were forced to live the ways they did a mere generation ago because they had little to no ability to obtain stable, self supporting, fair and equal paying careers to escape philandering or abusive husbands; that and true difficulty in obtaining separations were the real causes of the past low divorce rates. Without a lot of freedom robbing regulations, much of our society would be stuck back in third world feudalism overnight because of the wickedness of human hearts. It's sad, but these regulations are actually keeping an effective, technologically advanced society from cannibalizing itself for profit. That's the real shame.