I have been thinking lately about politics, as many of us have. Choosing a Presidential candidate has been difficult for me since I see value in both parties as well as severe problems. I decided to see if I could apply what I KNOW I believe to be true to this dilemma; my Mormon/Christian beliefs. I think that I have discovered that with the correct understanding of God's plan, Christ's atonement and the principles embedded in those, I can answer most any political question. Of course this is using my interpretation of God's plan but I think I can back it up with scriptures and history. So, if you're interested, come along on this journey with me through the next few posts and let's see if I'm right. And, please comment, ask questions, and help me tweak these ideas or tell me where you think I'm flat out wrong. But, to do that, I need you to put aside your already political thinking and try to tap into your Christian understandings, if those are what you subscribe to. Unfortunately, I'm not sure how these might work with other belief systems but I'd love to hear your thoughts on those, too.
In going through this exercise, I hope to figure out which party and candidate to support in the upcoming election. My hypothesis, however is that I won't be able to do that because both parties have some of the ideals that I'll be talking about. I'm not sure yet if one of them will stand out as enshrining a majority of the principles in God's plan. So this exercise may be for naught. But it should be fun, anyway.
Let's start with economics since that seems to be of highest priority in this election. Republicans and those on the right seem subscribe to capitalism with as little government involvement as possible - let the market work things out. Whereas the Democrats and those on the left seem to be a bit more flexible on this. They too believe in capitalism but seem to think it's ok for the federal government to get involved when things seem to go against some people. So, what might God prescribe as the optimal way to manage an economy?
As I see it, there are several instances in scripture and history where God's people have used one particular economic system. In the early days of the Mormon church, this system was called the United Order, but we find it also described as "having all things in common". We, in the Mormon faith say that it is a "divine principle whereby men and women voluntarily dedicate their time, talents, and material wealth to the establishment and building up of God’s kingdom." (LDS.org, Guide to the Scriptures). These days, it's practiced in a much milder form, devoting volunteer time and tithing and fast offerings to the church, but back in the day, The United Order was all-encompassing, sharing all wealth, property and time to the community that was the church at the time.
This system is also found in the Book of Mormon, historically around 35-341 AD, after Christ's visit to the people in the Americas. In 4 Nephi 1:3, it says,
"And they had all things common among them; therefore there were not rich and poor, bond and free, but they were all made free, and partakers of the heavenly gift."
But, it is not unique to Mormons. It is also found in the New Testament. Members of the church, converted by the apostles and led by Peter lived the law of consecration. In Acts 2:44,45 it is described like this,
"And all that believed were together, and had all things common; And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need."
In Acts 4:33,34 it further talks about this system,
"neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold, and laid them down at the apostles' feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need."
In the early history of the church, the United Order did not survive because of the weaknesses of human beings. Greed and jealousy made it impossible. In the New Testament times, Ananias and Sapphira were caught disobeying this law and, combined with lying to the Lord, it got them killed. I think the same greed kept this system from surviving then, as well.
This sounds a lot like Socialism or even Communism, to me. I know that is political blasphemy but it's hard to argue that God has not supported such economic systems in the past. My personal belief is that the Law of Consecration/United Order in its purist form is the ideal economic system that God wants for his people. We, as Mormons, believe it will be reinstituted at the Second Coming, this time permanently with Christ as its head. It is part of His plan for us.
So, in my humble opinion, this preoccupation with such strict capitalism is not God's ideal for us. Failing the actual ideal, we should be institutionally supporting the poor and making the playing field more level for everyone.
However, this system must be combined with the most important value of work. This is also an ideal that God expects of all of his people. How can we help the poor if we, ourselves, are not willing to work? How can we contribute to society or be a good citizen? Helping the poor, in this instance, is not a permanent welfare state. It is a temporary lift up to a point where someone can again work and support the community, in some way.
This idea goes all the way back to Genesis 3:19 which says: "In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread". The scriptures are replete with verses extolling the value of work and its importance to us and our growth. Here are a few more:
Proverbs 10:16 - "Labour of the righteous tendeth to life"
Proverbs 14:23 - "In all labour there is profit"
Romans 2:10 - "But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good"
Matthew 25:21 - "Well done, thou good and faithful servant: thou has been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things"
Mosiah 13:14 - "And even I, myself, have labored with mine own hands that I might serve you, and that ye should not be laden with taxes" (King Mosiah as a great example of this principle)
Alma 36:25 - "The Lord doth give me exceedingly great joy in the fruit of my labors"
D&C 42:42 - "Thou shalt not be idle; for he that is idle shall not eat the bread nor wear the garments of the laborer"
D&C 58:27 - "Men should be anxiously engaged in a good cause"
So, when you think about a United Order system- similar to Communism, minus the corruption and dictator, and combine that with work of our own free will to sustain the community and help those who are less fortunate, you get pretty much what God wants us to aspire to.
My lovely daughter Vienna brought up the question - what is the incentive? Great question. I heard recently that people need some sort of incentive or motivation for anything they do. So, what is the motivation to work if you are assured to be cared for by the economic system. Well, in God's system, there are many, including striving toward righteousness, belonging to a larger community, and the pride of working for you and your family. Notice none of these are monetary or material in nature. Humans must grow past their need for such things before this system can work.
My uber-smart husband asked "What about render unto Caesar what is Caesar's?", meaning shouldn't this question be put in the realm of government, and isn't really a religious question at all? That's a fair question. Was Christ really separating the spiritual from the temporal? The quote is found in Matthew 22. The Pharisees were trying to trick him into saying that paying taxes was illegal - wouldn't that be cool? But, Christ knows what they're thinking and quotes this famous phrase, followed by "and unto God the things that are God's". Not only is he fabulously ensnaring the Pharisees in their own trap but also teaching a valuable lesson about the goodness of both paying taxes and, in my opinion, paying tithes. He's basically equating them. Further, we Mormons believe that all things are spiritual. God's plan for us is not a temporal/material one. He wants us to return to Him where material things don't matter. Everything we do here is toward that end. D&C 29:34 says "all things unto me are spiritual, and not at any time have I given unto you a law which was temporal". Also, one of our main tenants, an Article of Faith, number 12 to be exact, says: "We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying honoring and sustaining the law". So, as an Article of Faith, government is clearly a spiritual matter to us.
But, to my point, if I am going to use this exercise to help me decide who to vote for in the election and which political party I more align with, that is a trickier question. It would be easy for me to say this leans towards the Democrats because they more strongly believe in a state organized system to help the poor, whereas Republicans are more market-based, believing that smaller charitable organizations are the best way to care for the poor. Plus, I believe the Democrats do have a strong work-ethic, unlike the caricature painted by the right. It was under Clinton that the Welfare-to Work act passed, for example.
But, I am sure that some of my more right-leaning friends might disagree with that, stating that work and self-reliance is center to this system and their economic platform. Their market-driven system requires one to work for his/her own living. But, I think that I would have to counter with their extreme aversion to anything coming even close to Socialism or Communism. Of course, I hope you all fact-check me, correct me and call me on my fallacies.
At this point, though - I think I'm going to have to give this one to the Dems. But, fear not my Republican and far-right friends. Next time, I plan to tackle social issues - abortion, gay marriage, etc. You are sure to prevail as the moral superiors in that arena! Or will you? ;-)
In going through this exercise, I hope to figure out which party and candidate to support in the upcoming election. My hypothesis, however is that I won't be able to do that because both parties have some of the ideals that I'll be talking about. I'm not sure yet if one of them will stand out as enshrining a majority of the principles in God's plan. So this exercise may be for naught. But it should be fun, anyway.
Let's start with economics since that seems to be of highest priority in this election. Republicans and those on the right seem subscribe to capitalism with as little government involvement as possible - let the market work things out. Whereas the Democrats and those on the left seem to be a bit more flexible on this. They too believe in capitalism but seem to think it's ok for the federal government to get involved when things seem to go against some people. So, what might God prescribe as the optimal way to manage an economy?
As I see it, there are several instances in scripture and history where God's people have used one particular economic system. In the early days of the Mormon church, this system was called the United Order, but we find it also described as "having all things in common". We, in the Mormon faith say that it is a "divine principle whereby men and women voluntarily dedicate their time, talents, and material wealth to the establishment and building up of God’s kingdom." (LDS.org, Guide to the Scriptures). These days, it's practiced in a much milder form, devoting volunteer time and tithing and fast offerings to the church, but back in the day, The United Order was all-encompassing, sharing all wealth, property and time to the community that was the church at the time.
This system is also found in the Book of Mormon, historically around 35-341 AD, after Christ's visit to the people in the Americas. In 4 Nephi 1:3, it says,
"And they had all things common among them; therefore there were not rich and poor, bond and free, but they were all made free, and partakers of the heavenly gift."
But, it is not unique to Mormons. It is also found in the New Testament. Members of the church, converted by the apostles and led by Peter lived the law of consecration. In Acts 2:44,45 it is described like this,
"And all that believed were together, and had all things common; And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need."
In Acts 4:33,34 it further talks about this system,
"neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold, and laid them down at the apostles' feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need."
In the early history of the church, the United Order did not survive because of the weaknesses of human beings. Greed and jealousy made it impossible. In the New Testament times, Ananias and Sapphira were caught disobeying this law and, combined with lying to the Lord, it got them killed. I think the same greed kept this system from surviving then, as well.
This sounds a lot like Socialism or even Communism, to me. I know that is political blasphemy but it's hard to argue that God has not supported such economic systems in the past. My personal belief is that the Law of Consecration/United Order in its purist form is the ideal economic system that God wants for his people. We, as Mormons, believe it will be reinstituted at the Second Coming, this time permanently with Christ as its head. It is part of His plan for us.
So, in my humble opinion, this preoccupation with such strict capitalism is not God's ideal for us. Failing the actual ideal, we should be institutionally supporting the poor and making the playing field more level for everyone.
However, this system must be combined with the most important value of work. This is also an ideal that God expects of all of his people. How can we help the poor if we, ourselves, are not willing to work? How can we contribute to society or be a good citizen? Helping the poor, in this instance, is not a permanent welfare state. It is a temporary lift up to a point where someone can again work and support the community, in some way.
This idea goes all the way back to Genesis 3:19 which says: "In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread". The scriptures are replete with verses extolling the value of work and its importance to us and our growth. Here are a few more:
Proverbs 10:16 - "Labour of the righteous tendeth to life"
Proverbs 14:23 - "In all labour there is profit"
Romans 2:10 - "But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good"
Matthew 25:21 - "Well done, thou good and faithful servant: thou has been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things"
Mosiah 13:14 - "And even I, myself, have labored with mine own hands that I might serve you, and that ye should not be laden with taxes" (King Mosiah as a great example of this principle)
Alma 36:25 - "The Lord doth give me exceedingly great joy in the fruit of my labors"
D&C 42:42 - "Thou shalt not be idle; for he that is idle shall not eat the bread nor wear the garments of the laborer"
D&C 58:27 - "Men should be anxiously engaged in a good cause"
So, when you think about a United Order system- similar to Communism, minus the corruption and dictator, and combine that with work of our own free will to sustain the community and help those who are less fortunate, you get pretty much what God wants us to aspire to.
My lovely daughter Vienna brought up the question - what is the incentive? Great question. I heard recently that people need some sort of incentive or motivation for anything they do. So, what is the motivation to work if you are assured to be cared for by the economic system. Well, in God's system, there are many, including striving toward righteousness, belonging to a larger community, and the pride of working for you and your family. Notice none of these are monetary or material in nature. Humans must grow past their need for such things before this system can work.
My uber-smart husband asked "What about render unto Caesar what is Caesar's?", meaning shouldn't this question be put in the realm of government, and isn't really a religious question at all? That's a fair question. Was Christ really separating the spiritual from the temporal? The quote is found in Matthew 22. The Pharisees were trying to trick him into saying that paying taxes was illegal - wouldn't that be cool? But, Christ knows what they're thinking and quotes this famous phrase, followed by "and unto God the things that are God's". Not only is he fabulously ensnaring the Pharisees in their own trap but also teaching a valuable lesson about the goodness of both paying taxes and, in my opinion, paying tithes. He's basically equating them. Further, we Mormons believe that all things are spiritual. God's plan for us is not a temporal/material one. He wants us to return to Him where material things don't matter. Everything we do here is toward that end. D&C 29:34 says "all things unto me are spiritual, and not at any time have I given unto you a law which was temporal". Also, one of our main tenants, an Article of Faith, number 12 to be exact, says: "We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying honoring and sustaining the law". So, as an Article of Faith, government is clearly a spiritual matter to us.
But, to my point, if I am going to use this exercise to help me decide who to vote for in the election and which political party I more align with, that is a trickier question. It would be easy for me to say this leans towards the Democrats because they more strongly believe in a state organized system to help the poor, whereas Republicans are more market-based, believing that smaller charitable organizations are the best way to care for the poor. Plus, I believe the Democrats do have a strong work-ethic, unlike the caricature painted by the right. It was under Clinton that the Welfare-to Work act passed, for example.
But, I am sure that some of my more right-leaning friends might disagree with that, stating that work and self-reliance is center to this system and their economic platform. Their market-driven system requires one to work for his/her own living. But, I think that I would have to counter with their extreme aversion to anything coming even close to Socialism or Communism. Of course, I hope you all fact-check me, correct me and call me on my fallacies.
At this point, though - I think I'm going to have to give this one to the Dems. But, fear not my Republican and far-right friends. Next time, I plan to tackle social issues - abortion, gay marriage, etc. You are sure to prevail as the moral superiors in that arena! Or will you? ;-)
4 comments:
So cool, Jen!
I dig how you're working through such complex issues in a systematic and thoughtful way. Naturally folks of good will are likely to bring different parameters and interpretations to the issues you've chosen to tackle, but there's no doubt that you're providing a clear and cogent rationale for how/why you'll vote and advocate. I look forward for reading your next post!
Thanks so much, Andy! That is great encouragement. I love you!
When it comes to the poor, what those on the Left invariably misunderstand about folks on the Right (and I'm glad you pointed this out, Jenny) is that folks on the Right care very deeply about the poor. No one wants anyone to suffer and that includes conservatives. We don't want people to suffer. Where we actually differ is not in whether the poor should be helped. We both agree that they should and that it is a moral imperative to.
Where we disagree is how best to deliver that help. Progressives favor a government-operated mandatory system where taxes are assessed upon everyone disproportionally according to rules they favor and a portion of the resulting largesse be distributed among folks that the government determines to be worthy of that help. To the conservative mindset, this is draconian and appalling in its forced dependency upon government as if it has demonstrated itself to be worthy of being the repository of such power. It has not and it can be easily demonstrated that it has not. And worse, why should government be allowed to operate as an effective monopoly on providing assistance?
Local charities inherently know local needs best. How can they not? Local charities also understand the particular needs of a community. Again, how can they not? Local charities also have a better opportunity to get to know those who need help, to find out about their individual challenges and help them really get back on their feet and independent again, to assist them in becoming contributors to their communities again, rather than a permanent ward of the state, which is an outcome that government assistance tends to create.
So, in contrast to the mandatory, government-operated federal system that progressives favor, conservatives believe in a voluntary, privately-owned and locally-operated plan for organized charity. This has many advantages. In the government-owned system, if corruption is present, it becomes institutionalized, entrenched, and and powerful; enjoys access to the power of government to hide that corruption; and has access to government funds to defend itself against prosecution should the corruption eventually be discovered. We've had many instances where this has happened, particularly in recent years. In a privately-owned charity, corruption is just as possible (and yes, it happens), but here it is limited only to the extent of that local charity or that local branch of a larger charitable organization, and private charities do not have access to the power of government to hide their activities, nor do they have access to taxpayer money to defend themselves against the charges if their corruption is discovered. Secondly, a public-sector administration to administer public assistance is always very costly. As a result, less than 18 cents of every taxpayer dollar budgeted for public assistance actually ends up in the hands of those the government is trying to help. That's reprehensible. No private-sector charity could survive with a track record like that because a private charity can be made much more accountable to its donors for how it handles its finances. And again, if a local charity goes off the rails, the loss is mitigated to that single charity and other charities that are run well do not suffer, nor do the people who rely on them suffer.
So, the conservative perspective is, if you want to increase the power of government by taking advantage of the neediness of the poor to justify the ever-increasing expansion of governmental bureaucracy which then joins the needy to the state in a cycle of dependency, then by all means vote for your favorite Monty Hall Democrat. But if you really want to help people in the darkest time of their life, to guide them through their temporary tragedy and back into being self-sufficient and productive lives, then show your genuine concern for the poor, that you believe in their ability to succeed on their own once they are given a temporary hand, then vote Republican and watch the nation and more of its citizens enjoy true prosperity.
Thank you for your comment, Tristan. I think you described perfectly what conservatives believe in this area. I know that I could not do that nearly as well in my blog.
I do wonder what you think about the perspective I give on God's plan and how that should or should not be reflected in our economic system. To me, it's clear that God has given direction on this at different times in Christian history yet we don't ever take that into consideration when developing our own system.
Post a Comment