The "Whole Gospel" and Other Things

I finally got my copy of The Hole in our Gospel from the library, and am about 2/3 of the way through it. I can’t wait to hear your thoughts on it. I am thrilled that it has encouraged you to be more involved in the Lord’s commands to care for the poor. I also hope that reading this book has helped you to understand me a little better. My views about “social justice” or caring for the poor do not come from some liberal ideology—when I talk about these things I’m talking about the gospel of Jesus Christ, the “whole gospel” as Stearns describes in this book.

You asked specifically what role I think government should have in caring for the poor. For one thing I think it’s exactly what you said, providing checks and balances—making laws that keep companies accountable in instances when their actions are harmful to those without the power and wealth companies often have. Beyond that I don’t know exactly. There are many people who believe the government should provide services and resources to help the poor. Perhaps if the Church were actually doing its job of loving God, loving our neighbor and making disciples who do the same, people wouldn’t see a need for the government to provide these things. I’m sure I have expressed this before, but what frustrates me greatly is that so many in the Church have spoken out so vehemently against government involvement in helping the poor, and yet our churches are so unaware and uninvolved in doing it themselves.

As I have said before, government is not the answer to these problems, but it does have a role. I know there are flaws in our system of government, and of course, our government officials are human beings affected by sin. However, I don’t agree with you that there are no checks and balances to the greed and inefficiency of our government. There are term limits, we all have the right to vote, we can call our representatives and let them know our views, we could even run for office if we wanted. There is still room for the government to mess up, but there are checks and balances.

You seem to have implied several times that a completely unhindered free market would take care of any problems of corporate greed or injustice on its own. I don’t understand this. Perhaps reading Adam Smith will shed some light. Let me know what abridged version you have and I’ll try to find it at the library. You said that many people think this book “helped set the West on a path of prosperity unprecedented in the history of the world.” While that may be true, I would question whether that has actually been a good thing, for the West or for the rest of the world, especially in light of what Stearns says in his book.

I’m very much looking forward to hearing more about your thoughts on the Hole in our Gospel.

Fending for Ourselves

Dear Mindy:
It seems we are in basic agreement about the message of the Grand Inquisitor, i.e. that many people are terrified of freedom and are willing to give it to anyone who can keep them in bread and rule over them. As you say, even the church is guilty of not thinking adequately about throwing money and goods to the poor withour giving them and insisting from them an opportunity to grow on their own. You might (did) say, let them "fend for themselves" as if that was a bad thing.

I have finished "The Hole in the Gospel" and you may use my copy if you wish. It had an impact on me that I didn't expect, and look forward to sharing that with you. I will just say it challenged me (and Nancy) again to get back to the basics of the Lord's commands to feed, clothe, give drink.

You're right, many do see the mixing of caring for the poor and government in the same sentence as a kind of creeping socialism, mainly from experience in countries that have tried it over many centuries past. What do you mean by government involvement in this area? You didn't say exactly.

For the record, Mark and I spoke briefly about a wacky proposal Tammy told me about during a visit with her in Colorado Springs recently. It seems someone envisioned a resort hotel on the top of Pikes Peak! There is after all, a paved road to the top and many make the trip, as I and Mark have done. However there's not enough room on the top to do that. The solution, shave off a couple hundred feet to make a larger spot. Mining wasn't in the conversation, but it did remind you of "corporate greed", a phrase you used several times in your piece on strip mining. If some think of socialism in regard to government involvement in social issues, others default to "corporate greed" when thinking of for-profit enterprises. Yes, there are a lot of scars on the landscape from mining. I have also seen near your hometown, places where land has been reclaimed after Big Muskie went through, with cattle grazing and crops growing. Granted, requiring a company to do that by law may be part of protecting the peace we have spoken about, and that's OK. Everyone needs checks and balances.

I'd like to speak of greed. For some, greed virtually defines the business world, that of capitalism and free enterprise, and it's the first and only adjective that comes to mind. The good news is, there is a check and balance in a competitive atmosphere to ameliorate that, plus as we described above, laws to make sure it happens. The truth is, every human is infected with greed, whether in business, education, the church or yes, the government. The bad news is, there is no check and balance to greed and inefficiency in the government bureaucracy, that part of society many want to turn over major sections of our lives.

There is a very good reason to "keep the government out of it" in many areas. When that happens, people are free to pursue the best solutions because they themselves will benefit from it. It would be "fending for ourselves" in the best sense, and the poor can and want do it too. That is the essence of the work of Adam Smith, who wrote a book many consider helped set the West on a path of prosperity unprecedented in the history of the world. It is called "The Wealth of Nations". I have actually never read it, but I'd like to read it with you and discuss it. I have an abridged copy on order. The original ran to 900 pages I hear. The minority parties right now have their hands full trying to beat back a 2000 page Health Care bill that will transform society as we know it. If the are successful, time will allow for more studied responses to legal and medical abuses in our health care system. I wouldn't have described the current medical system as destroying the peace of our communities, as you have, but it does need work.
Love,
Dad

Socialism and The Grand Inquisitor

I enjoyed reading the Grand Inquisitor again—it reminded me of how much I loved The Brothers Karamozov. When I read it the first time there were sections of it that held so much truth about God and the world that I felt my reading of it counted as my devotional time.

The way I understand it, in this chapter the Grand Inquisitor explains to Jesus that although He came to set men free, men exchanged their freedom for happiness. He claims that the vast majority of people don’t really want freedom, they just want someone else to take care of their needs. The Inquisitor says that the common man is terrified of freedom and is willing to give it up to be ruled by a small group of people who “suffer” freedom on his behalf, in order to make sure he is happy. The Church has done this, the old man claims, and that is why the people, although they recognized Jesus for who He was, did not interfere when the Grand Inquisitor ordered Jesus to be arrested. Jesus, he claims, was wrong to offer true freedom to all—instead, he should have offered them bread.

I agree that having a State or a Church that says, “We’ll take care of everything, you don’t have to worry about a thing,” is not good. A system in which the people must depend on the State or the Church for their survival or their salvation is dangerous. Many government welfare programs have led to this kind of dependence, and so have many charitable, church-run programs.

It seems that often when someone seen as a liberal mentions “caring for the poor,” especially when government may be involved, conservatives immediately think they are talking about socialism. Julie Clawson, author of Everyday Justice, describes an example of this here on her blog. When I talk about government involvement in caring for the poor, I do not mean that the State should exist in order to provide for all the needs of the people and make sure they are happy. In an earlier post you said, “The State exists for just a few reasons, one being to maintain a standing army for national defense, a domestic police force for preserving the peace internally, and not much more.” OK, so what does it mean to “preserve the peace internally”? Is it only a matter of protecting us from burglars, drug dealers or violent individuals?

Mark told me that you and he had a conversation a while back about mountain top removal mining. Mountain top removal is an example of corporate greed that destroys the peace of our land and our communities. Coal companies basically blow up a mountain top in order to expose the coal, and push the debris down into the valleys, clogging up rivers and streams and destroying forests and wildlife. Coal companies do this because it is a cheap and easy way of getting their product, and this increases their profits. These companies are allowed to do this by law, because the law also states they are responsible for reclaiming the land they have destroyed. Even if the companies did the reclaiming, which often they don’t (and no one enforces the laws about this), the land is still never the same. Not only is this bad for the environment, but communities have been destroyed because of this practice. If it is a responsibility of the State to preserve peace internally, then the State ought to be involved in protecting our land and communities from this type of corporate greed.

I believe that our health care system is another place in which corporate greed has contributed to destroying the peace of our communities. Corporate greed is not the only issue, it’s all very complicated, but certainly the desire of drug companies, hospitals and insurance companies to maximize their profit has led to practices that harm. Again, since the State is supposed to preserve the peace, the State should be involved in regulating corporations to protect people from their greed. Please know that I am not saying that profit is bad or that all corporations or businesses are greedy. But some certainly are, and I believe the government should be involved in regulating that.

Of course, the government isn’t the only answer. It would be better if people who run corporations would have some sense of social responsibility and make better choices. This is one place where the Church should have some role. Christians should have an influence and should be working to bring shalom to every area of our world. Jesus came to bring shalom, a word whose meaning goes way deeper than the English word “peace.” American Christians (and maybe Christians throughout the world) have made the gospel about forgiveness of individuals’ sins so that those individuals can make it to heaven when they die. The gospel is so much more than that, though. It is the good news that our God reigns! And in a world where God reigns there shouldn’t be people dying of starvation, or girls sold into slavery, or people living extravagantly lavish lifestyles with wealth they “earned” through harmful business practices, while a few miles away people are struggling to find a job or a place to live. As John Wimber said, we live in the already but not yet. But we shouldn’t let the “not yet” be an excuse to not work towards seeing the Kingdom come alive now. Jesus Himself taught us to pray “Thy Kingdom come, Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven.” I don’t think He meant for us to just pray that and then go about our day.

I don’t believe forced socialism is the answer. But I see too many Christians deriding socialism, and then just leaving it there. I don’t hear solutions to the problem of poverty from conservatives beyond “Keep the government out of it.” Or, perhaps the solution of conservatives is just to protect and build up our free market system, and let everyone fend for themselves to make it in that system. For non-believers that may be enough. But for Christians, I don’t think Scripture lets us off the hook that easily. Now I’m getting into the realm of The Hole in our Gospel, although I haven’t had the chance to read it yet (I've requested it from the library, but it hasn’t come in yet). I don’t want to jump ahead to that book if there is more to say about the Grand Inquisitor. There is more in my head right now that I want to say, but I’m not sure how directly related it is to the Grand Inquisitor, and this is already a long post. As usual, I’ll hope the opportunity to share these other thoughts will come up again as we continue the conversation.

I’ll let you know when I’ve gotten the book.

Mindy

Our Government at Work

Dear Mindy:
Well, it's done, at least in the house, by a rousing 220-215 margin, not close to the majority Democrats have there. At least abortion is out of it for now, a wrenching disappointment for the Pelosi kids. I'm not able to respond to all the points you bring up on the specifics of the bill. I too am disappointed conservatives have been slow to put a proposal on the table. Perhaps you can bring me up to date on what it says.

What would I do about health care reform? First, as we began this discussion some time ago, I would want it to line up with my understanding of biblical principles as outlined in one of my first blogs, speaking to the 10th commandment about coveting anything that is our neighbors, the fallacy of trying to make health care a right to be provided by the government, which produces nothing on it's own. Also, tort reform, and assuring the maximum competitive situation between insurance companies to allow them to bid across state lines both of which would reduce costs drastically. In other words, a free market initiative. Ironic that we will be studying I Cor 6 in our home group next Sunday, the biblical version of tort reform.

I'm looking forward to your comments on "The Grand Inquisitor", esp in response to mine. I now have a copy of "The Hole in our Gospel" and will be starting on it this week on long plane rides. If you have some comments on that book, let me know them also.

Love,
Dad

Information on Republican Health Care Reform Proposals

Last Saturday John Boehner gave an address in which he outlined "Republicans' plan for common-sense health care reform our nation can afford."

This is what I have been looking for, I'm just a little disappointed that it has come out just a week before the Democratic bill is scheduled to be voted on. There is some helpful information included here at the GOP website. The links at the bottom are very helpful, and I wish I had been able to find this information earlier, as many of these documents were written this summer.

There is a lot of information here, and I don't know if I will have the time to look over all of it, but from what I've seen it looks like some of what has been proposed by Republicans is similar to what the Democrats have proposed, including "pooling mechanisms" to help small businesses and individuals find affordable coverage, and providing coverage for those with pre-existing conditions through "high-risk pools" and "reinsurance" (I don't understand those terms, though, so I'd have to do a little more research on that). The Republican proposals also include medical liability reform and the ability for employees to find their own insurance if they don't like what their employer offers, while retaining the same tax incentives their employer gets. These things sound good to me. One thing I can't quite understand, though is that many of the proposals strengthen Medicare--isn't that government run health care?

As I said, I found this information to be very helpful. What I find frustrating is that Republican politicians and conservative commentators have focused so predominantly on attacking their opponents, rather than on trying to provide good information about both sides of the debate. Many conservative Christians have gone with the flow of the media, simply believing what they are told by anyone who claims to believe in God and holds conservative views, and then repeating it. I read once that a prophet needs to not only send the message that something is wrong, they need to paint the picture of what could be. If conservative Christians have felt that the Democratic health care proposals are wrong, I wish they would have respectfully and reasonably pointed out what was wrong, affirmed that this is an important issue that needs to be addressed, and then painted the picture of what could be. I wonder if things would be different at this point if that had been the approach taken several months ago.

Well, we'll see what happens on Saturday (last I heard that was when they were hoping to vote on the bill). If the bill is voted down, I think I will be a little relieved, and will hope that everyone can start from scratch to find something that will address the real problems in our health care system. If the bill passes, I think I might also be a little relieved, but hope that those who want real change will not feel that they have gotten it and sit back and do nothing. There are those who feel that this bill's passing will be the beginning of the end of our country as we know it--I can' t say I agree with this, but even if the worst did come to pass, God is still on the throne.

Dad,

The problem is that you and I both think we’ve found truth, but we don’t seem to agree on it. So, ultimately, yes, our goal is to find truth. But in order to do that, we do first need to understand each other’s current view of truth. Without this understanding we just get stuck at the point of each of us thinking we’re right and the other is wrong.

You seem surprised that I “as much as declared that I can’t decide what is the best thing to do about health care…”, but this is what I’ve been saying all along. My original reason for starting this conversation was not to convince anyone that the liberal agenda was the right one, or that reform proposals by Obama or Congress would be the best thing. What I have wanted in this whole health care debate is good information to help me make my decisions, as opposed to the reactionary rhetoric that has come from many media sources and forwarded emails. I understand that conservatives are saying the government should stay out of it and let the market fix the problems. I’m willing to believe this, but I don’t understand how that will work. You said that doing nothing would be better than what is being proposed right now, although doing nothing is not what you would choose. Can you tell me what you would choose to do to address the problems in our health care system, besides simply telling the government to stay out of it? Earlier you mentioned that reform needs to allow competition between insurance companies. I’m pretty sure I agree with this. Could you help me understand this better?

You said you were trying to decipher what I believe. Regarding the health care issue, I feel I can now say that I oppose the current legislation coming through Congress. I have only come to that conclusion in the last week or so, and what led me to this point is what I learned from an NPR program that aired this month, a program that finally gave me some of the good information I’ve been looking for. October 11 and 18, NPR’s This American Life devoted two hours to explaining some of the problems with our health care system. They didn’t talk about the current bill, they didn’t propose any kind of solution. The purpose was not to support or oppose any political party or agenda. The purpose was simply to explain how complicated the system is.

I knew our system was broken, but I wanted to understand how and why it was broken so I could figure out whether or not the current legislation would address the real issues. I now have a better understanding of why health care costs are so high, why insurance premiums keep going up, why insurance companies sometimes drop customers leaving them without insurance, and I can say with more confidence that I don’t believe current proposed health care legislation will fix the real problems. I now understand what David Brooks was saying in this article that I linked to in an earlier post. I do think there may still be a need for some kind of government intervention, just not what is currently being proposed.

So, that’s where I am on that. I still have a lot more to say on a couple of broader topics, one being the role of the Church and the role of government in caring for the poor, the second being the way the public discussion about current political topics has gone and the way conservative Christians have contributed to that discussion. I have probably said enough for today, so I’m sure I will get the chance to address these other topics as we discuss the Grand Inquisitor, which I hope to write about soon.

Our Grand Communicator

Dear Mindy: Here I am on a Sunday afternoon trying to decifer what you believe and where you are. Your last post as much as declared that you can't decide what is the best thing to do about health care unless you see a full blown proposal from conservatives. That does tell me a lot. Actually, if you listen, there are many voices decrying the intrusion of government into this major part of our lives, and pleading to let the private sector continue to what it does best, that is make it better at the least cost (for everyone). Doing nothing, although not what I would choose right now, is far better than what is being proposed. For the time being, Barry and friends are steamrolling a bill through that must be so toxic, they can't afford to let the representatives have as much as 72 hours to look it over before voting. They have also changed the locks on the committee rooms so someone from the minority party doesn't barge in. Believe it. Conservatives have their hands full right now throwing a wrench in the gears of the most far reaching and damaging social legislation in the history of our fair nation.

You like the President's "clear and concise" way of communicating in a constructive, rather than critical way of others ideas. I am reminded of Charles Krauthammer's remarks that we need to watch what he does rather than what he says. They are two different things, sad to say. I wouldn't classify his health care reform, HR3200 that is 1506 pages long, as clear and concise. His speeches are one thing, the reality is a 1500 page bill. What is his clear and concise response to General McCrystal? Still dithering on a request for more troops that is in line with his campaign promise to clean up Afganistan.

You want to now go to the church's role in dealing with poverty. We (I) have been dealing with that all along. The government's place will be to force the redistribution of wealth to those with less, and I am against that. Does that label me one with selfish interests because I have more than some? I reject it. The church's role is to facilitate the commands of Christ to give, help, enable, disciple, comfort. It is not the role of the State. I have purchased the book, "The Hole in Our Gospel" and am looking forward to it. In the meantime, "The Grand Inquisitor" is speaking to a reincarnated but silent Christ about the three temptations. For purposes of this discussion, most of the material is in the one about turning stones into bread, to wit;

"...for never was there anything more unbearable to the human race than personal freedom! Dost Thou see these stones in the desolate and glaring wilderness? Command that these stones be made bread - and mankind will run after Thee, obedient and grateful like a herd of cattle."
and, "...for where is there freedom of choice where men are bribed with bread?" He is speaking in arrogance about how the church has come to conduct itself. Pretty descriptive of mankind, whether Church or State doing the bribing.

One last thing. Because I love you and you are my daughter, I want to understand you and is a major reason I'm doing this. However, in a dialogue truly pursuing the truth, whether we understand each other is second to whether we find the truth. The good news is, when we find the truth, we will understand each other better.
Love,
Dad