The Religious Left’s Heresy
By Patrick Hynes on Religion
Ankle Biting Pundits
Arthur C. Brooks has written a book, and …
<<< The book’s basic findings are that conservatives who practice religion, live in traditional nuclear families and reject the notion that the government should engage in income redistribution are the most generous Americans, by any measure.
Conversely, secular liberals who believe fervently in government entitlement programs give far less to charity. They want everyone’s tax dollars to support charitable causes and are reluctant to write checks to those causes, even when governments don’t provide them with enough money.
Such an attitude, he writes, not only shortchanges the nonprofits but also diminishes the positive fallout of giving, including personal health, wealth and happiness for the donor and overall economic growth.
All of this, he said, he backs up with statistical analysis. >>>
This should surprise no one. In my book I discuss some correlations between the act of regularly going to church and earning higher income, being happier, and being able to withstand personal and financial hardships. That regular church attendance and having a strong family support system would also make you more likely to give to the needy should not shock us.
The shocking part is that some people are shocked by Professor Brook’s statistics, or will be when the book comes out. I have often felt that liberals use government spending as a tool to
1.) Win votes from the underclass;
2.) Avoid the genuine sacrifices that come with genuine charity; and
3.) Sate some intangible guilt that haunts them regarding their own material wealth.
From what I can glean from the write-ups, Professor Brooks compares conservative Americans of faith to secular liberals. But there is a third group that I would like him to explore, if he does not do so in this book: How do our Christian brothers and sisters on the “Religious Left” measure up? I have been working on an article for some time now in which I will—if I ever finish it and get it published—essentially accuse these well-meaning folks of practicing idolatry by worshiping government. Jim Wallis truly believes government can cure poverty. John Edwards honestly believes government can help people with spinal chord injuries walk again. And on and on down the line.
Now, bear in mind that I’m hardly the model Christian, so when I say I will “accuse” them, I merely mean to say that I will confront them about their sins, as I hope they would do with me. And certainly many on the libertarian-Christian-right (an ever shrinking community, I fear) frequently argue that my friends in the old-line Religious Right worship government by pursuing halts on abortions and gay marriage strictly through government means (this is a frequent theme in Cal Thomas’s columns). So the Religious Left is hardly alone in the kind of idolatry I’m talking about.
But the business of raising taxes to increase the size of government as a vehicle of redistributing wealth all in the name of Jesus, which is Jim Wallis’s game, is a truly heretical understanding of the Christian’s obligation to help the poor. Raising other people’s taxes, paying your own taxes, and increasing the size and scope of the welfare state do not amount to Christian charity. As Pope Benedict has written: “Christian faith has never presumed to impose a rigid framework on social and political questions. … Christians must reject political positions and activities inspired by a utopian perspective which, turning the tradition of biblical faith into a kind of prophetic vision without God, makes ill use of religion by directing consciences towards a hope which is merely earthly and which empties or reinterprets the Christian striving towards eternal life.”
anklebitingpundits.com
amazon.com
arthurbrooks.net
anklebitingpundits.com
catholic.org |
