Paul Soupiset is a graphic designer, illustrator, songwriter, liturgist, youth media consultant, journalist, mentor, typophile, husband, father, and self-described armchair theologian who lives in San Antonio, Texas, USA, with his wife Amy and four children.
Jesus was clearly a godless communist!
Oh, wait...
Posted by: Sean McMains | Wednesday, October 22, 2008 at 12:26 PM
Jesus never said "If you would be perfect, sell what you possess and give to governmental agencies to give to the poor..." Furthermore, ealth redistribution is not really socialism, and socialism is not what Jesus advocates.
But you knew that already, didn't you... :-)
Posted by: Kent Kingery | Wednesday, October 22, 2008 at 12:44 PM
agree with the sentiment, just not the follow through. i think we (and by "we," i don't mean we, but the collective western conscience) expect the government to take care of social ills so that we (once again) don't have to get our hands dirty. we are rejecting one corrupt empire and embracing another. i am not content with either dirty empirical system. i would rather be deshackeled to be as selfless and benevolent as possible.
Posted by: richard | Wednesday, October 22, 2008 at 02:34 PM
The idea behind Jesus words is personal responsibility, not government redistribution. I think the application of Jesus words to socialism seriously misreads Jesus and inaccurately applies his words.
Posted by: scott | Wednesday, October 22, 2008 at 02:38 PM
Thanks, Scott. Great food for thought.
Who agrees with Scott? Disagrees?
Discuss...
Posted by: paul | Wednesday, October 22, 2008 at 02:43 PM
I think Scott said it well. Socialism is a great idea, in theory. We all throw our possessions in a big pot and everyone shares.
Government socialism, however, is a small group of elites taking your stuff to put in their pot. The then dole out the goods as they see fit. Humans being, well, human, some get more and the keepers of the pot get the most. The poor stay poor, but now he system that is to provide for them traps them so they cannot climb out.
The human race is not equipped to properly implement such a utopia. We are selfish and fail. That's why the church, when we really understand where our loyalties lie and where our treasure is, can shine as we "share with those who have need."
Posted by: salguod | Wednesday, October 22, 2008 at 04:08 PM
it is funny, this thread
capitalism is somehow more christian than socialism ? where is personal responsibility a christian value ? how is it dirty to have people like us in gov't feed people, but not dirty to have them make law & execute war ?
as mlk said: The moral arc of the universe bends at the elbow of justice.
and that ain't just us, mi amigos
Posted by: bob c | Wednesday, October 22, 2008 at 08:27 PM
I have a tremendous amount of admiration for Catholic social justice, particularly outside of the lens that US politics puts on it.
In 1891, Pope Leo XIII launched a frontal attack on structural economic injustice with Rerum Novarum. As John Médaille summarizes, Pope Leo also gave solutions: "the just wage, the distribution of land, and worker associations."
As Pope John XXIII put it in Mater et Magistra,
Now is the time to insist on . . . the widest possible distribution of private property: durable consumer goods, houses, land, tools and equipment (in the case of craftsmen and owners of family farms), and shares in medium and large business concerns.
Posted by: bob c | Wednesday, October 22, 2008 at 08:49 PM
In a perfect world: Government should not redistribute wealth forcibly - we should each do it voluntarily. The Church should care for widows and orphans, feed the hungry, share all we have so that none are in need.
Reality check: Most everyone (believers included) get all they can, can all they get and sit on the lid. So without government enforcement of wealth redistribution, people in need are often forgotten.
Would this really change if our taxes went down or if the government simply stopped helping people? I have my doubts...
As usual, Christ's words shine light in the midst of my dark heart - exposing the greed and selfishness that I hate to admit is there.
Posted by: griff | Thursday, October 23, 2008 at 04:11 AM
@salguod:
You wrote: "The human race is not equipped to properly implement such a utopia. We are selfish and fail. That's why the church, when we really understand where our loyalties lie and where our treasure is, can shine as we "share with those who have need."
You seem to forget the fact that the "church", just like the government, is created by, run by, and composed of humans. Whatever failing the government can experience can and will be evidenced in the church as well.
Posted by: virusdoc | Thursday, October 23, 2008 at 01:20 PM
@griff
is it ever wrong to do the right thing? just because selfish, greedy american christians currently have no desire to the right thing (which by the way causes me to question their christianity, because it certainly is not the way of Jesus) does that mean we should institute (or alow for the institution of)another bad thing. the primitive church was [rightfully] skeptical (understatement) of empires. we would do well to have the same attitude.
american generosity sharply declined once the government began withholding income tax, because people had the expectation that the government would now be helping the hurting. not only has government done a crappy job at it, but we should not be content being left out of the benevolent process. i believe it is laziness on the part of those who would do the right and just things that allows the government to be in the redistribution business.
i wrote a few thoughts on the subject for blog action day on my blog. i would love for you to check it out.
http://epicdialogue.com/blog/2008/10/15/blog-action-day-poverty/
Posted by: richard | Thursday, October 23, 2008 at 04:46 PM
Why can't it be all of the above?
Individual Christians do their part.
Christians band together in churches and do the same.
Christians advocate for and support their government's initiatives in this area.
I just don't see the "either, or" here.
Posted by: rerc | Tuesday, October 28, 2008 at 07:12 AM
Well as broad as the word socialism is, there's room for the belief that this redistribution should be in the hands of the people, not the government. That is to say not all socialists want the government to be in charge of doling out money. So in this sense Jesus' words are, or at least seem, socialist.
I don't want the gov't taking my tax dollars to bail out the banks or to fight wars that are pointless. I would much rather my wealth (such as it is) get redistributed to those poorer than I or to schools that need books and supplies or to non-profits (faith based and not) that will do the Lord's work whether they realize they're doing it or not.
Our current government has and has had socialist practices. I think that those on the right that have been casting stones at those on the left need to sit down and think about that next time they eat an ear of corn.
Posted by: Scott | Thursday, October 30, 2008 at 08:58 AM
@virusdoc
You said:
"You seem to forget the fact that the "church", just like the government, is created by, run by, and composed of humans. Whatever failing the government can experience can and will be evidenced in the church as well."
True. But the church has no power of law to take from me and give to someone else. I can give freely to support whatever I feel is worthy. Church is voluntary, government is not.
Government welfare is inefficient and uncaring. Care for the poor by the force of law, as someone else indicated, dulls the desire to act in others. The government will handle it, it's their responsibility.
In contrast, personal acts of charity are born of genuine concern and love. It fosters community and binds people together. Of course, it is not perfect either.
There's room & need for both, I just find that individuals acting from the heart is preferable and more in line with Jesus' words.
Posted by: salguod | Friday, October 31, 2008 at 07:20 PM