Pay Your Air Share

How to let the market solve climate change
Matt Harrison | 2.16.08 | Environment

Urban Politics

Positive, race-neutral ideas to create equality of opportunity
Matt Harrison | 2.10.08 | Environment

The FCC v. Free Speech

Matt Harrison | 2.11.08 | Freedom

To attempt to achieve these Christian goals or duties by initiating force against others is antithetical to the ends themselves. Though physical force may be justified in some instances (such as self-defense, though Christ and many others refrained even from this and chose martyrdom), I do not see any way in which the initiation of violence can be seen as a moral way to advance the work of Christ. When Jesus taught kindness to the poor, do you think he meant it by first doing violence to the rich or middle class? When he taught righteousness, do you think he meant making others righteous on threat of fine or imprisonment?

I do not.

If we do not feel justified in using force to advance these goals individually, why should we feel justified doing it as a group, or hiring it out to others?

Everything government does is done by force. If it’s a new law or regulation, it is backed by threat of fine, imprisonment, or (if you are persistent enough in resisting) force to the point of death. If it is a welfare program, it is funded by tax dollars, which are not given voluntarily. Try not paying your taxes long enough and you’ll find that indeed, force is what’s ultimately behind tax collection. If it were not, it would be a voluntary association, not government. Government has nothing to give but that which it first takes, and it takes by force or the threat of it.

If you’ve accepted the Christian life (as I have) it should indeed transform your entire being and all your actions. Far from believing Christ’s example and words regarding righteousness or care for the poor to be merely spiritual commands, I see them as part of the holistic goal of His kingdom, and involving physical actions. However, I do not see these ends as a justification for violent means.

To attempt to use government to achieve Christian goals is to, ultimately, use physical force. This not only corrupts government, it corrupts the goals themselves and diminishes the true depth of the work of the Kingdom. It reduces a life-transforming message delivered by loving believers into a program for political preferences pushed by a religious interest group.

Oh, and it just so happens that the way nature and human nature work (by no coincidence), peaceful and voluntary means of helping the poor achieve unimaginably more than any force-backed government initiative ever can. If you don’t see the genius of God in economics, I’m not sure what it will take.

Christians should not only daily examine their hearts to see if their goals and actions are in line with the ultimate Truth; they should also ask themselves if the means they are using to accomplish those goals are righteous. Sometimes a government program would just be easier than doing the work of Christ ourselves, or organizing voluntary efforts. Then again, Christ never said it would be easy.

---------------

(Lest the reader think this is some kind of radical new idea or interpretation of Christianity, I might refer you to great Christian thinkers from St. Augustine to Leo Tolstoy (and many in between) who held much the same view. Augustine, arguably one of the greatest influences on western philosophy and theology, famously said, “What are the states but big robber bands, and what are the robber bands but small states?”)