RECOVERY OR RELAPSE? Biblical Resources for Our Economic Future

Uncategorized

Is there a word from the Lord?  This anguished question – spoken aloud or uttered in secret – cries out to present-day Jeremiahs.  Retirees bagging groceries, their grandkids interrupting college; unmanageable mortgages and bankruptcies; the unemployed, sharing the news or keeping it secret.  Unsettling feelings—anxiety, fear, or sheer panic; discomfort, sadness, or depression; sleepless nights and days of agitation.  People need a pastor.  Is there a word from the Lord?  If only we could return to October 2007, the Dow at 13,000, we muse.  When an addict “goes back” it is called relapse, not recovery.  Dare I suggest that our desire to go back economically is addiction from which we must recover?

Unsustainable, unjust and unfulfilling

The economy we must leave behind was environmentally unsustainable.   Our environment is like a bank account—deposits and withdrawals must be balanced to maintain viability and longevity.  Sustainability requires depletion at the rate of global replenishment and waste production at earth’s capacity to absorb it.  Global deforestation, rapid loss of arable land, “dead zones” clogging the mouths of rivers or floating toxic islands in the world’s oceans, massive depletion of the large fish population.  Unfettered globalization, unbridled growth accelerates momentum toward global environmental collapse.   It was socially unjust.  The quarter century after World War II a “rising tide did lift all boats.”  Wealth generation rose steadily and equitably.  Dramatically in the ’80s, precipitously in the ’90s, the gap between the rich and the non-rich dramatically widened.  And it was spiritually and psychologically unfulfilling, spawning the highest rate of mental illness in the world, 700,000 treated daily for alcoholism, 75 percent of physician appointments for stress-related conditions.  Loneliness and isolation are epidemic, what researchers term “symptoms of malaise,” with suicide rates steadily increasing.  Drug wars are fought abroad, with U.S. drug consumption the highest per capita on the planet.

Toward Biblically Based Economics

The biblical tradition offers foundational themes and core elements for a more environmentally sustainable, socially just, and spiritually fulfilling economics.  Let me offer eight.

1. Creation EconomicsBounty and Abundance

In the creation story’s repeated phrase – and God saw that it was good – “good” is an exuberant, scintillating, pulsating word better translated “bountiful, overflowing, lavish.”  Our planet can produce food enough to feed seven times its population, every nation potentially food self-sufficient. Worldwide hunger is thoroughly unnecessary, a travesty and embarrassment.  The earth can produce abundance for all, so scarcity is a contrived, not an intrinsic, issue.  

2. Manna EconomicsEnough

In Egypt the Hebrews knew only imperial economics, wealth concentrated in the hands of an elite minority, an economics of accumulation resting on the backs of an enslaved people. The “two weeks walk that took forty years” and buried and birthed an entire generation, trained a people for an ethic of sufficiency.  Manna, nourishing and tasty, plentiful but unable to be hoarded, demonstrated that enough is plenty.

3. Promised Land EconomicsFair Distribution

The Book of Numbers offers stories of intrigue and frustration, preparing a people for freedom. Finally glimpsing that “land flowing with milk and honey,” the land is assigned:  each tribe’s allotment based on population, that land divided among tribal families equitably.

4. Sabbath and Jubilee EconomicsRedistributio 

Inequality, over time, becomes inevitable – luck, differing degrees of healthiness and heartiness, the vagaries of weather – a second generation, then a third inheriting a legacy of gain or loss.  Yahweh proposed correctives to re-level the playing field – yes “strategies of redistribution.”  The Sabbath and Jubilee years with their sweeping redistribution agendas. 

5. Nazareth EconomicsJubilee Reaffirmed

Jesus sermon at Nazareth appears to renew the Jubilee year, sounding of a core theme of Jesus’ mission and ministry, a theme echoing resoundingly in Luke’s gospel – the political, economic and social thrust of Luke’s Beatitudes; the “evidence” offered to John the Baptist’s query; Luke’s fragment of the Lord’s Prayer; and the twin feast stories, the best seats reserved for the poor and disabled.

6. Table-Turning Economics – Status Quo Upended 

Jesus mini-rampage in the Temple, over-turning the tables of merchants and tax collectors, seems not so much to protect worship space as to symbolically “overturn” an unjust economy featuring collusion of a Roman, Jewish and ecclesiastical cabal.  (In the prophetic tradition: challenging unjust business persons and an unjust economic system).

7. Barnabas EconomicsRadical Commonalit 

The evidence is unassailable and unambiguous: that the radical economic sharing advocated and practiced by Jesus became normative in the early church.  Resources were held in common, even capital reserves liquidated. No one was in need.  This sharing was practiced with exuberance, communal deepening and shared joy. 

8. Corinthian EconomicsJustice, not Charity

2 Corinthians 8 and 9 profiles Paul’s theology of giving, justice not charity, a call to a “fair balance” between one person’s abundance and another’s need, “the one who had much did not have too much, and the one who had little did not have too little” –the “abundance of the rich” met by the “abundance of the poor.”

AN URGENT, UNAVOIDABLE, ESSENTIAL FINAL WORD

These words are a challenge to pastors and everyday Christians to renew the message and movement of the prophets.  But who wants to go there?! Amos and Micah spoke their prophetic truth and scurried out of town. They intermittently threw Jeremiah into the nearest cistern. Only the power of Jesus’ person saved him from summary execution after his Nazareth sermon.  Speaking truth to power is risky business.  Such prophets are grounded in a spiritual practice, walk the talk of a new economics, wean from consumerism and materialism, re-visit their family expense budget as a moral document.  A daunting, daring, humble calling!

5 Comments

5 Responses

  1. C. Observer says:

    You are only in danger if you actually succeed. Governments are more inspired by Herod than they are by Jesus.

  2. Howard says:

    Dear C. Observer,

    You are, by the way, the single day record-holder for responses to my blog postings and I am appreciative. You have a delightfully cryptic, quite engaging, writing style. I’d love to hear more of your basic ideological/philosophical perspective. What you’re seeing and what you sense is called for. Jim Wallis and Sojourners magazine, David Korten’s writing an Yes magazine, biblical scholars Ched Myers and Walter Wink feel like partners in this effort to name what does not/cannot work about economics-to-date and what just might be “componant parts” as well as a fresh perspective on “doing economics.” Who and what do you read? With whom do you feel resonant? Do continue the dialogue.

    Howard

  3. C. Observer says:

    Howard, your responses encourage my moving in several directions. However, most of your queries will be answered indirectly by my progressing in one.

    If you don’t see the effective political power in the US as belonging to an oligarchy, then it will take a lot of explanation to get you to see the argument much less accept it.

    Some examples of members of the oligarchy: Bechtel Construction, Halliburton, Goldman Sachs, Kellogg Brown and Root, JP Morgan Chase, Morgan Stanley, Bank of America, Alcoa, Exxon Mobile, Shell, British Petroleum, Chevron, Cargill, GE, GM, Coca Cola, Pepsi Co, Verizon, Comcast, and others. They act either in collusion or out of common interest to sculpt a body of law that favors their profits at the expense of anything else including the general welfare. They do this with money: Money for lawyers, money for lobbyists, money for politicians. Their executives don’t need general welfare as long as their personal welfare is provided by the profits of their companies.

    If the government were not run by the oligarchy, there would have been no bank/wall-street bailout. In the two years since this latest financial crisis, there has been no significant financial reform, and no significant perpetrators have been prosecuted. The bailout was preceded by a long string of government policies and actions that favored the financial sector: regulation was reduced, toxic financial practices were allowed to proliferate unchallenged, cheap money was provided to banks with ridiculously low interest rates, the IRA and 401K were created bloating the stock market, and all the while the government ignored it’s own fiscal responsibility.

    If you accept that the government is essentially run by an oligarchy (via a revolving employment door between government and oligarchy members, through managers responsible for keeping politicians’ investments growing by any means, through campaign contributions, by agents of the oligarchy posing as expert consultants to politicians and the government, etc…), AND if you do not like the way the government runs, then you can consider at least two choices: join the oligarchy and create your own hegemony (empower it to do only your will), or defeat the oligarchy (make it powerless).

    Both of these require that you have a more effective weapon than the oligarchy which means, essentially, that you need to have more money than the oligarchy. Good luck with that.

    The oligarchy has been fought before and the war was lost. In the war, a body of laws was passed, watchdog groups were established, and the regulations of the watchdogs were enforced. It was called the New Deal. This suppressed the power of the oligarchy for a time, but the oligarchy simply bought the politicians and had the laws and regulations removed. The periods in American History, when the oligarchy was weakest, were during the presidencies of Polk, Theodore Roosevelt, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and Kennedy/Johnson. The next move of the oligarchy will be to remove or neutralize the watchdogs. Expect to see, among others, the fall of the FCC, the Consumer Financial Protection Agency, the Environmental Protection Agency, and others. What teeth they have left will be removed.

    When third world political observers complain that the US still supports Manifest Destiny as a political policy, they are usually complaining that US policy is to achieve hegemony in every relationship that it has with other political bodies. It doesn’t matter what the form of the relationship (member of the UN, member of NATO, participant in a trade agreement, etc.) may be, the US only contributes or participates if the US is able to exercise control over the power in evidence. The problem, the political observers have, is that if the US fails to achieve hegemony, the US either doesn’t play or doesn’t play nice. As these political observers support a political entity that is not the US, their question becomes why should the political entity that I support participate when that places it in the position of slave and not master. US diplomacy counters this by claiming (successfully fairly often) that the other participants will gain by letting the US exercise hegemonious control.

    The US doesn’t participate unless it is allowed to exercise some control. Military War is only one of the tools that the US exercises to establish control. The US perfers to leave military war as the tool of last resort because it is so costly (how that cost is paid is another question). The military industrial complex arm of the oligarchy inflates that cost to gain profit. The coffers of the government are under constant attack. Simultaneously, while appearing to avoid war, the US must show willingness to use that tool. Both the carrot and the stick are required to maintain the hegemony.

    The political observers fail to mention, or understand, that hegemony is the goal of every political entity that thinks it has power, or of every political entity that thinks it can trump perceived but undeployed power.

    Saddam Hussein made the mistake of thinking the US would not resort to war. Twice. Those wars were about oil, and oil is about money, and money is how the oligarchy gets power.

    …but of course, if we really said it was about how the oligarchy gets power, we would be conspiracy theorists. So, we’ll not say the war was/is about any of those things. We’re allowed to say it’s about almost anything else that the righteous will support. For instance, we can say the war was about chemical weapons used against Iranians, or about poison gas used against Kurds, or about maltreatment of political dissidents, or about discrimination against some cultural groups, or about providing sanctuary for terrorists, or about the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.

    An oligarchy is a form of government in which power effectively rests with a small elite segment of society distinguished by royalty, wealth, family ties, military might, or religious hegemony. Can we imagine that people in power, those who exercise the power of the US, see their own roles within government as being much different than how they see the role of the US in the world?

    There are no Mr. Smiths (Jimmy Stewart) in Washington. They changed the fillibuster rules anyway. To change the government, the wall of money has to come down.

  4. Peggy says:

    Wow – I found this blog because I was wandering around the internet after buying your most recent book, Howard, which I saw referenced in an Alban email. I bought it because I loved your earlier RECOVERING THE SACRED CENTER, and have done some teaching from it in both congregation and lay leadership Academy in Maine (I’m UCC clergy). The people who have commented on your recent book are some of the people who are teachers to me, so it feels like a kinship here.

    I really appreciate your listing of the Biblical economic themes. (I did a stewardship series on Ched Myers’ Sabbath Economics a couple of years ago – not sure how successful it was – the church ended up closing, tho with a surprisingly positive outcome). Then I read C. Observer’s reply about oligarchy – there is some kind of -ocracy that arises in my mind as I try to follow his thinking.

    The other thing that arises here is a comment from Meg Wheatley, another one of my teachers – about emergence theory, relative to globablization, but I wonder if applicable here: once something like globalization is functional, you can’t dismantle it. The only hopeful/helpful response is for another force to emerge which can then limit the growth because the open field is a bit less vast. So – what would be the force that could counter oligarchy? (As I try to picture this, I’m not sure the image holds, because I also believe in vastlessness, so it’s not like two forces filling a given space, but one force which is influenced by the presence of another force as they both evolve, and thus each is contained somewhat by the other, or others.)

    I am heartened by the number of folks you seem to have found who are some of the folks I have found – there are a goodly number of us intent on living from a different value system and thanks to the internet it is easier to find folks – and to form links.

    I have had two significant experiences in the past several years, one recently within the UCC and the other in Snowmass Monastery, where I had a clear sense of being in a group where God was pulling a whole bunch of people forward to something unknown. As I try to put words together here, this also feels like part of the pulling –

    Thanks for your writing – I look forward to reading the book!

  5. Howard says:

    Dear Peggy,

    Thanks for your “wow!” . . . authors (and bloggers) can wonder “is there anyone out there?” I’d love to know more about who and where you are (we pass through Maine each summer, usually a leisurely sojourn. And I’d love to hear more about how you’ve used my writing. C Observer is head by twenty lengths in terms of number of responses. I still have some to respond to and he surely has made me think. It got me back to reading Howard Zinn, whose writing has had deep impact on me. Thanks, Peggy.

    Howard

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>