A Short Paper On Sharing God’s Gifts
The aim of this short paper is to introduce several mutually interconnected remarks from a field common to ecology, economy and ethics. The paper is intended to accord with the document Reformed Faith and Economic Justice, Metanoia, Vol. 6, No 4, Winter 1996-7; it simply views some paragraphs of that thorough text from an other angle and stresses the need for Christian-engaged studies of the natural sciences.
From economic theory we know that there are three principal sources of wealth: (a) natural sources, (b) human labor, (c) capital. The last is a contribution of the past to the wealth of present, and so the primary sources are natural sources and human labor. The natural sources are the God’s gift to mankind; speaking about human labor we should not forget that it is God who has given man the ability to work.
The relation between primary sources of wealth is contained in a well-known Old Testament story about manna (Ex.16). God gave to his desert-wandering people enough food for their needs. He did not put it into their mouths. Labor - the gathering of the manna - was important. Everybody could gather as much manna as he/she needed. In addition he/she could add effort e.g. to prepare food. But people were not allowed to gather more manna than they needed, and then to use it for some other purpose, to stock it or to transform God’s gift into an object of speculation. Whoever did so, was punished by the terrible smell of spoiled food. To be filled people needed both God-given manna and their own efforts, but much more important was the first: the God’s gift.
In this model story from the Bible, God himself supervises his gift, so that it should not be misused. Today mankind has great freedom with God’s gifts. We have received from God the ability to think. We can study the created ‘KOSMOS’. We know, as Gándhí said, that the Earth is sufficiently rich for the needs of all people, but not for their (our) greed. Nowadays we surely know that natural sources are limited. A bad feature of our economies is that they do not distinguish between scarce natural sources and the products of human labor. It is just and right, that he/she who more works, should also use the products of human labor on a larger scale. But our economic rules enable he/she who has more money, to take more from the wealth that God gives to human beings in a sufficient, but limited amount. If one takes more, another has nothing or less than he/she needs. The Gospel challenge seeks a way out of this amoral situation. Jesus’ disciples at the end of the 20th century must not put their heads into sand as ostriches do; they have to make every effort to (1) create an economic system acceptable from the viewpoint of Christian ethics, and (2) to outline an appropriate transition strategy. This is a complex important task which must not be postponed. It concerns the whole culture, including basic paradigms of perception and subjective interpretation of reality.
Both history and the present provide a broad consensus on all problems within democracy, which is the best system so far known, to support human dignity. But our concept of democracy is strongly influenced by neocapitalist dogma of the determination of economic development, based on the mechanism of the free market; this dogma proclaims that an uncontrolled free market is a necessary condition for democracy 1. However, Jesus’ Gospel brings full freedom, it frees man also from contemporary neoliberal paradigms, supported by the mighty and the rich (especially if they have such a narrow view of reality, that they do not see the risks for the future in the neoliberal free-market philosophy). People who are interested in their neighbor’s lives should give all their efforts to reform the economic system, regarding the responsibility for the natural wealth which God has given to mankind. As an example let us mention tax reform; exploring natural sources should be charged with rather high taxes (with some socially motivated exceptions, e.g. some defined amount of energy for everybody without that high tax); this would be compensated by lowering human-labor-dependent taxes - this solution could help not only to save natural sources, but to lower unemployment, too.
The economic order has to be changed. The natural sources must be saved and distributed more justly. It may be necessary to experiment. These experiments could hardly be realized on a global scale. So European economic integration and similar tendencies, supported by the existence of multinational (supra-national) economic companies, stabilize contemporary neoliberal ideology including its injustice.
Let us have a short look at another possibly negative feature of economic integration. Our next consideration will be based on the contemporary economic rules transforming every value to money. We will consider the distribution of wealth (including possessions and incomes) among subjects (persons, families, ...). The paradigm of non-controlled economics leads to the opinion that society tends to some „most natural“ distribution of wealth. This is like dry sand poured during non-windy weather, there is a „most natural“ shape of the heap. Similarly, in a relatively closed society (a state with customs and without the influence of multinationals) a natural distribution of wealth could be supposed. Very approximately it can appear that the n-th richest subject (person, family, ...) has approximately n times less than the absolutely richest (so called Zipf’s law).
Let us denote the number of subjects by N and let us suppose that the mean value is fixed. The smaller the closed society, the smaller its value of N. The statistical distribution is characterized by some global characteristics according to given purposes. So called standard deviation is one such very important characteristic. It shows how much individual values differ from the mean. In the case of Zipf’s distribution (and in the case of similar distribution, too) the standard deviation grows with the growing N. This simplified consideration shows that - if no regulation is introduced - the integration of economies should bring greater differences in the partitioning of wealth; one of its consequences would be a less just distribution of natural wealth, that is to say less just distribution of God’s gifts. 2
The complexity of our time needs a global approach and a global strategy. But liberal economic integration itself, with its stress on non-control (or self-control), contradicts that strategy. 3 Despite being an integration process, it builds new barriers (in the social field) among men.
The actual economic order and its tendencies satisfies the rich and the powerful. But it is not just, and its injustice deepens. Jesus blesses those who hunger and thirst for righteousness (we can understand the term righteousness as superior to justice). Jesus’ disciples should be the light of the world and the salt of the earth. Hunger and thirst for righteousness express themselves through personal engagement. We must seek the righteous distribution of God’s gifts, which have been given to all people, not only in the present, but also in the future. This is not an abstract task, it is connected e.g. with energy consumption, with the composition of the atmosphere, with food, with space in towns etc. Jesus’ Sermon on Mount in its very width and depth leads to the study of God’s creation in its whole complexity - to study both nature (natural sciences: physics, chemistry, biology, ...) and society (social sciences: psychology, sociology, politics, history, economy - the term science is used in a wider, Middle-European sense). And to study them seriously needs to use exact methods based on mathematics, logic and statistics and to link pieces of knowledge into a whole corresponding to the oneness and wholeness of all God’s creation.
To be the salt and the light implies not living somewhere in retreat. Jesus calls to prayer in the Spirit and the Truth. According to Paul’s word ‘Pray continually’ (1.Thess.5:17) all our life, all our personal efforts (including work in such fields as natural and social sciences, mathematics, economics, politics and so on) are part of our prayer. God’s promise belongs to the very prayer of righteous men. It belongs to the active life lived according to God’s will. To serve God with our whole personality, to engage for justice, for righteousness is very important and significant.
The contemporary world is much more complicated then it was when the books of the Bible were written. That is why the Holy Scriptures must be learned and interpreted with regard to the present, to the actual situation in every concrete region. This is the very important task of theology. That is why theology must not be separated from other disciplines; it has to communicate not only with the social sciences, but with the natural and exact sciences, too. The creation is an important aspect of theology - and it is linked primarily with nature.
Human sin affected all creation. But Christ’s sacrifice also concerns the whole creation (John 3:16: God loved the world). To preach the Gospel in its fullness means to reflect all creation as a very good work of God’s hands, to think of man in relation with all creation, which must not be something that can be destroyed, but something to be shared - as a gift from God - with all people living both in the present and in the future.
To stand on God’s side, not to be a non-useful servant, means (today more than in the past) to appropriate Jesus’ commandments of love - to love God in one’s whole personality (including mind and strength) and to love one’s neighbors, and so to share God’s gifts with them fully.
Jiøí Neèas
1 See also the paper Bellah, R.N.: The neocapitalist Employment Crisis, Metanoia, Vol. 6, No 4, Winter 1996-7
2 If the sources were high-taxed on a global scale, transportation becomes much more expensive, transportation costs will partially play the role of the former custom barriers and the spontaneous tendency to the „most natural“ distribution of wealth will be reduced.
3 For an analysis of the contemporary situation and transition strategy see the paper Gruson, C.: Pour refuser l’absurde, Metanoia, Vol. 7, No 1-2, Spring/Summer 1997.