Pragmatism Under Christian Veneer

Insult to Injury

In the Wild West the legend has it that tough sheriffs demanded folk check in their guns before going into town.  There are some who argue that Christians should do the same when they come into that great metropolis called the "Public Square".  This would seem to be a view shared by two Christians, Michael Gerson and Peter Wehner who have argued a case for Christian involvement in politics.

Here is the heart of their argument:

One way of [translating our religious convictions into language and images that can illuminate for all our fellow citizens the truths of how we ought to live together] . . . is through an appeal to natural law.  This is a venerable theory that posits basic rules of conduct that are inherent in human nature, essential to creating a civilized society, and valid and applicable everywhere and always.  Natural law theory asserts that a "moral logic" exists, that it is accessible through human reason and reflection, and that does not depend solely upon revelation.  To set forth, by its lights, the rights that are due to human beings qua human beings  is to provide an ecumenical lens through which to judge individual policies.  [Michael Gerson, Peter Wehner, City of Man: Religion and Politics in a New Era (Chicago: Moody Press, 2010), p. 118. The material in square brackets is a quotation from George Weigel cited by the authors.]

So, there is a general moral logic common to all men and inherent in human nature which can be appealed to on the basis of human reason and reflection.  When we are working in the political or public square, we should appeal to this, whilst checking in Scripture at the gate.  We Christians can find common ground with Unbelief, and we can stand on that ground and reason together.

So how does that work out?  The authors provide an example: their apologia for capitalism.   Firstly, the authors assert that economic systems are not a matter of church doctrine.   That may be a claim reflecting the sociology and modern practice of the contemporary church, but it is not true of the historical Church.  That Church freely confessed economic doctrines, and inscribed them into creeds and confessions, whenever it believed it had rightly understood scriptural teaching on the subject.

Secondly, lacking any reflection upon the Scripture, the authors state that the case for capitalism should be made on its merits, and they have plenty to say about that, they tell us.  Then comes a dose of classic American pragmatism.  The Scriptures say nothing, but we are going to tell you what economic system is best, because this thing called capitalism works best.  At that point, the authors have nothing Christian to contribute to the discussion.  They resemble secular men, employing secular reasoning.  This is what happens when you check your scriptural armaments in at the door before entering the room. 

First, no other economic system--not socialism, not autarky, and surely not communism--can compare to capitalism as an engine of economic growth, wealth creation, and human achievement.  This in itself should mean a great deal to anyone concerned for the poor and oppressed.

Capitalism has produced two things that for much of history were regarded as inconceivable: a large middle class and intergenerational wealth building.  In so doing, it has lifted untold numbers of people out of mass poverty and mass misery.  What is more, the medical, scientific, and technological advancements that have resulted from capitalism have brought wholeness and healing to countless lives.  By contrast, where capitalism has not yet taken root we find destitution, widespread misery and illiteracy, and much early death. (Ibid., p. 107)

Hmmm.  Nothing on the other side of the ledger?  What about exploitation, monopolistic behaviour, plutocracy, bribery and corruption, grinding the faces of the poor, etc.  Equally (negative) pragmatic arguments can be (and have been) made on the other side. 

And all this, despite the Scripture containing a great deal of revelation and instruction about work, wealth, poverty, charity, and labour.  After all, two of the Ten Commandments are explicitly focused upon property and upon what one possesses (the eighth and the tenth).  Much of the law of God is an explication and application of those two commandments.  Not relevant, say Gerson and Wehner.  We are all secularists in the public square.   Christians can have nothing distinctively Christian to say about economics and economic systems. 

Sadly, the authors claim apostolic authority for this kind of modus operandi--which makes their argument even worse.  It's one thing to make a mistake.  It's another to claim the Bible sanctions or warrants the error. That, as the saying goes, adds insult to injury.

We will address the injury in a following post.