![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/nortonspeaks.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/03\/Jesus-Socialist-picture.jpg?resize=350%2C350\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Image credit: \u201cIcon of the laborers in the vineyard<\/a>,\u201d Ted at Flickr, Creative Commons\u00a0ShareAlike 2.0 Generic<\/a>.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n \u201cAll who believed were together and had all things in common; they would sell their possessions and goods and distribute the proceeds to all, as any had need. \u2026 Now the whole group of those who believed were of one heart and soul, and no one claimed private ownership of any possessions, but everything they owned was held in common. \u2026 There was not a needy person among them, for as many as owned lands or houses sold them and brought the proceeds of what was sold. They laid it at the apostles\u2019 feet, and it was distributed to each as any had need. (Acts 2:44\u201345; 4:32, 34\u201335; NRSV)<\/em><\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n \u201cThe Spirit of the Lord is upon me, <\/p>\n \u201cHe has brought down the powerful from their thrones, <\/p>\n \u201cBlessed are you who are poor, \u201cBut woe to you who are rich, <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\nThanks in no small part to folks like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Bernie Sanders, everyone is talking about socialism these days. Unfortunately, many Christians seem to be under the impression that socialism is at odds with their faith.<\/h4>\n
Plenty of other Christians disagree, of course. For example, theologian\u00a0David Bentley Hart<\/strong><\/a>\u00a0has\u00a0spoken about his democratic socialism<\/strong><\/a>\u00a0on\u00a0several occasions<\/strong><\/a>, and\u00a0Sojourners<\/em>\u00a0Magazine recently published a short piece by Obery M. Hendricks Jr. on \u201cThe Biblical Values of Ocasio-Cortez\u2019s Democratic Socialism<\/strong><\/a>.\u201d\u00a0AOC is herself a Christian<\/strong><\/a>, along with many other prominent democratic socialists, such as\u00a0Cornel West<\/strong><\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0Martin Luther King Jr.<\/strong><\/a><\/h4>\n
However, I\u2019ve yet to find a systematic examination of the many things Jesus had to say on this subject. So that\u2019s what I\u2019ve endeavored to put together in this article.<\/h4>\n
My apologies for the length. If I\u2019m not mistaken, this has turned into the longest single piece posted on NORTONSPEAKS.\u00a0 \u00a0But I wanted to cover as much as I reasonably could while limiting my scope primarily to Jesus\u2019 sayings in the canonical Gospels. (In practice, this has meant New Testament writings of Matthew and Luke. Mark in the New Testament Gospel contains parallels to many of the passages under discussion, but little unique on this subject. And John of the New Testament, while in no way contradicting these themes, simply has its main focus elsewhere.)<\/h4>\n
\n
Jesus was a socialist<\/strong><\/a><\/h4>\n<\/li>\n
The kingdom of God<\/strong><\/a><\/h4>\n<\/li>\n
The rich ruler & Zacchaeus<\/strong><\/a><\/h4>\n<\/li>\n
God & wealth<\/strong><\/a><\/h4>\n<\/li>\n
The rich fool<\/strong><\/a><\/h4>\n<\/li>\n
The judgment of the nations<\/strong><\/a><\/h4>\n<\/li>\n
The laborers in the vineyard<\/strong><\/a><\/h4>\n<\/li>\n
The shrewd manager<\/strong><\/a><\/h4>\n<\/li>\n
The rich man & Lazarus<\/strong><\/a><\/h4>\n<\/li>\n
Jesus is Lord<\/strong><\/a><\/h4>\n<\/li>\n
Conclusion\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/strong><\/a><\/h4>\n
Jesus was a socialist<\/strong><\/h3>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
It\u2019s not uncommon to hear people claim that the early church practiced a form of socialism. After all, the Book of Acts does seem to describe something along those lines:<\/h4>\n
But Christians of a capitalist bent tend to brush this aside with a stock response. The Book of Acts, they point out, is descriptive rather than prescriptive. That is, these early believers acted voluntarily, and Acts merely records what they did, but the book stops short of actually instructing other believers to follow their example.<\/h4>\n
Fair enough. On a technicality, they are correct. The Book of Acts does not explicitly instruct its readers to follow the example of these believers who sold their possessions, held all things in common, and provided for the needy.<\/h4>\n
For some, that\u2019s enough to make this an open-and-shut case. They happily dismiss socialism and move on. However, the more curious might not be content to leave it there. We might venture to ask: Why did the early church act in this manner to begin with? Where did they come up with these radical ideas?<\/h4>\n
I believe the answer is that the early church was acting directly on the teachings of Jesus because\u00a0Jesus was a socialist<\/strong>. That being said, I should acknowledge a few things about this claim before defending it.<\/h4>\n
First, the idea that Jesus was a socialist is obviously somewhat anachronistic. Socialism as a formal economic system did not originate until long after Jesus walked the earth. But as I will demonstrate, Jesus taught (and the early church modeled) principles very much in line with socialist thinking.<\/h4>\n
Second, socialism has always been a broad concept covering multiple variations and many different aspects. And I have little interest in debating what constitutes \u201ctrue socialism.\u201d However, I do need to specify what I mean by making this claim.<\/h4>\n
When I say that Jesus was a socialist, I am not referring to the communal ownership of the means of production. This aspect of socialism is certainly consistent with Jesus\u2019 message, and one could argue that it is a logical outworking from it for an industrial society, but it is not something Jesus ever specifically addressed. However, the socialist principle that positively saturates Jesus\u2019 gospel is the idea of fair distribution of wealth, \u201cfrom each according to their ability, to each according to their needs.\u201d And that is what I will be defending in this article.<\/h4>\n
Third, in the interest of full disclosure, I see Democratic Socialism as being well aligned with what Jesus taught. However, democratic socialism is an ideology particular to our time and culture, and I do not presume it to be exactly one and the same as Jesus\u2019 teachings. Jesus was a socialist in principle, but he left all manner of room for us to figure out the specifics of applying that principle today.<\/h4>\n
The Kingdom Of God\u00a0<\/span><\/h1>\n
To lay the foundation for this discussion, we first need to consider the kingdom of God (also called the \u201ckingdom of heaven\u201d in Matthew). Jesus framed all of his teachings within this concept. The gospel itself\u2014the good news that Jesus preached\u2014is explicitly about this kingdom (Mark 1:14; Matt. 4:23; 9:35; 10:7; 24:14; Luke 4:43; 8:1; 16:16).<\/span><\/h4>\n
The kingdom is the reign or rule or influence of God in the world. This should not be understood as a theocracy where Christians take over and impose their beliefs on others, but as the spread of Jesus\u2019 love-based ethic in all areas of life. So what does that look like? As Jesus began teaching, he provided a sort of mission statement for his ministry. Composed mostly of quotes from Isaiah, it summarizes Jesus\u2019 gospel of the kingdom:<\/span><\/h4>\n
\nbecause he has anointed me
\nto bring good news to the poor.
\nHe has sent me to proclaim release to the captives
\nand recovery of sight to the blind,
\nto let the oppressed go free,
\nto proclaim the year of the Lord\u2019s favor.\u201d (Luke 4:18\u201319, NRSV)<\/span><\/em><\/p>\nOf note, that last bit about \u201cthe year of the Lord\u2019s favor\u201d is probably a reference to the year of jubilee, described in Leviticus 25. Every 50 years there was to be a release from all debts, a restoration of property that had been sold, and a pause on farming to allow the land to recover. This would indeed have been good news for the poor and the oppressed. It would have prevented anyone from acquiring excessive wealth, and it would have ensured that everyone received their fair share.<\/span><\/h4>\n
We hear echoes of similar themes in portions of Mary\u2019s \u201cMagnificat,\u201d her song of praise to God for having chosen her to bear Jesus:<\/span><\/h4>\n
\nand lifted up the lowly;
\nhe has filled the hungry with good things,
\nand sent the rich away empty.\u201d (Luke 1:52\u201353, NRSV)<\/span><\/em><\/p>\nAnd these same reversals of power to care for the poor can be found among the blessings and woes Jesus pronounced:<\/span><\/h4>\n
\nfor yours is the kingdom of God.
\n\u201cBlessed are you who are hungry now,
\nfor you will be filled. \u2026<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n
\nfor you have received your consolation.
\n\u201cWoe to you who are full now,
\nfor you will be hungry.\u201d (Luke 6:20\u201321, 24\u201325, NRSV)<\/span><\/em><\/p>\nAt its most basic level, the kingdom of God means justice\u2014for the poor, the marginalized, the oppressed, the outcast\u2014and such justice demands that the rich and the powerful be brought low enough that everyone else can have enough.<\/span><\/h4>\n
Jesus taught that the kingdom is in our midst (Luke 17:21), but that it is also like a mustard seed\u2014starting small but growing ever greater (Matt. 13:31). Therefore he taught his disciples to pray, \u201cYour kingdom come,\u201d which means \u201cYour will be done, on earth as it is in heaven\u201d (Matt. 6:10).<\/span><\/h4>\n
And yet the kingdom is not something we can simply pray about and then wait for God to accomplish. We\u2019re meant to partner with God to bring about these kingdom purposes:<\/span><\/h4>\n
And in everything, as we know, he co-operates for good with those who love God and are called according to his purpose. (Rom. 8:28, REB)<\/span><\/h4>\n
When we say that \u201cJesus is Lord,\u201d we are proclaiming him to be the head of God\u2019s kingdom, and we are pledging our service to the spread of that kingdom. We are responsible to work for the changes that advance God\u2019s kingdom within the kingdoms of this world, until we can one day say, \u201cThe kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Messiah\u201d (Rev. 11:15).<\/span><\/h4>\n
So let\u2019s look a little closer at some examples of Jesus\u2019 teachings about this kingdom.<\/span><\/h4>\n
<\/h2>\n
The Rich Ruler & Zacchaeus<\/span><\/span><\/h2>\n
<\/h4>\n
We\u2019ll start with the story of the \u201crich ruler.\u201d It\u2019s found in Mark, Matthew, and Luke, but we\u2019ll quote the latter for now:<\/span><\/h4>\n
\u201cA certain ruler asked him, \u201cGood Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?\u201d Jesus said to him, \u201cWhy do you call me good? No one is good but God alone. You know the commandments: \u2018You shall not commit adultery; You shall not murder; You shall not steal; You shall not bear false witness; Honor your father and mother.\u2019\u201d He replied, \u201cI have kept all these since my youth.\u201d When Jesus heard this, he said to him, \u201cThere is still one thing lacking. Sell all that you own and distribute the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; then come, follow me.\u201d But when he heard this, he became sad; for he was very rich. Jesus looked at him and said, \u201cHow hard it is for those who have wealth to enter the kingdom of God! Indeed, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.\u201d (Luke 18:18\u201325, NRSV)<\/span><\/h4>\n
In all three accounts, the basic story is the same. The rich ruler had lived by the letter of the law, but he had failed the spirit thereof by accumulating so much wealth that should have been used to help others. So Jesus told him that he must distribute his wealth to the poor if he wanted to enter the kingdom of God.<\/span><\/h4>\n
At this point, capitalist Christians are quick to point out that while Jesus gave this instruction to a specific individual, he did not make it a universal mandate. As with the story of the early church in Acts, they are again correct on that technicality. However, Jesus did follow it up with a universal statement about how hard it is for such wealthy people to enter the kingdom of God. Per the comparison of a camel going through the eye of a needle, it\u2019s impossible. There is no place for excessive wealth in God\u2019s kingdom.<\/span><\/h4>\n
Of course we must use wisdom to discern the point at which wealth becomes excessive. The next chapter (Luke 19) contains the story of Zacchaeus, and the placement of these two stories in such close proximity is probably no coincidence. Jesus had just said that the rich ruler must sell all of his possessions. But for Zacchaeus\u2014who was rich, but likely not quite as wealthy as the ruler\u2014a slightly different solution would suffice:<\/span><\/h4>\n
Zacchaeus stood there and said to the Lord, \u201cLook, half of my possessions, Lord, I will give to the poor; and if I have defrauded anyone of anything, I will pay back four times as much.\u201d Then Jesus said to him, \u201cToday salvation has come to this house, because he too is a son of Abraham. For the Son of Man came to seek out and to save the lost.\u201d (Luke 19:8\u201310, NRSV)<\/span><\/h4>\n
In both cases, what is clear is that excessive wealth has no place in the kingdom of God. As for how much is too much, we can\u2019t say exactly how much either had in the first place, but the principle at work is something Jesus said earlier in Luke:<\/span><\/h4>\n
\u201cMuch is required from the person to whom much is given; much more is required from the person to whom much more is given.\u201d (Luke 12:48, TEV)<\/span><\/h4>\n
God & Wealth<\/span><\/h2>\n
Jesus elsewhere put it simply, \u201cDo not store up for yourselves treasures on earth\u201d (Matt. 6:19). This warning is found in his \u201cSermon on the Mount.\u201d And from start to finish, this famous sermon is all about what life should look like in the kingdom of God. While it covers a wide array of ethical teachings, Jesus\u2019 views on wealth sit right at the center of it all. A few verses after the above statement, Jesus goes on to say the following:<\/span><\/h4>\n
\u201cNo one can serve two masters; for a slave will either hate the one and love the other, or be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and wealth. Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or what you will drink, or about your body, what you will wear. Is not life more than food, and the body more than clothing? Look at the birds of the air; they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not of more value than they? And can any of you by worrying add a single hour to your span of life? And why do you worry about clothing? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they neither toil nor spin, yet I tell you, even Solomon in all his glory was not clothed like one of these. But if God so clothes the grass of the field, which is alive today and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, will he not much more clothe you\u2014you of little faith? Therefore do not worry, saying, \u2018What will we eat?\u2019 or \u2018What will we drink?\u2019 or \u2018What will we wear?\u2019 For it is the Gentiles who strive for all these things; and indeed your heavenly Father knows that you need all these things. But strive first for the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well.\u201d (Matt. 6:24\u201333, NRSV)<\/span><\/em><\/h4>\n
<\/h4>\n
I\u2019ve always heard this passage explained to mean that we should put our efforts into our spiritual life with God, and that God would then take care of our physical needs. The extreme \u201cprosperity gospel\u201d version would have us donate our every last cent to mega church pastors with the promise of God\u2019s blessings in return, while a more moderate version would view this as less of an absolute promise than a general principle. In either case, it\u2019s a transactional understanding of how God\u2019s blessings work.<\/span><\/h4>\n
Can we be honest for a moment? Can we admit that this just isn\u2019t true? Can we accept that it doesn\u2019t work this way? Can we own up to the fact that the devoutness of one\u2019s spiritual life has no effect on whether or not they are physically provided for?<\/span><\/h4>\n
Millions of people around the world do not have access to the basic necessities of life, and some of the most sincere Christians are among them. The last thing they need is to be shamed into believing that their lack of faithfulness is the cause of their suffering.<\/span><\/h4>\n
Not only is the traditional interpretation of this passage absurd on the face of it, but it is also contradicted by Jesus\u2019 own words from a few verses earlier. He taught that God, far from transactional giving or withholding provisions, blesses all people equally, \u201cfor he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the righteous and on the unrighteous\u201d (Matt. 5:45). And yet it remains an indisputable fact that people go without.<\/span><\/h4>\n
So what did Jesus mean in this passage? Why did he say that we have no need to worry? Was Jesus wrong? Or could it be that we\u2019ve missed the context for his statements?<\/span><\/h4>\n
I would again suggest that the necessary context is that of the kingdom of God. Inasmuch as the kingdom of God is in effect, all people will be sharing their possessions, and thus everyone will be provided for. Therefore, we must \u201cseek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness\u201d (better translated as \u201chis justice\u201d) by working to bring about this reality.<\/span><\/h4>\n
It is our job to work with God to bring about the kingdom. And once God\u2019s kingdom is fully in place, then \u201call these things will be given to you as well.\u201d In the kingdom, where wealth is distributed fairly, we will not need to worry about our basic necessities.<\/span><\/h4>\n
The Rich Fool <\/span><\/h2>\n
In Luke 12, we find a parallel version of this passage from Matthew. The section on worrying is nearly identical, but in Luke\u2019s version, Jesus prefaced it by telling his parable of the \u201crich fool\u201d:<\/span><\/h4>\n
\u201cThe land of a rich man produced abundantly. And he thought to himself, \u2018What should I do, for I have no place to store my crops?\u2019 Then he said, \u2018I will do this: I will pull down my barns and build larger ones, and there I will store all my grain and my goods. And I will say to my soul, Soul, you have ample goods laid up for many years; relax, eat, drink, be merry.\u2019 But God said to him, \u2018You fool! This very night your life is being demanded of you. And the things you have prepared, whose will they be?\u2019 So it is with those who store up treasures for themselves but are not rich toward God.\u201d (Luke 12:16\u201321, NRSV)<\/span><\/h4>\n
Here we see exemplified the kind of excessive wealth that Jesus says has no place in the kingdom of God. The land of this man produced an abundant crop, and that\u2019s a wonderful blessing in itself! But then he stopped to consider what to do with it. And by now, the answer Jesus would give should be clear. This rich man ought to have used what he needed and given the rest to others in need. Instead, he chose to store his excess wealth in new barns, where this blessing intended to provide for many people would be of no use to anyone.<\/span><\/h4>\n
With this parable in mind, Jesus\u2019 words that follow make even more sense: \u201cTherefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat, or about your body, what you will wear\u201d (Luke 12:22).<\/span><\/h4>\n
Jesus surely wasn\u2019t suggesting that we bury our heads in the sand and pretend we have nothing to worry about, despite all evidence to the contrary. Freedom from worry means that we truly have nothing to worry about. That will be possible once we live under kingdom economics that ensure our most basic needs are always met. And for this to happen, the rich must stop hoarding their excess and start sharing it with the poor.<\/span><\/h4>\n
God intends for the world to work in a certain way. When the world is working as God intends, the birds of the air will always have food, the lilies of the field will always grow into their beauty, and people everywhere will always have their needs provided. The fact that so many people are currently without provision means that the world is not working as God intends. And the reason for this is that some are allowed to hoard their wealth when they should be sharing with those who need it.<\/span><\/h4>\n
For those who would see God\u2019s kingdom come, there is nothing optional about the reversal of this grave injustice.<\/span><\/h4>\n
The Judgment Of The Nations<\/span><\/h2>\n
At this point, some of my readers will object because they believe caring for the needs of others should be up to individuals\u2014that we shouldn\u2019t involve the government. This is essentially a libertarian position. A Christian variation would suggest that it\u2019s the church\u2019s responsibility to care for the poor.<\/span><\/h4>\n
I can understand the appeal to this position. I went through a libertarian phase myself. It sounds nice in theory, but the fact is that it doesn\u2019t work.<\/span><\/h4>\n
We\u2019ve had hundreds of years of allowing individuals in a capitalist society to take care of others, and we\u2019ve had thousands of years of allowing the church to do the same, and both have proven to be insufficient. I\u2019m not saying that charity hasn\u2019t done any good at all\u2014absolutely it has! And we should certainly, as individuals and as the church, continue doing charitable work. But it\u2019s not enough. Individual philanthropy hasn\u2019t cut it.<\/span><\/h4>\n
However, if we work together as a nation, we do have the resources to eradicate poverty. There\u2019s enough to go around for everyone. The only reason this hasn\u2019t yet happened is that we, as a nation, have allowed individuals to amass excessive wealth and thus hoard what should be communal resources\u2014land, shelter, food, etc.<\/span><\/h4>\n
Jesus\u2019 parable of the \u201csheep and the goats\u201d is often (and I believe wrongly) explained as a judgment of individuals. But Jesus spoke of nations:<\/span><\/h4>\n
\u201cNow when the Son of Man comes in his glory and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne. And all the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate them from one another like a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. And he will place the sheep on his right and the goats on the left.\u201d (Matt. 25:31\u201333, LEB)<\/span><\/em><\/h4>\n
A number of popular translations replace \u201cthem\u201d (referring to \u201cthe nations\u201d) with \u201cpeople,\u201d making it sound as though it were a separation of individual people. But that\u2019s an interpretative choice that the translators have added to the Greek text. And it doesn\u2019t seem to reflect Jesus\u2019 intention.<\/span><\/h4>\n
The parable is often referred to as the \u201cjudgment of the nations,\u201d and I believe that\u2019s exactly what it is. The nations themselves are separated, and they are evaluated according to the standards of God\u2019s kingdom. What are those standards?<\/span><\/h4>\n
\u201cThen the king will say to those on his right, \u2018Come, you who are blessed by my Father. Inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world! For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me as a guest, I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you cared for me, I was in prison and you came to me.\u2019 Then the righteous will answer him, saying, \u2018Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? And when did we see you a stranger and welcome you as a guest, or naked and clothe you? And when did we see you sick or in prison and come to you?\u2019 And the king will answer and say to them, \u2018Truly I say to you, in as much as you did it to one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did it to me.\u2019\u201d (Matt. 25:34\u201340, LEB)<\/span><\/em><\/h4>\n
Feeding the hungry, giving drink to the thirsty, welcoming the stranger, clothing the naked, and caring for the sick and the imprisoned\u2014these are the criteria according to which Jesus judges a nation as righteous and as a part of God\u2019s kingdom.<\/span><\/h4>\n
Even if we were to assume, for the sake of argument, that the judgment of individual people was in view here, then this would still be based on their actions within the context of their respective nations. If individual people are being judged, then they are the people of a given nation being judged on how they acted as that nation.<\/span><\/h4>\n
One way or another, you can\u2019t remove the national element from this parable without fundamentally altering it. Jesus cares about how nations conduct themselves, and he judges them according their treatment of \u201cthe least of these.\u201d He gave no indication that such matters should be left up to individuals without any government involvement.<\/span><\/h4>\n
The Laborers In The Vineyard<\/span><\/h2>\n
Another objection is the idea that rich people deserve to keep everything they worked for. Here we\u2019re getting into one of the fundamental myths of capitalism. I don\u2019t want to get too distracted, as this article is supposed to be about Jesus\u2019 views, but suffice it to say that the rich do not become rich by hard work alone.<\/span><\/h4>\n
No doubt many wealthy people are indeed hard workers. That much is not in dispute. But gaining excessive wealth also requires a good deal of luck or the right connections or previous wealth to build upon or shady dealings or any combination of the above. The rich may work hard, but they do not work harder than the poor. And even if they did, it would not entitle them to an exorbitant lifestyle while others can\u2019t afford basic necessities.<\/span><\/h4>\n
In any case, Jesus had some thoughts on this as well. On the one hand, he affirmed that \u201cthe laborer deserves to be paid\u201d (Luke 10:7). But on the other hand, Jesus disagreed with the idea that greater work inherently deserves greater pay, as he explained in his parable of the \u201claborers in the vineyard\u201d:<\/span><\/h4>\n
\u201cFor the kingdom of heaven is like a landowner who went out early in the morning to hire laborers for his vineyard. After agreeing with the laborers for the usual daily wage, he sent them into his vineyard. When he went out about nine o\u2019clock, he saw others standing idle in the marketplace; and he said to them, \u2018You also go into the vineyard, and I will pay you whatever is right.\u2019 So they went. When he went out again about noon and about three o\u2019clock, he did the same. And about five o\u2019clock he went out and found others standing around; and he said to them, \u2018Why are you standing here idle all day?\u2019 They said to him, \u2018Because no one has hired us.\u2019 He said to them, \u2018You also go into the vineyard.\u2019 When evening came, the owner of the vineyard said to his manager, \u2018Call the laborers and give them their pay, beginning with the last and then going to the first.\u2019 When those hired about five o\u2019clock came, each of them received the usual daily wage. Now when the first came, they thought they would receive more; but each of them also received the usual daily wage. And when they received it, they grumbled against the landowner, saying, \u2018These last worked only one hour, and you have made them equal to us who have borne the burden of the day and the scorching heat.\u2019 But he replied to one of them, \u2018Friend, I am doing you no wrong; did you not agree with me for the usual daily wage? Take what belongs to you and go; I choose to give to this last the same as I give to you. Am I not allowed to do what I choose with what belongs to me? Or are you envious because I am generous?\u2019 So the last will be first, and the first will be last.\u201d (Matt. 20:1\u201316, NRSV)<\/em><\/span><\/h4>\n
Even though some of these laborers worked much harder than others, it did not entitle them to greater pay. Rather, the landowner was concerned that they all receive \u201cwhatever is right,\u201d which came to a normal daily wage for everyone.<\/span><\/h4>\n
So why was it right for everyone to receive the same wages, even though some worked harder? Because the wages they received were the wages they needed to care for themselves and their families. If the landowner had paid lower wages to the workers who came on later, he would have left them without enough. But if he had paid higher wages to the workers who came on earlier, he would have given them an excess beyond what they needed.<\/span><\/h4>\n
God\u2019s notion of what is right has little to do with proportionality, but it has everything to do with ensuring that all needs are met. According to Jesus, and according to socialism, it is not right for some people to earn excessive wealth while others do not have enough. It may sound counterintuitive to those of us indoctrinated in capitalism, but this is how the kingdom of God is supposed to work.<\/span><\/h4>\n
The Shrewd Manager<\/span><\/h2>\n
Related to the above objection, some will say that it isn\u2019t fair to take from some to give to others. However, we need to understand that the ultimate goal of socialism\u2014and of the kingdom of God\u2014is not so much taking from the rich to give to the poor as it is restructuring society so that there are no rich or poor to begin with.<\/span><\/h4>\n
That said, as we progress toward that state, one immediate method for reducing income inequality would be to implement fair taxes. The people who earn the most should also contribute the most back into society. For example,\u00a0<\/span>Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez<\/span><\/b><\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0<\/span>Elizabeth Warren<\/span><\/b><\/a>\u00a0have both recently proposed tax plans along these lines.<\/span><\/h4>\n
But Jesus seems to suggest that we go even further than that. In his parable of the \u201cshrewd manager,\u201d Jesus defies our notions of \u201cfairness.\u201d The manager blatantly gives away some of his master\u2019s wealth by cancelling portions of the debts others owed him:<\/span><\/h4>\n
\u201cThere was a rich man who had a manager, and charges were brought to him that this man was squandering his property. So he summoned him and said to him, \u2018What is this that I hear about you? Give me an accounting of your management, because you cannot be my manager any longer.\u2019 Then the manager said to himself, \u2018What will I do, now that my master is taking the position away from me? I am not strong enough to dig, and I am ashamed to beg. I have decided what to do so that, when I am dismissed as manager, people may welcome me into their homes.\u2019 So, summoning his master\u2019s debtors one by one, he asked the first, \u2018How much do you owe my master?\u2019 He answered, \u2018A hundred jugs of olive oil.\u2019 He said to him, \u2018Take your bill, sit down quickly, and make it fifty.\u2019 Then he asked another, \u2018And how much do you owe?\u2019 He replied, \u2018A hundred containers of wheat.\u2019 He said to him, \u2018Take your bill and make it eighty.\u2019 And his master commended the dishonest manager because he had acted shrewdly; for the children of this age are more shrewd in dealing with their own generation than are the children of light. And I tell you, make friends for yourselves by means of dishonest wealth so that when it is gone, they may welcome you into the eternal homes.<\/span><\/em><\/h4>\n
\u201cWhoever is faithful in a very little is faithful also in much; and whoever is dishonest in a very little is dishonest also in much. If then you have not been faithful with the dishonest wealth, who will entrust to you the true riches? And if you have not been faithful with what belongs to another, who will give you what is your own? No slave can serve two masters; for a slave will either hate the one and love the other, or be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and wealth.\u201d (Luke 16:1\u201313, NRSV)<\/span><\/em><\/h4>\n
I\u2019ve witnessed biblical teachers twist themselves in knots to try to get around what this passage seems to say. And I\u2019ve spent a fair bit of time doing so myself. But maybe this isn\u2019t that difficult of a passage at all, and we just don\u2019t like what Jesus said.<\/span><\/h4>\n
The shrewd manager gave away his master\u2019s wealth, and he was commended for it. Jesus then turned to his disciples and essentially said, \u201cGo and do likewise.\u201d<\/span><\/h4>\n
The rich man likely became rich precisely by holding the poor in debt. New Testament Scholar N.T. Wright explains that \u201cJews were forbidden to lend money at interest, but many people got round this by lending in kind, with oil and wheat being easy commodities to use for this purpose\u201d (<\/span>Luke for Everyone<\/span><\/i><\/b><\/a>, p. 193).<\/span><\/h4>\n
But even if he wasn\u2019t charging interest, the fact remains that he was rich, and his debtors were poor. He had enough that he could have chosen to \u201clend, expecting nothing in return,\u201d as Jesus instructed (Luke 6:35). So that\u2019s what he should have done. Instead, this man who had more than he needed demanded repayment in full from those who did not have enough.<\/span><\/h4>\n
Jesus said that the manager\u2019s method of reducing income inequality was an example of faithfulness. And then Jesus charged his disciples\u2014and by extension us\u2014to likewise be faithful with the \u201cdishonest wealth\u201d that \u201cbelongs to another.\u201d<\/span><\/h4>\n
If we\u2019re willing to take Jesus at his word, then perhaps we can accept that he wants us to use other people\u2019s wealth for kingdom purposes. This we are called to do as an act of faithfulness. A democratic \u201cwealth tax\u201d frankly pales in comparison to this radical idea from Jesus.<\/span><\/h4>\n
The Rich Man & Lazarus<\/span><\/h2>\n
Yet another objection claims that socialism is coercive. This view sees God as being non-coercive, and it asserts that we should thus avoid coercion as well. While I agree with the premise of non-coercion, this principle can easily be taken to an absurd extreme if not properly understood.<\/span><\/h4>\n