Should the Government Enforce Charity?

Date Published: 04/13/2010

The provisions in the US Health Care Reform that call for subsidy to help low income people purchase health insurance has evoked a fascinating discussion. Some have argued that charity should be voluntary and not compelled by government taxation on the basis that the Bible says that people should choose to be generous with the poor, but it does not direct the government force people to give to the poor through taxation.

To be consistent, those who want to make this argument from the Bible should be openly donating at least a tithe (10%) to charitable causes. If that goes to a congregation of which the donor is a member (which I strongly endorse), the bare minimum such a congregation should be using specifically for the care of the poor would be a tithe (10%) of what they receive. Since so much of the giving of a congregation’s members benefits them directly, I would suggest that healthy congregations will be giving about a third of what they receive for the benefit of people beyond their walls, locally and globally. Would such a scheme be sufficient to care for the poor in our society? What would it take for the private sector (religious and secular) to take over all social service functions now supported by taxation?

One other area for exploration is in what ways and to what extent the Bible should inform the way the United States does government in the 21st century. I have written in other posts in this blog about why a truly secular government is better for the spiritual health of the Church than the public promotion of a generic, superficially Judeo-Christian civil religion. That might seem to suggest the Church intentionally taking over the social services now provided by the government. To be sure, from the earliest centuries, Christians have been in the forefront of care for the poor, marginalized, rejected, wounded. Across the centuries and across cultures, those in power generally exploit rather than care for the weakest in society. Christians as individuals and together as the Church have stepped in with compassion and advocacy for justice on behalf of the poor and weak, which has often put them at odds with those in power.

From Jesus until Constantine, Christians were outsiders to the power structures of society, so the New Testament and the early Church writers offer little direct guidance for what is the proper role for secular government. (Preserving order so the Gospel can be proclaimed is mentioned in places such as Romans 13:1-7.) What the Hebrew Scriptures might contribute and how to apply the principles of a theocratic monarchy to a 21st century democracy is not easy to discern.

A significant part of the tithe laws had to do with care for the poor, and the tithe was treated almost as a flat tax. It was not voluntary such as charitable contributions are today but was mandated by divine edict (Deuteronomy 14:28-29). The gleaning laws required intentionally leaving some of the produce in the field to be gathered by the poor (Deuteronomy 12:19-22). Gleaning was an intrinsic part of the culture to which any land holder was subject. In fact, the concern for property rights in our society was unknown, as land holders were thought to hold in trust for the community what actually belonged to God (Leviticus 25:23). Violating that was a grievous offense, such as Ahab’s confiscation of Naboth’s vineyard (1 Kings 21). The whole system of Sabbath and Jubilee Years (Leviticus 25) addresses a range of issues from equalization (redistribution?) of wealth to debt relief. In some sense it was community consensus that enforced these practices rather than the king’s government (see Ruth 2), but the king was specifically charged with maintaining justice and equality by both caring for those on the bottom and limiting those on the top of the economic ladder (Deuteronomy 17:14-20; Psalm 71:1,4,12). Especially the kings that claimed the Davidic line were supposed to be models of the ideals of the messianic king, who the prophets repeatedly said would bring justice to the poor (Isaiah 11:4).

I am not at all suggesting that the United States adopt ancient Israelite economic and government structures. We know that Israel practiced them sporadically and poorly, which some have taken as proof that they were impractical. That opens up a whole different area of exploration, how to understand the divine mandates of Scripture. While I think it is disingenuous or at least ignorant to say that the Bible does not enjoin mandatory giving (tithe – tax) to care for the poor, the social and cultural distance between the idealized Davidic Israel and 21st century United States prevents direct transfer of structures.

One of the greatest differences is between a theocratic monarchy and a secular democracy. While the New Testament doesn’t say much about how the Roman government should conduct its business, it does tell Christians to pray for rulers (1 Timothy 2:1) and to respect their authority, always recognizing that their primary allegiance and loyalty is to Christ (Acts 4:19). The way Paul uses his Roman citizenship in the legal system of the Empire, may give a clue as to what Christians should expect of secular government. At the top of that list is opportunity to proclaim the Gospel. I would propose that by extension in a secular democracy Christians should be advocates for justice, integrity, compassion – especially as it affects those who are least able to advocate for themselves. Whether embodied in government or social consensus, the measure of the nobility of any society is how it respects and cares for its weakest members and those who are considered to be different or alien.

I do not believe the Bible tells us specifically whether to be for or against the current national health care reform or what provisions should or should not be in another proposal. I don’t think the Bible tells us how to set up the tax or social service systems so that the poor are cared for. But I do think it urges Christian to advocate for justice and compassion for the weakest in our society and in our world in both government and social consensus. Even more, I am sure the Bible makes personal involvement in ministries of justice and compassion an integral part of Christian faith and congregational life. Of course, there will be differences and disagreements about how to accomplish this, but I suspect that if Christians adopted this goal and value, we’d find a lot more consensus about how to work toward achieving it.