Realizing Harmony

The “problem” of lifestyle? How can lifestyle be a “problem?”

Lifestyle is a “problem,” really, only for those who are able to live above a “survival” level of subsistence. And that would fit the vast majority of people living in North America – not just the United States. The question is: How much is “enough”? Or, at what point are we consuming and/or accumulating “too much”?

I’ve been reading “Your Work Matters to God” by Doug Sherman and William Hendricks. (1)
The authors explore the realm of work-life and its connection to spiritual life.

One of the issues they discuss is this issue they dub “The Problem of Lifestyle.”

Some may be tempted to say those are easy enough questions. Others, particularly those who like to be precise and those who have a deep desire to be “right,” will find them a lot tougher to answer.

Begin by identifying the “easy” things: What are your real NEEDS? And what are your responsibilities in terms of your family’s NEEDS? Do you have a responsibility or obligation to provide for others’ NEEDS? If so, what’s your obligation there?

How about WANTS… your desires for non-essential things? (This is where it may start to get difficult.) At what point does fulfilling your WANTS cross over into luxury, greed, or gluttony?

For those who pride themselves on ONLY spending money on NEEDS, and think you’re doing really well on that front… how can you justify reading this blog post – online, on a computer – when neither the medium (the web) nor the tool (your computer) are really necessities? If you find yourself arguing with that, then explain why those are necessities for you, while Billions in the world’s population have no access, much less “ownership” of either.

Well, “Your Work Matters to God” points out several (inadequate) “solutions” various people/groups have offered. The first three are:

1) Prosperity Theology. Claims that the Bible is “God’s Book of Success… by applying [its] truths… [one] can become the success that God designed [one] to be.”

Without quite coming out and saying it (in order to provide plausible deniability), the implication is that the Bible is “God’s Book of Fantasy” – providing whatever fame and fortune, health and love-life one desires.

But that doesn’t jibe with what the Bible actually says:

He said to them, “Beware, and be on your guard against every form of greed; for not even when one has an abundance does his life consist of his possessions.” (Luke 12:15)

2) The Franciscan Response (named after St. Francis of Assisi) Claims that God wants us to live more simply so that others might simply live. It’s a response that calls us to consider the plight of the poor.

Its claim is based on the notion that “the poverty of the poor is explained by the wealth of the wealthy.”

However, there’s an interesting quote from Michael Novak’s book, The Spirit of Democratic Capitalism, that points out the fallacy of this position:

For this there is not a shred of evidence. What causes wealth is intelligent economic activity. Societies can become wealthy through the blessings of nature, which the Creator distributed unequally. Yet richly endowed nations, like the Middle Eastern oil sheikdoms, can remain in poverty for millennia without awareness of the wealth awaiting their awakening. Societies may lack resources and, nevertheless, become wealthy, like Hong Kong and Japan. Societies may be colonies or former colonies, like the United States. Others, like some in Latin America, blessed with climates that make subsistence relatively easy, can languish without significant development for generations. Theories of wealth which try to ignore cultural factors miss the central point. Theories which overlook the importance of a system of liberty miss a crucial lesson of economic history.

Certainly, there’s an important place for considering the plight of the poor. I would say it’s imperative that we consider the poor, and try to help them out of poverty. But taking a vow of poverty, while possibly providing encouragement and empathy for the poor, will do nothing to lift others’ financial status up.

Novak goes on to explain the pathetic response from the Church:

It is, therefore, a sad commentary on the sociology of knowledge in the Christian churches that so few theologians or religious leaders understand economics, industry, manufacturing, trade, and finance. Many seem trapped in pre-capitalist modes of thought. Few understand the laws of development, growth, and production. Many swiftly reduce all morality to the morality of distribution. They demand jobs without comprehending how jobs are created. They demand the distribution of the world’s goods without insight into how the store of the world’s goods may be expanded. They desire ends without critical knowledge about means. They claim to be leaders without having mastered the techniques of human progress. Their ignorance deprives them of authority. Their good intentions would be more easily honored if supported by evidence of diligent intelligence in economics.

To put that in my words: Those who hold this mindset are under the false impression that economics is a zero-sum endeavor.

3) The Capitalist Defenders. Claim that Capitalism is God’s Will for mankind, that (similar to those who promote Prosperity Theology) God wants us to be wealthy (but in contrast to the Prosperity Theologians He supposedly wants it to come) through control and command of the American economic system.

While they are correct in stating that Capitalism is far more effective in generating wealth, there’s nothing inherent in Capitalism that requires one to consider the plight of the poor. And, while Capitalism has been shaped in part by Christian principles, it is by no means the exclusive “Christian” economic system.

They need to understand that it’s possible to defend democratic capitalism as an economic system without:
1) Confusing it with Christianity
2) Trying to show that it is the only possible “Christian” economic system
3) Needing to “Christianize” it in order to function in it
4) Excusing or ignoring its sins, flaws, and failures
5) Compromising one’s allegiance to Christian theology and practice

What is needed is a plan for generating/creating wealth – even excess wealth – combined with a heart for helping the poor to also generate/create wealth. (Just giving handouts creates more dependents who think little of their own capabilities, not self-sustaining individuals with good self-image.)

(1) I feel a need to “warn” you: the book starts out rather “heavy” or “dense”, probably as a result of it being apparently a re-written doctoral thesis. And it never gets “light.” But I believe it’s worthwhile reading.