Many
years before socialism brought about the collapse of the Soviet Empire, the
inadequacies of socialism were demonstrated right here on American soil. The
Pilgrims who landed at Cape Cod in the fall of 1620 at first attempted a
communal type of living, but disbanded it when it became obvious their
community could not survive with such a system.
The
Pilgrims Experience the Pain of Socialism
The Pilgrim’s journey
to America was funded by a group of venture capitalists who provided the ship
and supplies for their journey to the New World. In return, the Pilgrims agreed
to live communally with everyone receiving the same recompense for their work,
and with everything above their basic necessities going into a common fund to
be used to pay their creditors.
William
Bradford, who served as governor of Plymouth for many years, told of the
challenges of this socialist system. Young men, he said, resented getting paid
the same as older men when they did so much more of the work. As a result they
tended to slouch and slack since they knew they would receive the same no
matter how hard they worked.
The older men
felt they deserved more honor and recompense because of their age and resented
getting paid the same as the youngsters in their midst. Bradford said that the
women often refused go to the fields to work, complaining of headaches, and to
have compelled them to go would have been considered tyranny and oppression.
This socialist
system discouraged work and innovation and almost destroyed the colony. When it
became obvious that lack and perhaps starvation would be their lot, Bradford
and the leaders of the colony decided to make a change. After much prayer and
discussion, they decided to dispense with that part of the agreement with their
creditors that required them to live communally until their debt was paid.
They
Experience the Gain of Free Enterprise
According to
Bradford, they then divided the land around them, allotting to each family a
certain portion that would be theirs to work and use for their own needs.
Bradford said there was an immediate change. The young men began to work much
harder because they now knew they would eat the fruit of their own labors.
There were no more complaints from the older men for the same reason. And now
the women were seen going into the fields to work, taking the children with
them, because they knew they and their family would personally benefit.
Instead of
lacking food, each family now grew more food and corn than they needed, and
they began to trade with one another for furnishings, clothes and other goods.
They also had enough excess to trade with the Indians for furs and other items.
In short, the colony began to prosper when they got rid of their socialist form
of government and implemented a free, entrepreneurial system.
Of their
experience with socialism, Bradford wrote;
This
community [socialism] was found to breed much confusion and discontent and
retard much employment that would have been to their benefit and comfort . . .
and showed the vanity of that conceit of Plato’s, and applauded by some of
later times, that the taking away of property and bringing in community into a
commonwealth would make them happy and flourishing; as if they were wiser than
God (Bradford, Of Plymouth Plantation,
120-21).
No
Socialism in the Early Church
Based on a
superficial reading of Acts 2:44-45; 3:34-37, some claim that the early church
practiced a form of socialism. It should be pointed out, however, that their
having all things in common was not
the result of a system implemented from without, but a voluntary overflow of
compassion from within. This is confirmed by the fact that there is no evidence
that this community experience was ever suggested anyplace else, or that it
continued in Jerusalem.
That no one was
required to share their property and goods with others was made clear by the experience
of Ananias and Sapphira. This couple sold a piece of land and Ananias brought a
portion of the proceeds to Peter but claimed it was the entire amount. He was
struck down on the spot and when his wife arrived later and affirmed his lie,
she too fell over dead.
Their sin was
not that they had kept back some of the proceeds from the sale of their
property. They were completely free to keep it all if they had chosen. Their
sin was that they lied about what they had given to try and impress Peter and
others of their generosity and spirituality. They were hypocritical!
This is clear
from the words of Peter who said to Ananias, While it remained was it not your own? And after it was sold was it not
in your own control (Acts 5:4)? In other words, the property belonged to them
before it was sold and was theirs to utilize however they chose. And after they
sold the property, the money was theirs to use as they pleased.
This clearly shows
that there were no rules governing how the people used their property and money
in the early church in Jerusalem. Ananias and Sapphira were struck down, not
for holding back certain monies, but for lying in the midst of a mighty and
powerful work of the Holy Spirit.
Christianity
& Capitalism
Bradford
believed that socialism did not work because it ran counter to God’s will for
humanity in a fallen world. Because of mankind’s fallen state, he cannot be
expected to labor for no reward. In Scripture, God rewards individuals for
their labor and good works. Capitalism works because it is compatible with the reality
of human nature and the world in which we live.
For
capitalism to fully succeed, however, it must function in a strong Christian milieu.
Otherwise, the strong and powerful will trod underfoot the weak and poor. Capitalism
worked for the Pilgrims because they were a compassionate people who looked
after those in their midst when they were sick, injured or unable to work.
True
Christianity brings a compassion that helps the weak and poor, apart from initiative-destroying
government programs. This is what happened in the early church and is what happened
with the Pilgrims, who wanted to emulate that church.
Conclusion
Just a few years
ago, identifying one’s self as a socialist meant being ostracized from most of
American society. It would spell doom for a politician. That Bernie Sanders is attracting
huge crowds and grabbing so much media attention under that banner shows the
change that has occurred in the American mindset. It shows that much of the
American populace is willing to look to government as the answer for the nation’s
problems.
As Christians,
our responsibility is to call people to Christ and help them live out their
Christianity in the real world. Living out our Christianity means a life of responsibility,
not looking for government handouts but working and prospering in a way that we
can give a hand up to those in need. We desire the best for the greatest number of
people which is why we must pray for Bernie Sanders, but reject his vision of a
government-mandated socialist system in America.
Dr. Eddie Hyatt is an author, historian and ordained minister. His books on Spiritual Awakening and church history are available from Amazon and his website in both paperback and Kindle. To read about his vision for another great Spiritual awakening go to his website at www.eddiehyatt.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment