Tag Archive for 'military'

Christianity and Covenants: Christians And Employers

This is the third article in a multi-part series examining contracts and Christianity. Here is the full list of written and upcoming works in this series:

Christians And Employers
I want to preface by saying that some may find this article offensive. However, my goal here is not to judge the decisions that others have made or to condemn them, but to try and look at some biblical passages and consider what they mean with regard to the topic of employment. Let me also state that I am not coming at this from a position of compliance or adherence, my own employment history is full of disregard for biblical principles, and the course to right it is ongoing and has required many sacrifices. So please consider this as a word from one sinner saved by grace to another.

The most fundamental question to ask in working out the mess or the relationship between Christians and their employers is this: what kind of contract do Christians have with their employers?

The Greco-Roman cultural context of the new testament had several classes of labour relationships: slaves/masters, employees/employers, patrons/clients, heads of house/family and others. So when Peter writes “Servants, be submissive to your masters with all fear…”(1 Peter 2:18-20) or Paul writes “Bondservants, be obedient to those who are your masters…” (Ephesians 6:5), we have to keep it in it’s proper historical and cultural context.

Modern employees most certainly are not in the same category as ancient slaves. This is because employees are freely contracted - and they have been able to do this because our culture views a contract as an agreement between two or more parties or equal status. In the ancient world, slaves (and to a lesser extent: debtors and clients) had an inferior status to their masters - and this includes bond-slaves. It’s a concept entirely radical in a modern society which holds equality as a fundamental part of humanity.

Slavery is a relationship also defined by force - that is the threatening or delivering of aggressive violence. People who are being forced to work against their will, without an explicit contract, are slaves. In this sense, the relation of most people to their governments then, is a slave/master relationship - but this will have to be dealt with elsewhere, as we are focussing on employment. However, employment is a voluntary contract - not a coercive or forced one. We choose to work for an employer.

But the point is this: that the biblical language about slaves/servants and masters in not applicable to most employment. You boss is not your master and your co-workers aren’t slaves. However, this doesn’t mean that the bible has nothing to say about employees.

Making Employment Contracts
Because contracts with employers are voluntary, that is, we make them by our own free choice and as people of equal status with our employers, then we are responsible for our decisions. These relationships fall under the same kind of categories as “vows” in the bible - verbal (or written) agreements, often involving mutual obligation. And the bible has plenty to say about these relationships. A few examples:

Proverbs 20:25 - It is a snare for a man to devote rashly something as holy, And afterward to reconsider his vows.

Ecclesiastes 5:4-5 - Pay what you have vowed— Better not to vow than to vow and not pay.

Luke 16:9-13 - And I say to you, make friends for yourselves by unrighteous mammon, that when you fail, they may receive you into an everlasting home. He who is faithful in what is least is faithful also in much; and he who is unjust in what is least is unjust also in much. Therefore if you have not been faithful in the unrighteous mammon, who will commit to your trust the true riches? And if you have not been faithful in what is another man’s, who will give you what is your own? No servant can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or else he will be loyal to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon.”

If we agree to do something for our employer, then we should do it, and we should do it with quality and diligence. We need to leave no question that we have fulfilled our vows.

But implied here is a bigger principle - the place where the most care is needed is before we even make an employment contract. We should make vows that can exist in harmony with our Christian lifestyle and worship of God. Before even entering into an employment contract, we need to be asking basic questions:

Could this job interfere with my Christian obligations? As Christians, we are to be part of a local church, sharing the gospel and ministering to the body. It would not be wise to get a job which interferes with these things. Would my workplace be a gospel-free zone? Would my work schedule cause dramatic conflicts with fellowship and ministry in my local church? Does my job place undue burdens on my family, and my ability to lead/serve them? Are my children or spouse lacking in the reception of my biblical role/responsibilities because of this job?

Could this job require me to engage in immoral/unbiblical activities?  We might be surprised, if we thought about it, that there are a large number of culturally acceptable jobs which might go against biblical principles. I wonder how many soldiers ask themselves if what they are doing is defending against aggression or if they are actually engaging in a hostile initiation of violence against others. Could my my job be exploiting others? Might it promote, fund or contribute towards advocacy or endorsement of sinful or immoral lifestyle?

Could this job stifle my worship? We need to beware of taking on so much responsibility to our employer that it affects our mental and emotional capacity to engage meaningfully with God. Again the best solution is pro-active: could this job/promotion lead to me not having enough time to pray, to read my bible or consider who God is and what he has done for me?

It’s Never Too Late
We often don’t realise we’ve bit off more than we can chew with our employers until we’ve already made the contract. The bible takes this into account in other places - such as with divorces or marrying an unbeliever. We’re commanded not to do these things, but God has foreseen our inability - and yet he still sent his son to die on the cross for us. He knows that we are but dust. Just because we can’t share the gospel at work, have neglected the raising of our children or find ourselves “too busy” to commune with God does not mean we are hopeless or “outside” of God’s capacity to work with us. My family needs this word just as much as anyone - as we have both taken on plenty of contracts which have interfered with our Christian faith.

Many jobs and responsibilities can be drawn down, altered and amended to provide more time for more important things. However, this could mean that our material lifestyles must also be drawn down. My wife and I will likely never own a house or have a new car - but that is a small sacrifice. And Christians are not entitled to a middle or even lower-middle class lifestyle.

Ideally, a person who is working in an unethical profession would quit as soon as contractually possible. With some military jobs - this may not be possible, but even the military often allows for transfers/demotions to positions which are not directly contributing to the killing or harming of others.

Its easy for a person with a blog to say what should and shouldn’t be, and then throw out life-altering solutions. Trust me, it’s impacting me as well (just wait until I talk about debt!). But the point is that biblical principles aren’t measured relative to the contracts and vows we’ve made - rather, our life needs to conform to these principles.

McCain and Obama both Clueless on Patriotism

I never read Parade Magazine in the Sunday paper for the same reason I don’t read something like People or Time -  in short, it’s total crap. I am generally not interested in celebrity gossip, oversimplified political analysis or to know how much people make. However, I couldn’t help but see Barack Obama and John McCain on the cover with the question “What is Patriotism?” below.

Upon turning to the articles that each of them “wrote” (most likely someone wrote these letter for them), I was not surprised to see identical rhetoric from both of them. Essentially - patriotism is submission to the state and the total suppression of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

John McCain
The lead answer for McCain was: patriotism is “putting the country first.” Specifically, this means:

…it is the sacrifices of so many Americans, at home and abroad, in times of peace and times of war, that give meaning to all of us. We are blessed to be Americans, and blessed that so many of us have so often believed in a cause far greater than self-interest, far greater than ourselves.

McCain looks immediately to the military, war and militarism to sell his point. Americans need to support the American Empire because it is killing foreigners in their own countries which keeps us free and “give meaning to all of us.” Actually, McCain is right on this account. It was Randolph Bourne, after four years of this principle put into action in World War I (ironically, the “war to end all wars”) who wrote that “war is the health of the state.” McCain’s potential presidency, the careers of politicians and the constant expansion of government power in the name of never-ending emergencies or crises is sustained by drumming up and redirecting the fear of Americans from their own government towards some external threat - be it Iran, global warming or gas prices.

If the revolutionaries had this view, they would have gladly yielded to the British Empire and submitted to the taxes, trade restrictions and suppression of liberty (mild compared to the modern US Government). They would have fought for Britain in more foreign wars, personally submitted to its king and docily handed over their wages and wealth with a smile because they “put the country first.”

Barack Obama
Obama’s short answer was not so terrifying as McCain: “Faith in one another as Americans.” But it doesn’t take long for Obama to start praising war and welfare as the health of the state:

…true patriotism also means a willingness to sacrifice for our common good. For those who have fought on the battlefield under the Stars and Stripes—for the young veterans I meet at Walter Reed Army Medical Center or those like John McCain who endured physical torment while serving our nation—no further proof of such sacrifice is necessary. Those who have signed up to fight for our country in distant lands inspire me…

When politicians say “sacrifice” it means us, not them.  In times of “sacrifice” the government itself is increased and benefited while individuals are trampled upon, stolen from and killed. In other words, patriotism means that more individuals readily give up their lives, liberty and property with diminishing resistance.

For Obama, who would use the power of the state to dramatically interfere with economic liberty, this is especially true. So that insurance companies can have a state-enforced monopoly, American’s should sacrifice their their little-remaining rights to choice and freedom in healthcare. Perhaps we should also sacrifice to the special interests that both Obama and McCain would give our tax money to in the name of “fighting global warming.”

What Patriotism Is

I have never heard a more inspiring message of patriotism than one given on the house floor last year. A short excerpt barely does it justice:

The true patriot is motivated by a sense of responsibility and out of self-interest for himself, his family, and the future of his country to resist government abuse of power. He rejects the notion that patriotism means obedience to the state…

Statism depends on the idea that the government owns us and citizens must obey. Confiscating the fruits of our labor through the income tax is crucial to the health of the state. The draft, or even the mere existence of the Selective Service, emphasizes that we will march off to war at the state’s pleasure.

A free society rejects all notions of involuntary servitude, whether by draft or the confiscation of the fruits of our labor through the personal income tax…

Resistance to illegal and unconstitutional usurpation of our rights is required. Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing. Let not those who love the power of the welfare/warfare state label the dissenters of authoritarianism as unpatriotic or uncaring. Patriotism is more closely linked to dissent than it is to conformity and a blind desire for safety and security. Understanding the magnificent rewards of a free society makes us unbashful in its promotion, fully realizing that maximum wealth is created and the greatest chance for peace comes from a society respectful of individual liberty.

Ron Paul outlines patriotism in a nutshell: it is unwavering resistance to collectivism and an authoritarian state.

McCain and Obama clearly would move the government in a more authoritarian direction. They are both anti-patriots, who triumph the suppression of individual rights and expansion of power (and the inevitable resulting abuse) of the state.


Recent Forum Topics

Archives

You are currently browsing the Zeal For Truth weblog archives for 'military' tag.

You are currently browsing the Zeal For Truth weblog archives for 'military' tag.

March 2010
M T W T F S S
« Feb    
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031  

You are currently browsing the Zeal For Truth weblog archives for 'military' tag.