Christian Charity versus Government Welfare; T. Johnson

Dr. Johnson is Associate Professor of Biology at Mary Washington College of the University of Virginia. 9,,19 One of the fundamental tenets of the Christian church is that the human is a creature possessing free will. It is because of the Christian recognition that man has control over his actions by means of his own will, that he is considered responsible for all of his actions. (Our system of juris prudence is built upon this foun dation.) It is also held that for a Christian to perform an act of charity and to gain the spiritual rewards for this act, it must be performed by the deliberate intent of the individual. An act of char ity - an act of helping those in need - can only be a Christian act when it involves the application of free will. It is the concept of free will that is absent from all forms of government welfare. A government, by its nature, can only act by means of force.

The first act of a government is a 1970 CHRISTIAN CHARITY VS. GOVERNMENT WELFARE 243 legislative one - the passing of laws - followed by the carrying out of these rules of social be havior by the 'executive a'nd judi cial branches. The government possesses a legal monopoly in the use of force in executing its duty of seeing that citizens obey the law, and in punishing them if they do not. Thus, the essence of gov ernment is coercion. Opposing Procedures Force and free will are oppo sites. Government welfare pro grams which are executed by means of law and the enforcement of this law, i.e., by the threat or application of force, are diametri cally opposed to Christian acts of charity which must be performed by an act of the indi vid ual will. Many Christians consider the support of government .welfare programs to be consonant with the tenet of free will, and one often hears the expression: "I am a taxpayer, and therefore I think that such and such a program should be supported by tax money." Such individuals forget the fact that taxation is not a matter of individual choice and that all men are bound by law to pay taxes. They also forget that although they should have the right to designate how their own property is dispensed in charita ble ventures, that they do not have the right to make this choice for other men. A majority voting for a welfare program supported by tax money is inconsistent with Christian behavior, for it abolishes the act of choice (free will) of all those who voted against the pro gram. (Such matters should never be brought to a vote for no man has the right to force others to support a welfare project.) True charity, without choice, is an im possibility, and when attempted, negates the concept of Christian love.

Every Christian realizes that he does not have the right to perform an act of charity at the forced ex pense of his neighbors - that he does not have the right to enter another's home and steal property that he intends to use in a charita ble venture. But when the act of stealing is impersonalized by au thorizing, by way of a vote, an established agency (government) to perform the confiscation for him, he loses a conscious aware ness of the immorality of this prac tice. As government welfare activity continues to expand at a phenom enal rate of speed, greater sums of money are required to support this "charity-by-force" undertak ing. Taxation thus remains at a high level, with more of the tax dollars diverted to welfare pro~ grams, leaving little money in pri244 THE FREEMAN April vate circulation which can be used for Christian charity. Govern ment welfare action is, of neces sity, destructive to Christian giv ing and will almost completely stifle voluntary acts of benevo lence if the present trend con tinues.

Misguided Sense of Charity Supports Coercive Measures Because of a lack of understand ing of one of the basic premises of Christian belief - that of free will - and its application to acts of charity (welfare), most well 111eaning, but misguided, Chris tians have vigorously or silently supported government welfare programs. Others, observing the disastrous consequences of legal ized welfare - the demeaning of the human spirit and the creation of parasitical degeneration, as well as the enslavement of the produc tive members of society who are required, by law, to provide sup port for' welfare recipients - do not wish to continue to uphold the cause of this evil (government welfare legislation). But they feel a strong sense of guilt if they do not do so, and fear that if they oppose government welfare they will be considered as unchristian. In reality, nothing could be fur ther from the truth.

Any Christian who does not openly and vehemently denounce all forms of government welfare, cannot, in truth, call himself a Christian, for government welfare is the antithesis of Christian char ity. Government welfare operates on the premise of force, whereas Christian charity can only exist where there is freedom of choice where there is an act of the indi vidual will. Since government wel fare programs are outside the con trol of the individual, and thus outside the realm of free will, they are outside the province of Chris tian morality and are consequently evil, and must be condemned by all moral men. I t is not only the right, but the duty, of every Christian to ac tively seek the demise of all gov ernment welfare programs, for they are in total conflict with the Christian doctrine which recog nizes man as a being possessing free will - the fundamental prem ise upon which all Christian mo rality is based. I) IDEAS ON LIBERTY Goethe TREAT people as if they were what they ought to be and you help them to become what they are capable of being.