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 to go to the fields to work, complaining of headaches, since 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 unsold,
was it not your own? And when it was sold, was it not under your
authority?" (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
and 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.
For a limited
time, we are extending our celebration of the 40th anniversary of Charisma. As
a special offer, you can get 40 issues of Charisma magazine for only $40!
NEW - Life in the Spirit is your Spirit-filled teaching guide.
Encounter the Holy Spirit, hear God speak to you, and enjoy timeless teachings
on love, mercy and forgiveness. LEARN MORE
http://www.charismanews.com/politics/opinion/52830-how-the-pilgrims-proved-that-bernie-sanders-is-wrong-about-socialism
No comments:
Post a Comment