Tuesday, January 20, 2009

Equality and Prosperity


Why do I listen to Rush Limbaugh? I know he's going to make me angry and yet I keep trying to give him a fair hearing. Unfortunately, fair was just what Rush was railing against today.

Not surprisingly, Rush was less than thrilled with President Obama's inaugural speech. He argued that the speech attempted to marry fairness and growth or equality and prosperity, and that the two simply cannot go together. While I would disagree that fairness=equality, I'll address the culmination of the argument. Rush insists that we must make prosperity or equality our priority. Rush makes his choice perfectly clear, stating that prosperity must have its "have nots," but that "equality is shared misery."

I guess it's the Christian in me that takes issue with the American in Rush. I'm not saying that he is altogether wrong in his assessment of equality vs. prosperity (though he certainly oversimplifies it), but that his priorities are woefully misplaced and that his definition of equality is disturbing.

As a Christian, I would argue that prosperity should not be had at the expense of others. I would say that equality doesn't necessitate "shared misery", but that, if there is misery to be had, we will share it. I would insist that we cannot rejoice with those who rejoice unless we are also willing to weep with those who weep. I would remind us all that we follow the one who, "being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made Himself nothing." 

Rush is right that this kind of action certainly isn't fair. The right thing rarely is. Nothing could be less fair than for the true "Have" to make Himself nothing for the sake of "have nots." Nothing could be less fair than for one who is in "very nature God" would submit to death on a cross.

Rush and his ilk are right to argue that I can't expect the United States to seek Christian ideals, and it is my Kingdom citizenship that will always keep me from being a true patriot. But I refuse to compromise these ideals, nonetheless. I refuse to accept a reality that places personal prosperity over what is good. I refuse to embrace a system that must have its "have nots." 

Let us instead echo the words of Paul, to not seek our "own good, but the good of many, that they might be saved." Let us follow the One who shared in our misery in order that we all may be one in Christ Jesus.

1 comment:

thepriesthood said...

I hear you Kes. The other day a verse from Paul blew me away--and he also uses the word "equality" while explicitly referring to money and redistribution:

"Our desire is not that others might be relieved while you are hard pressed, but that there might be equality. At the present time your plenty will supply what they need, so that in turn their plenty will supply what you need. The goal is equality, as it is written: 'The one who gathered much did not have too much, and the one that gathered little did not have too little.'"

Paul sounds like a "socialist" to me...