Is Caring for the Poor Too Big for the Church?
Kristin Hansen, Institute for Faith, Work & Economics
How are Christians to think through this question from a sound Biblical and economic perspective? We know the Bible teaches we are to care for the poor, but how can we do that most effectively?
Conference: “Global Commodities: The Material Culture of Early Modern Connections, 1400-1800″
Global History and Culture Centre – University of Warwick – 12-14 December 2012. This International conference held at the Global History and Culture Centre of the University of Warwick seeks to explore how our understanding of early modern global connections changes if we consider the role material culture played in shaping such connections. In what ways did material objects participate in the development of the multiple processes often referred to as ‘globalisation’? How did objects contribute to the construction of such notions as hybridism and cosmopolitanism? What was their role in trade and migration, gifts and diplomacy, encounters and conflict? What kind of geographies did they create in the early modern world? What was their cultural value vis-à-vis their economic value? In short, this conference seeks to explore the ways in which commodities and connections intersected in the early modern world.
The idea that being a monastic is godly while being a businessperson is worldly reflects a widely held belief among Christians, says James R. Rodgers. But the pursuit of a vocation in business doesn’t necessarily means the embrace of a lesser form of the Christian life:
Read more on Christian Discipleship and the Vocation of Business…
Check out this video, which is interesting on a number of levels (HT: James R. Otteson):
Hazony points to some really important ideas in this short video. In many ways the culture war, so to speak, really comes down to a clash of worldviews about what work is and ought to be. For a narrative that sets the problem up the same way, but favors the “Leavers” over the “Takers,” see the work of Daniel Quinn, particularly his novel Ishmael.
Judaism’s Central Sacrifice
David P. Goldman, Tablet
Yoram Hazony’s new book bases Judaism on a naturalistic reading of the Bible, but it’s a stretch.
HHS revises mandate third time; foes say it misses the point
Michelle Bauman, Catholic News Agency
The subtitle of Lester DeKoster’s little classic, Work: The Meaning of Your Life–A Christian Perspective, can be a bit off-putting. Is work really the meaning of your life?
On the one hand, when we understand DeKoster’s definition of work, we might be a bit more amenable to the suggestion. DeKoster says that work is essentially our “service of others.” This means that “work” as such is not strictly defined as waged labor outside the home, for instance.
In his debut column at Forbes, Fr. Robert Sirico discusses how the collapse of European economies has exposed the false hope of the welfare state:
[T]he great lie at the heart of the all-encompassing welfare state, with its empty promises of eternal security and freedom from want. The welfare state and its advocates would have us believe that they have a political solution for a world where scarcity and human brokenness still hold sway.
Three things the American people don’t understand about trade
Logan Albright, AFF Doublethink Online
The problem with the way trade is discussed in politics and the media can be boiled down to three common misconceptions that crop up again and again.
What economic issues do America’s two main political parties agree on? The short answer: not much. But the New York Time‘s Annie Lowrey identifies eight areas of overlap:
1. Tax simplification
2. Regulatory simplification
3. Fannie and Freddie
4. Avoiding the fiscal cliff
5. Son of Debt Ceiling
6. Drill, baby, drill
7. Start-ups
8. Iran sanctions
What is interesting about the list is that except for the items that are overly obvious (e.g., #4 could be restated as “Avoid the Apocalypse), the areas of agreement are concerns that would be common to corporate lobbyists—and ignored by the general public. This is probably to be expected since the political parties are heavily influenced by lobbyists. But another reason may be that if politicians followed the bipartisan advice of economists, they’d never get elected.
For instance, NPR’s Planet Money asked a panel of economists (mostly left-leaning, though with a couple of libertarians thrown into the mix) to come up a economic platform for a presidential candidate. They mostly agree on the following items:
A recent national Pew Research Center survey has found conflicting opinions regarding many Americans’ view of the rich:
As Republicans gather for their national convention in Tampa to nominate a presidential candidate known, in part, as a wealthy businessman, a new nationwide Pew Research Center survey finds that many Americans believe the rich are different than other people. They are viewed as more intelligent and more hardworking but also greedier and less honest.
Read more on What Causes Wealth (and Dishonesty and Greed)?…
