Is Inequality a Moral or Mathematical Term?
Written by Dan McDonald
We learn in mathematics that 2 + 2
equals four, while 3 + 2 equals five.
One of the assumptions we learn in a mathematical view of the world is
that three does not equal two, they are not equal. Is one morally superior and the other
inferior? We do not ascribe three-ness
as morally evil and two-ness as morally superior. They simply are. That is a mathematical world, a world that is
hard and unfeeling because things simply are.
I believe that the mathematical
truth of this first statement is an important aspect (but not the only aspect)
of how the Scriptures deal with matters of equality and inequality. Inequality is explained to some degree both as
a mathematical description of what is true, as well as a moral reality that
something has gone wrong in human society.
St. Paul’s understanding of inequality was one which focused on what
persons ought to do with their unequal gifts of property and talents rather
than seeing those unequal distributions of property and talents as evil. I believe if someone in St. Paul’s day had
accused him with being a man of privilege, he would have taken a look at his
situation in life and would have replied: “Yes, of course, you are right. I am a man who came into this world with a
privileged life.”
St. Paul imagined himself to be privileged
as a Jew, because the Jews as he explained in Romans had the Scriptures which
he believed was a superior viewpoint in understanding God from that of those
who did not have the Scriptures. But he
labored to prove that did not mean that Jews were better as people than the
Gentiles, for both the Jew and the Gentile dealt with sin, and all were leveled
at the truth that both Jew and Greek had sinned and fallen short of the glory
of God. Still, he would not deny that
the Scriptures were a great advantage in understanding God. He would accept the charge that he was a
privileged man.
Secondly, St. Paul would accept the
charge that he had abilities to function in Roman society with freedom that
most of the other apostles did not have.
He was a Roman citizen, one born into a family with Roman
citizenship. That gave him freedom to
travel and speak and gave him legal advantages to spread the Christian faith to
non-Jewish portions of the Roman Empire that were not as readily able to be
done by the other apostles as St. Paul could do. Functionally, this was likely part of the
reason why St. Paul, an apostle born out of time, was given the task of taking
the Gospel to the non-Jewish portions of the world, especially within the
framework of the Roman Empire. It was
recognized that his privilege gave him protections and opportunities that the
other apostles did not have. He would
use those privileges and push the envelope by spreading the Gospel to the point
that the authorities within Rome would see his Gospel as a threat to the Roman
Gospel. Rome came to understand its
Gospel, the good news of Roman law and Roman rule, to be threatened by St.
Paul’s message of a Lord who did not rule in the same manner as the lords of
the fallen world system. So, St. Paul proved
to be one who understood that his privilege allowed him opportunity to proclaim
the declaration of a lord who was superior to Caesar, with a superior form of
righteousness that came into this world as a gift of God that would forever
change the equation of those who had privilege and those who did not.
St. Paul understood, I believe, that
inequality was a part of life.
Inequality had two causes. On the
one hand it was undeniable that man’s sin played a role in the structure of
society as it existed within the Roman Empire and within every era of human
history since the time of man’s fall into sin.
As one perhaps wise but cynical observer noted of the difference between
capitalism and communism in a former time of our history: “In capitalism man
oppresses man and in Communism it is just the opposite.” Inequality partially has its roots within
man’s sinful tendencies to take advantage of others through greed and envy to
the extreme of building armies.
But St. Paul saw another reason for
there being inequality in human affairs that was mathematical and therefore did
not require a revolution aimed at eliminating all inequality. He recognized that God had given differing
gifts and talents to men and women. This
is something Jesus described when he spoke of the lord giving one man five
talents, another two, and another one.
The greater privilege afforded one brought that person under a greater
responsibility to use wisely the gifts he had been given. The radical teaching of the Gospel was that
inequality could be addressed through men and women taking responsibility to
use their privilege for one another because men and women in Christ were
meant to share the mindset of Christ.
One could have more property than another, but if all had the mind of
Christ, no one would be overlooked by the one whose possessions were seen as
treasures possessed for the service of Christ and the needs of God’s people.
In the building of society, it might
even be argued that inequality is the engine upon which human trade and
involvement with each other is built. If
each of us owned the same amount of property and things and had the same gifts
and abilities then societal teamwork would be less advantageous. For example, if everyone on a football team
had the same ability to pass and run a football, who would be the quarterback
and who would be the running back? The
team is better if it has a great running back who is strong and quick and a
great quarterback capable of extremely accurate throwing ability, than if both
persons were equal in abilities. The
more a running back is known to be exceptional in his running ability compared
to a quarterback being gifted in his position the better the team is. Equality of ability would be a detriment;
whereas a variety of unequal gifts and abilities brings a dynamic to the
backfield that mere equal ability could not produce for the team.
Put it in another way.
I grew up in Illinois and whenever I am there I look across the prairie
with its rich soil and favorable weather conditions and I understand how blessed
we were for growing grain. I live now in
the northeastern part of Oklahoma and know that my region of Oklahoma will
never be able to raise the corn and soybeans that can grow in central
Illinois. But when I drive by a field
with some livestock grazing and see a pump pumping oil out of the ground, I
know that is one of the ways my present state was blessed. My brother-in-law and nephew farm in central
Illinois. I work in an oil refinery in
Oklahoma. We have inequalities of
economic advantage that when traded help each other much more than if we had
all been given the same gifts, talents, and resources. The modern farmer uses machinery that enables large
segments of our national population to be freed from the subsistence farming
method that kept a majority of our ancestors down on the farm. The modern farmer needs a means to energize
such equipment that allows modern civilization the luxury to follow so many
more pursuits than when more than half of a population was required simply to
produce the food that fed a population at subsistence levels.
This is not meant to convey a view
that modern life is utopian. Within our
world of inequalities which allow for the enrichment of the greater society,
there is the continued problem of human sin, and the temptation we each have to
try to position ourselves for an advantage against others in life. St. Paul understood something Jesus taught in
saying that sometimes the wheat and tares need to be allowed to grow together
until the final harvest. We have been
given differing gifts, talents, abilities, privileges. Some of that is the result of sin. Some of that is the result of a wise God who
has made us need one another if we are to grow together, each brother and
sister conveying a spiritual blessing upon another. The field that is white for harvest is a
field with wheat and tares. That is the
reality. But the one with privilege (we
all have some privileges don’t we?) is to look to his brother and sister with
the mind of Christ so that we might be a blessing to one another. That was how Paul saw and lived his
life. He was a man privileged, and as a
privileged man he gave himself as a drink offering to be poured out into the
soil of humanity for the sake of Christ and the people of God. That is why he could encourage others to
imitate him even as he imitated Christ.
So we can conclude by answering the
question of whether inequality is a mathematical or moral description of human
life and we can answer the complex question with a simple “yes.” Yes, inequality is a mathematical description
of the human condition and yes it is a moral description of a humanity plagued
by sin, and the Gospel of Jesus Christ and the possibility that we can mutually
share in the mind of Christ remains the single best remedy to the moral problem
and the single best way to make the mathematical formula add up. I know this doesn’t answer all the questions,
but it is I believe the beginning of a way to think through the issues in a way
that begins to equip us to make use of our privileges while also remembering
our brethren in the process, for we are all answerable to the one true Lord
through whom we have been created and redeemed, and granted to know and
experience the love of God.
No comments:
Post a Comment