Early Christian America

“Christian Commerce” and Guilt Manipulation?

It is certainly true. The drive for greed as associated with “the getting of wealth” has always been with mankind. Prostitutes, pimps, gamblers, pirates, tyrants, and Mercantilist slave masters, have always been with society. Certainly, America has had its share of “greed”, which invariably comes with a lust for power. No doubt.

But, the presence of a distinctively
“Christian commerce” (a Christian-based approach to business and charity) attempted to change that imbalance … and did so, according to the famous Alexis D’Tocqueville (1835), a visitor to our country.

Response to an Early American Distinctive: “Christian Commerce” and Charity

“Lucy’s” comments reflect another side – that side of America which once was taught in the pulpits of most churches throughout the colonial landscape and the first century of our existence as a culture.(See below – 2 point listing.)

In contrast to her statements, there are those whose critiques of this country always seem to land “only” upon this nation’s history. But, what is guilty in America – past or present – is equally (evil) guilty in all other nations.

All other nations demonstrate remarkable degrees of greed, the lust for wealth, with its lust for power, in their histories.

That is a reigning certainty in ALL cultures.

But, let’s “share the guilt” here. Guilt manipulation is an art that targets America through criticisms of our history as a nation, and the Christian faith accompanying that history. It is empowered by our media, overseas media (who often admit their bias), our politicians, foreign powers, schools and college professors.

It usually involves distraction – avoiding commentary in other directions – for a concentrated critique of one country… this one… “the oh so horrible American people”. At least, that is usually the approach, unfortunately.

But, instead of guilt manipulation, let’s remind ourselves of some “results” of “Christian commercial” strength and generosity.

Christian Commerce: A Key “2 point” Listing.

1. America – unlike other (criticizing, guilt-manipulating) nations around the world – has a legacy of immigrants coming to this culture… a 300 year legacy in which people were – and are – attracted to this country and found refuge in it (despite the presence of “greed” in some here).

That’s objective. It came, initially and in part, through the churches of New England and the Middle colonies.

That fact didn’t mean a legacy of subsidized “handouts” paid for by the taxpayers (which, many assert, is a real problem with much of the immigration issues we face today).

But, it DID mean (at that time) help and generosity with food, medical care, housing, education, and jobs through the networks of churches and “voluntary charity” organizations.

Salem, Massachusetts comes to mind, as one helpful, Christian community of the 18th and 19th centuries.

Let’s give pause to allow a necessary and surprising digression on the topic for a moment, using this example of Salem, Massachusetts.

As far as historians’ emphasis is concerned, unfortunately, “Salem” conjures a knee-jerk reaction in thought. It is difficult to get a potent lesson concerning Christian commercial generosity across, over the din of the oft-touted “Salem witchcraft trials”.

Usually, the historian’s emphasis is upon one community, one ministry, and one perverse judge/civil court… That approach overwhelms other considerations (Incidentally, why isn’t there “equal exposure – at least! – of the fact that in Europe, from which so many immigrants were fleeing to America, there were many “witchcraft trials” taking place, particularly in France, Italy, Spain, though also other European countries as well?)

We are never treated to a rendition of the intense petitioning and pressure of 200 Massachusetts ministers toward the Governor condemning the witchcraft trials as a vicious, non-Christian response and ethic.

Those churches of Massachusetts got those trials stopped over the reluctance of a Governor who was NOT a man who cared about the Christian legacy of Massachusetts through 1692. He was favored (and,in essence, imposed, politically) by bureaucrats in Mercantilistic London.

Why?

London despised its New England colonies. Anything that hurt the Puritan reputation, hurt them COMMERCIALLY. And that commercial rivalry was just fine to the politicos of Mercantilistic London at that time.

The “Puritans” who are always featured as the “hate-peddlers” in this saga, resented this kind of political control over their constitutions, knowing the existence of sin in human nature is the reason for having representative government to begin with. They resented “being tagged” for an episode their churches fought to stop.

In contrast, Salem, did go on to demonstrate another history which we hear little about. Salem led most other cities in helping immigrants who came to our shores for almost a century.

- Salem led in helping orphaned children.

-It was a refuge for single mothers (What happened to “Puritanical snobbishness” here?).

- Immigrants found homes, work, and freedom here as well.

- Women’s church groups helped immigrants with learning to cook the kinds of food new to them.

- Education was provided by churches free of
charge.

- Medical care was extended to those in need
through patrons who were contacted in the
church associations.

- English was taught through churches which
created ministries for just such a purpose.
{This author has participated in such
ministries in places such as Philadelphia.
So, the ethic is ongoing.]

- The plight of the Afro-American slave was a
deep concern in Salem, as elsewhere in New
England. Former slaves found refuge and help
there and elsewhere throughout “Puritanical”
New England.

Yes, the Puritans had their problems, no doubt. But, lack of charity through commercial patronage was not one of them.

2. America, for all of her problems, had developed a powerful economic base from the impact of what has been called here, “Christian commerce”. That productivity over time, growing up from our Christian roots in the churches as a charitable and productive people, allowed this country to feed the world many times, long before CARE packages were ever introduced.

The point here is simple: What other nation or people have such a legacy of “feeding the world” many times over?

What other nation or people are invariably the first people to respond to some disaster overseas – tsunami, volcano, hurricane, earthquakes, genocide? Name a disaster in the last 50 years where Americans DID NOT send their help?

Maybe, as many allege, we shouldn’t be so generous. Debating that point may be a necessary agenda item. But, if Americans do stop giving overseas, the hate-fest toward our nation will not change one wit in our college classrooms … or overseas. It will simply shift to more of the same bias: “Now Americans are really showing what they are, ‘greedy’”… or something like that, perhaps.

But, that’s not the real issue, is it? It does reflect, however, the unfortunate bias.

Question: If our nation should suffer a series of catastrophes, crippling it and threatening its existence, will we as Americans feel confident that someone around the world will “run to help us?”

I think we all know the answer.

-submitted, Wayne Sedlak, ICHR

By Administrator on Jun 3, 2008