All Things in Common. The Economic Practices of the Early Christians PDF
Preview All Things in Common. The Economic Practices of the Early Christians
All Things in Common All Things in Common The Economic Practices of the Early Christians RomAn A. monTeR o Foreword by Edgar G. Foster All Things in Common The Economic Practices of the Early Christians Copyright © 2017 Roman A. montero. All rights reserved. Except for brief quota- tions in critical publications or reviews, no part of this book may be reproduced in any manner without prior written permission from the publisher. Write: Permis- sions, Wipf and stock Publishers, 199 W. 8th Ave., suite 3, Eugene, oR 97401. Resource Publications An imprint of Wipf and stock Publishers 199 W. 8th Ave., suite 3 Eugene, oR 97401 www.wipfandstock.com paperback isbn: 978-1-5326-0791-2 hardcover isbn: 978-1-5326-0793-6 ebook isbn: 978-1-5326-0792-9 manufactured in the U.s.A. April 24, 2017 “scripture quotations are from the nRsV© Bible (The holy Bible, new Revised standard Version©), copyright © 1989 by the Division of Christian Education of the national Council of the Churches of Christ in the UsA. Used by permission. All rights reserved.” Contents Foreword by Edgar G. Foster | vii introduction | 1 1 The Economic Context of First-Century Palestine | 6 2 Economic Relationships | 15 3 The Essenes, a Jewish messianic Community | 27 4 hellenistic Concepts of Friendship, Common Property, and Attitudes toward the Poor | 38 5 The Economic Practices of the Early Christians | 48 6 “The Tragedy of the Commons” | 70 7 The View from the outside | 76 8 The Theological origins of Christian sharing | 83 9 A Universal Community | 104 10 Why others get it Wrong | 110 Conclusion | 118 Bibliography | 125 Ancient Document Index | 129 v Foreword Academics classify economics as a social science along with psycholo- gy, anthropology, sociology, and history; the social sciences usually are dis- tinguished from the so-called hard sciences like physics, chemistry, biology or astronomy. nevertheless, Biblical scholars (among others) have found value in using the social sciences with the aim of illuminating scriptural texts and their respective sociocultural contexts. one can point to stud- ies written by malina, Pilch,1 and osiek.2 The last-mentioned study offers some cautionary advice for scholars who choose to use social-scientific approaches in their work, and osiek issues the reminder that the social sciences have their individual strengths and concomitant weaknesses. For example, economics like any other discipline, only models what transpires in the actual world: scientific models do not wholly correspond to things and events in the world. Einstein writes: “As far as the laws of mathemat- ics refer to reality, they are not certain, and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality.” modeling only approximates reality as opposed to identically mirroring the external world. The tentative or provisional nature of economic models is not the only thing that osiek discusses; yet another concern for some is the marxist foundation of social sciences. The “father of sociology” is Auguste Comte. he originated the term “sociology” and proffered the view that society unfolded in three stages—religious, metaphysical, and scientific. Comte 1. malina and Pilch, Social Science Commentary on the Book of Revelation; malina, The New Jerusalem in the Revelation of John. 2. osiek, “The social sciences and the second Testament,” 88–95. vii Foreword insisted that the religious and metaphysical stages depended on non-rigor- ous and unsatisfactory methods to account for social phenomena, so they lacked genuine explanatory power. he advanced the suggestion that nei- ther religion nor metaphysics have the efficacious potency to account for social phenomena. hence, Comte proposed that sociologists would even- tually develop a scientific approach that would surpass the other two stages with respect to explanatory potency. it is easy to ascertain the elements of positivism at play with Comte’s approach since he privileged empiricism, statistics and evolutionary thought. Positivism elevates the quantifiable or focuses on what is measurable, and it supposedly operates without the usual biases of other methods. nevertheless, opponents of positivism say that no facts are unfiltered: we all start with specific preapprehensions. The founder of sociology pioneered the way for marxist conflict theo- ry; Karl marx consequently shaped his own thought to revolve around class conflict, economic stages, and revolution.3 g.W.F. hegel, a german idealist, who enjoyed iconic status at the University of Berlin, provided the elements that marx apparently needed to develop a comprehensive theory of his- tory and class conflict.4 But while hegel portrayed the Weltgeist abstractly or ideally unfolding throughout history by means of a triadic dialectical movement (thesis, antithesis, and synthesis, as it were), marx understood history’s dialectical progression to occur by dint of economic changes, that is, via alterations whereby one type of economic system leads to another opposing system, which ultimately culminates in a classless society wherein “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs” becomes the applicable and governing slogan. marx asserted: “in a higher phase of communist society, after the enslaving subordination of the individual to the division of labor, and therewith also the antithesis between mental and physical labor, has vanished; after labor has become not only a means of life but life’s prime want; after the productive forces have also increased with the all-around development of the individual, and all the springs of co-operative wealth flow more abundantly,” then each would give from his ability “to each according to his needs.” marxian thought has exercised great influence in China, north Korea, Cuba, and the former soviet Union. Keith Ward considers elements of this 3. marx has been described as “the greatest critical theorist of the industrial Revo- lution and nineteenth-century capitalism.” stevenson, haberman, and Wright, Twelve Theories of Human Nature, 187. 4. Ward, The Case for Religion, 64. viii Foreword philosophy to be “both theoretically dubious and highly value-laden” and possibly “wish-fulfilling.”5 Contra the teachings of Jesus, marx appeared to emphasize humanity’s limitless ability to produce ideal circumstances (rather than looking to god’s sovereign rule); all we need are the right con- ditions to make social environments flourish. nonetheless, a theory like marxism that stresses human potency and creaturely governance clashes head-on with the Christian doctrine of sin, on one hand, and divine om- nipotence from another perspective. only god is able to bring about libera- tion, not the creature. Ward also contends that marxian theory potentially fails on two other fronts: 1) human life is characterized by aggression and avid desire; 2) marxist governments have been tried and found wanting. of course, there are possible responses to these criticisms, but the important question is whether “communitarianism” in the relevant sense is feasible within a Christian setting. marxism and Christianity seem to be diametrical opposites: hardly anyone disputes that point. so is it possible to redeem elements of this philosophy so that it becomes applicable for communities like the ancient Christian ecclesia? Roman A. montero’s work All Things in Common makes an interesting proposal by employing the famous marxist slogan as a spring- board for discussing practices of the early Christian congregation, concern- ing which luke narrates in Acts of the Apostles; however, montero argues that while marx might have articulated the slogan, “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs,” there is evidence that early Chris- tians somehow lived by the slogan since luke reports that certain followers of Jesus held all things in common with one another following Pentecost (Acts 2:44; 4:32). montero invokes history and economics in the process of setting forth an arresting narrative. Yet how does he contribute to the growing use of social-scientific approaches in Biblical studies? The aforementioned proposal, which indicates that ancient Christians shared all things in common, is not entirely new.6 The lukan account of Acts testifies to a sharing of communal property in some sense, and the Apostle Paul later writes about an equalizing taking place between giver and recipient (2 Corinthians 8:13–15), an idea that he finds supported in the hebrew Bible (Exodus 16:18). Paul’s advocacy for equalizing ma- terial goods ultimately occurs within the context of a letter addressed to Corinthian Christians (cf. Romans 15:25–27; 1 Corinthians 16:1–4). in 5. ibid., 66. 6. see Crawford, What Is Religion?, 165. ix Foreword this particular correspondence, the author exhorts his readers to support a ministry for poor Christians; moreover, one encounters similar ideas in the Qumran scrolls of the Dead sea Community. Tertullian (ca. 160–240 C.E.), a north African apologist belonging to the church, likewise refers to the ecclesiastical practice of holding material goods in common (Apol- ogy 39.11). still, montero’s study is unique insofar as he argues that early Christians lived by the communitarian principle, they shared all things in common, and the early followers of Jesus subsequently thrived—even out- lasting the indomitable Roman Empire that persecuted the nascent eccle- sia, sometimes quite brutally. montero suggests that the practices outlined by luke were not lim- ited to a few congregations or to a circumscribed area. To the contrary, he thinks early followers of Jesus applied “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs” across the entire greco-Roman world for at least the first two centuries of the Christian community’s existence. if his idea turns out to fit the evidence, then a case would be made that when this principle is applied within a Christian setting or implemented properly, then it possibly might yield a unified and budding community that honors god. nevertheless, how does one go about examining such an idea? Which scholarly methods should be utilized? The current study invokes historical, economic, and sociological evidence while refusing to ignore scriptural or theological factors. The methodology is varied: Jewish texts are examined; so are Christian and greco-Roman sources. Economic practices receive the primary emphasis, but they are coupled with historical analyses of primary sources and the study demonstrates adequate sensitivity for sociocultural context. What- ever one might think of marxism and its possible relationship with the early Christian community, students of the social sciences and scripture will find montero’s study to be refreshing, objective, and a genuine con- tribution to our knowledge of ecclesiastical history. he also goes beyond theoretical considerations in order to show the practical relevance of the texts from Acts and the author’s intriguing suggestion posits that the early communal practices outlined by luke ultimately originated with Jesus of nazareth. The main arguments in this book, while provocative, admittedly run counter to the contemporary promotion of laissez-faire capitalism. But that has been the longstanding conflict between scripture and modern- day capitalism. Regardless of which economic theory that one espouses, x
The list of books you might like
