Money, money everywhere, but no one stops to think the love of money is the root of all evil.

That popular colloquialism is more than just folk wisdom. It happens to be the 10th verse from the sixth chapter of the New Testament book of Timothy.

To me, it shines a spectacular light on one of the most befuddling bedfellows in the entire political sphere.

Republicanism, in its modern iteration, has linked the small government libertarians with the Christian conservatives.

The two factions disagree largely on social, but not economic, issues. What concerns me, however, is not their disagreement; rather, I am concerned that they agree on anything at all.  

By accepting the economic idea that there should be minimal taxes, little or no social safety net and, more generally, the broad ideology of rugged individualism, the conservative Christian community seems to abandon one of the primary tenets of the
teachings of Christ.

In his own words, “Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.” (Matthew 25:40)

For the non-Sunday-schooled, this verse is at the end of a parable in which Christ admits to heaven those who have fed the hungry, clothed the naked and cared for the sick. The verse above is Christ telling the righteous that when they did those things they were in fact caring for Christ himself.  

The point I am after, then, is this: I think the evangelical community should take a long look in the mirror and think about the interests with which they have allied themselves politically in the modern era. It isn’t those of the poor, the needy or the downtrodden. It isn’t the lepers, the outcasts or the “least of these.” It is those seeking to ease their tax burden.

Often this includes billion-dollar corporations and the wealthiest of the wealthy. Indeed, it seems to be those that are the furthest removed from the struggles to which Christ refers.   

At this point one might argue, “Well, my desire to help the poor might guide my behavior individually, but that doesn’t mean it should be the government’s responsibility to actively support the weakest segment of society.”

This is an argument I hear all too frequently. The logic might fly with me if it were applied across the board. But many Christian conservative who don’t want to see higher taxes used for social support are the very same people who promote the idea of legislating a particular brand of biblical morality in the social sphere.

And there’s the ideological incoherence. If our personal religious beliefs are to inform our political beliefs, I don’t think we can pick and choose which ones to legislate, especially if the beliefs we choose to ignore are those concerning wealth —
often, our own wealth.

That would seem to put us in dangerous territory, so aptly phrased by the Apostle Paul as the “root of all evil.”

­— jontodd@indiana.edu