The
Free Dictionary gives these as the first two definitions of socialism:
1. Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.
2. The stage in Marxist-Leninist theory intermediate between capitalism and communism, in which collective ownership of the economy under the dictatorship of the proletariat has not yet been successfully achieved.
The Wikipedia says much the same thing about socialism.
Recently, President Obama has been called a Socialist.
Quadrilateral Thoughts says that calling someone a Socialist when they really aren't is "labelism," a good term, and one which describes a phenomenon that is all too common. (The post is about other labels, too, not just socialism.)
It is sometimes said that the early church practiced socialism, or communism. See
Acts 4:32. Was this socialism? Very close, or really socialism, if you allow that there was some central church government (which isn't clear, at least to me -- maybe there was, and maybe there wasn't). I have heard, and even taught, that this is not binding on Christians today, because Acts 4 is describing a special circumstance, when many new Christians, who had come to Jerusalem for the Passover, become converted, and stayed on, were away from their normal means of making a living, in Galilee, or in other countries which were several days travel from Judea. At any rate, I don't practice Acts 4:32 fully, and neither does my church, or my denomination, nor am I aware of any congregation that does. And many conservative Christians are strongly opposed to socialism, or anything even close to it.
Acts 4:32 is apparently the fulfillment of
Luke 12:33 (I have linked to the Blueletter Bible. Scroll down to see verse 33, which is shown in more than one translation, so as to present as clear a picture of the meaning as possible.) I confess that, in spite of reading the Bible many times, I hadn't paid attention to that verse, which says, in the
ESV:
33 Sell your possessions, and give to the needy. Provide yourselves with moneybags that do not grow old, with a treasure in the heavens that does not fail, where no thief approaches and no moth destroys. 34 For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also. (See here for information on quoting the ESV.) I have often heard sermons on verse 34, and the last part of verse 33, but I don't recall one on the first part of verse 33. Why not? Perhaps because of the objections, valid or not, by conservative Christians to socialism. Perhaps because I, or the churches I've been in, just don't want to do this. Perhaps because someone preached on it and I didn't want to listen. Have I followed Christ's commands here, as fully as I should have? I'm not sure.
What do you think? Thanks for any comments.
* * * * * *
Addendum, April 9, 2010
As Weekend Fisher points out in a comment, Peter seems to have kept his boat and fishing equipment. It occurred to me, after writing this, that some members of the early church kept their homes, because Paul or Peter stayed in them, or a new church began meeting in them. So either Christ wasn't demanding that all of us sell all of our possessions and give the result to charity, or the early church didn't follow His commandment.
Nonetheless, I'm afraid that I, and most Christians, take having things too seriously, and Christ's command to help the poor not seriously enough.
