--------------------, .

1
Social Security
Ethics and Economics
A Response to the Open
the PCA Insurance, AnnUities & Relief
What is frequently missed by Chris-
tians and non-Christians alike, is that
social policieS, like laws, rest upon .
moral, and therefore religious premises.
Both reflect the 'moral or religious be-
liefs held by a nation. Granted, all re.,
ligions are not "theistic", much less
"Christian." Nevertheless, both social
poliCies and laws codify by legislation
some system of morals, which rest
upon religious precepts. Our marriage
laws, which forbid bigamy, are clearly
more Christian than Mormon. Also,
our beef industry obviously does not
operate under Hindu laws which would
protect cattle. One can learn much
about the civil religion of a nation IYy
the cultural sociology which . grows
from its social policies and laws.
In scripture, the sociology of God's
covenant people i.s dictated by faith and
obedience. At root, they are a people
rich in faith. This faith. governs their
thinking concerning the future. By faith
they believe God, by kind pro-
vidence, to be their provider. But this
faith also is active, and requires dis-
cipline and individual responsibility - or
self-government. In God's economy we
are directed to the ant to learn diligence
in labor and preparauon for the future .
(Pro. 6:6-11). Like the good and faith-
ful s.tewards of Matthew 25, we seek to
maximize investment returns. We are
. David E. lt01:kett II a
1. fee-only Rnanclal
. planner In
': . .
He Lt an elder In the
St. Paul Presbyterian
Church (PCA) In
Jaduon.
by David E. Rockett
not to be paralyzed by fear, and bury
our God-given wealth like the wicked
and lazy servant (vs. 25). Our children
and church families are to provide if we
need financial help in our old age. By.
faith, we are to obey God's laws; God's
providence, disciplined obedience, the
family, and the covenant community,
govern the futtire security of a godly
people . .
In contrast, governments gradually
move toward totalitarianism by a succes-
sion of paternalistic programs which
seek to provide security for their citi-
zens. But this process requires a loss of
faith by the people. This loss of faith is
evidenced IYy an ungodly fear of the
FUTURE, and. quest for SECURITY.
There must be a loss. of faith in God's
providential blessing of obedience and
diligent . labor; BEFORE one begins
looking to civil government as . . pro-
. vider, sustainer, and savior. People :
strong in faith toward God dcJ not turn
to government for security.
Also, however benevolent and well
intentioned, civil governments have no
money of their own. They must flfSt
confiscate by before becoming
benevolent providers. of "aid, support.
or assistance." Specifically, money
must first be taken from my neighbor
(fellow citizens), before I can benefit
from government redistribution. This is
one reason Socialism is anti-Christian.
It is premised upon theft in order that
the state, by ITS kind providence, may
. redistribute the wealth more "justly." In
so doing, the Socialistic State clearly
seeks to take the place of God. Is not
this usurpation of divine prerogatives
blasphemy? Also, the faith of the
people is diverted from the LORD to a
new god - the State.' is rwt the
. ".'fhe of January,l987
attribJJling of divine prerogatives, or
affections, to ali individual or institu-
tion the essence of idcJiatry? Like the
chief priests of John 19:15 told
Pilate, "We have no King but Caesar!"
Considering the above discussion, I
submit that the Social Security Admin-
istration is an anti-Christian usui'pation
by the civil government. It preys upon
a fearful society weak in faith. A gov-
ernment program of theft and redistri-
bution is substituted for faith, discip-
line, individual responsibility, the. fami-
ly; and covenant Govern-
ment security, instead of God's provi-
dential <;are, becomes the hope of the
future. But Social Security has more
than just problems of theological prin-
ciple.
Most of us have received "chain
letters" which appeal to your non-pro-
greed You are instructed to send
one dollar .to the name at the top of the
list, eliminate that name when retyping
the letter, and place your name at the
bottom of the list. . You then send the
. newly typed letter to 100 or so new
people, and receive dollars exponen-.
ually when your name makes it ta the
top. This is rightly illegal because it is
fraudulent, being premised upon there
being enough fufure suckers to keep it
going. The overwhelming majority lose
their dollar due to weak participation.
The early players are the only winners.
The Social Security program works
similarly. Do NOTthink . your current
contributions are being set aside, or in-
vested for your future needs. The
ment is NOT merely acting as an invest-
ment manager, OR conduit to the in, .
vestment market place. It is
buting your current contributions to the
early participants. The only way you
can collect' is for the government to
continue fleecing enough new workers
in the next generation.
It is one thing for civil government
to assume such a god-like posture. But
it is more tragic for church leaders to
adopt unbiblical 'thinking. If we are not
careful, . we can carelessly mimic the
culture's way of thinking. The PCA
Open Letter does not address the. above
theological. and. ethical considerations.
Does this not reveal a timidity

. i
critique social policy? Perhaps our fail-
ure to critique such practices is due to
our having too many benefitting partici-
pants, who began before they thought?
Sadly, the arguments of the Open
Letter and article are pragmatic appeals
to secure the future. It holds that,
"Since Social Security benefits are so
great and cannot be duplicated privately,
one would be foolish to attempt it."
This is done by yielding your responsi-
bilities, then benefitting from a govern-
ment redistribution scheme. Particularly
held out as of critical importance is the
Medicare Benefits to subsidize other-
wise "exorbitant" post-retirement medi-
cal expenses. True or not, notice that
God's prerogatives, the family, and
covenant community, are subverted and
exchanged for a socialistic program.
How are our ministers to preach
against the ungodly actions of civil
government if they are subsidized by
the same government? Is socialistic
theft and redistribution wrong EXCEPT
when we are the beneficiaries? How can
the church call for civil government to
be subject to the limits of scripture,
while its ministers are subsidized by
that government, at the expense of their
fellow citizens? To yield at this point
will either silence the church of Christ,
or make hypocrites of her ministers.
Should we now expect letters from
denominational boards encouraging all
eligible church members to promptly
apply for food stamps, government
housing, welfare, or any kind of gov-
ernment subsidies? Is failure to get all
we can from the government to be con- .
sidered neglect of family responsi-
bilities? If doing so would be more
effective, why not?
The people of God are hence trans-
formed into people of the state. Christ's
community of Kingdom warriors, 'en-
listed into his service, become a kept
people by a paternalistic government 1
submit that such a mentality is the seed
of idolatry or state worship. So even if
the economic benefits were . superior,
the .theological and ethical considera-
tions should cause us to ignore a sys
tern built upon theft, redistribution and
idolatry.
(yet ! the economic superiority of
Social Security benefits are highly
debatable. Such superiority is invari-
ably premised upon continuation of
past practices. With lower birth rates
and fewer workers to support a growing
elderly population, the future continua-
tion of past Social Security practices is
anything but secure. Legion of articles
have documented serious problems. The
government's own encouragement for
citizens to supplement future Social
Security benefits with IRA's, company
pension plans, and Medicare Supple-
ment policies, are glaring evidence that
these programs are financially inade-
quate if not vulnerable. Why would de-
nominational boards ignore these prob-
lems and boldly declare the future se-
curity of this system?
However, let us suppose a young
pastor of 30 averages $25,000 income
starting in 1988. If he invested his
CURRENT Social Security tax of
$3,255 (13.02% X $25,000 yearly at
12% average return, he would have
$1,573,672 in 35 years (age 65).
Working to age 70 would yield him
$3,298,440. [That's over three and
a quarter Million dollars, folks -
Ed.] Allowing for catastrophic medi-
cal bills, disability, and old age, this
might not equal Social Security Bene
fits in all hypothetical situations. But
his $1.5 million fund would pay his
$10,500 Social Security benefit at the
highest rate (42% of his last year
$25,000 salary) for over 149 years!
Withdrawing 5% in annual income
would pay him $78,683 yearly. Work-
ing to age 70, the numbers increase to
261 years of $12,600 income
($10,500+20%), or $164,922 5% an-
nual income! This fund could pay some
hefty medical insurance premiums if
necessary, and is fully inheritable as
part of his estate. And these figures
assume NO FUTURE INTEREST
EARNED, NO RAISES, AND NO
OTHER RETIREMENT SAVINGS.
All considered, ministers not only
have a theological/ethical rationale for
opting out of Social Security; but also
have very compelling economic reasons
for doing so. By diligent labor and
investing, those who do not reap over-
whelmingly superior fmancial results
will be a small minority. Could not
those few brothers who need aid be
helped voluntarily? The ministers who
transfer their responsibilities to a gov-
ernment program might find themselves
reflecting 'in old age upon Jeremiah
17:5-6:
Thus says the Lord: "Cursed is the
man who trusts in man and makes flesh
his strength, whose heart departs from
the LORD. For he shall be like a shrub
in the desert, and shall not see when
good comes, but shall inhabit the
parched places in the wilderness, in a
salt land which is not inhabited." D
What Is Calvinism?
(Continued from page 24)
knowing what these views were, as he
was brought up under Presbyterian in-
struction, and had been taught the cate-
chism in his youth.
Min.-As an evidence that he WaS
either unacquainted with the catechism,
or with the contents of the book, I will
refer you to another quotation, which I
fmd on page 195. It professes to be
from the "Assembly's Catechism,
chapter 5." Now, as you say you have
been looking a little at the Confession
of Faith, you have perceived that the
catechisms are not divided into chapters;
and, where to find the fifth chapter of
the Assembly's catechism we will have
to ask "the General Conference," by
whose order the book has been pub-
lished, who should have known, at
least, that there were chapters in the
catechism, before they referred us to one
of them. But you will, perhaps, be
surprised to learn, that there are not
only no chapters in the catechism, but
no such language as is quoted. The
quotation is as follows: "The almighty
power of God extends itself to the first :
fall, and all other sins of angels and
men." Now, there is no such language,
or anything like it, anywhere in either
of our catechisms, nor is there anything
anywhere in the Confession, to afford
the least ground for a sentiment so
grossly blasphemous as this is made to
be, in d1e connection in which it
(Continued on page 20)
..__ ____ _...._ The Counsel of Chalcedon, January, 1987