David,

I can agree that all of these social benefits in Australia are parallel with 'applied Christianity'. They conform with the list of good works associated with Christian faith in James 2:

"My brothers and sisters, if a person claims to have faith but does nothing, that faith is worth nothing. Faith like that cannot save anyone. Suppose a brother or sister in Christ comes to you in need of clothes or something to eat. And you say to them, “God be with you! I hope you stay warm and get plenty to eat,” but you don’t give them the things they need. If you don’t help them, your words are worthless. It is the same with faith. If it is just faith and nothing more—if it doesn’t do anything—it is dead" (James 2:14-17), http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jas+2%3A14-17&version=ERV

Do you consider it appropriate for secular Aussies who don't believe in God to call it 'applied Christianity' when they don't believe in God? Wouldn't they find that labelling inappropriate?

The article completely ignores the negative effects the welfare state has had on citizens' attitude to charity, and on the demise of extended family obligations. Welfare has weakened work incentives, and also contributed to problems such as single parenthood and reductions in individual responsibility.

Peoples attitude to the poor (in countries with high levels of welfare) has ended up with a groupthink shifting almost complete responsibility to the Government.

There is also a strong association between the growth of the welfare state and the weakening of extended family obligations.

In developing countries, when someone experiences hard times, the extended family feels obligated to help. One big advantage of help of this type is that the extended family usually has a good knowledge of individual circumstances so that issues of "bludgers" are severely dealt with.

I am not saying that help from extended family, as happens in many Asian countries, is a panacea. There are obvious problems when the extended family is also poor.

There is another saying, which is also used by non-Christians, albeit it is derived from Christianity: "Do unto others as you would them do unto you", which is called the Golden Rule. As well, other 'versions' are: "What you do not wish upon yourself, extend not to others." — Confucius (ca. 551–479 BCE)
"Neither to harm, nor be harmed."— Epicurus (c. 350 BCE)

I agree with your argument, David. Basic humanity, not just Christianity should be the rationale for all our decisions

Socialism and Christianity have nothing in common.

On the contrary, ttbn, they have an enormous amount in common. Socialists are motivated by a desire to improve the lives of the less fortunate. In many cases that's because of Christianity.

Whether they achieve that outcome is another issue, but it's what they're all striving for.

I believe that this is just another ruse by nonconformist churches to gain relevance in a post-Christian world. They have already gone political and moved so far to the left that they will never be upright again. All to no avail. Pews remain empty except for the Catholic ones. We have enough professional lefties and social workers spending other people's money on welfare, climate change, and encouraging mass immigration and multiculturalism in the public sector without amateurs, who might or might not have Christian motives, putting their oars in.

//I believe that this is just another ruse by nonconformist churches//

The author is Anglican. Insofar as the term 'nonconformist church' can be said to apply in the Australian context, it seems to me that Anglicans don't fit the definition.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonconformist_(Protestantism)

//Pews remain empty except for the Catholic ones.//

No, they're empty too.

//who might or might not have Christian motives//

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+25%3A31-46&version=KJV

By all means feel free to disagree with Christians who are in favour of the welfare state, but it's a rather a stretch to suggest that they are being non-Christian by doing so.

Applied Christianity?

Is that different from Theoretical Christianity?

Yes, Mr 0.
If you want to see what happens when someone's theoretically a Christian but fails to apply it, take a look at runner.

Aidan,

runner is the sort of person who should definitely tweet Ricky Gervais to let him know what he thinks.

I think runner is deserving of such an experience.

Certainly the apostle Paul wrote that those who would not work should not eat. He also said that men who refused to provide for their families were worse than infidels. Giving instruction of which widows were to receive help he stated they needed to have shown they served others. The applied Christianity welfare that David speaks of is very different from the bible view. Then again coming from a church that is largely dominated by feminist and homosexuals in certain parts it is no wonder David reaches his socialist conclusions.

runner

Ricky Gervais wants you to tweet him.

runner,

Thanks for your post. It knocks right out of the argument the idea that Christianity should be all weepy welfare and no responsibility just like the lefist welfare state.

I agree with Toni. Plenty of talk the talk Christians and judges like the runner. But few real lead by example, authentic Christians.

Moreover, no matter which way you cut it ttbn, conservative idealogy and Christianity are mutually incompatible belief systems. And an abit I'd like to break because it is the most blatant hypocrisy ever, writ large!?

And why we see in so-called Christian countries small islands of OFTEN OBCENCE wealth surrounded on all sides by endemic, generational poverty. South America, the Philippines, and numerous other (I'm all right Jack) examples where more and more of our collective and finite wealth winds up in fewer and fewer hands.

And by definition, another Great Depression going somewhere to happen!

TALK JS CHEAP! Blah, blah, blah!

Not looking for a handout idealogy or failed socialism, but cooperative capitalism, and where everyone gets a fair slice of the economic pie, they help create! And has to start with affordable, carbon-free, reliable, dispatchable energy!

Name a single enterprise or service that does not have a price gouged energy component and then understand the cascade effect as those price gouged energy charges, magnify as they are passed on to the end consumer/homeowner!
Alan B.

runner, the Paul you are so fond of quoting was a self-confessed homosexual. I guess therefore, he was yet another of those heterosexuals that moved to the city and embraced homosexuality as you yourself may!

Given you believe such a sinister conversion is actually possible and as you claim, the devil's work for the devil's disciples?
You'll have a nice day now,y'hear.
Alan B.

'runner, the Paul you are so fond of quoting was a self-confessed homosexual'

no doubt suites your narrative Alan. Pity truth and facts don't support you.

Nice bit of homophobia chucked in there Allan.

Firstly, charity is not particularly Christian: all religions encourage it.

Now we do have a problem - when the state gives our money to the poor without asking for our consent, this deprives us to a large extent (we can still contribute from our remaining after-tax income, but it is harder) of the opportunity to do good and be charitable. Sadly, this robs us of the merit and blessings that we could obtain through acts of willing sacrifices for the sake of the poor and needy.

But this has a simple remedy: make taxes (or at least the charity component thereof) voluntary! The vast majority of people will then be so happy and proud to pay their taxes!

Government is already doing it, so that's fine: most of us are too busy to actively search for the poor and assess their needs and genuineness, so what a beautiful world we could be living in if we let government be our agents instead of our robbers!

Mr Opinion,

<<Applied Christianity?
Is that different from Theoretical Christianity?>>

Both are very different from biblical Christianity that:

1. Requires faith AND works (James 2:14-26), http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jas+2%3A14-26&version=ERV

2. At Judgment Day, the godly and ungodly will be judged by their ministry to human beings in deprived situations AND “The king will answer, ‘The truth is, anything you refused to do for any of my people here, you refused to do for me.’ “Then these evil people will go away to be punished forever. But the godly people will go and enjoy eternal life” (Matthew 25: 45-46), http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matt+25%3A31-46&version=ERV

Alan B,

<<runner, the Paul you are so fond of quoting was a self-confessed homosexual>>

Evidence please!

Aidan,

<<If you want to see what happens when someone's theoretically a Christian but fails to apply it, take a look at runner.>>

I find that to be a disgustingly judgmental comment.

Do you know runner personally or only through OLO posts? How do you know he personally is only theoretical in his application of Christianity?

OzSpen,
No, not personally - I don't even know his real identity; I only know runner through his OLO posts - but it's the disgustingly judgemental comments he makes in them that indicate his failure to put Christianity into practice.

Considering he doesn't even recognise me as a Christian (he regards me as following the "warmist religion") I have no qualms about highlighting his hypocrisy.

Applied Christianity? Awesome idea, I'm all for that. Does that start and end with welfare though? There are issues with welfare. Big enough ones to cause people to stand against it. It does help those who are poor, are sick, or in some way fit the program's parameters. Unfortunately though, in most countries this also means that if someone gets just out of that spot by getting a job that is low paying and doesn't meet their needs, then they get shut off from the help within welfare. When you get more help for doing nothing, then you can get by providing for yourself, (and you have to choose one or the other) then that encourages people to stay in the welfare system instead of trying to get out.

This is one huge hurdle in welfare systems, and it shouldn't be ignored. That said though, any application of Christianity is a good thing. At least in my opinion. Care for the widows, the poor, the sick, those in prison. These just name a few of the needs of the people around you. And Jesus taught that those who do things for the least of these people, did that also for Jesus. This is also huge. Another applied Christian concept within Christian is to love your neighbor. But who is your neighbor as one teacher asked Jesus. Jesus's response was the parable of the Good Samaritan. Both of these concepts are good for a welfare like program. But what good does any of this mean if it's not actually helping. Have a welfare system that helps the poor, and allows them to slowly get in a better position in life without completely shutting them off the program and not receive assistance while they still need it. If welfare isn't helping people get out of poverty, but instead keeps them there, then something needs to be reexamined to see how to make it work better. How to apply Christianity in a better way.

Aidan,

<<Considering he [runner] doesn't even recognise me as a Christian (he regards me as following the "warmist religion") I have no qualms about highlighting his hypocrisy.>>

I agree with you that many times 'runner' makes judgmental and hasty comments that don't seem to come from thoughtful engagement in the discussion about God in Christ.

Would you please help me to understand your Christianity? I became a Christian in the early 1960s when I believed on the Lord Jesus Christ (cf Acts 16:30-31) and invited Him into my life. That's 58 years ago and I've been growing in Him since then, http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ac+16%3A30-31&version=ESVUK

Can you identify a time when the Gospel was shared with you and you asked Jesus into your life?

Not_Now.Soon,

<<When you get more help for doing nothing, then you can get by providing for yourself, (and you have to choose one or the other) then that encourages people to stay in the welfare system instead of trying to get out.>>

I find this to be a harsh assessment. I depend on the welfare system - an age pension - as I'm no longer able to work in my retirement. I've paid taxes all my life and Australia provides a pension within limits of financial assessment.

I have a severe heart condition after 5 - yes, five - open heart valve replacement surgeries, epilepsy and sleep apnoea. In your language, I'm 'doing nothing'. I cannot provide for myself. I'm a pension recipient because I need that financial help. I'm blessed to live in Australia where that help is available.

//Unfortunately though, in most countries this also means that if someone gets just out of that spot by getting a job that is low paying and doesn't meet their needs, then they get shut off from the help within welfare. When you get more help for doing nothing, then you can get by providing for yourself, (and you have to choose one or the other) then that encourages people to stay in the welfare system instead of trying to get out.//

Australia has a better designed system than that - you don't have to choose one or the other, if your job is insufficient to make ends meet you can still get a partial payment, but you will always have higher income working and claiming a partial payment than not working and getting the full payment. It's specifically set up that way to remove financial disincentives from the unemployed taking up work, even if it's low hours/pay.

To OzSpen

Sorry about that, I should have specified more to what portion of welfare assistance
I was focusing on. I fully support retirement pensions and think those who've worked most of their life should be able to retire and be taken care of. Whether this is through family support, government taxes, or something else, it doesn't matter to me so long as it's being provided somehow. That said, after reading Toni's comment, I don't think my concerns for misuse of the welfare program has merit. Which is good because I agree with the idea to give assistance and be generous as an applied Christian teaching.

To Toni.

Thanks for the correction. It was my misunderstanding.

Great article.