Seeking the City, Chad Brand and Tom Pratt. Kregel Academic (ISBN: 9780825443046) 2013.

Summary: A biblical, historical, and political economic argument defending responsible free-market capitalism.

My life has been marked by an ongoing discussion of what it means to have a good society. It is a discussion that has not only occupied political deliberation but also significant discussions among Christians of all stripes. One of the images offered for our destiny as God’s people is the City of God, a place of flourishing for all the people of God and all creation. And scripture articulates how we might live toward that destination in fruitful work and a beloved and just community.

Chad Brand and Tom Pratt came together to produce a lengthy treatise (912 pages) exploring these matters. They consider what scripture teaches about what might be called “political economics” and how this has worked out through history. The first part of the book considers the teaching of scripture. The second part surveys political economic development from the Roman empire, the Middle Ages, the Reformation, the development of mercantilist economics, and American history up until the present. The final part explores how we might order our political-economic house in ways that pursue a biblical vision.

In brief, the authors argue that we best “seek the city” through responsible and just forms of free-market capitalism. They argue for the dignity of human work. That is as God’s vice-regents in creation, we exercise dominion in ways that bear fruit in the prosperity of the worker for both their own benefit and that of others. Good government, in whatever form, exists to justly enforce laws protecting life, liberty, and property.

The book also serves as an extended polemic against coercive distribution of wealth by government. They critique the idea that wealth is inherently evil, and the corollary of manipulating guilt in redistributionist schemes of government. Along the way, they criticize movements for social justice, efforts to address poverty involving governmental measures to transfer wealth, and environmental regulation that stifles business development.

I had a variety of reactions to this book. I know entrepreneurial people who create jobs, justly employ and treat their employees, produce useful goods and services, and prosper as a result. Many are quite generous and entrepreneurial in giving as well. Yet they’ve sat in churches where they were made to feel guilty about being wealthy. Often, it is a prelude to requesting a generous contribution. Yet they have been both lawful and ethical in their work, and sometimes acted out of rigorous thought of how to do business “Christianly.” This form of guilt manipulation is wrong.

I appreciate the authors’ affirmation of justice, including measure affording civil rights. Yet I wondered if the authors sufficiently reckoned with the ways powerful interests use our system to protect their interests at the expense and/or exclusion of others. One may speak of equal opportunity for those who work hard. But I know of some who must work much harder than others to achieve the same result.

I didn’t appreciate caricatures that crop up at points like the person using SNAP benefits to buy unhealthy food. The use of “straw man” or worst case arguments ignored more moderated approaches. I found this particularly so in the anti-environmental arguments, opposing productive enterprise and environmental measures. In fact, the situation is very different where entrepreneurial “green” businesses are employing people and making money, contributing to the economy while our government afford huge subsidies (read this as redistribution of tax monies!) to the fossil fuel industry.

In fact, the redistribution of funds to enhance the wealth of the rich far exceeds poverty spending. Is it just for someone like Warren Buffett to pay less tax than his secretary? I agree with the authors in opposing redistributionist schemes. Particularly, I oppose having to pay for the benefits of the rich either through my taxes or budget deficits.

I would argue that wealthy individuals or corporations disproportionately benefit from the infrastructure we all pay for. Currently, in our region big data companies are building data centers that are energy intensive. These companies want all rate payers to share the cost of new transmission lines. I wonder if the authors would oppose such forms of redistribution? It’s not something they discuss.

My basic issue is not with the authors’ thesis but whether they have taken the measure of what it means to consistently apply their principles. They are right to defend wealth acquired honestly and to observe that much of our philanthropy would be impossible without it. But not all wealth is created equal. When it is created through exploiting people and resources, or where it benefits from unjust protection that amounts to a redistribution from the poorer to the richer, this needs to be addressed. The binaries set up in this book seem to me to ignore this excluded middle of those arguing for a truly just free-market system for all. That seems to me to be the city we ought to be seeking.

_____________

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary copy of this book from the publisher for review.