Democracy must mean, in our era, representative government. It is too unwieldy to be applied well as might occur in a small community where discussion reaches all, votes are quickly counted, distortion and corruption are easily recognized, volunteerism or sacrificial service is common, and politics are at a minimum. A nation with massive population centers, invites all sorts of human problems, of which many are the natural results of a lowered exposure of the individual related to the mass, and the sheer size of the problem of meeting the needs of community where community control does not exist, or has been so diluted that it is no longer equal to problems. In colonial America the community spirit was strong, sometimes so strong that it provided excuse for prejudice against non-community interlopers. A basic reason for the rebellion of the Colonies against the English Crown was that the English did not adapt to the community spirit that had grown up in America – that had provided a sense of liberty and personal responsibility. Some violators of community rules were assigned to highly respected families, and became virtually indentured servants until the master of the family declared the violator rehabilitated. Some were put in public stocks. Humbled and embarrassed they were released to the organism of the community. A recent article in the largest newspaper in Minnesota discussed the decline of Swedish community in the State, of Italians in St. Paul, and other ethnic cohesions. Independent lives may not learn community so feel less committed to state welfare. The story may be told for scores of states and areas across the nation.
There are always some remnants of community, serviceable when understood and applied to social life properly. That community may be based on race, or language, or occupation, or some other meaningful factor, including religion. Scripture makes clear that Christian community begins with care for other Christians. The early Christians used a form of Christian Communism to meet the needs. The immediate concerns related to widows and dependent children. The burden of charity was on the community, not the government. The more the community served, the lower the cost, the closer to the problem, the lesser opportunity for violations. Persons knew each other. Cheaters were easily identified. There was virtually no cost in policing, in distribution, in addressing avenues for exiting programs that were completed. A problem emerged early. Did Jewish (community) converts to Christianity receive better treatment in the largess of the Church charity than did the gentile (community) Christians? The plan needed to be amended while useful and open to amendment. They must have addressed the issue, and found ways to assure fairness, or found the accusation to be baseless. The concept of deacons was adopted so to manage the work of the community. The early system apparently faded out. It became unwieldly.
The need for community continues, with protection from distortion and prejudice. Studies have been made of how it can be distorted, a curse. Families were found to have mastered the manipulation of the systems. As many as five or six generations of the same family survived on charitable benefits. A family in a community with a high rate of public dependence was challenged with the nuisance of the family’s pet dog. It was wisely suggested that some kennel arrangement be made on the property rented for them, that a kennel be constructed. Their response was: Is it free? They would take it if provided for their dog, which, by logical extension, was also publicly supported. The solution for much of the problem rests in the education of the citizenry on what democracy and freedom are, and how they work. Mankind is called to charity under God so learns discretion to minister to real needs and solutions for those who are unable to provide for themselves. Where persons fail by simply taking advantage of the system to cover their own lack of effort and commitment, the Apostle Paul was severe. Such persons were not to be awarded the charity, and needed instruction about self-purpose. Without the engagement in responsible life, the person is unable to give to others. Such giving is necessary to the awareness of meaning and performance. To deliberately avoid responsibility for self, when one is competent to meet the necessity, is an affront to God. Part of his image in mankind is to serve, conduct that reflects what God does. It begins with one’s integrity to self. From that orientation the person reaches out to those in genuine need. *Mark W. Lee, Sr. — 2016, 2020