Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Christianity and social justice?

By Richard Mulgan - posted Friday, 2 March 2007


In terms of attracting voter support, the universal, mutual-support view of welfare has always been much more effective than the charitable safety-net view. It treats people as members of the mainstream with shared entitlements and appeals to their enlightened self-interest.

The charitable approach, on the other hand, though providing a sense of self-worth to donors, remains demeaning to the recipient.

Christian doctrine can support either model. However, the churches, historically, have been particularly associated with administering charity. It is no accident that the role of church institutions in state welfare is increasing as the charitable model returns to favour with governments.

Advertisement

In such a climate, those on the left need to be careful about defending state welfare on the basis of Christian compassion for the weak and the vulnerable. Certainly, many Christian socialists have been inspired by Christ’s concern for the poor and the weak and have seen state-based policies of social justice as a way of institutionalising this concern on behalf of the community as whole. But Christian compassion for the vulnerable can easily slide into patronising assumptions of social and moral distance between those who give and those who receive.

The charitable approach may be more suited to forms of compassionate conservatism based on noblesse oblige (or, as in Hayek’s case, bourgeoisie oblige) than to social democracy. It casts the ordinary punter in a subservient role and fuels the charge that the progressive left are a condescending elite who set themselves above the rest.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. All

This article first appeared in Eureka Street 23 January 2007.



Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

53 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Richard Mulgan is author of Holding Power to Account (Palgrave Macmillan 2003) and a former professor in the Crawford School of Economics and Government at the ANU.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Richard Mulgan

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Photo of Richard Mulgan
Article Tools
Comment 53 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy