The Gospel and Social Ethics

Philippians 2:4 – “Do not consider each one’s own interests, but each one also consider other people’s interests.”

It's truly spectacular how texts written millennia ago manage to remain current. And this is one of the fundamental aspects that place the Bible on a level above any other work: it is not tied to the temporal constraints that normally stamp any compendium that deals with contemporary socioeconomic aspects as 'outdated'. Even classic authors praised for generations, if they were still alive, would have to witness the updating, correction and, in certain cases, the complete disuse of their masterpieces, such as, for example, Plato, Marx, Nietzsche and others.

What's more, the Word of God not only remains current but also seems immune to all the attacks made against it day after day by the armies of liberality and relativism, enraptured by the contradiction of an irrationally subtle criticism that, using the mask of supposed “progress” and “development” (euphemisms for progressivism and other destructive agendas), brings in its depths a brutal discomfort in having to live with the truth translated by the will of God, the primary source of human wisdom.

Let's look specifically at the verse mentioned above. It was written in the first century of the Christian Era. It could have been written yesterday. It could be printing t-shirts in peaceful protests against the mistreatment that the population receives from their governments. Or even to complain about noisy neighbors or people who throw trash in the street.

In clear and objective words, the apostle says that, at the same time as we take care of our interests, we must understand that others also have theirs, in a statement that gains popular echo by reading between the lines that 'my right begins when the neighbor's rights end', and vice versa.

He speaks nothing strange to the heart of the Creator God, who had already said something in the desert that points to this “(…) but you will love your neighbor as yourself” (Leviticus 19:18). Jesus reaffirms the expression in Matthew 22:39. In other words, I must treat how I would like to be treated. I must respect what is not mine as if it were. And this is a fundamental point in what we would like to call civilization.

Let's take, for example, the case of the rulers of a nation. The way they deal with the three most important issues of a society, namely: education, health and security, exactly in that order.

Their immediate concerns (“What is properly yours”) are – redundancy – immediately resolved as soon as they come to power. New car, depending on the position, armored car, new house, new school for the children and health plan with international coverage. And so, here's the question. Once they relax in their new comfort zone, “What belongs to others” falls into oblivion. In this case, “What belongs to others” is about the health of others, the education of others, the safety of others. We saw this a lot recently in the draconian decisions of managers preventing people from coming and going, from working, from seeking support from their loved ones, while they were safe in their carpeted offices without lacking anything.

The rulers we have, most of whom are socialists and progressives, are not sincerely concerned about the nation. At least not on this side of the Equator. His main concern is to remain in the spotlight during the right period with a view to the next election, in order to continue with “Own yours” at a high level. A senator once thought of proposing that all those who were elected enroll their children in public school. A delusion indirectly referred to Thomas Moore which, being so dreamlike, was perhaps the only way out of our destroyed, humiliated and fragmented education.

How about if we extended the idea to other sectors?

What if all politicians depended on public defenders to speed up their processes? Would we have so few public defenders for such a large number of cases that were stopped due to lack of available manpower?

What if our authorities had to use the public health network, the ineffable SUS? Would we or would we not have hospitals equipped with the minimum necessary to carry out the most basic exams, available medicines and doctors on duty?

And that's the problem. A problem that mixes culture with impunity. Without knowing exactly which came first, but being sure that one complements the other. The idea that I can manipulate public opinion to stay in power is easily supported by the lack of political-social knowledge of a large part of the population, originating from the disguised – but successful – policy of not allowing the population to have access to quality education. Which means that the population, ignorant of their rights or powers, so to speak, remains alienated from the process, satisfying themselves with crumbs that are thrown at them from the top of the carpeted offices of the Federal Capital.

She – the masses – doesn't care if the person she puts in power doesn't care about her. And those in power know this, and work to ensure that everything stays that way.

Paying attention to what belongs to others, according to Paulo, is inserted in the context of giving up something smaller for a greater good. In this case, the apostle follows, Jesus Christ gives up his divine royalty in favor of an unprecedented work: the salvation of humanity. Once the intention has been carried out, the sacrifice proves redemptive. He – Jesus Christ – is revealed Lord, and to him all honor is due.

Here's the question. Who will sacrifice themselves for the greater good if it is easier to act blind and deaf? This only becomes possible when we have God-fearing men and women in power, although this statement sounds anachronistic and retrograde today. It doesn't matter, the truth is only an anachronism in seared minds that already feel comfortable calling mistakes a right. Leaders who recognize divine authority above all and are not ashamed to carry the flags defended by the Judeo-Christian tradition will always be the best option for maintaining the West's civilizing message. They are "antidotes" against the diabolical agendas disseminated by common sense distorted by countless destructive theories.

Finally, in general, the ethics of the Gospel do not apply only to constituted authorities. It applies to everyone who aspires to live in a civilized society. In developed countries, leaving dog feces on the sidewalk generates a fine. And why? Because someone (the ‘other’) can pass by and step on. If the pet owner wants to leave his house full of dog feces, that's his problem, but when it becomes a problem for others, he must have a civilized attitude. Civilization implies organized society, egalitarian laws, freedom of expression. Elements that are slowly being put at risk every day as the world becomes more modern. It seems like a paradox. And it is.

In the end the Bible was right. Always has been. It always will be.

Brazil above all.

God above all.

Article published in Revista Conhecimento & Cidadania Vol. I No. 10 April 2022 edition – ISSN 2764-3867