Several years ago while working as an intern at Sojourners Magazine in Washington, D.C., I had the pleasure of taking a class from David Hilfiker. The class was titled, “The Radical Inclusivity of the Gospel: Ending the Spiral of Violence,” in which we explored the theories of Rene Girard. After having been enlightened by his class and the conversations that surfaced from our readings, I’ve stayed up with his work, both written and otherwise. Not too long ago he wrote an essay about capitalism called “Straight Thinking About Capitalism.” After having read that essay, I had a few questions for him. These are questions David graciously took the time to answer for me in an email interview.

Jeshua Erickson: Your write about the perils of past and current infatuations with free-market capitalism in your essay titled, “Straight Thinking About Capitalism.” What impact, if any, do you hope an essay like this will have on future discussions about economics and the public good?

David Hilfiker: Our culture faces an interlocking set of potentially disastrous crises: global warming and other environmental threats, global poverty and growing inequality, “peak oil” and other resource depletion, dysfunctional governance, an economic system that no longer improves human well-being, and so on. Perhaps the linchpin of what’s coming and what’s preventing us from stopping it is a free-market-based economic system that is simply incapable (even in theory) of preserving the environment, inevitably leads to growing inequality and poverty, results in recurrent economic collapses, encourages monopoly, and develops the power to effectively control government. In other words, we cannot escape the coming tragedies unless we drastically change our economic system.

One significant problem is the general ignorance of our economic system and the misperception that the common person cannot understand enough of it to have an opinion about what needs to be done. For the past 40 years professional economists have preached that the assumptions of free-market capitalism are simply givens, fundamental realities about which we have no choice. But that’s not true. The free market is based on assumptions, on choices that could be made differently: the primacy of self-interest, the universal goal of profit. The measurement of all value by a dollar yardstick, the distribution of goods according to supply and demand (ie who can pay and who can’t), and the absolute sanctity of private property.

Because of our nation’s general economic illiteracy, there is a fundamental confusion between capitalism (where a relatively small group of people own the capital [“the means of production” as Karl Marx said]) and the market (a decentralized method for setting prices and making other economic decisions that avoids the major pitfalls of centralized planning). Because of this confusion, we have confused conversations and end up reinforcing our assumptions that we can’t understand it.

Part of the confusion is that capitalism uses the assumptions of the market; but so do other economic system. A primary difference between capitalism and other economic systems is that the latter consciously moderate the assumptions of the market to produce the socially desired result. But pure free-market capitalism doesn’t interfere with market mechanism. It’s important to recognize that in practice no economy is based on an absolutely free market. Government services (like defense or police protection), government regulation (against, for instance, monopolies), some degree of assistance for the destitute, and so on, all contradict the free market but are part of any workable capitalism.

Unless enough of us understand (relatively) free-market capitalism, understand the choices it assumes, realize that we could make different choices, and are willing to work for those different choices, our society-as-we-know-it will not survive. I hope my essay(s) will contribute to economic understanding and the movement toward different choices.

Jeshua Erickson: Folks tend to see capitalism as a value system that holds its own intrinsic set of morals when, as you point out, the values associated with capitalism actually run contrary to a number of major spiritualities, including those in the Judeo-Christian tradition. Why do you think, for so many, capitalism has been interpreted as the economic system that is fully sanctioned by God? What Biblical basis may there be for this thinking?

David Hilfiker: I’m not sure I agree with your assumption that most people see capitalism as a value system. While I have not seen any polls to confirm this, I am coming to think (based primarily on the work of Howard Richards and Joanne Swanger )¹ that most people do not understand that there are value choices that underpin capitalism. People, it seems to me, have understandably bought the assertion by mainstream economists that the assumptions of (mostly) free-market capitalism describe the nature of reality; those assumptions are “just the way it is.” And if “it’s just the way it is,” then God must sanction it as well. If one wants to have an economic system that works, declare the mainstream economists, one must found it upon reality, ie those assumptions. Few people, I think (and certainly not most economists), realize that these are value choices that could be made differently.

Most people do recognize that the end result of a (mostly) free-market capitalism runs contrary their own values and certain contrary to most spiritualities, they bemoan the results, but they don’t think there are any real options. We been convinced that Western capitalism using the (mostly) free market is the “end of history” and that nothing else is practicable.

It must also be mentioned that, with some very important exceptions, Americans have done very well by the current system. Although they don’t like many of the end results, they’re also afraid that modifying it may change their privilege (which, indeed, it should). So, the way most people deal with the cognitive dissonance between their values and what they want is to avoid learning to much about capitalism’s underlying values.

Jeshua Erickson: Jen once pointed out an interesting contradiction. She mentioned how odd it was that some Christians who are vehemently opposed to Charles Darwin’s ideas are perfectly happy using “survival of the fittest” as a rational for why capitalism and free-markets ought to be the rule of the day. And why government should not act on behalf of those who live in poverty. Do you observe folks using this rationale? If so, how do you call it out in a way that is tactful and diplomatic?

David Hilfiker: Again, I don’t think that most people really are happy using the “survival of the fittest” as their rational. The privilege we’ve gotten to date from the way capitalism works and the teaching that the assumptions are “just the way it is” mean that most of us don’t see that there is a choice.

I would also disagree with your assumption that most people believe that government should not act on behalf of those who live in poverty. Most polls show that people are very concerned about poverty, and, in every poll I’ve seen, people think the government should intervene … they even seem willing to pay higher taxes to make it possible.

Most of the people that have used that argument with me have been college students enamored of Ayn Rand; it doesn’t usually survive into adulthood.

Jeshua Erickson: This next question is slightly off topic, but helpful in understanding a bigger picture, perhaps, of where you’re coming from in your writings and the overall impetus behind your concern for the poor. Can you point to any anecdotes in your childhood or growing up that shaped your current perspectives on justice and care for the poor? Or did your own personal movement toward helping marginalized folks come only later in life in your work as a physician, etc.?

David Hilfiker: I’ve been asked that before and I’m always at a loss to explain it in large part because nothing else makes sense to me. I don’t see how one whose basic needs are met (as mine certainly have) could not be concerned about the marginalized. Compassion is innate, although it can and does certainly get squelched by our experiences.

By the way there is a fascinating experiment with toddlers showing their apparently innate desire to help another. The toddler is in a room with his or her mother. The researcher comes in and makes a “mistake” in which he demonstrates a clear need for help. (For instance, the researcher tries to hang up a garment on a clothesline, drops a clothes pin, and pretends not to be able to reach it.) In almost every instance the toddler comes over immediately (to a stranger, no less) and helps, in this case picking up the clothespin and handing it to the researcher. I was astounded by the videos of some of these, which are online. (http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/311/5765/1301 You have to sign up, but it’s free and one can opt out of any consequences.)

Certainly my parents held the same values I do (my mother was a nurse; my father was a pastor who directed an integrated youth center in a poor area of St Louis when I was very young), but I don’t remember any defining stories. (Of course, my memory is such that I don’t remember much of anything from childhood.) I took part in several civil rights education projects in the South during the mid-1960s and lived for a number of years in the inner city, but those seem to be more expressions of my values than causes of them. So I can’t be very much help to you there.

Facts about David Hilfiker

Date of Birth: Feb 12, 1945

Education: (high school, college, graduate school): Kenmore East Senior High School near Buffalo, NY, Yale College, University of Minnesota medical school

Author(s) or thinker(s) who have most influenced your work: some great philosophy courses at college, René Girard, William Julius Wilson, Walter Brueggemann, Walter Wink, and I’m sure many others.

¹Richards, Howard, and Swanger, Joanna, The Dilemmas of Social Democracy, Lexington Books, New York, 2006.

Illegal immigration is a hot topic in Albert Lea, Minnesota. We’ve had a number of visits from Centro Campesino and others who are marching to raise awareness about the animosity that some folks feel toward immigrants. Needless to say, there are a number of Albert Leans who don’t care for groups who show support for illegal immigrants.

Here is the lead from a recent article in the Albert Lea Tribune titled, “Immigration reform groups march in Albert Lea”:

Carrying a message of hope, justice and fair immigration reform, about 30 people from multiple organizations around the state marched in Albert Lea on Sunday, during what was the last of a series of reform marches over the weekend.

Of particular interest are the kind of comments that get posted after an article like this. Here is an example of a comment written by a fellow who goes by “taxpayer”:

It makes me sick that this was held near the veterans memorial. What a slap in the face to all the vets who gave their lives in order for us to have the rights and lifestyles that we have today(or used to have). I am sick and tired of all of these immigrants whining and crying about EVERYTHIING! One of the reasons that this nation is financially in the crapper today is because of all the catering that we do to these people. Who the heck provided all of these things to our immigrant ancestors when they came to America? NOBODY, that’s who! They earned everything that they got. Nothing was handed to them. If you dont like it here, do us all a favor and leave. Please..let us AMERICANS get back to life as we used to know it.

I’m afraid that this sort of comment is not unusual and not unique to Albert Lea. These kind of comments are being posted on news websites and forums all over the country. And it appears as though the pervasiveness of comments like these won’t cease any time soon.

Every once in a while I add a comment or two of my own just to show that not everyone who reads and posts comments at the Albert Lea Tribune has such a vindictive attitude toward immigrants, but it feels like a losing battle.

Here’s one comment I wrote:

You all have a right to your opinion. I respect that. Just respect that I have a right to treat people kindly whether they are here legally or illegally. They are all God’s children and many of them are trying to support their families the best they know how.

If you feel you have the right to step on them because they’ve broken the law, remember that being merciful is a good thing and using vindictive words toward immigrants probably won’t fix anything. Work to change legislation. It will be far more productive than working to instill fear.

And a response to the above comment from a fellow by the name of “savypro”:

They are all God’s children,,,,,,,,Paaalease,this is not about religon,its about ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS coming here trying to change the laws that mine and yours LEGAL IMMIGRANTS fought and spilled their blood trying to protect.

Yikes. There is a great chasm between folks who view faith as something that doesn’t apply to political discussions, particularly immigration, public health, etc. and folks who view faith as that which teaches us people ought to be respected and treated kindly…even if they knowingly break the law to find a better life for themselves and their families.

My reply to “savypro”:

Savypro, how I treat people, whether they are lawbreakers or not, has everything to do with my relationship with God and my religion.

If you get the chance, stop by the Albert Lea Tribune and leave a comment.

My brother-in-law, Kevin Land, sang this fantastic tune at my son’s baptism. It’s a song he wrote and I’m not even sure of the title of it, but the line that ties it all together is “Death is no more master over him.” The phrasing is excellent and I liked it so much that I played it from my camcorder and listened while I drove home from Mankato with Jen and Axel. For those who don’t know Jen and I have a new baby boy, Axel Christian Erickson, who was born on March 19, 2009…just over a month ago. We have piles of pictures on Facebook.

Perhaps one of the most baffling considerations in religion and philosophy is the “Problem of Evil.” If there is one God who created everyone and everything, then is it possible that God created Satan? And if so, why? (Some of this is in response to my own previous blog entry about evil spirits, etc.)

In the Christian tradition, Satan is a fallen angel. God created Satan and then Satan became evil because God granted him the free-will do to so. Does evil come from Satan because Satan chose evil, or does evil come from God because God granted Satan the power to choose evil? Some argue that evil is the absence of God, which inadvertently suggests that there are places where God does not exist. How could there be places where God doesn’t exist if God is the Creator of everything?

These questions get me back to my own fascination with free-will. I’ve been thinking and writing about free-will for over a decade. Theoretically, all the ingredients that lead to our making one choice or another come from God. If all ingredients come from God, and if all the experiences we face come from God, how is it that we’re the one’s responsible for the outcome of our life’s recipe? Excuse the cooking metaphor, it’s just difficult to see clearly where the Creator stops and Creation starts. Where does the hand-off take place? Or does it take place at all? Who is actually at work in the world making us who we are?

Finally, if we acknowledge the existence of Satan, are we not saying that there are two gods? Are we not saying that there are two competing forces in the world? I’d argue that there is only one true force of power in the world: a God who created everything. But this doesn’t explain what many have described from experience as the apparent presence of evil.

I’m not prepared to rule out the possibility that Satan’s evil is a force in competition with God’s goodness. There is plenty of evidence in history to suggest that evil exists as its own force: the holocaust, ethnic cleansing, brutal wars and injustices; and millions of experiences and tragedies that are too horrible to describe.

What I see, however, is that people tend to worship that which they fear the most. If they fear Satan more than God, then this preoccupation with Satan takes over and they loose their emotional and spiritual footing — and often their sanity. If people consider God as the sole source of true power in the world, I speculate that they experience less fear in their day to day lives and, as a result, have more room in their hearts to love their neighbors.

The purpose of this latest blog entry is not to answer questions, but to ask them. My reflections on “The Problem of Evil” change from one month to the next. However, I am inclined to say that singleness of mind comes, not from trying to spot evil in the world, but from seeking God. Rather than asking, “How is Satan at work in the world?” it is far better to ask, “How is God at work in the world?”

Lately, as a result of recent conversations with Bob Ekblad, author of “Reading the Bible with the Damned” and “A New Christian Manifesto,” I’ve found myself contemplating the Holy Spirit in my life and in the lives of others.

Bob told me about a book written by Francis MacNutt, “Deliverance from Evil Spirits: A Practical Manual.” MacNutt says that folks encounter evil and can sometimes become disturbed by demons within. These people come to the church for help, but most churches are unable to help them because delivering folks from evil spirits simply isn’t in ministers’ job descriptions or training.

According to MacNutt, certain can people become conduits of the Holy Spirit, ministers of healing and deliverance from evil. For some, a catalyst toward entering this type of ministry comes from first being “baptized by the Holy Spirit.” Folks who are baptized by the Holy Spirit supposedly experience a radical infusion of the Holy Spirit. And many find they are then able to deliver people from evil spirits and free them from whatever emotional or physical distress they’re experiencing simply by calling upon the Holy Spirit to do this work for them.

So what it is this Holy Spirit? I’ve felt in the past that all this healing and deliverance stuff was just a bunch of hocus pocus. I’m not so sure any more.

If folks are interested in learning more about healing and deliverance, I suggest they visit Bob Ekblad’s website and look around a bit. He’s busily bridging gaps between conservatives, liberals, charismatics and evangelicals. And every time I talk to him I find my understandings of God’s power get challenged a little more.

Upon seeing the cover of “Deliver Us From Evil” and reading the back of the DVD case, I thought to myself, “Oh, not another piece about abuse in the Catholic Church. Isn’t that whole controversy over and done? Didn’t all the victims get their money and the Catholic Church do an overhaul of their treatment of abuse allegations?”

After seeing this movie, I conclude the following: the Catholic Church, as an institution, is still very much involved with the cover-up of sexual abuse perpetuated by clergymen. Here’s what’s missing: transparency. Piles of documents, paperwork, letters, and testimonies have been made inaccessible to the criminal justice system in this country. When allegations of abuse surface, it is the responsibility of bishops and hierarchy within the church to respond by reporting these allegations to the proper authorities. Instead, allegations are handled in-house and dismissed. The public has been fooled into thinking that this problem is solved. It is not.

Case in point: Father Oliver O’Grady. Admittedly, he is an extreme case. His abuse of hundreds of young children, as was described throughout “Deliver Us From Evil,” is a rare and tragic characterization. But what is most tragic, is that at the time of this movie, he was living in Ireland…even living with a family at the time. And they new nothing of his past. And it was the Catholic Church who put him in Ireland in exchange for not testifying against the hierarchy of the church.

Do I think it is a good thing to dwell on a person’s evil past? Not necessarily, but when the safety of children is at stake, their knowledge of his past is of the utmost importance. He was compelled to abuse in the past and he will be compelled to abuse in the future; he’s sick. Not because he’s chosen to be an evil man, but because he was abused as a child…because he continued to abuse even after allegations of his abusing children continued to come forward. And the church did nothing.

This movie does not rail against Catholics, rather it empowers them to take back their church. And all of us, Catholic and non-Catholic, must celebrate the Mother Theresa’s, Oscar Romero’s, and Dorothea Day’s of this world. They are witnesses to God’s love on Earth. And it is our love for the church that should propel us to seek the truth…and the utmost transparency about what has yet been uncovered concerning sexual abuse within the Catholic Church.

Here are positive reviews of “Deliver Us From Evil. And here are negative reviews of “Deliver Us From Evil.” Read both…they are very interesting.

Here’s the first paragraph of an article by David Hilfiker: The High Price of American Inequality. It is an excellent analysis of growing income inequalities in the United States…and what these inequalities mean the future of our society.

The High Price of American Inequality
And What Might Be Done About It

In the March 17, 2008, Washington Post were two articles on toll roads. The first concerned the ongoing attempt by the current US Department of Transportation to get the federal government out of the business of funding road building, thereby “encouraging” states to move toward toll roads where the users pay for construction and maintenance. And the second article was about a report from a Metropolitan Washington regionwide council that in order to relieve the disabling traffic congestion in the area such toll roads are now an absolute necessity precisely because both state and federal governments are pulling back from the costs of roads. The council is recommending that most of the existing area highways, the bridges into the District and even major District thoroughfares be at least partially converted to toll roads. Those able and willing to pay would zip by on their toll roads while the rest would stay stuck in traffic. The impact of toll roads will be to give the affluent a further advantage over others. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer. (more)

A few weeks ago my friend, Bob Ekblad, called to get a copy of my Swords into Plowshares CD. Excited to hear from him, I immediately asked about his ministry and told him how much I enjoyed his last book “Reading the Bible with the Damned.” He told me he wrote a new book that was soon to come out.

I told him I was anxious to read it, so he sent me an electronic copy and I started reading it right away. When I finished it, I felt completely overwhelmed…almost disturbed. Why? Well, let’s say this much: though I’m totally into Jesus’ ministry and the power of what he teaches—and I am riveted by Jesus’ unwavering commandment that we love one another, I never quite got into the healing stuff.

Yes, I confess, my belief in all praying for this and that all the time, non-stop, Jesus do this, Holy Spirit do that is rather dim. Which is why “A New Christian Manifesto” rattled me. From my encounters with Bob in the past, I’ve not known him to be particularly into the charismatic stuff. When I first met him, he was solidly in the Liberation Theology / Theology of the Cross camps. (Whether or not he was truly in either of those camps is only for him to say; I’m only offering my past impressions.)

Well, folks, let’s say this much: Bob is into healing now. And a lot of it. The stories in this book blew me away. I read it weeks ago and they still blow me away. Not just because the idea of healing like Jesus sounds preposterous to me, but because it’s Bob; an academic, skeptical, critical thinker…who is devoted to Justice and the power of Jesus’ love…but not a charismatic healer. Um, but he is now. And after several rather riveting personal experiences, his life has changed forever…in ways that I could never explain in this short blog entry.

Yes, the book is about more than Bob’s tanglings with the Holy Spirit; it is also about “Pledging Allegiance to the Kingdom of God.” It is about Bob’s ministry; his work with undocumented immigrants, with prisoners, with drug addicts, and all those who find themselves on the margins of society. It is about Jesus’ total ministry, which is a ministry of presence, of healing, of protection, deliverance and WHOLE LOT of Holy Spirit. Story after story in this book hammers home something very clear in my head. God is doing a new thing. Wow. Am I still as skeptical as ever? Well, yeah, kinda, but I now have hope that God is at work in ways that are far beyond my limited rational understandings of Divine power.

“A New Christian Manifesto” is a dense read; it is packed with enough material for a thousand Bible studies. (Okay, I’m prone to hyperbole, but you get the point.) And now that I actually have a copy of his book, I’m going to read it again. There’s something about these stories that never let my mind rest…or that never let me get complacent about what the Holy Spirit can actually do here on Earth, right now, today. I leave you with these two words: read it. To learn more about Bob Ekblad’s ministry follow this link.

Questions about the existence of hell have been meandering through my brain over the last few weeks. Not just questions, but implications. Let’s say hell doesn’t exist. Do we all lose our reasons for behaving well? Or are there other reasons to do the right thing? Look at atheists. They don’t believe in Hell, yet most of them are not lawless, malevolent creatures. In fact, most atheists I know are conscientious, benevolent beings.

Most Christians believe they’ll avoid Hell if they ask for forgiveness, so it’s all about timing. If they happen to do something that earns them a trip to the fiery depths, and then right before they die they ask forgiveness, all is well. On the other hand, if they die suddenly and don’t have that chance, or they simply forget to ask for forgiveness because they were too busy saying goodbye to loved ones, too bad.

Can one be a Christian and not believe in Hell? Doesn’t Jesus talk about Hell? Weeping and gnashing of teeth? Furnace of fire? It’s all there, plainly spoken…no question about it.

Rather than argue what is meant there or whether it means folks will go to Hell if they do not behave, I’m instead entranced by a rather profound statement Jesus makes right before his death on the cross. He says, “Father, forgive them for they know not what they do.” Who is the “them” that Jesus is referring to? And is Jesus saying that we’re all clueless sinners? Can Jesus forgive us even before we’ve asked for forgiveness?

We can choose to be miserable on earth and not forgive ourselves and others for transgressions, or we can accept the fact that Jesus has already forgiven us…in advance. Hence, we love our neighbors as ourselves not because we’re afraid of flames, but because we love God. I don’t believe anyone ought to follow Jesus because they’re afraid of flames in the afterlife. And, frankly, if a kid comes up to me and says, “Jeshua, do you believe in Hell?” I’ll say, “You know what, I guess I don’t believe in Hell, but you’ll have to come to your own conclusions and reasons for why you believe what you believe.”

No one knows for sure whether Hell exists or not, but it does make for rather interesting discussion. And these kinds of questions, I think, should be a part of every follower’s faith journey.

This sermon by David Hilfiker is titled, “Kindom Economics.” His not the usual critique of capitalism. Instead, he uses the biblical illustrations to portray an economic system that takes us beyond the bottom line, or calibrates our bottom line to be based on peoples’ well-being rather than profit margins.

Of course, staunch supporters of the supposed “miracle” of market capitalism suggest that capitalism simply takes care of people by increasing production and making it so that there is more for everyone. Hilfiker responds, “The problem, of course, is that our earth won’t sustain ‘more for everyone.’ We simply don’t have the resources. But built into the fundamentals of the system are ever-increasing production and productivity.”

The above response is one piece of several issues he addresses in “Kindom Economics.” I recommend reading it. Whether or not you agree that capitalism is good, bad or indifferent, it is clear that society simply cannot sustain itself with capitalism in its current form.

Download the “Kindom Economics” sermon.