February, 1999

Dear ICE Subscriber:

This civilization is arrogant as none in recorded history has been. Men who are in positions of authority, especially political authority, believe that they are autonomous decision-makers in a world governed by impersonal forces. These forces sometimes can be harnessed by man, through science and technology, or through scientific techniques of public relations and opinion polling. But these forces are impervious to older techniques, most notably public sacrifices and prayer. Public figures no longer invoke God, except as a way to manipulate public opinion.

This sense of autonomy from supernatural forces has delivered men into the hands of other men. There is no appeals court beyond man and history in a world devoid of supernatural powers. Man must make do with the material forces at his command. These material forces include politics, psychology, education, the sciences, and most of all, money. Money is the most marketable good. It can open more doors than any- thing else. This is why it is the great rival to God. It is mammon. It promises more things to more people than any other route to safety in an unsafe world. Its promises are believed more than those of any other temporal deity.

Money makes possible the division of labor economy. It is the division of labor that has produced the cornucopia of wealth that seems to have validated man's autonomy. Men have many talents. These talents have been harnessed by the invisible hand of the free market. Men bring the work of their hands into the market place in search of money. They serve their fellow man and thereby gain money, for which other men will then serve them. Money is the means by which the forces of nature, through the institutions invented by men, can be harnessed by individuals. We cannot yet change the weather, but we can buy air conditioners, heaters, and clothing designed for the seasons. The division of labor has enabled mankind to overcome many of the limits imposed on man by the environment.

Men rarely worship the division of labor, although economists come closest to this form of idolatry. But they do put their trust in money, the primary tool of control in a division of labor society. This is why Christians refuse to tithe. They have more faith in money's powers of deliverance than God's. They believe that their money will protect them. Their pension fund will deliver them from the worst curses of old age. They believe in the social division of labor more than they believe in God's law. We know this because we can look at their checkbooks. A man's bank checkbook stubs tell what he believes in most, what his choices have been.

"I give as the spirit moves me," we are told. Indeed; the question is: Which spirit? The spirit of autonomy or the Spirit of God? The suggestion that 10% of a man's net income should go to his local church is resisted by the vast majority of those who call themselves Christians. Why? Because they do not accept the idea that the continuing mark of covenantal subordination to God is membership in His church. They do not want to accept the biblical principle that the mark of devoted membership is the tithe. Abraham paid a tithe to Melchizedek. The Epistle to the Hebrews uses this fact to prove that the New Covenant is superior to the Old. The priesthood given to Israel was subordinate, through Abraham, to the priesthood of Melchizedek. Jesus' priesthood was through Melchizedek, not Levi or Aaron.

Now consider how great this man was, unto whom even the patriarch Abraham gave the tenth of the spoils. And verily they that are of the sons of Levi, who receive the office of the priesthood, have a commandment to take tithes of the people according to the law, that is, of their brethren, though they come out of the loins of Abraham: But he whose descent is not counted from them received tithes of Abraham, and blessed him that had the promises. And without all contradiction the less is blessed of the better. And here men that die receive tithes; but there he receiveth them, of whom it is witnessed that he liveth. And as I may so say, Levi also, who receiveth tithes, payed tithes in Abraham. For he was yet in the loins of his father, when Melchisedec met him. If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron? For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law. For he of whom these things are spoken pertaineth to another tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the altar. For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood. And it is yet far more evident: for that after the similitude of Melchisedec there ariseth another priest, Who is made, not after the law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an endless life (Heb. 7:4-16).

The church is deserving of our tithes because Melchizedek was. The New Covenant is greater than the Old because Melchizedek received Abraham's tithe. But the modern church refuses to preach on Hebrews 7 because it fears the revolt of the autonomous members. "Give as the spirit moves you," pastors tell the members, and so they do. They remain confirmed in their would-be autonomy, working out a deal, month by month, with this lawless spirit.

A Great Awakening

The division of labor has reinforced man's greatest illusion: his own autonomy. Now comes the Millennium Bug. It threatens this cozy relationship among would-be autonomous men. It threatens the cornucopia: the division of labor. Soon, billions of people will be thrown back on their own resources, in the broadest meaning of the term. They will be forced to live without their checkbooks because electronic promises to pay will be in default. Men will face a world where the division of labor has shrunk to levels not seen in a century, where production was aimed at a billion buyers and sellers, not six billion. It was a world with a different set of skills. Think of the local blacksmith. Have you ever known one? If the banks closed tomorrow, and the local hardware store closed with them, where would you locate a blacksmith? This is why, in a world without electronic money, duct tape will be a form of money for a few years, at least.

Anyone who has read Leviticus 26 or Deuteronomy 28 knows what can happen when God brings negative corporate sanctions to replace positive ones. When men systematically break the laws of the covenant, God brings these sanctions. But modern men do not believe there are social laws of the covenant, which means that they do not believe in a social covenant. This is believed as firmly by pietistic Christians as by the humanists. In fact, for three centuries, this agreement has been the basis of the pietist-humanist alliance, which has supported this civilization.

This is why Deuteronomy 28 stands as a testimony against this civilization. It ties wealth and poverty to the covenant. This is why the Book of Deuteronomy is despised today by those pietists who have bothered to read it. It testifies against pietism as loudly as it testifies against atheism. It testifies against social autonomy.

Christian leaders are divided on Y2K for many reasons. Those few Christians who say there are predictable corporate sanctions in history are always afraid to predict them, just in case the looming sanctions do not appear. So, in actual operation, there are no predictable sanctions in history. But most preachers deny the existence of a social covenant, for a covenant mandates a formal oath, written law, and sanctions. Modern democracy -- pioneered by Roger Williams -- denies the existence of such a civil oath, biblically revealed civil law, and biblically mandated civil sanctions. Thus, Y2K is interpreted in terms of other categories, most notably dispensational prophecy. Or it is simply denied.

This is why the churches are silent. The pastors are afraid to bet on the wrong horse. They do not want controversy. They do not see how the local congregation could make a big difference after Y2K hits, and they are afraid to sound the alarm before it hits. The pastors are in denial, just as most people are. They cannot comprehend the possibility that two missing digits could bankrupt a civilization. But autonomy always comes up with an account marked "insufficient funds." The trouble is, the pastors cannot bring themselves to admit that their pension funds, their retirement plans, their days of wine and roses are at risk. So, they will not warn their flocks, who would not believe the warning anyway.

The pastors in 2000 and beyond will be called upon to exercise more responsibility than they have ever thought possible. Local politicians, checkbooks empty, will soon face the wrath of State-dependent voters. The welfare State will collapse in a mighty way next year, and with it, the lies and dreams of autonomy of an entire society. There will be a frantic scramble by politicians to locate safety nets for those who have fallen through the State's broken computerized nets. The politicians will then come to the pastors. They have ignored pastors in the past because the social autonomy seemingly provided by the division of labor made pastors seem peripheral. Not in 2000 and beyond.

What will pastors then tell their congregations? Whatever they tell them, they had better begin with a series on the tithe as the antidote to autonomy. A desperate man who has lost everything had better begin with an admission before God that he has lost everything. "I have nothing" is the first confession of the repentant autonomous man. Then what is God's way to get something? To give Him 10% off the top. This is God's way of saying, "you have 90% of something valuable." The proof of the value of the 90% is the value of the forfeited 10%. The 10% testifies as to the origin of the 90%. It legitimizes the retention of the 90%. To get something of value, a covenant-keeper acknowledges that he has nothing of value on his own authority, even his own life. "He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it" (Matt. 10:39).

Social reconstruction must begin with a confession: "This is my father's world." The first step in the affirmation of this confession is the tithe, paid to the local church. The Protestant church has been in bondage to an alien faith for three centuries: the religion of autonomy. This religion begins with a confession: "This world does not belong to the God of the Bible." Its affirmation is a refusal to pay the tithe. The church, by allowing members who do not tithe to vote in church elections, i.e., impose sanctions, consents to the religion of mass democracy. He who does not pay the piper calls the tune. The churches have adopted the fundamental principle of the welfare State: those who refuse to pay for the services rendered nevertheless allocate the services rendered. This principle of government was adopted by Protestantism centuries before it was adopted by civil government. The church set that pattern for the State.

A great shaking of the foundations is coming. Autonomy will suffer a setback when society's wealth disappears. "The rich man's wealth is his strong city, and as an high wall in his own conceit" (Prov. 18:11). But it is the economists -- theologians of autonomy -- have assured us that compound growth will continue. They are preachers of positive corporate sanctions. Despite the universally acknowledged impossibility of permanent compounding in a finite universe, economists preach long-term economic growth as the product of endogenous (self-sustained) market forces. They know that this compounding process cannot go on forever in a universe of scarcity, yet they preach every year as though it can for another year. They are like those preachers who preach that God's negative corporate sanctions must come, but not just yet. But the wealth of nations is always covenantal, never autonomous. This, neither the economists nor the preachers are willing to affirm today. They will pay a high price for their blindness. So will all those who have listened to them and have agreed.

Sincerely,

Gary North