The Haven of Anonymity called The Church

The article is by Maia Szalavitz, "a neuroscience journalist for TIME.com."  The article is entitled "Sidewalk Rage: Mental Illness or 'Altrustistic Punishment'?"  You can find the article online at 

http://healthland.time.com/2011/02/17/sidewalk-rage-mental-illness-or-altruistic-punishment/.

Szalavitz describes the tendency of resident New Yorkers to chastise slow and distracted side walkers and to be particularly hard on the out-of-town tourists.  She uses that phenomenon as a platform to describe and employ the research on "altruistic punishment" (see my previous post).

I am in mini-research mode for a while this morning (I have odd but inexpensive hobbies).  And I got to thinking.  If we are hard-wired for altruistic punishment and derive physical pleasure from its exercise, why do we tolerate a variety of "freeloaders" in Christian congregations?  If altruistic punishment is, as Ernst Fehr describes it, "the cement of society," why is that particular construction material so lacking in many local faith communities?

Local congregations depend, by and large, on voluntary contributions from participants.  In most mainline Christian congregations, a majority of those participants contribute little or nothing in gross financial terms.  That behavior, however, is not sanctioned in any way.  In fact, that information is the most closely guarded secret in the life of the congregation.  Woe to the religious professional who might suggest that household giving should be published abroad, even in the most general of terms.  That is a highly efficient way to get one's walking papers.

It was not always the case.  Older members can recall the days when household contributions were published on an annual basis.  The result was that those in strained financial circumstances were branded with local social stigmata.  It is a good thing, in my opinion, that we do not make such sociological tarring and feathering an option these days.

We have, however, surrendered any real possibility of community discipline.  Researchers have found, after all, that this is the value of altruistic punishment.  We enforce anonymity in giving.  Moreover, we insist on "niceness" as the social norm in churches.  Is it any wonder that many congregations suffer from the social behaviors that flourish in the absence of altruistic punishment--freeloading and bullying?

There are good reasons to be very disciplined about exercising community discipline.  Kahneman notes that "our brains are not designed to reward generosity as reliably as they punish meanness.  Here again, we find a marked asymmetry between losses and gains" (Thinking, Fast and Slow, page 308).  We are more likely to punish failures than to reward successes.  And we are always in danger of enjoying the delivery of punishment more than is healthy for us or the community.

There is not enough "speaking the truth in love" in our faith communities these days.  Thus they become secret havens for non-supporting participants.  As a result, the mission of the Church--in the name of Christ to love and serve those who need us--suffers from under-resourcing and emotional intimidation.