Wondering if anyone might respond to the following statement:
"A social justice that does not call forth repentance in persons is not the social justice revealed in the life and teachings of Jesus Christ."
Any feedback (pro or con) will be appreciated, as I am in an ongoing discussion with several people who wonder about the way the church is choosing to address issues that come under the umbrella of Social Justice. This quote came up the other day, and I really would like some feedback.
Thanks,
Rick
5 comments:
I think it depends on how one understands both social justice and repentance.
"Social Justice" can mean many things. As Christians, what we are involved in can better be expressed, I believe, as "works of mercy." This language ties our understanding to the particular work of God, most clearly seen in Christ.
As for repentance: Yes. I believe our work should invite people to repentance. However, I would disagree strongly with the many who would that that this means something basically along the lines of: "It's only worth giving people bread if after the meal we get some to say the sinner's prayer." Repentance is a fundamental change of life that draws one into greater Christlikeness. This can be seen, if only in a small way, simply in thankfulness. If our work makes people more grateful for the mercy they have received, even by means of a loaf of bread, then it is Christian and "worthwhile." It is inviting people to participate in the Kingdom that matters, not whether or now we can put another tic mark on our annual pastor's reports.
Dad,
As I think about, I am not thrilled that social justice and repentance are so categorically separate. I really like what Wil said about works of mercy. Works of mercy allows us as the Church to talk about the life of repentance, which is more attune to the Greek concept of metanoia, which implies a life-long turning towards God. Works of mercy as we have learned them in Christ characterize the life of repentance. Therefore, when the Church talks about social justice it is never a vague category. Neither is it conditioned by the world!
I do, however, believe that “non-Christians” can reflect the Kingdom of God (as something bigger than merely the Church) in their actions. Perhaps it is wiser to point out when the world reflects the Kingdom of God than try and elicit some sort of cognitive response from persons that, more than anything else, might only really appease our own minds. Perhaps such calls for repentance are really rooted in false categories of consumption and productivity.
Thoughts? I am sure this needs quite a bit of clarification and fine tuning.
Peace,
Scott
The statement is confusing because issues of social justice are consistent with the life and teachings of Christ. Turning toward social justice is always consistent with repentance and can be a form of repentance in of itself.
Insert any characteristic of Christ in the place of social justice in that statement.
"Compassion that does not call forth repentance in persons is not the compassion revealed in the life and teachings of Jesus Christ."
"Righteousness that does not call forth repentance in persons is not the righteousness revealed in the life and teachings of Jesus Christ."
These don't make much sense either. In other words how can compassion and righteousness and justice in society not be reflective of the life and teachings of Jesus Christ?
This is not to say that just because someone is active in issues of social justice they have nothing else they need to repent of but but this does not make their compassionate pursuit of issues of justice in society somehow lacking the revealed character of Christ.
Peace,
James
Thanks for the input. It's all helpful to the conversation I am in. The larger question for us, into which the first question it placed, is "What does it mean for the church to be faithful to the mind and spirit of Christ?" My hope is to find a place where the Christian community can say, "This is us. This is who we are. Without this we are not Christian." This may be too broad an expectation, but in an age of so many conflicting voices within the Faith, and instantaneous communication everywhere, seeking to hear what the Spirit is saying to the Church becomes more and more crucial everyday; at least for me.
Thanks again for the input.
Rick
Dad,
You last post reminded me of something I have been reading for class. It comes out of a commentary on Philippians by Stephen Fowl.
Here Fowl is commenting on Philippians 1:1, “Paul and Timothy, slaves of Christ Jesus, to all the saint in Christ Jesus who are in Philippi.” Fowl comments, “This would indicate that identifying the Philippians as ‘saints in Christ Jesus’ defines both the parameters of the community and the character of that community” [my italics]. Paul’s overall concern in Philippians is that they would develop a pattern of thinking, feeling, and acting (Philippians 1:27) that is informed by the economy of God’s salvation in Christ (Philippians 2:5-11). Christ is the paradigm in which/by which the Philippians develop certain habits and dispositions which are analogous to Christ. Being “in Christ” means they find themselves within the realm/sphere of Christ, which means that they much pattern their lives after His. Fowl juxtaposes being “in Christ” to being “in Philippi.” The dynamic is deep. From the beginning Paul is all about the parameter and pattern of what it means/looks like to be “in Christ.” This is highly political language! Thus, to pattern one’s life after Christ and not the ways of the world (i.e. Philippi) necessarily implies a life of repentance, or turning from one pattern of thinking, feeling, and acting towards another, that is at the same time not about ones self-interests and status but about the redemptive well-being of another.
Sorry this is a bit wordy. I am still trying to make the language my own.
Peace,
Scott
Post a Comment