Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: The Social Gospel
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
As I said elsewhere:
This is the most profound, astounding call to arms, for me, that I think I have ever encountered. Truth be told I've encountered it in many guises over 40 years and sneered at it. God forgive me. And once again. God bless Tony Benn RIP. THIS is what's missing from Christianity, my Christianity, the Christianity that proclaims the Kingdom of God in secret healings, in 'words of knowledge', in more prayer, more bible study, extended worship, [in universal dogmata from a couple of words out of context] ANYTHING rather than pursue TRUE righteousness. Putting our money and time where our mouths are. Do we not fear to hear 'Depart from me, I never knew you.'? [ 28. June 2014, 09:56: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
-------------------- Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Rhythm Methodist
Shipmate
# 17064
|
Posted
Our general and widespread failure to "love our neighbour as ourselves" is merely symptomatic of not loving God with all our hearts - it really is that simple. After all, we could hardly expect to comply with Christ's second commandment, while ignoring the first. You want to see Christians sacrificially loving their neighbours? Disciple them....help them to really know God, and encourage them to allow him to change them from the inside out. When Christ condemned those who had not helped the poor, visited the sick etc., it was not because they had failed to tick a couple of boxes: it was because they had failed to get to know and love him to the point where they would naturally feel the need and desire to care for others.
Posts: 202 | From: Wales | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
Nah...Jesus is just bluffing.
-------------------- Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible. -Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574
|
Posted
When it comes to things like this I think many create a false dichotomy by making it look like if you choose one you automatically ignore the other. There is no such thing as the "social" gospel or the "prosperity" gospel or whatever. There is only one gospel and that is the gospel of Jesus Christ.
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Schroedinger's cat
![](http://ship-of-fools.com/UBB/custom_avatars/schroedingers_cat.gif) Ship's cool cat
# 64
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Ad Orientem: When it comes to things like this I think many create a false dichotomy by making it look like if you choose one you automatically ignore the other. There is no such thing as the "social" gospel or the "prosperity" gospel or whatever. There is only one gospel and that is the gospel of Jesus Christ.
But that is like saying "There is one God. This Trinity is meaningless division of the real truth". The social gospel is one part of the Christian message, and one that is very easy to ignore. It is one aspect pf the whole message, but useful to identify separately.
The danger is that, by rejecting these subtleties, we end up with "the Gospel", that is only the part of it that we like, and ignore those bits that we don't, because "it is all the same gospel".
In truth, if your faith does not make a difference to how you act, if it does not make you more caring, in practical ways, to the poor, to the suffering, to the oppressed - if there is not a social aspect to your gospel, that is practically lived out - then I want nothing to do with your faith.
-------------------- Blog Music for your enjoyment Lord may all my hard times be healing times take out this broken heart and renew my mind.
Posts: 18859 | From: At the bottom of a deep dark well. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574
|
Posted
Of course faith should lead to action. I'm not disputing that. My beef is with the false dictomy that many create in the process, and I fear that the OP does just that.
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
Indeed. I really hate the lie that conservative Christianity does nothing for the needs of others.
Has no one ever heard of The Salvation Army - one of the most conservative groups both theologically, doctrinally and ethically you will ever find. We were doing redemption theology in the 1880s - without ditching conservative doctrines of course.
One doesn't need to become almost agnostic in order to get out the 'bowl and towel'.
-------------------- "The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid." G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Matt Black
![](http://ship-of-fools.com/UBB/custom_avatars/matt_black.jpg) Shipmate
# 2210
|
Posted
Robin Gamble, in The Irrelevant Church, also criticises the false dichotomy between the 'social gospel' and 'spiritual gospel', calling instead for what he calls the 'Jesus Gospel':
quote: The social gospel sees with a very clear eye that people are living in terrible housing conditions; that their children have little or no educational future; that the aged and disabled are being brushed aside by the enterprise culture. It relates all these and similar issues to God’s loving concern for every part of our lives, and then bases a mission strategy on the need for the church to do something practical and positive about such social evils…Social gospel people tend to be involved with community and maybe political compaigns (sic), and usually come from a liberal or middle-of-the-road theological background…The spiritual gospel attitude sees with an equally clear eye that people are living without Christ; that they have little or no experience of the joy of knowing God in this life, and nothing to look forward to in the future. It relates this to the love of God and the saving death of Christ, and then bases a mission strategy on the need for the church to reach out and tell people of Jesus and his gift of eternal life…Spiritual gospel people tend to be very involved with congregational and maybe even evangelistic campaigns, and usually come from an Evangelical or Anglo-Catholic background...The Jesus gospel [OTOH] holds together and actually puts into practice the social and the spiritual gospel. It represents the full depth and breadth of God’s love, without missing anything out. It confronts sin and offers salvation in two overlapping zones, the corporate zone and the individual zone...The Jesus gospel brings judgement for the victimisers and compassion and healing for the victims, into this corporate zone…[and] brings judgement against all evil, but it also offers forgiveness and salvation to all evil-doers who are prepared to change their ways and believe
- Gamble, The Irrelevant Church, pp. 125-126.
-------------------- "Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)
Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
I fear that the late Tony Benn is in danger of being made into a secular saint.
There was plenty wrong with his message: not just economically but socially.
And the economics matter because we live in a real, not fantasy, world and so the money to pay for pie-in-the-sky programmes has to be found.
There is also an unwillingness to recognise that for every 100 (or whatever) people in poverty desperate to get out of it and willing to do everything in their power so to do, there are people who fail entirely to see that there has to be a real, as well as implied, social contract between those who fund 'the system' and those who at one time or another benefit from it. To imply or state as fact that no one chooses to leech on the state is not only naive but untrue: to base government policy on such naivety is unaffordable, not only in economic terms but also in relation to the implicit trust that taxpayers need to have towards the state institutions that spend their money.
Mr Benn was always very ready to smear anyone who disagreed with his proposed solutions to national ills and accuse them of being uncaring right-wingers; it is not only sad but deeply worrying that these same allegations are now flung about by Christians towards those who disagree with the soft-left opinions that are espoused by church leaders of the CofE and RCC in particular.
If we need to create a secular saint a better person, IMO, would be William Beveridge. And all people who talk about a 'social gospel' would do well to actually read his Report for themselves: Beveridge was very clear about the implicit contract that should exist between those helped by the state in times of need and those funding that help, and the loss of that link has been profoundly damaging to UK society as a whole.
-------------------- Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
Indeed - and William Booth addressed it all in 1890 with his book, 'In Darkest England, and the way out.'
The mission statement of the Salvation Army in the UK is to "Save Souls, Grow Saints and Serve Suffering Humanity."
the vision statement is that "As disciples of Jesus Christ, we will be a Spirit-filled, radical growing movement with a burning desire to lead people into a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ, actively serve the community, and fight for social justice."
The worldwide Salvation Army, active in 126 countries, is an evangelical part of the universal Christian Church. Its message is based on the Bible. Its ministry is motivated by the love of God. Its mission is to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ and to meet human needs in his name without discrimination.
You see, you can be conservative, evangelical and preach the social gospel alongside individual salvation. I really fail to see either the dichotomy or the reason for this being seen as a new thing.
Maybe it's because we've just gotten on with it without writing too many academic papers about it all!
-------------------- "The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid." G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Matt Black
![](http://ship-of-fools.com/UBB/custom_avatars/matt_black.jpg) Shipmate
# 2210
|
Posted
Indeed: the forgotten one of Beveridge's 'Five Great Evils' which were supposed to be addressed by the Welfare State is 'idleness'.
-------------------- "Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)
Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by L'organist: state as fact that no one chooses to leech on the state is not only naive but untrue: to base government policy on such naivety is unaffordable
It may however be somewhat irrelevant. How many people are unemployed? How many vacancies are there? What percentage of the benefits and welfare budget go to the long term unemployed?
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hairy Biker
Shipmate
# 12086
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by L'organist: There is also an unwillingness to recognise that for every 100 (or whatever) people in poverty desperate to get out of it and willing to do everything in their power so to do, there are people who fail entirely to see that there has to be a real, as well as implied, social contract between those who fund 'the system' and those who at one time or another benefit from it. To imply or state as fact that no one chooses to leech on the state is not only naive but untrue: to base government policy on such naivety is unaffordable,
I think there is also an unwillingness to accept just how few leeches there are. You quote 100 (or whatever) who wish to leave poverty, but conveniently gloss over any suggestion of just how many leeches there might be among them. I'm sure there are those who subsidise their benefits with criminal activities. I'm not so convinced that anyone can afford to choose to raise a family on state benefits alone. By implying that it's a large proportion, you and the current UK government, put the welfare of the honest victims at risk in a vain search for saving a few quid by denying the dishonest ones their ill-gotten prize.
There's a matter of priorities. Do the rights of the exploited taxpayers over-ride the right of a safety net for those who fall victim to the system. (Remember, without the pool of unemployed, and without the flexible working contracts, the system would never make the tax payers half as rich!)
-------------------- there [are] four important things in life: religion, love, art and science. At their best, they’re all just tools to help you find a path through the darkness. None of them really work that well, but they help. Damien Hirst
Posts: 683 | From: This Sceptred Isle | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by L'organist: There is also an unwillingness to recognise that for every 100 (or whatever) people in poverty desperate to get out of it and willing to do everything in their power so to do, there are people who fail entirely to see that there has to be a real, as well as implied, social contract between those who fund 'the system' and those who at one time or another benefit from it. To imply or state as fact that no one chooses to leech on the state is not only naive but untrue: to base government policy on such naivety is unaffordable, not only in economic terms but also in relation to the implicit trust that taxpayers need to have towards the state institutions that spend their money.
The part that you miss out here, which mudfrog and his SA colleagues focus on, is that many people are so-called "leeches" due to addiction, mental and/or physical illness, and a legacy of abuse that has made it difficult for them to take control of their lives.
The government is neither capable nor suitable to address all of these problems. That's where the church needs to step in. By loving and helping people as Jesus did, we can help them become productive members of society by freeing them of the evils and ailments that plague their lives.
In many ways the so-called "social gospel" actually serves conservative political goals regarding the welfare state. If the church can fill the gaps then the state doesn't have to. But that requires Christians to put our money where our mouth is.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
![](http://forum.shipoffools.com/custom_avatars/13538.jpg) Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by seekingsister:
The government is neither capable nor suitable to address all of these problems. That's where the church needs to step in. By loving and helping people as Jesus did, we can help them become productive members of society by freeing them of the evils and ailments that plague their lives.
There are plenty of non- faith charities which do just this, and do it without the ulterior motive of gaining converts.
-------------------- Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Boogie: quote: Originally posted by seekingsister:
The government is neither capable nor suitable to address all of these problems. That's where the church needs to step in. By loving and helping people as Jesus did, we can help them become productive members of society by freeing them of the evils and ailments that plague their lives.
There are plenty of non- faith charities which do just this, and do it without the ulterior motive of gaining converts.
Not sure what your point is. Christians are called to imitate Jesus, and Jesus cared for the poor and sick. That other people do so as well has never been a matter of debate, obviously they do. Their motivation for it differs, that is all.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
![](http://forum.shipoffools.com/custom_avatars/11770.jpg) Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by seekingsister: <snip> By loving and helping people as Jesus did, we can help them become productive members of society by freeing them of the evils and ailments that plague their lives.
seekingsiter, how do you envisage that churches are able to free people of the "evils and ailments" of their lives?
The people I can think of who would probably get castigated as leeches are:
- on the ASD spectrum with severe depression and self-medication with alcohol;
- disabled by cancer with children with disabilities;
- disabled with multiple conditions - diabetes, bi-polar, knees awaiting transplants, sleep apnoea - claiming benefits as is their full-time carer (both these have worked in the past and are volunteering);
- a couple where the husband is recovering from cancer, they have young children, an older disabled child and poor English skills.
Are we expecting churches to manage miracles of healing? Or can we trust in medical progress? You know those hospitals and other organisations paid for by the State?
What on earth is the church going to do to support people such as these, even if all or any of them were Christian.
-------------------- Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...: seekingsiter, how do you envisage that churches are able to free people of the "evils and ailments" of their lives?
The people I can think of who would probably get castigated as leeches are:
- on the ASD spectrum with severe depression and self-medication with alcohol;
- disabled by cancer with children with disabilities;
- disabled with multiple conditions - diabetes, bi-polar, knees awaiting transplants, sleep apnoea - claiming benefits as is their full-time carer (both these have worked in the past and are volunteering);
- a couple where the husband is recovering from cancer, they have young children, an older disabled child and poor English skills.
Are we expecting churches to manage miracles of healing? Or can we trust in medical progress? You know those hospitals and other organisations paid for by the State?
What on earth is the church going to do to support people such as these, even if all or any of them were Christian.
I'm amazed that you read my comment and decided to respond in this way. While I do believe miraculous healing is possible, I don't believe that the cancer-ridden and disabled will be found skipping out of their local parish church with a guarantee that their illness has been cured.
My reference to the Salvation Army should make quite clear that I am talking about the things the church can and does help with - addiction, counselling for victims of abuse, providing food and staples for the needy, helping people escape gangs and sex work, etc. The more we can do, the less the government will have to. And if we claim to be followers of Jesus then we need to do as much in these areas as possible.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Hairy Biker: There's a matter of priorities. Do the rights of the exploited taxpayers over-ride the right of a safety net for those who fall victim to the system. (Remember, without the pool of unemployed, and without the flexible working contracts, the system would never make the tax payers half as rich!)
I think it's worth the risk that some might abuse the system in order to help those who need the welfare system. The welfare system is certainly one of those things (or rather one among many) where our faith can and should influence our political thinking. I remain sceptical, however, of descriptions such as the "social" gospel. In the link in the openning post there was mention of building the kingdom of God on Earth, or something like that, yet our hope and the fulfilment of the kingdom lie in the Parousia not in some kind of manmade social utopia.
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Matt Black
![](http://ship-of-fools.com/UBB/custom_avatars/matt_black.jpg) Shipmate
# 2210
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Boogie: quote: Originally posted by seekingsister:
The government is neither capable nor suitable to address all of these problems. That's where the church needs to step in. By loving and helping people as Jesus did, we can help them become productive members of society by freeing them of the evils and ailments that plague their lives.
There are plenty of non- faith charities which do just this, and do it without the ulterior motive of gaining converts.
Why is trying to expose people to Jesus' salvation an 'ulterior motive'? You make it sound as if this is a negative; I view it as overwhelmingly positive.
-------------------- "Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)
Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Mudfrog: Indeed - and William Booth addressed it all in 1890 with his book, 'In Darkest England, and the way out.'
The mission statement of the Salvation Army in the UK is to "Save Souls, Grow Saints and Serve Suffering Humanity."
the vision statement is that "As disciples of Jesus Christ, we will be a Spirit-filled, radical growing movement with a burning desire to lead people into a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ, actively serve the community, and fight for social justice."
The worldwide Salvation Army, active in 126 countries, is an evangelical part of the universal Christian Church. Its message is based on the Bible. Its ministry is motivated by the love of God. Its mission is to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ and to meet human needs in his name without discrimination.
You see, you can be conservative, evangelical and preach the social gospel alongside individual salvation. I really fail to see either the dichotomy or the reason for this being seen as a new thing.
Maybe it's because we've just gotten on with it without writing too many academic papers about it all!
I think that the extreme right wing of the Republican Party has a lot to do with it - I'm surprised at you claiming that the SA is 'the most conservative' in theology, doctrine and ethics. There are many more conservative groups! The far right of the Republican Party are happy to starve children in the name of Jesus.
I'm also saddened but not surprised by the anti-intellectualism in your post, as if writing academic papers is somehow not what real Christians do. In this post and in the one about the SA documentary, I do see a lot of unhelpful and un-Christian reverse snobbery around the SA.
-------------------- Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Matt Black: quote: Originally posted by Boogie: quote: Originally posted by seekingsister:
The government is neither capable nor suitable to address all of these problems. That's where the church needs to step in. By loving and helping people as Jesus did, we can help them become productive members of society by freeing them of the evils and ailments that plague their lives.
There are plenty of non- faith charities which do just this, and do it without the ulterior motive of gaining converts.
Why is trying to expose people to Jesus' salvation an 'ulterior motive'? You make it sound as if this is a negative; I view it as overwhelmingly positive.
Because lots of people don't want to convert and they are perfectly entitled to not want that.
-------------------- Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Hairy Biker: quote: Originally posted by L'organist: There is also an unwillingness to recognise that for every 100 (or whatever) people in poverty desperate to get out of it and willing to do everything in their power so to do, there are people who fail entirely to see that there has to be a real, as well as implied, social contract between those who fund 'the system' and those who at one time or another benefit from it. To imply or state as fact that no one chooses to leech on the state is not only naive but untrue: to base government policy on such naivety is unaffordable,
I think there is also an unwillingness to accept just how few leeches there are. You quote 100 (or whatever) who wish to leave poverty, but conveniently gloss over any suggestion of just how many leeches there might be among them. I'm sure there are those who subsidise their benefits with criminal activities. I'm not so convinced that anyone can afford to choose to raise a family on state benefits alone. By implying that it's a large proportion, you and the current UK government, put the welfare of the honest victims at risk in a vain search for saving a few quid by denying the dishonest ones their ill-gotten prize.
There's a matter of priorities. Do the rights of the exploited taxpayers over-ride the right of a safety net for those who fall victim to the system. (Remember, without the pool of unemployed, and without the flexible working contracts, the system would never make the tax payers half as rich!)
Indeed. I'm also concerned by talking about real people, created in the image of God, being described in such terms. A person strugging to make ends meet, and now emergency social funds are no longer available, decides to commit benefit fraud. OK, it's wrong, but wanting to make ends meet is not. It is wrong that people are penalised for being poor. Benefit fraud is wrong, but less wrong than tax avoidance from big business. Time to put people before profit.
I also think idleness is vastly underrated. Work being a virtue is an Enlightenment, Industrial Revolution value, not a Christian one - we can't work for our salvation, that doesn't mean it's worth less.
-------------------- Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Jade Constable: Because lots of people don't want to convert and they are perfectly entitled to not want that.
Unless you are talking about a specific group that you are aware uses charity as a means to proselytize, this seems like a strawman.
I've been engaged in many Christian-based charities and not a single one ever required people to declare Christian faith to receive the benefit offered or engaged in attempts to convert while offering it - and on both sides of the pond. In fact the church I went to in the US had some funding from the Red Cross and had to agree in writing NOT to proselytize in order to maintain the grant.
However - if we are living in Christ's example and genuinely loving the poor and needy, some of them will convert through their own choice, as they did in Acts 2. That is a good thing.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Matt Black
![](http://ship-of-fools.com/UBB/custom_avatars/matt_black.jpg) Shipmate
# 2210
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Jade Constable: quote: Originally posted by Matt Black: quote: Originally posted by Boogie: quote: Originally posted by seekingsister:
The government is neither capable nor suitable to address all of these problems. That's where the church needs to step in. By loving and helping people as Jesus did, we can help them become productive members of society by freeing them of the evils and ailments that plague their lives.
There are plenty of non- faith charities which do just this, and do it without the ulterior motive of gaining converts.
Why is trying to expose people to Jesus' salvation an 'ulterior motive'? You make it sound as if this is a negative; I view it as overwhelmingly positive.
Because lots of people don't want to convert and they are perfectly entitled to not want that.
Oh, absolutely. But it doesn't follow from that that the desire of Christians to see them in a saving relationship with the Lord Jesus is negative.
-------------------- "Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)
Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Jade Constable: I think that the extreme right wing of the Republican Party has a lot to do with it - I'm surprised at you claiming that the SA is 'the most conservative' in theology, doctrine and ethics. There are many more conservative groups! The far right of the Republican Party are happy to starve children in the name of Jesus.
I'm also saddened but not surprised by the anti-intellectualism in your post, as if writing academic papers is somehow not what real Christians do. In this post and in the one about the SA documentary, I do see a lot of unhelpful and un-Christian reverse snobbery around the SA.
I wasn't aware that the Republican Party was a church. The Salvation Army has not changed its doctrines in 150 years and we are passionately conservative.
The not writing academic papers was nothing to do with anti-intellectualism - we are not anti-intellectual in the slightest. My comment about not writing academic documents was a comment on the fact that people seem to see the social Gospel as a new thing in the church, not compatible in the evangelical movement - I was suggesting that people don't know that we have been combining the two because, not having written much but doing it quietly instead, people don't know too much of our work and especially our theology.
-------------------- "The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid." G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
There was an article on Radio 4 yesterday morning where they were talking about the church in London. The Bishop of Stepney was saying how the church has increased by 14% in his parish! One of the themes was how people come to the Church and The salvation Army and find more than just the answer t their need. One woman wanting food from a food bank said she was amazed to be given a cup of tea and asked how she was, etc.
It cannot be denied that when the Church 'does' community work it does it with a heart of love, friendship and compassion that is not generally seen in other groups.
-------------------- "The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid." G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
In the Salvation Army, just like the Roman Catholic Church and old world evangelicals, theological conservatism is not driven and crippled by social and political conservatism as much as it is in those who put their politics first. Our conscience is not seared as much by an order of magnitude at least. Conservative theology still does hold us back. We still despise the poor to an unbelievable extent. I don't think we have faintest idea how bad we are. How unjust, how unfair, how inequitable, how selfish, how judgemental, how blind, naked ... poor we are. How unrighteous.
-------------------- Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard: We still despise the poor to an unbelievable extent. I don't think we have faintest idea how bad we are. How unjust, how unfair, how inequitable, how selfish, how judgemental, how blind, naked ... poor we are. How unrighteous.
I don't recognise The Salvation Army in that statement.
-------------------- "The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid." G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012
|
Posted
In a nutshell, the mission of the church is to make baptised, well taught disciples who are committed to obeying Christ as their Lord and Saviour.
Disciples are made and matured through the verbal proclamation of the word of Christ. Mercy ministry happens when those disciples obey Jesus. Mercy ministry is not the gospel but it is an indispensable result of discipleship in the ways of Christ. The word of Christ is what creates disciples, the way of Christ is what those disciples obey.
Obedience to the way of Christ is not the gospel, but it is the result of the gospel being believed and Christ being obeyed. [ 14. April 2014, 17:23: Message edited by: daronmedway ]
Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Mudfrog: quote: Originally posted by Jade Constable: I think that the extreme right wing of the Republican Party has a lot to do with it - I'm surprised at you claiming that the SA is 'the most conservative' in theology, doctrine and ethics. There are many more conservative groups! The far right of the Republican Party are happy to starve children in the name of Jesus.
I'm also saddened but not surprised by the anti-intellectualism in your post, as if writing academic papers is somehow not what real Christians do. In this post and in the one about the SA documentary, I do see a lot of unhelpful and un-Christian reverse snobbery around the SA.
I wasn't aware that the Republican Party was a church. The Salvation Army has not changed its doctrines in 150 years and we are passionately conservative.
The not writing academic papers was nothing to do with anti-intellectualism - we are not anti-intellectual in the slightest. My comment about not writing academic documents was a comment on the fact that people seem to see the social Gospel as a new thing in the church, not compatible in the evangelical movement - I was suggesting that people don't know that we have been combining the two because, not having written much but doing it quietly instead, people don't know too much of our work and especially our theology.
The Republican Party often operates as if it is a church, and most of their politicians are explicitly 'Christian'. Tying conservatism to Christianity by them has done immense damage to the idea of compassionate conservative Christianity, it's not very difficult to understand that. The SA not changing its doctrines in 150 years does not mean there are not more conservative Christians in existence. Tea Party Christians are undoubtedly more conservative in most ways than the SA. That's not a bad thing for the SA!
Evangelicalism also doesn't automatically mean conservative and it's unfair to conflate the two - many liberal/open evangelicals exist and they are still evangelicals.
I personally don't think the social gospel is a new thing at all, and Nonconformists, Anglo-Catholics and RCs have done incredible work for it. I do, however, feel that political conservatism is incompatible with the social gospel or any other idea in the Gospel, because capitalism is incompatible in the same way. I am inclined to think that theological conservatism is usually incompatible with it too.
-------------------- Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Mudfrog: quote: Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard: We still despise the poor to an unbelievable extent. I don't think we have faintest idea how bad we are. How unjust, how unfair, how inequitable, how selfish, how judgemental, how blind, naked ... poor we are. How unrighteous.
I don't recognise The Salvation Army in that statement.
That's because you're inside it, and not a poor person on the receiving end. I think conservative evangelicalism absolutely despises the poor, and is a natural ancestor of the idea of the 'deserving poor'. The relative lack of incarnational theology and dismissive attitude towards Our Lady also don't help. The despising of the poor is naturally rather worse in those who claim to help them (despite only addressing the symptoms of poverty and not the causes).
-------------------- Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
The work of the Salvation Army is peerless. God bless them.
But there is no comparison with the elevation of America at its lowest since the Civil War, blessed were the poor indeed.
And Tony Benn was no secular saint. He was a Christian. A saint period. A true prophet. If his love of the poor made him despise the powerful, he'll be forgiven.
All very naïve of me I'm sure.
Didn't Jesus' brother have something to say about a gospel of words alone?
-------------------- Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Desert Daughter
Shipmate
# 13635
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Jade Constable: I think conservative evangelicalism absolutely despises the poor, and is a natural ancestor of the idea of the 'deserving poor'.
Agree. This whole "prosperity to those who are True (TM) in their practice" is poison and misses the point of the social gospel. And it places fault where there mostly is none at all. And it does not help. Still, it attracts millions in places like Brazil
What do we (and by "we" I mean all those who are non-conservative evangelicals) have to set against it?
As an RC I really hope Pope Francis can get his message (uncomfortable to many as it may be, I admit to struggling myself) through. Loud and clear. At the risk of losing popularity brownie-points.
-------------------- "Prayer is the rejection of concepts." (Evagrius Ponticus)
Posts: 733 | Registered: Apr 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
Absolutely astonishing! I can't believe what I'm reading. What the hell do you think we do?
-------------------- "The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid." G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
Offer temporary respite from the symptoms of poverty, whilst supporting the systems that keep people in poverty.
-------------------- Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
hatless
![](http://ship-of-fools.com/UBB/custom_avatars/3365.jpg) Shipmate
# 3365
|
Posted
I don't think that's entirely fair, Jade. It's a criticism that probably all churches of all theologies ought to think about. We are small scale organisations, which is good, but it does mean that we have a small scale, sometimes sticking-plaster small, response to big problems. We don't do well at challenging the social order.
But the Salvation Army does tend to be in it for the long haul. They don't have the odd good works project and then get bored, as many churches do. Getting involved in the lives of people in need is part of their DNA. Having an exciting and deep theological wing, much less so.
What I think we need is more prophetic action and speech from the churches.
-------------------- My crazy theology in novel form
Posts: 4531 | From: Stinkers | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
In fairness, I am as frustrated with my own home turf of liberal/affirming Anglo-Catholicism, perhaps even more because Anglo-Catholicism has such a strong history of social activism (that hardly anyone knows about, by the way) and left-wing Christian thought. Unfortunately, Dead Horses have taken up so much time and energy that it has been sidelined - and I am definitely critical of Dead Horses debates stopping Anglo-Catholicism from moving forward and being a real force for good and the Gospel within UK Christianity. We are far too inward-looking as a movement.
-------------------- Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Jade Constable: Offer temporary respite from the symptoms of poverty, whilst supporting the systems that keep people in poverty.
Indeed Mudfrog
Vote Labor and post political screeds on the internet. What more does Our Lord require of us than that? And,if Our Lord does, all will be forgiven anyway.
-------------------- Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible. -Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jengie jon
![](http://forum.shipoffools.com/custom_avatars/0273.gif) Semper Reformanda
# 273
|
Posted
I read yesterday a prayer* that started: quote:
I was hungry And you formed a humanities group to discuss my hunger
it ends quote:
But I am still hungry and lonely and cold
It is not aimed at the well intention activist Evangelical who would have met, fed and clothed them while perhaps not questioning why they were so.
Jengie
*From "Wisdom is Calling" which is edited by Geoffrey Duncan and the prayer is written by "Crosspoints, Sri Lanka" pg 58
-------------------- "To violate a persons ability to distinguish fact from fantasy is the epistemological equivalent of rape." Noretta Koertge
Back to my blog
Posts: 20894 | From: city of steel, butterflies and rainbows | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Beeswax Altar: quote: Originally posted by Jade Constable: Offer temporary respite from the symptoms of poverty, whilst supporting the systems that keep people in poverty.
Indeed Mudfrog
Vote Labor and post political screeds on the internet. What more does Our Lord require of us than that? And,if Our Lord does, all will be forgiven anyway.
I am not under the impression that any modern political party is capable of totally overhauling our current economic systems, and neither do I believe that simply 'posting political screeds on the internet' is real social gospel action. I am fully aware that Our Lord requires much more than that and I think it is incredibly rude to suggest otherwise, it has absolutely no basis in anything I have said.
-------------------- Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Jade Constable: I think conservative evangelicalism absolutely despises the poor, and is a natural ancestor of the idea of the 'deserving poor'.
What is your evidence for this? Other than not liking conservative evangelicalism.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Jengie Jon: I read yesterday a prayer* that started: quote:
I was hungry And you formed a humanities group to discuss my hunger
it ends quote:
But I am still hungry and lonely and cold
It is not aimed at the well intention activist Evangelical who would have met, fed and clothed them while perhaps not questioning why they were so.
Jengie
*From "Wisdom is Calling" which is edited by Geoffrey Duncan and the prayer is written by "Crosspoints, Sri Lanka" pg 58
I have never said that feeding and clothing people is not needed - both are definitely needed. Being without food and shelter makes a person temporarily cold and hungry, governmental systems keep them permanently so. Both the temporary and permanent needs are important and both need addressing. I would certainly not suggest setting up a 'humanities group'(not sure what that is sorry) and just discuss things. The well-intentioned evangelical, without questioning why the poor are poor, guarantees that the cycle continues. It's surely worth stopping that from happening.
-------------------- Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Jade Constable: The Republican Party often operates as if it is a church, and most of their politicians are explicitly 'Christian'. Tying conservatism to Christianity by them has done immense damage to the idea of compassionate conservative Christianity, it's not very difficult to understand that. The SA not changing its doctrines in 150 years does not mean there are not more conservative Christians in existence. Tea Party Christians are undoubtedly more conservative in most ways than the SA. That's not a bad thing for the SA!
Evangelicalism also doesn't automatically mean conservative and it's unfair to conflate the two - many liberal/open evangelicals exist and they are still evangelicals.
I personally don't think the social gospel is a new thing at all, and Nonconformists, Anglo-Catholics and RCs have done incredible work for it. I do, however, feel that political conservatism is incompatible with the social gospel or any other idea in the Gospel, because capitalism is incompatible in the same way. I am inclined to think that theological conservatism is usually incompatible with it too.
Actually I think you and I are using the word 'conservative' in different way. you are talking 'conservative politics', I am talking conservative doctrine and ethics.'
In this country (UK) you can be a conservative evangelical and a socialist.
-------------------- "The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid." G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Jade Constable: I have never said that feeding and clothing people is not needed - both are definitely needed. Being without food and shelter makes a person temporarily cold and hungry, governmental systems keep them permanently so. Both the temporary and permanent needs are important and both need addressing. I would certainly not suggest setting up a 'humanities group'(not sure what that is sorry) and just discuss things. The well-intentioned evangelical, without questioning why the poor are poor, guarantees that the cycle continues. It's surely worth stopping that from happening.
And what makes you think that TSA is not doing stuff to try and stop the cycle? What part of 'fight for social justice' do you not understand? [ 14. April 2014, 21:12: Message edited by: Mudfrog ]
-------------------- "The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid." G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by chris stiles: quote: Originally posted by Jade Constable: I think conservative evangelicalism absolutely despises the poor, and is a natural ancestor of the idea of the 'deserving poor'.
What is your evidence for this? Other than not liking conservative evangelicalism.
It's wrapped up in those Enlightenment ideals of Protestant work ethic, individualism and the free market. All of which are grounded in the expansion of capitalism in the late 1500s and 1600s and then again with the Industrial Revolution, and the poor as a workforce to be exploited and patronised, rather than full members of the Kingdom. It's not really a surprise that the US, descended from a broadly conservative evangelical band of people from burgeoning capitalist Netherlands and England (the Low Countries were the home of early banking and capitalist democracy in the late 1500s) is now so full of conservative evangelicals that hate the poor - though the US is quite a strange country in that respect.
That isn't to say that all conservative evangelicals on an individual level hate poor people either as a group or individuals, rather that conservative evangelicalism is rooted in cultural ideas that despise the poor. I also think the rejection of Our Lady and therefore the Magnificat and its honour of the poor is an issue there, as well as the relative lack of incarnational theology (therefore not having the images of God in Christ being a poor person, a homeless person, an immigrant etc).
-------------------- Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Mudfrog: quote: Originally posted by Jade Constable: The Republican Party often operates as if it is a church, and most of their politicians are explicitly 'Christian'. Tying conservatism to Christianity by them has done immense damage to the idea of compassionate conservative Christianity, it's not very difficult to understand that. The SA not changing its doctrines in 150 years does not mean there are not more conservative Christians in existence. Tea Party Christians are undoubtedly more conservative in most ways than the SA. That's not a bad thing for the SA!
Evangelicalism also doesn't automatically mean conservative and it's unfair to conflate the two - many liberal/open evangelicals exist and they are still evangelicals.
I personally don't think the social gospel is a new thing at all, and Nonconformists, Anglo-Catholics and RCs have done incredible work for it. I do, however, feel that political conservatism is incompatible with the social gospel or any other idea in the Gospel, because capitalism is incompatible in the same way. I am inclined to think that theological conservatism is usually incompatible with it too.
Actually I think you and I are using the word 'conservative' in different way. you are talking 'conservative politics', I am talking conservative doctrine and ethics.'
In this country (UK) you can be a conservative evangelical and a socialist.
No, I am talking about both. And since socialism is primarily about equality, I have a hard time accepting that a conservative evangelical would actually truly embrace socialism.
-------------------- Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Mudfrog: quote: Originally posted by Jade Constable: I have never said that feeding and clothing people is not needed - both are definitely needed. Being without food and shelter makes a person temporarily cold and hungry, governmental systems keep them permanently so. Both the temporary and permanent needs are important and both need addressing. I would certainly not suggest setting up a 'humanities group'(not sure what that is sorry) and just discuss things. The well-intentioned evangelical, without questioning why the poor are poor, guarantees that the cycle continues. It's surely worth stopping that from happening.
And what makes you think that TSA is not doing stuff to try and stop the cycle? What part of 'fight for social justice' do you not understand?
Are you campaigning against the bedroom tax, for the reinstatement of the Social Fund, for getting rid of ATOS, for building more social housing, for the Robin Hood Tax, for companies like Vodafone to pay their full tax bill? I am in contact with a lot of Christian social action organisations such as Church Action on Poverty and others who campaign on such issues. Resounding silence from TSA.
-------------------- Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Mudfrog, we're ALL in this together. The Salvation Army and CAFOD and Christian Aid have well deserved good, excellent reputations.
In my mind none is higher than the Salvation Army.
I lift my little finger for 1% of my time. The impact is commensurate. I do it 'in community', as part of a group, so there is a synergy. But it is incredibly difficult to serve the poor. Trying to go further than 1%, one on one almost never, 1% of the extra time and money at best, works.
We do NOT hold all things in common. We do NOT give our all to the poor. We are NOT effective lobbyists. We don't use our collective economic power. We are not subversive, counter-cultural, radical, inclusive (including of the enemies of the poor), sacrificial AND peaceful and non-coercive.
And worse we think that there is something wrong with the poor, that they are spiritually, morally worse off than we are. They whom Jesus called blessed. That if only they would put all their cares at the foot of the cross they would be infinitely better off in their destitution. We actually believe that we have something, some quality they lack. But that we CAN'T give them. So there's no point giving them anything else. Generally. As World Vision's conservative supporters showed. By pulling their support of tens of thousands of starving children over a point of 'higher' principle.
THAT'S the problem. That conservatism. That mean spiritedness. MINE. And by our fruits, ours.
How DARE we think we have anything other than wealth, power, privilege to lay down, pool, share, give away.
I'm tired and failing here, but don't be defensive. That detracts. King David knew that there was validity in Shimei's cursing.
-------------------- Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Jade Constable: quote: Originally posted by Beeswax Altar: quote: Originally posted by Jade Constable: Offer temporary respite from the symptoms of poverty, whilst supporting the systems that keep people in poverty.
Indeed Mudfrog
Vote Labor and post political screeds on the internet. What more does Our Lord require of us than that? And,if Our Lord does, all will be forgiven anyway.
I am not under the impression that any modern political party is capable of totally overhauling our current economic systems, and neither do I believe that simply 'posting political screeds on the internet' is real social gospel action. I am fully aware that Our Lord requires much more than that and I think it is incredibly rude to suggest otherwise, it has absolutely no basis in anything I have said.
In my experience, people who use that sort of rhetoric usually do nothing more radical than vote for a left wing political party and post screeds on the internet. Some will have a little fun with an occasional protest. Mudfrog is actually doing something. You are speaking in the abstract.
-------------------- Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible. -Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|