One of the favourite activities of mainline churches is not, as one might expect, saving people from hell and judgement but pestering governments on how they should run the country. In practice, this usually amounts to leftist agitating, couched in familiar clichés like speaking truth to power, or advocating for the [choose any of the following, alternating as needed to avoid vain repetition]: poor, marginalised, disadvantaged, refugees, migrants, or make poverty history – a less onerous task than simply helping the poor, since it can’t be done.
Part of the problem seems to be that the church is nursing the fantasy that Jesus spent his time confronting secular authorities. Tom Wright says as much in this article [my emphasis]. The fact is, though, he didn’t; Jesus reserved his harshest criticisms for the religious authorities – in today’s terms, people like….. bishops. Although he called Herod a fox, the Pharisees were likened to snakes and cosmetically disguised coffins.
The gospels are not, then, a compendium of detached moral maxims for individuals. Jesus’ sayings find their meaning within the larger story about new creation struggling to be born. ‘Supposing God was in charge,’ Jesus was asking, ‘might it not look like this?’ – as he healed the sick, fed the hungry, rebuked the arrogant, told sharp-edged stories, wept with distressed friends, and (not least) confronted cynical authorities. ‘God’s rule’ poses its challenge to nations and cultures, not just individuals.
[….]
This brings us to the other key point. Along with the absolute priority of looking after the weakest and poorest, the church has a specific vocation. One of the tasks Jesus bequeathed his followers is to hold earthly rulers to account. This doesn’t mean clever clerical soundbites, still less theologians aping one strand of popular prejudice. It means drawing on the sustained wisdom of the worldwide church, across space and time, to remind rulers (often distracted by the next election or referendum) what they are there for. Back once more to the Psalms, the prophets and Jesus’ vision of God’s Rule. At the climax of the fourth gospel, Jesus confronted Pontius Pilate on the topics of kingdom, truth and power. His followers need to do the same.
Jesus’ point to Pilate was, surely, that his kingdom and Pilate’s occupy a different dimension. The church can advocate until all its bishops turn blue in the face but God’s Rule is not going to be established until Jesus returns. Meanwhile, the church might want to consider getting back to the job of saving sinners from hell and judgement.
Perhaps – but is the question not how we might best live out the reminder by Abraham Kuyper: “There is not a square inch in the whole domain of our human existence over which Christ, who is Sovereign over all, does not cry, Mine!”?
Certainly. And there is nothing – nothing – in the entire universe more important than an individual human soul. So, as I said, the church might want to consider getting back to the job of saving sinners from hell and judgement.
A quite excellent comment, David.
In thorough accord with the moderator: the key question for the Church’s Mandate + Matthew 28:18-20 since its issuance by its Sole Head and King is whether Marx sanctifies St.James; or St. James sanctifies Marx. There is but one Gospel:there is no “social” gospel. or any other gospel, gayspel, etc., v. + Galatians 1 in toto.
Of late, while ‘occupying’ a Sunday pulpit, one of the Democrat presidential contenders took great comfort in the best of all possible worlds, the United Methodist world, because
“the Methodist Church gave us the great gift of personal salvation, but also the obligation of the social gospel.” Yet, in starkest contradiction of the Gospel inspired teachings, which the Wesleys and their sainted Mother (and Father) would have upheld to the death itself, about the most spiritually divisive social issues of our day (and in clear contradiction of the official teachings of the UMCUSA itself), that is, most currently,about abortion and its US branch plant ‘Planned Parenthood’, and homosexual ‘liberty’ cum gay marriage, the same candidate supports the anti-Scriptural positions on these issues; as do an heterodox to apostate host of other ecclesiastical ‘social gospel’ advocates.
“If ye abide in Me, and My WORD’s abide in you, ye shall ask what ye will and it shall be done unto you. Herein is My Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit; so shall ye be My disciples.” + John 15:7,8.
There is a place for soup kitchens;but not to the exclusion of missing The Marriage Supper of The Lamb.The Wesleys also would be in thorough accord.
Excellent comment, David.