The phrase "Social Gospel" has been batted around in the media in recent months but most Americans have only scant knowledge of the historical meaning of the term. The term seems like a good place to begin our exploration of the theme: What Would Jesus Do? .....Down South.
Attempting to define and describe the Social Gospel is akin to the blind men attempting to describe the elephant.
In addressing the question, "What is the Social Gospel?"; it is useful to make a distinction between the "Social Gospel" and the "Social Gospel Movement". There is a subtle but important difference between the two terms.
The Social Gospel can refer to a particular interpretation of one aspect fo the message of Jesus about how faith/belief should translate into action. The term conveys the thought that Jesus life and words demonstrate a concern for service, for acting to improve the lives of others, for changing the established social order, for meeting physical needs of other people. Most proponents of the Social Gospel believe that this aspect of Jesus ministry should be imitated in modern day society by modern day followers of Christ.
The Social Gospel Movement generally refers to a period in the late 1800s and early 1900s in which Christian theologians, preachers, and laymen emphasized a belief in the concepts of the Social Gospel and took specific actions to address social problems based on their understanding of Jesus words and examples.
Keeping that distinction in mind is essential in exploring the both the propagation and the criticisms of the Social Gospel and the Social Gospel Movement throughout history.
There are many facets of the Social Gospel but most center around the concept of faith-based service to others and addressing societal problems based on an interpretation of scripture.
When addressing the question, What is the Social Gospel?, some focus solely on abstract theological concepts, others focus on political implications, and others take a more balanced approach or focus on the practical implications of the Social Gospel in the everyday lives of individuals.
From a theological standpoint, one often debated topic surrounding the Social Gospel is the concept of salvation. The word salvation has different meanings in different religions and also many different interpretations within Christianity. The concept of "personal salvation" has evolved throughout the history of Christianity. For example Calvinism and Arminianism hold different views on Christian salvation. The differences are also evident in the formation and beliefs of differing Christian denominations. (see Salvation in wikipedia )
Many (but not all) proponents of the Social Gospel (and the Social Gospel Movement) made a distinction between "personal salvation" and "collective salvation". The concept of "collective salvation" echoes ancient Jewish concepts of God choosing to bless "lands" or "nations" in response to their obedience to God. Many proponents of the Social Gospel placed an emphasis on Biblical obligation for Christians (and Christian society) to address the outward physical needs of people in addition to (and not in place of) the inner spiritual needs. Historians and Theologians have often referred to this concept as "collective salvation". Some critics of the Social Gospel Movement focus on disputing the idea that God is concerned with society as a whole or with the the specific actions of specific countries.....yet some of these same critics adhere to the principle that America is "God's Chosen Nation" and claim that God has blessed America because it is a "Christian" nation.
From a political standpoint, some critics of the concepts of the Social Gospel have attempted to pigeon-hole the Social Gospel as a socio-political movement rather than a spiritual concept. Some critics have narrowly defined the Social Gospel in political terms as being akin to Socialism or even Communism. (We'll look more at some of these criticisms in tomorrow's post). Some proponents of the Social Gospel during the Social Gospel Movement of the late 1800's and early 1900's did ascribe to certain tenants of Socialism. But, others proponents of the Social Gospel were vocal critics of Socialism and strong supporters of Capitalism.
Attempts to narrowly characterize the Social Gospel Movement as solely a theological debate or a political movement equated with Socialism are historically innacurate.The Social Gospel Movement occurred in a historical context as well as a political context, but it was not a political movement.
Most adherents of the Social Gospel tend to focus on taking concrete action to improve personal and societal conditions rather than getting involved in abstract theological or political debate.
The Social Gospel Movement was a response by religious adherents to the message of the New Testament and specifically to the words and actions of Jesus. Most Social Gospelers acknowledged that addressing social concerns was only one aspect of the message of Jesus Christ. Their emphasis on this aspect of Jesus's message did not negate other aspects of Jesus's teachings, it simply focused attention on Jesus's response to the social problems and physical needs of the people he encountered and attempted to apply those examples to modern times.
This website will return repeatedly questions about the Social Gospel, Social Justice, and the implications of the question What Would Jesus Do?.
Specific questions to be addressed in further detail include:
We will look more specifically at how these questions were dealt with in the southern states from the post-Civil War period up to today and how beliefs were translated into actions.
So....back to the question at hand....What is the Social Gospel?
To begin with, below are a few examples of how others have described the Social Gospel:
------------------------------------------------
The Social Gospel movement is a Protestant Christian intellectual movement that was most prominent in the late 19th century and early 20th century. The movement applied Christian ethics to social problems, especially social justice, inequality, liquor, crime, racial tensions, slums, bad hygiene, child labor, weak labor unions, poor schools, and the danger of war. Theologically, the Social Gospel leaders were overwhelmingly post-millennialist. That is because they believed the Second Coming could not happen until humankind rid itself of social evils by human effort. Social Gospel leaders were predominantly associated with the liberal wing of the Progressive Movement and most were theologically liberal, although they were typically conservative when it came to their views on social issues. Important leaders include Richard T. Ely, Washington Gladden, and Walter Rauschenbusch.
In the late 19th century, many Americans were disgusted by the poverty level and the low quality of living in the slums. The social gospel movement provided a religious rationale for action to address those concerns.
In the United States prior to World War I, the Social Gospel was the religious wing of the progressive movement which had the aim of combating injustice, suffering and poverty in society.
Attempting to define and describe the Social Gospel is akin to the blind men attempting to describe the elephant.
Once upon a time, there lived six blind men in a village. One day the villagers told them, "Hey, there is an elephant in the village today."
They had no idea what an elephant is. They decided, "Even though we would not be able to see it, let us go and feel it anyway." All of them went where the elephant was. Everyone of them touched the elephant.
"Hey, the elephant is a pillar," said the first man who touched his leg.
"Oh, no! it is like a rope," said the second man who touched the tail.
"Oh, no! it is like a thick branch of a tree," said the third man who touched the trunk of the elephant.
"It is like a big hand fan" said the fourth man who touched the ear of the elephant.
"It is like a huge wall," said the fifth man who touched the belly of the elephant.
"It is like a solid pipe," Said the sixth man who touched the tusk of the elephant.
They began to argue about the elephant and everyone of them insisted that he was right. It looked like they were getting agitated. A wise man was passing by and he saw this. He stopped and asked them, "What is the matter?" They said, "We cannot agree to what the elephant is like."
Each one of them told what he thought the elephant was like. The wise man calmly explained to them, "All of you are right. The reason every one of you is telling it differently because each one of you touched the different part of the elephant. So, actually the elephant has all those features what you all said."
"Oh!" everyone said. There was no more fight. They felt happy that they were all right.
The moral of the story is that there may be some truth to what someone says. Sometimes we can see that truth and sometimes not because they may have different perspective which we may not agree too. So, rather than arguing like the blind men, we should say, "Maybe you have your reasons."
In addressing the question, "What is the Social Gospel?"; it is useful to make a distinction between the "Social Gospel" and the "Social Gospel Movement". There is a subtle but important difference between the two terms.
The Social Gospel can refer to a particular interpretation of one aspect fo the message of Jesus about how faith/belief should translate into action. The term conveys the thought that Jesus life and words demonstrate a concern for service, for acting to improve the lives of others, for changing the established social order, for meeting physical needs of other people. Most proponents of the Social Gospel believe that this aspect of Jesus ministry should be imitated in modern day society by modern day followers of Christ.
The Social Gospel Movement generally refers to a period in the late 1800s and early 1900s in which Christian theologians, preachers, and laymen emphasized a belief in the concepts of the Social Gospel and took specific actions to address social problems based on their understanding of Jesus words and examples.
Keeping that distinction in mind is essential in exploring the both the propagation and the criticisms of the Social Gospel and the Social Gospel Movement throughout history.
There are many facets of the Social Gospel but most center around the concept of faith-based service to others and addressing societal problems based on an interpretation of scripture.
When addressing the question, What is the Social Gospel?, some focus solely on abstract theological concepts, others focus on political implications, and others take a more balanced approach or focus on the practical implications of the Social Gospel in the everyday lives of individuals.
From a theological standpoint, one often debated topic surrounding the Social Gospel is the concept of salvation. The word salvation has different meanings in different religions and also many different interpretations within Christianity. The concept of "personal salvation" has evolved throughout the history of Christianity. For example Calvinism and Arminianism hold different views on Christian salvation. The differences are also evident in the formation and beliefs of differing Christian denominations. (see Salvation in wikipedia )
( NOTE: Theologians heavily debate concepts of salvation.
We'll try to steer clear of such abstractions on this site
but if that sort of thing interests you, you might
enjoy exploring the concept of Christian sotierology )
We'll try to steer clear of such abstractions on this site
but if that sort of thing interests you, you might
enjoy exploring the concept of Christian sotierology )
Many (but not all) proponents of the Social Gospel (and the Social Gospel Movement) made a distinction between "personal salvation" and "collective salvation". The concept of "collective salvation" echoes ancient Jewish concepts of God choosing to bless "lands" or "nations" in response to their obedience to God. Many proponents of the Social Gospel placed an emphasis on Biblical obligation for Christians (and Christian society) to address the outward physical needs of people in addition to (and not in place of) the inner spiritual needs. Historians and Theologians have often referred to this concept as "collective salvation". Some critics of the Social Gospel Movement focus on disputing the idea that God is concerned with society as a whole or with the the specific actions of specific countries.....yet some of these same critics adhere to the principle that America is "God's Chosen Nation" and claim that God has blessed America because it is a "Christian" nation.
From a political standpoint, some critics of the concepts of the Social Gospel have attempted to pigeon-hole the Social Gospel as a socio-political movement rather than a spiritual concept. Some critics have narrowly defined the Social Gospel in political terms as being akin to Socialism or even Communism. (We'll look more at some of these criticisms in tomorrow's post). Some proponents of the Social Gospel during the Social Gospel Movement of the late 1800's and early 1900's did ascribe to certain tenants of Socialism. But, others proponents of the Social Gospel were vocal critics of Socialism and strong supporters of Capitalism.
Some Social Gospelers were Socialsts but some were not.
Some Socialists were Social Gospelers but most were not.
Attempts to narrowly characterize the Social Gospel Movement as solely a theological debate or a political movement equated with Socialism are historically innacurate.The Social Gospel Movement occurred in a historical context as well as a political context, but it was not a political movement.
Most adherents of the Social Gospel tend to focus on taking concrete action to improve personal and societal conditions rather than getting involved in abstract theological or political debate.
The Social Gospel Movement was a response by religious adherents to the message of the New Testament and specifically to the words and actions of Jesus. Most Social Gospelers acknowledged that addressing social concerns was only one aspect of the message of Jesus Christ. Their emphasis on this aspect of Jesus's message did not negate other aspects of Jesus's teachings, it simply focused attention on Jesus's response to the social problems and physical needs of the people he encountered and attempted to apply those examples to modern times.
This website will return repeatedly questions about the Social Gospel, Social Justice, and the implications of the question What Would Jesus Do?.
Specific questions to be addressed in further detail include:
- What is the Social Gospel?
- What was the Social Gospel Movement?
- How did the Social Gospel Movement impact History?
- How did History impact the Social Gospel Movement?
- How does the New Testament speak to social issues and how is that reflected in the Social Gospel?
- How does the Old Testament address social issues; especially social justice?
- What are the implications of the Social Gospel and Social Justice on today's societal problems?
We will look more specifically at how these questions were dealt with in the southern states from the post-Civil War period up to today and how beliefs were translated into actions.
So....back to the question at hand....What is the Social Gospel?
To begin with, below are a few examples of how others have described the Social Gospel:
The social gospel is the old message of salvation, but enlarged and intensified. The individualistic gospel has taught us to see the sinfulness of every human heart and has inspired us with faith in the willingness and power of God to save every soul that comes to him. But it has not given us an adequate understanding of the sinfulness of the social order and its share in the sins of all individuals within it. It has not evoked faith in the will and power of God to redeem the permanent institutions of human society from their inherited guilt of oppression and extortion.
Both our sense of sin and our faith in salvation have fallen short of the realities under its teaching.The social gospel seeks to bring men under repentance for their collective sins and to create a more sensitive and more modern conscience. It calls on us for the faith of the old prophets who
believed in the salvation of nations.
[source: Walter Rauschenbusch - A Theology for the Social Gospel, 1917) ]
------------------------------------------------
The Social Gospel movement is a Protestant Christian intellectual movement that was most prominent in the late 19th century and early 20th century. The movement applied Christian ethics to social problems, especially social justice, inequality, liquor, crime, racial tensions, slums, bad hygiene, child labor, weak labor unions, poor schools, and the danger of war. Theologically, the Social Gospel leaders were overwhelmingly post-millennialist. That is because they believed the Second Coming could not happen until humankind rid itself of social evils by human effort. Social Gospel leaders were predominantly associated with the liberal wing of the Progressive Movement and most were theologically liberal, although they were typically conservative when it came to their views on social issues. Important leaders include Richard T. Ely, Washington Gladden, and Walter Rauschenbusch.
In the late 19th century, many Americans were disgusted by the poverty level and the low quality of living in the slums. The social gospel movement provided a religious rationale for action to address those concerns.
In the United States prior to World War I, the Social Gospel was the religious wing of the progressive movement which had the aim of combating injustice, suffering and poverty in society.
Although most scholars agree that the Social Gospel movement peaked in the early 20th century, there is disagreement over when the movement began to decline, with some asserting that the destruction and trauma caused by World War I left many disillusioned with the Social Gospel's ideals while others argue that World War I actually stimulated the Social Gospelers' reform efforts.] Theories regarding the decline of the Social Gospel after World War I often cite the rise of neo-orthodoxy as a contributing factor in the movement's decline. Some believe that many of the Social Gospel's ideas reappeared in the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s.
(SOURCE: Wikipedia)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The social gospel is an idea that arose particularly in Protestant denomination churches in the US and in parts of Europe during the 19th century. It was the concept that efforts should be made to share wealth, and especially that people should emulate Christ’s examples by acting with charity toward those less fortunate
Social Gospel was a movement led by a group of liberal Protestant progressives in response to the social problems raised by the rapid industrialization, urbanization, and increasing immigration of the Gilded Age. The social gospel differentiated itself from earlier Christian reform movements by prioritizing social salvation over individual salvation. Although the ministers and activists of the social gospel based their appeals on liberal theology, which emphasized the immanence of God and the doctrine of Incarnation and valued good works over creeds, they usually showed more interest in social science than in theology. Believing that laissez-faire capitalism's understanding of labor as a commodity and its sole reliance on mechanisms of supply and demand to determine wages and allocate resources was un-Christian, social gospel advocates supported the labor movement and called for an interventionist welfare state. They differed from secular activists in that their ultimate vision was not just a more equitable balance of power within society, but a Christianized society in which cooperation, mutual respect, and compassion replaced greed, competition, and conflict among social and economic classes.
(SOURCE: Gale Encyclopedia of US History)
So we can already see that there is a great diversity of opinions about what the phrases "Social Gospel" and "Social Gospel Movement" refer to. When you read information and opinions about the Social Gospel (including those on this website) give remembrance to the story of the elephant.
It was six men of Indostan
To learning much inclined,
Who went to see the Elephant
(Though all of them were blind),
That each by observation
Might satisfy his mind.
II.
The First approached the Elephant,
And happening to fall
Against his broad and sturdy side,
At once began to bawl:
"God bless me!-but the Elephant
Is very like a wall!"
III.
The Second, feeling of the tusk,
Cried: "Ho!-what have we here
So very round and smooth and sharp?
To me't is mighty clear
This wonder of an Elephant
Is very like a spear!"
IV.
The Third approached the animal,
And happening to take
The squirming trunk within his hands,
Thus boldly up and spake:
"I see," quoth he, "the Elephant
Is very like a snake!"
V.
The Fourth reached out his eager hand,
And felt about the knee.
"What most this wondrous beast is like
Is mighty plain," quoth he;
"'Tis clear enough the Elephant
Is very like a tree!"
VI.
The Fifth, who chanced to touch the ear,
Said: "E'en the blindest man
Can tell what this resembles most;
Deny the fact who can,
This marvel of an Elephant
Is very like a fan!"
VII.
The Sixth no sooner had begun
About the beast to grope,
Than, seizing on the swinging tail
That fell within his scope,
"I see," quoth he, "the Elephant
Is very like a rope!"
VIII.
And so these men of Indostan
Disputed loud and long,
Each in his own opinion
Exceeding stiff and strong,
Though each was partly in the right,
And all were in the wrong!
MORAL.
So, oft in theologic wars
The disputants, I ween,
Rail on in utter ignorance
Of what each other mean,
And prate about an Elephant
Not one of them has seen!
source: THE BLIND MEN AND THE ELEPHANT. A HINDOO FABLE.
by 1816–1887)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please share your thoughts on this topic. We look forward to thoughtful, rational discussion of this topic. (This is a moderated discussion, meaning all comments must be approved prior to appearing on the site.)
Please use the comments area for discussions related to the topic. If you have comments or suggestions about the website itself, or suggestions for future topics, people, places, organizations related to the theme of the site, please send them to dontalley@gmail.com.