Science in Christian Perspective
needs diagram!!!!!!!!!
Towards Consistent Christian Social Involvement
Jack O. Balswick
Department of Sociology,
The University of Georgia
Athens, Georgia 30601
From: JASA 23 (June 1971): 64-66.
Introduction
Consistent Christian social involvement is one of the greatest needs
of contemporary
Christianity. It is common for persons in the various branches of Christiandom
to level charges of inconsistency at each other, thus making the task even more
difficult. Much of the confusion and disagreement over Christian
social involvement
today may be the result of inconsistent usages of concepts which prevent real
communication. As an example, the concept "social action" can mean a
religious organization passing and establishing social resolutions or
the sponsoring
of social welfare agencies, or attempting to change the institutional structure
of society. Further misunderstanding arises when social involvement
is discussed
without clear indications as to whether the involved unit is meant to
be the individual,
the local church, the denomination, or the interdenominational
organization. The
purpose of this paper is not to attempt to determine the hounds of legitimate
Christian social involvement, but rather to present possible guidelines whereby
such bounds can systematically and Biblically be determined.
A Paradigm
It is proposed that the following paradigm can serve as a systematic
classification
scheme within which all potential types of Christian social involvement can he
placed. The structure of the paradigm is based on the concommitant
considerations
of two dimensions. At left from top to bottom the acting agent in
social involvement
can be: (A) the individual Christian; (B) the local church; or (C)
the denomination
or inter
64
denominational organization. At the individual level, Christian
conscience should
be quite clear as the individual Christian seeks to gain a knowledge of God's
directive in his own life. With increased collectivization of social
involvement
there is a parallel decrease in the clarity of Christian conscience, The larger
the involved group, the less the likelihood' of consensus concerning
the desirability
of the social involvement. Across the top from left to right the type
of Christian
social involvement can be: (1) ministering to an individual's spiritual needs;
(2) ministering to an individual's social needs; (3) taking a
position on an existing
social issue; and (4) engaging in social action in an attempt to
change existing
social structure. Biblical verification is quite clear commanding our attention
towards individual spiritual and social needs, but becomes less clear
as the Christian
seeks for guidance in taking stands on social issues and engaging in
social action.
Examples of behavior given within each cell of the paradigm are for
illustrative
purposes only and should not be interpreted as examples of what this
writer considers
legitimate social involvement. The legitimacy of the behavior in each cell is
directly dependent upon Biblical support. Biblical support must be of both the
type of Christian activity (legitimacy of the cell itself) and the
specific issue
(within the cell). Explicit Biblical support, such as the application
of the parable
of the good Samaritan for love towards a minority group member, constitutes the
most legitimizing kind of support. Implicit support, such as using
Paul's appeal
to Philemon in regards to Onesimus as an injunction against slavery, is subject
to differences in
CHRISTIAN SOCIAL INVOLVEMENT
Type of Christian Activity
Fig 1. of Balswick
exegetical interpretation. Many types of social institutions such as
slavery are
definitely against the norms and ideals of Christianity, but such conclusions
must often be implied and may not be based upon the "proof
text" method.
The real issues facing the church today center upon the legitimacy of the type
of social involvement which falls within cells 3B, 3C, 4B, and 4C. A legitimate
question can be raised as to whether a religious organization, be it
a local church,
denomination, or interdenominational organization, should take
positions on social
issues or attempt to change the social structure through collective
social action.
It is the duty of the church to make its members knowledgeable and
aware of social
issues and problems which clearly have a moral basis. Discussion of
social problems
such as racial prejudice and discrimination, law and order, poverty, justice,
war, and alcoholism is not "getting involved in politics" but rather
is the rightful duty of the church concerning itself with moral
problems of society.
The church's entrance into the-realm of "politics" takes place only
when it goes beyond a discussion of the goals or ends of a social problem and
starts concerning itself with
the means to desired ends.
One very real function which the paradigm may serve is to force
religious organizations
to examine the consistency of their own beliefs about social
involvement. A religious
organization which takes the position that the church should never be involved
in an attempt to change the existing structure of society most also
behave according
to this injunction. As an example, a religious organization which lobbies for
greater law and order would be inconsistent if it at the same time criticized
another religious organization for lobbying for social justice. Such
a situation
would be an example of a religious organization seeing the speck in another's
eye and not the beam in it's own. It is possible for a religious organization
to argue for the legitimacy of the church's participation in social action and
distinguish between the legitimacy of the issues. However, the groups which are
lobbying the hardest for law and order seem to ignore the Biblical injunctions
for justice, and the groups which lobby for social justice often tend to slight
Biblical teachings concerning law and order. If religious organizations were a
little more introspective, they might be a little more
consistent in their social involvement, as well as reduce the often unjustified
name-calling that exists between themselves. An attempt at consistent Christian
social involvement is of course futile where Biblical teachings are rejected as
the basis for legitimate social involvement. Where Biblical authority
is rejected
as a normative guide, a religious organization's social involvement is likely
to he largely a reflection of present day societal norms.
A common phenomenon is for denominations to pass resolutions on social issues
when only a very few of the local churches have done so and for
interdenominational
organizations to pass even stronger social resolutions than the denominations
which it represents. Thus there develops the very interesting ease
where the social
concern committee of a denomination recommends to its general
conference the adoption
of social resolutions which were adopted by the interdenominational
organization
of which that denomination is a member. Too often there is a
filtering down process
where the local church, instead of originating social resolutions, is the last
collectivity of Christians to take stands on social issues. If the larger the
group, the less the likelihood of consensus, then this method is
the exact reverse of the ideal and is, in fact, an example of
bureaucracy at its
worst since the members of the religious power hierarchy are making
the decisions.
Whereas there is greater ease with which social resolutions can be
passed at the
higher echelon level, the dangers and inconsistencies in this method with the
democratic process should also be realized.
An important question, but one beyond the scope of this paper, is the
alternatives
available in attempting to change the social structure. It appears that social
ethics based on Biblical authority will produce definite priorities
which a Christian
must attempt to utilize in producing change. The most elementary
suggestions would
be that needed societal change must be attempted first within the law and only
secondly against the law.
The time is past (if it ever was here) when Christians can fail to
engage either
individually or collectively in constructive social concern and
action. However,
because the church is in the constant danger of being reshaped by society and
because each of us like to think that the problem is not ours but
those who differ
from us, the task in maintaining a consistent social involvement is
often a difficult
one.