John Wesley preached “practical
Christianity.” Few United Methodist practices illustrate our practical
Christianity more vividly than our Social Principles(which have their roots in
the “social creed” of our church which dates from the early Twentieth Century).
The Discipline defines
these principles as our
most recent official summary of stated convictions that seek to apply the Christian
vision of righteousness to social, economic, and political issues.
The God whom United Methodists worship combines love with justice, is not only
gracious but also demanding, not only died for you and me but for the whole
world. There is for us no personal gospel that fails to express itself in relevant social concerns;
we proclaim no social gospel that does not include personal transformation of
sinners.
The Social Principles are a
thoughtful effort on the part of a succession of General Conferences to speak
to the pressing human issues in the contemporary world from a Wesleyan biblical
and theological foundation. They are intended to be instructive, to teach
contemporary United Methodists the best thought and practice on selected
subjects, and they are also meant to be persuasive, urging the church on to
higher righteousness. The Social Principles call all members of The United
Methodist Church to a prayerful, studied examination of our life together and
our personal lives in the light of the gospel.
Our struggles for human
dignity and social reform have been a response to God’s demand for love, mercy,
and justice in the light of the Kingdom. We proclaim no personal gospel that
fails to express itself in relevant social concerns; we proclaim no social gospel
that does not include the personal transformation of sinners.
The Social Principles begin by
addressing issues in “The Natural World” – ecological concerns, energy
resources, technology and space exploration, next “The Nurturing Community,”
beginning with the family, moving to marriage (we’re in favor of it), divorce
(we’re against it but recognize that it sometimes is a “regrettable alternative
in the midst of brokenness”). There is a discussion of homosexuality (an
argument that has consumed much time and attention in recent meetings of the
General Conference), as well as a long paragraph on abortion (I suspect that
this paragraph is trying to please everybody by saying next to nothing). There
are also extensive discussions on “The Economic Community,” “The Political
Community” (the person who said that the church ought to “stick to saving souls
and stay out of politics” wasn’t a United Methodist!), and the “World
Community.” We have churchly opinions on just about everything.
Frankly, some of these sections
show the challenge of asserting the primacy of Scripture and at the same time
attempting to speak on many topics for which Scripture has no apparent concern.
The theological underpinnings of our social teachings are not always clear.
Even though these principles are our collective wisdom on social, public,
political matters, the Discipline’s scant attention to personal, individual
sin, when compared with this extensive and detailed treatment of social sin is
odd. Wesley certainly held the personal and the social together. But we live in
a curious age in which, if we think of sin at all, we focus more on the sins of
Congress or the corporate board room than sins committed by individuals in a
bedroom. Sometimes it’s safer to love a whole neighborhood than to love our
individual neighbors. It’s always sad when we United Methodists show our
conformity to the world rather than God’s calls to help transform the world. In
the great Wesleyan tradition, there is no clear demarcating between the
personal and the corporate, the social and the individual. The light of Christ
penetrates every somber corner of our lives, personal and corporate, and we are
under obligation, as followers of Christ, to let that light shine.
Religion that is pure and
undefiled before God, the Father, is this: to care for the orphans and widows
in their distress, and to keep oneself unstained by the world. (James 1:27)
Today United Methodists have over
80 hospitals, 64 extensive child care networks, and 214 retirement communities
and nursing homes for the elderly. We have over a hundred colleges and
universities in the United States and about the same number elsewhere. United
Methodist agencies like UMCOR are first on the scene of disaster and calamity
with emergency aid and relief. I don’t see how our Conference would have made
it after the terrible spring storms last year without the millions of dollars
of aid through our fellow UM’s and UMCOR.
All of this is the institutional
result of our Wesleyan theological commitments to faith and good works. (John
Wesley not only dispensed theology but also claims to have dispensed medicine
to over 500 persons in London each week.) The term “organized religion” is not
to us an insult. We believe that love is less than fully incarnational when it
fails to organize and institutionalize.
In Mark’s gospel Jesus is
confronted by a rich young man who asks a theological question (Mk. 10:17-22)
about the inheritance of “eternal life.” Jesus responds to the man’s question
by urging him to obey “the commandments.” When the young man says that he has
obeyed all the commandments, Jesus adds yet another, telling him to “go, sell
what you have, and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven.”
Maybe it would take a Wesleyan to notice, but did you note that Jesus responds
to a rather theoretical, theological question with ethics? Jesus somehow
connects “eternal life” with obedience – “go…sell…give to the poor”?
It is our conviction that the good news of the Kingdom must judge, redeem, and reform the sinful social structures of our time.
Adapted from William H. Willimon, United Methodist Beliefs: An Introduction, Westminster/John Knox Press, 2006.
"But we live in a curious age in which, if we think of sin at all, we focus more on the sins of Congress or the corporate board room than sins committed by individuals in a bedroom."
ReplyDeletereally? we must live in two very different contexts. it would seem to me that the sins of Congress and the corporate board room get lost in the arguing back and forth about gender equality, gender identification, glbtq issues, and birth control.