Jason and I are buried deep in a debate right now on the validity of the social gospel and its usage in the Church for outreach purposes.
So...in preparation and for your edification, I have decided to post our notes from this study of not only the social gospel, but also of dispensationalism, covenant theology, retaliation, hyper-Calvinism and evangelism, human wisdom and Scripture, elder rule, private interpretation, denominationalism, and the regulative principle.
I know this is a lot, and it will probably take a year or so to sort through all of this stuff...but I know that God will be glorified in this extensive use of my brain...although my brain already hurts.
So I begin with our critique of Walter Rauschenbusch's social gospel.
Rauschenbusch took a very negative stance toward previous theologians as he began his theology of the social gospel. He always seems to view himself on the edge of the new beginning in theology, the "revolution" if you will. He also seems to take a pragmatic approach to his theology: if it works, it must be true. If it doesn't work, then it cannot be true. He also bases his concepts off of "religious experience" (that would be his OWN religious experience) rather than the testimony of Scripture. He builds his social gospel from here.
Here are some general thoughts from his two books: A Theology for the Social Gospeland Christianity and the Social Crisis.
-Here lies a clear thesis of Rauschenbusch's gospel: Christianity is "to transform human society into the kingdom of God by regenerating all human relations and reconstituting them in accordance with the will of God." "The social gospel seeks to bring men under repentance for their collective sins and to create a more sensitive and more modern conscience."
I do believe that a couple of fruity diagrams should clarify this.
An optimistic view of the Social Gospel:
In this view, called the "Top Down" view, Christian principles are input into the institutions of humanity and this newly developed "Christian" environment draws men to repentance. This is a hybrid view between collective, national salvation and individual salvation.
An actual view of the Social Gospel:
This view is Rauschenbusch's actual view. This quote will make it clear:
"Instead of being an aid in the development of the social gospel, systematic theology has often been a real clog. When a minister speaks to his people about child labor or the exploitation of the lowly by the strong; when he insists on adequate food, education, recreation, and a really human opportunity for all, there is response. People are moved by plain human feeling and by the instinctive convictions which they have learned from Jesus Christ (hold up...didn't Jesus teach repentance and faith? For individuals? Whatev.) But at once there are doubting and dissenting voices. We are told that environment has no saving power; regeneration is what men need; we cannot have a regenerate society without regenerate individuals; we do not live for this world but for the life to come; it is not the function of the church to deal with economic questions; any effort to change the social order before the coming of the Lord is foredoomed to failure. These objections all issue from the theological consciousness created by traditional church teaching. These half-truths are the proper product of a half-way system of theology in which there is no room for social redemption. Thus, the church is halting between two voices that call it. On the one side is the voice of the living Christ amid living men today; on the other side is the voice of past ages embodied in theology. Who will says that the authority of this voice has never confused our Christian judgment and paralyzed our determination to establish God's kingdom on earth?"
He plainly reveals his hand here. A hatred of biblical theology (especially Calvinism), a Robin Hood gospel of automatic salvation for the poor (that sounds quite a lot like Shane Claiborne) and repentance for the rich, and a desire to produce God's kingdom on earth. This view is full of holes, and Jason and I will rip apart this garment/wineskin later.
Herein lies the correct view of the gospel and society (aside from eschatology):
This view has been self-titled as the "Bottom Up" view. This view states that God's mission is the personal, individual regeneration of persons, not nations. Nations become regenerate as the individuals within that nation are baptized and filled with the Holy Ghost and this presence sanctifies their beliefs. Regenerate individuals should be filled with compassion over injustice and should seek to bring it to an end, but through the only method that can truly end all wrongdoing: the glorious Gospel of Christ.
Here are some other thoughts:
-He addresses the main issue of poverty on the world's terms and in a worldly way. His motivation for action is drawn from circumstances (the absolute poverty of the working class in Hell's Kitchen NY at the turn of the century) rather than from Scripture. His gospel is rooted in compassion (which is NOT INCORRECT) but lacks the backing of truth. His gospel loves the neighbor as self, but does not love God above all else. Rauschenbusch states: "Power in religion comes only through the consciousness of a great elementary need to lay hold of God anew." This is a true statement, but Rauschenbusch misses that great elementary need: the need for a true salvation. Physical salvation is a blessing, but spiritual salvation is truly the deepest need for all of mankind. By replacing this spiritual need with a physical one, most mainline denominations have turned away from the true Gospel of repentance and regeneration to a gospel of humanitarianism and prosperity.
-On the positive side, we did discover a diamond in the rough (the deep rough....where the deer pis---): Rauschenbusch does make a wonderful case for contextualization. "Theology is not superior to the gospel. It exists to aid the preaching of salvation. Its business is to make the essential facts and principles of Christianity so simple and clear, so adequate and mighty, that all who preach or teach the gospel, both ministers and laymen, can draw on its stores and deliver a complete and unclouded Christian message. When the progress of humanity (?) creates new tasks, such as world-wide missions, or new problems, such as the social problem, theology must connect these with the old fundamentals of our faith and make them Christian tasks and problems." Tis good, no? Aside from the fact he didn't begin with Scripture. Yeah.
Tomorrow we will address some Biblical responses to Rauschenbusch, as well as more of his core beliefs and how those beliefs have shaped both the liberals who follow him and the conservatives who abhor him today.
-Dan
Guitarist, Generic Music Group
No comments:
Post a Comment