This past week, Christians have been invited to sign a statement crafted by 14 men that addresses the gospel and social justice. Published on September 4, 2018, the statement has been signed by 6414 people to date. The statement, which includes an introduction and 14 affirmations and denials on a range of topics, greatly troubled me upon reading it. I feel compelled to respond upon considering (1) my students, my neighbors, my family members, my friends, my colleagues, and total strangers who are not believers who may encounter this statement and assume that it accurately represents the beliefs of all Christians and the God who reveals himself in scripture, and (2) my brothers and sisters in Christ who are racial, ethnic, or linguistic minorities in the United States and may feel unheard, unimportant, and unvalued by the contents of this statement.
For the sake of my time, I am addressing only my five biggest concerns with the statement by asking the following quesitons.
What is the role of social activism in the church?
The Statement on Social Justice and the Gospel denies that social and political activism should be a primary mission of the church. While I agree that the church exists to worship God through teaching the gospel and equipping believers, I believe that worship without whole heartedly seeking justice is precisely the kind of worship that God disdains, as indicated repeatedly in scriptures such as Amos 5, James 1, and Micah 6. In Matthew 22, Jesus himself states the great commandment to love your neighbor as yourself, second only to loving the Lord your God with every fiber of your being. And, to leave us without doubts and excuses, Jesus even tells a parable in Luke 10 to clarify that there are no exceptions to the word neighbor.
The Statement on Social Justice and the Gospel affirms that all scripture, including the above verses, are breathed by God himself. I agree with them on that, which is why I am convinced that, in light of these scriptures, it is impossible for me to obey the commandment of Christ to love my neighbor without engaging in social and political activism. When 33% of women experience some form of sexual assult in their lifetime, when black Americans are incarcerated at more than 5 times the rate of white Americans, when the infant mortality rate is over twice as high for black babies than it is for white babies, when the poverty rate for black and hispanic Americans is over twice that of white Americans, when immigrant children are separated from their parents at the border, when Native American youth have a higher rate of suicide than all ethnicities in the country, then how can I love my neighbors without involving myself socially and politically in fighting for their lives?
What responsibility do white Christians have to repair historical oppression of people of color in America?
In their discussion of the issue of sin, The Statement on Social Justice and the Gospel denies that anyone is morally responsible for the sin of other people, adding that future generations share the guilt of their ancestors only if they approve of, embrace, or attempt to justify the sins of the past. This statement seems to me to be implying that as long as white Christians do not condone slavery and oppression, there is no need for them to make any reparations to any descendants of African slaves or people of color who were oppressed thoughout the history of our country. Therefore, according to The Statement on Social Justice and the Gospel, all white Christians who agree that slavery and oppression are wrong are off the hook, innocent, and unstained by the sins of their fathers.
Frankly, I find this conclusion to be dangerous. Whether we recognize it or not, white people like me have benefitted from the systemic oppression of racial minorities in America for as long as America has existed. While we may disprove of the ugliness of American history that includes the slavery and segregation of black people and the abuse of Native Americans, we continue to participate in these oppressive systems by enjoying the economic, social, and political power that our skin color affords us at the expense of the rest of our non-white neighbors. Perhaps many white Christians participate in these systems unknowingly, failing to recognize the power that they clutch in their closed fists instead of releasing their grip and reallocating it among people groups who have historically been powerless and voiceless in our country for generations. However, unknowing participation is still participation.
Clearing white Christians of moral responsibility for oppression that they participate in is dangerous because it feeds white supremacy. When we as white people do not have to recognize our role in oppression, then we can assume that the playing field is equal and that any unequal distribution of power is earned, which affects not only the way that we may (perhaps subconsiously) understand ouselves as superior, but also the way that we may understand non-white people groups as inferior because they seemingly underachieve on what is mistakenly believed to be an equal playing field.
Reparation is the act of repairing something that you have broken or benefited from being broken, the making of amends - monetarily or otherwise - of a wrong that has been committed. I believe that the Bibe provides multiple examples of reparations (Luke 19, Leviticus 6, Numbers 5, Exodus 22). Simply agreeing that slavery and historical oppression was wrong does not serve to clear white Christians of the guilt of continuing to participate in and benefit from oppressive systems without seeking justice. Those of us who have benefitted from systemic oppression must first repent and then repair. Repairations invite us to help fix what has been broken. Christ sets an example as the ultimate repairation. Whereas usually the guilty party must make things right, in the case between God and humanity, the innocent Lamb of God made reparations on behalf of us who sinned against him. He not only paid our debt through his own death on the cross, but imputed his own righteousness to us that we may be children of God.
Are some cultures inherently better than others?
This is not a question that I should have to address. But I do. And, to be clear, the answer is a loud, resounding, emphatic No.
But The Statement on Social Justice and the Gospel affirms that there are cultures that operate on biblical principals and that by operating on biblical principals that the assumptions of these particular cultures are inherently better than those of other cultures. I fear that the writers of this document were implying that the biblical principals present in white American culture or white evangelical culture makes the assumptions of those cultures inherently better than others. If this is indeed what is being implied here, then it seems to me that the authors of the statement have forgotten that the cultures in question have often and repeatedly misused or twisted their biblical principals in order to justify terrible things such as slavery, segregation, oppression of Native Americans, and the separation of immigrant children from their parents at the border. Clearly, the presence of biblical principals in a culture does not guarantee godliness.
Even if the presence of biblical principals in a culture did guarantee godliness, the very suggestion that there exists superior cultures (and therefore inferior cultures) is unacceptable, especially coming from a group of authors who represent very few cultures. As human beings immersed in our own specific cultures, we are not capable of accurately judging other cultures. We do not always realize it, but we have been taught how to think about things in a certain way through our cultural upbringing. This point of view affects the way we see the world around us, including other cultures. When looking at other cultures through the lens of our own culture, we automatically compare the other culture to what we deem to be right and normal based on our cultural perspective. This makes us automatically blind to some of the good things that are present in other cultures just because they contradict something about our own culture that we believe to be good.
The very concept of comparing the goodness of cultures is utterly ridiculous, but if such absurd games must be played, then the table must be much much bigger so that every single culture can be equally represented. To think that we can speak for any culture other than our own is ethnocentric, and to consider that we can even have an accurate perception of our own culture is presumptuous.
Must Christians reject intersectionality, radical feminism, and critical race theory?
No.
The Statement on Social Justice and the Gospel clearly and directly rejects intersectionality, radical feminism, and critical race theory. Intersectionality is the way that various forms of discrimination (gender, race, age, sexuality,...) converge and overlap. The aim of radical feminism is to dismantle patriarchy in society. Critical race theory seeks to uncover racism in structures and institutions with the goal of finding solutions that lead to justice. I have relatively little to say about this because I don't understand how one could possibly argue that these three ideologies are so inconsistent with Christian beliefs that they must be completely rejected. On the contrary, each of these ideologies seem to align with different parts of biblical justice that I see throughout scriptures.
We believe that God created human beings in his own image. When multiple kinds of discrimination converge upon image bearers, Christians cannot stand by in silence. Thus, the study of intersectionality can be useful.
During his earthly ministry, Jesus listened to, valued, loved, and taught women. He even invited women to learn from him alongside men in Luke 10, a startling challange to the patriarchy of his society. In light of that, radical feminist ideologies may reflect parts of God's design for men and women.
As far as critical race theory goes, I cannot figure out how recognizing systemic and institutional racism and white supremacy in the United States and seeking to dismantle it goes against biblical principals that call us to love our neighbors.
As Christians, what do we do with the topic of homosexuality and the LGBTQ community?
By directly rejecting "gay Christian" as a possible identity, The Statement on Social Justice and the Gospel implies that justification must include being made right with God and being made heterosexual, thus making sexuality a condition of salvation. Essentially, another requirement has been added to Romans 10:9. If you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead and are heterosexual, you will be saved. No. Romans 5 states that Christ died for us while we were yet sinners... homosexual sinners, heterosexual sinners, bisexual sinners, transgender sinners, sinners.
In 2017, 52 people were killed in hateful anti-LGBTQ violence. Despite disagreement with active LGBTQ lifestyles, Christians should be outraged at the way this group is treated as the biblical command to love your neighbor has no sexual orientation disclaimer. By rejecting the term "sexual minority" as a legitimate category, The Statement on Social Justice and the Gospel ignores the injustice of hateful violence against sexual minorities. Scripture does not leave space for us to only love and fight for the lives of those whom we agree with. We love because God first loved us, not because someone's sexuality, religion, or lifestyle makes them loveable.
In conclusion, this has not been an exhaustive discussion of the problems with The Statement on Social Justice and the Gospel. There is more to say. For anyone wishing to continue to investigate the topic, consider the following resources and will add to the list as necessary:
Ryan Burton King's Why I cannot and will not sign the "Social Justice and Gospel Statement"
The Immigration Project's John MacArthur, Social Justice, and The Gospel
Jemar Tisby's Battle lines form over social justice: Is it gospel or heresy?
Russel Moore's The Gospel and Social Injustice - Part 1 podcast
For the sake of my time, I am addressing only my five biggest concerns with the statement by asking the following quesitons.
What is the role of social activism in the church?
The Statement on Social Justice and the Gospel denies that social and political activism should be a primary mission of the church. While I agree that the church exists to worship God through teaching the gospel and equipping believers, I believe that worship without whole heartedly seeking justice is precisely the kind of worship that God disdains, as indicated repeatedly in scriptures such as Amos 5, James 1, and Micah 6. In Matthew 22, Jesus himself states the great commandment to love your neighbor as yourself, second only to loving the Lord your God with every fiber of your being. And, to leave us without doubts and excuses, Jesus even tells a parable in Luke 10 to clarify that there are no exceptions to the word neighbor.
The Statement on Social Justice and the Gospel affirms that all scripture, including the above verses, are breathed by God himself. I agree with them on that, which is why I am convinced that, in light of these scriptures, it is impossible for me to obey the commandment of Christ to love my neighbor without engaging in social and political activism. When 33% of women experience some form of sexual assult in their lifetime, when black Americans are incarcerated at more than 5 times the rate of white Americans, when the infant mortality rate is over twice as high for black babies than it is for white babies, when the poverty rate for black and hispanic Americans is over twice that of white Americans, when immigrant children are separated from their parents at the border, when Native American youth have a higher rate of suicide than all ethnicities in the country, then how can I love my neighbors without involving myself socially and politically in fighting for their lives?
What responsibility do white Christians have to repair historical oppression of people of color in America?
In their discussion of the issue of sin, The Statement on Social Justice and the Gospel denies that anyone is morally responsible for the sin of other people, adding that future generations share the guilt of their ancestors only if they approve of, embrace, or attempt to justify the sins of the past. This statement seems to me to be implying that as long as white Christians do not condone slavery and oppression, there is no need for them to make any reparations to any descendants of African slaves or people of color who were oppressed thoughout the history of our country. Therefore, according to The Statement on Social Justice and the Gospel, all white Christians who agree that slavery and oppression are wrong are off the hook, innocent, and unstained by the sins of their fathers.
Frankly, I find this conclusion to be dangerous. Whether we recognize it or not, white people like me have benefitted from the systemic oppression of racial minorities in America for as long as America has existed. While we may disprove of the ugliness of American history that includes the slavery and segregation of black people and the abuse of Native Americans, we continue to participate in these oppressive systems by enjoying the economic, social, and political power that our skin color affords us at the expense of the rest of our non-white neighbors. Perhaps many white Christians participate in these systems unknowingly, failing to recognize the power that they clutch in their closed fists instead of releasing their grip and reallocating it among people groups who have historically been powerless and voiceless in our country for generations. However, unknowing participation is still participation.
Clearing white Christians of moral responsibility for oppression that they participate in is dangerous because it feeds white supremacy. When we as white people do not have to recognize our role in oppression, then we can assume that the playing field is equal and that any unequal distribution of power is earned, which affects not only the way that we may (perhaps subconsiously) understand ouselves as superior, but also the way that we may understand non-white people groups as inferior because they seemingly underachieve on what is mistakenly believed to be an equal playing field.
Reparation is the act of repairing something that you have broken or benefited from being broken, the making of amends - monetarily or otherwise - of a wrong that has been committed. I believe that the Bibe provides multiple examples of reparations (Luke 19, Leviticus 6, Numbers 5, Exodus 22). Simply agreeing that slavery and historical oppression was wrong does not serve to clear white Christians of the guilt of continuing to participate in and benefit from oppressive systems without seeking justice. Those of us who have benefitted from systemic oppression must first repent and then repair. Repairations invite us to help fix what has been broken. Christ sets an example as the ultimate repairation. Whereas usually the guilty party must make things right, in the case between God and humanity, the innocent Lamb of God made reparations on behalf of us who sinned against him. He not only paid our debt through his own death on the cross, but imputed his own righteousness to us that we may be children of God.
Are some cultures inherently better than others?
This is not a question that I should have to address. But I do. And, to be clear, the answer is a loud, resounding, emphatic No.
But The Statement on Social Justice and the Gospel affirms that there are cultures that operate on biblical principals and that by operating on biblical principals that the assumptions of these particular cultures are inherently better than those of other cultures. I fear that the writers of this document were implying that the biblical principals present in white American culture or white evangelical culture makes the assumptions of those cultures inherently better than others. If this is indeed what is being implied here, then it seems to me that the authors of the statement have forgotten that the cultures in question have often and repeatedly misused or twisted their biblical principals in order to justify terrible things such as slavery, segregation, oppression of Native Americans, and the separation of immigrant children from their parents at the border. Clearly, the presence of biblical principals in a culture does not guarantee godliness.
Even if the presence of biblical principals in a culture did guarantee godliness, the very suggestion that there exists superior cultures (and therefore inferior cultures) is unacceptable, especially coming from a group of authors who represent very few cultures. As human beings immersed in our own specific cultures, we are not capable of accurately judging other cultures. We do not always realize it, but we have been taught how to think about things in a certain way through our cultural upbringing. This point of view affects the way we see the world around us, including other cultures. When looking at other cultures through the lens of our own culture, we automatically compare the other culture to what we deem to be right and normal based on our cultural perspective. This makes us automatically blind to some of the good things that are present in other cultures just because they contradict something about our own culture that we believe to be good.
The very concept of comparing the goodness of cultures is utterly ridiculous, but if such absurd games must be played, then the table must be much much bigger so that every single culture can be equally represented. To think that we can speak for any culture other than our own is ethnocentric, and to consider that we can even have an accurate perception of our own culture is presumptuous.
Must Christians reject intersectionality, radical feminism, and critical race theory?
No.
The Statement on Social Justice and the Gospel clearly and directly rejects intersectionality, radical feminism, and critical race theory. Intersectionality is the way that various forms of discrimination (gender, race, age, sexuality,...) converge and overlap. The aim of radical feminism is to dismantle patriarchy in society. Critical race theory seeks to uncover racism in structures and institutions with the goal of finding solutions that lead to justice. I have relatively little to say about this because I don't understand how one could possibly argue that these three ideologies are so inconsistent with Christian beliefs that they must be completely rejected. On the contrary, each of these ideologies seem to align with different parts of biblical justice that I see throughout scriptures.
We believe that God created human beings in his own image. When multiple kinds of discrimination converge upon image bearers, Christians cannot stand by in silence. Thus, the study of intersectionality can be useful.
During his earthly ministry, Jesus listened to, valued, loved, and taught women. He even invited women to learn from him alongside men in Luke 10, a startling challange to the patriarchy of his society. In light of that, radical feminist ideologies may reflect parts of God's design for men and women.
As far as critical race theory goes, I cannot figure out how recognizing systemic and institutional racism and white supremacy in the United States and seeking to dismantle it goes against biblical principals that call us to love our neighbors.
As Christians, what do we do with the topic of homosexuality and the LGBTQ community?
By directly rejecting "gay Christian" as a possible identity, The Statement on Social Justice and the Gospel implies that justification must include being made right with God and being made heterosexual, thus making sexuality a condition of salvation. Essentially, another requirement has been added to Romans 10:9. If you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead and are heterosexual, you will be saved. No. Romans 5 states that Christ died for us while we were yet sinners... homosexual sinners, heterosexual sinners, bisexual sinners, transgender sinners, sinners.
In 2017, 52 people were killed in hateful anti-LGBTQ violence. Despite disagreement with active LGBTQ lifestyles, Christians should be outraged at the way this group is treated as the biblical command to love your neighbor has no sexual orientation disclaimer. By rejecting the term "sexual minority" as a legitimate category, The Statement on Social Justice and the Gospel ignores the injustice of hateful violence against sexual minorities. Scripture does not leave space for us to only love and fight for the lives of those whom we agree with. We love because God first loved us, not because someone's sexuality, religion, or lifestyle makes them loveable.
In conclusion, this has not been an exhaustive discussion of the problems with The Statement on Social Justice and the Gospel. There is more to say. For anyone wishing to continue to investigate the topic, consider the following resources and will add to the list as necessary:
Ryan Burton King's Why I cannot and will not sign the "Social Justice and Gospel Statement"
The Immigration Project's John MacArthur, Social Justice, and The Gospel
Jemar Tisby's Battle lines form over social justice: Is it gospel or heresy?
Russel Moore's The Gospel and Social Injustice - Part 1 podcast
Comments
Post a Comment