Church and Society Until Justice Rolls Down Like Waters and Righteousness Like a Mighty Stream

By Collin Cowan, Council for World Mission

The conversation regarding the relationship between church and society has always been a contested space. The differing theological perspectives tend to centre around two broad categories - locating the church either as a separate community within the wider community of humanity or as an integral part of community with responsibilities, obligations and rights. The position one takes will determine the nature of the church’s contribution to civil society. The question is whether the church contributes to the ‘common good’ or functions as a ‘counter-culture’, whether the church’s prophetic and priestly roles serve to engage with society or stand in sharp contrast or in opposition to society.

There is inextricable intersectionality between Church and society that is both inevitable and necessary. Society is a composition of all peoples – races, religions, cultures and communions; and the church is made up of people drawn from society. The church’s interest in the affairs of society is bound up in the church’s understanding that it is part and parcel of society, drawn from but belonging to society. According to the Church of Scotland:

The Church and Society Council’s remit is to engage on behalf of the Church in the national, political and social issues affecting Scotland and the world today. This includes a huge range of issues including human rights, asylum, ethics, science and technology, concerns about gambling, climate change and education issues. It aims to do this through the development of theological, ethical and spiritual perspectives when formulating policy and by effectively representing the Church by offering appropriate and informed comments.1

The Minnesota United Methodist Church, following the Wesleyan tradition, states it this way:

As United Methodists, we are called to invite people to enter into a community of faith responsive to a vision of justice ministries that is biblically and theologically grounded, and to invite United Methodist congregations to play a prophetic role in bringing God’s vision to reality. Our mission is to advocate the gospel of Jesus Christ in the church and society.2

The Diakonia arm of the Protestant Church in the Netherlands (PKN) embraces social engagement as part and parcel of its mission mandate. It makes a very vital link between evangelism and social action, claiming that they are inseparable. Stek – ‘Stad en Kirk’ - is a foundation in which the City Council and the Church combine efforts in response to a range of social issues affecting people on the social margins of society. Stek has as its mission the following, which links faith to justice:

Stek – foundation for city and church – is The Hague based organisation targeting and supporting the less privileged in society. The foundation is inspired by the vital power of Christian faith and dedicates itself to improving social harmony, quality and vitality of life in the city.

Historically, the tension has really never been so much between church and society. The real tension has been between church and power, the political and financial power structures that conflict with the theology and values of the religious community of which the church is a contender. Martin Luther, the 16th-century reformist, was ex-communicated from the church because of his discontent with the corruption in the church and his attempt at addressing the issue through the posting of his 95 theses. What followed was that other reformers, including John Calvin, contributed to his work and even “broadened the scope” to include all “worldly systems or institutions… (that) did not represent God’s justice and truth”. St Augustine, for example, defines hope’s twin cousins as anger and courage, in which he sees hope as being expressed in anger at the condition of the world and courage to do something about it. Hope so defined is the church at work.

Systemic and structural power is a political arrangement, designed to control the masses and to serve the economic and social interest of the few. Empire defines power constructs, enshrined in systems and ideologies, with clear lines of demarcations that serves to divide and destroy. Notwithstanding, how the church responds to empire, with all its destructive vices, remains a contested

territory. There is the view that the church, by virtue of its identity and calling, has vested interest in how such power constructs affect the well-being of society as a whole; and as such, has a prophetic responsibility to speak truth to power. And there is the counter position that the church is ‘called out from among…’ (1 Peter 2: 9; Rom. 12: 1-2) and, as such, should distance itself from any such involvement in the affairs of society and pray instead.

In the ministry of Jesus, such a distinction is blurred. Jesus was concerned with the totality of human existence and conducted his ministry to show this holistic connection.

In Luke 4: 18-19, Jesus read from the prophecy of Isaiah, what has come to be considered his missional manifesto – concern for the plight of the poor, the prisoners, the blind and the oppressed; and committed to their freedom. However, it was his exposition of the text (Luke 4: 23-27) that caused the community to become angry at him, to the point of driving him out of the synagogue and wanting to throw him over the cliff (Luke 4: 28-30). In his reflection on the text, Jesus called the religious community to examine itself against the callousness and complicity of its ancestors, as his own entry point to addressing the plight of

“ The real tension has been between church and power, the political and financial power structures that conflict with the theology and values of the religious community of which the church is a contender.”

those named in the text. From this early beginning of his public ministry, Jesus made it clear that his would not be a conformist ministry.

In Jesus’ first teaching discourse, in Matthew’s gospel (Chapter 5-7), he outlined for the first disciples the essentials of his mission and that to which he called them – a combination of piety and praxis. And in the prayer, he taught his disciples, Jesus caused them to see how they are connected with God, with themselves and with the world around them. “our holy father… give us this day our daily bread… and forgive us our debt as we forgive our debtors…”.

In his encounter with the crowd, which followed him after he left the vicinity of Herod’s palace, where the nobles and officials gathered for Herod’s birthday party, Jesus requested and required the disciples to feed the crowd, a requirement that shocked the disciples as much as it centred them (Mt 14: 1-21). Jesus demonstrated care and concern for the physical as well as the spiritual needs of society, practised and modelled an alternative community to the Roman empire and invited his disciples to embrace this alternative as the hallmark of their discipleship.

There's a scholarly debate around the question of call, its meaning and purpose. For example, what was the purpose of Abraham, and by extension, Israel's call? Was Paul converted or called to Christianity; and if called, to what end? So the discourse is really about being called ‘for’ rather than ‘from’ the world (society). This calling ‘for’ is about vocation rather than status. In the words of Jesus, it is being light and salt, an inextricable connection between being and doing, identity and vocation. The church, as the movement called into being by Jesus, is meant to mirror the mission of Jesus. "As the father has sent me, so send I you" (John 20: 21). Accordingly, the church cannot be isolated from society, if it were to be its light and salt (Mt. 5: 13-16).

My topic is drawn from the words of the prophet Amos in his confrontation with power in the northern province of ancient Israel, more particularly, Bethel and Samaria (Amos 5: 24). Amos is not from the North; he is from the South and from that social location he experiences the impact of injustice. For him, justice is turned in to bitterness and righteousness is cast to the ground (5: 7). He talks about those who hate the one who upholds justice and detests the one who tells the truth (5: 10). He confronts those who oppress the innocent, take bribes and deprive the poor of justice in the courts (5: 12). He

Centuries later Dr Martin Luther King Jnr picks up the same message of Amos; and offers it to his beloved country, the USA, at a time of intense struggle for civil liberties for all of America, particularly those who were denied justice by the system:

We must forever continue our struggle on the high plane of dignity and discipline. We must not allow our creative protest to degenerate into physical violence. Again and again, we must rise to the majestic heights of meeting physical force with soul force.

The marvellous new militancy which has engulfed the Negro community must not lead us to a distrust of all white people -- for many of our white brothers, as evidenced by their presence here today, have come to realise that their destiny is inextricably tied up with our destiny. They have come to realise that their freedom is inextricably bound to our freedom.

We cannot walk alone, and as we walk, we must make the pledge that we shall always march ahead. We cannot turn back. There are those who are asking the devotees of civil rights: "When will you be satisfied?" We can never be satisfied as long as the Negro is the victim of the unspeakable horrors of police brutality. We can never be satisfied as long as our bodies, heavy with the fatigue of travel, cannot gain lodging in the motels of the highways and the hotels of the cities. We cannot be satisfied as long as the Negro's basic mobility is from a smaller ghetto to a larger one. We can never be satisfied as long as our children are stripped of their selfhood and robbed of their dignity by signs stating "For Whites Only." We cannot be satisfied so long as the Negro in Mississippi cannot vote and the Negro in New York believes he has nothing for which to vote. No, no, we are not satisfied and will not be satisfied until justice rolls down like water and righteousness like a mighty stream.3

The relationship between church and society is embedded in this statement – “We cannot walk alone” and the insatiable desire for justice as the connecting link, holding us all together in a spirit of community – “We can never be satisfied until…”.

The Church, as a Jesus movement, encapsulates the rich tradition of the religious community of Israel, called into a faith journey with the God of life, committed to the salvation of all families of the Earth. A cursory glance into that historical journey reveals that our mothers and fathers were faithful to living the tension of being part of society; but radically opposed to the power constructs that serve only to divide the community, with ideologies of supremacy and control.

The Hebrew midwives, Shiphrah and Puah – lived by the values of their faith and faithfulness to the God of life and defied the orders of Pharaoh (Ex. 1: 15-21).

The mother and sister of Moses – danced with the Pharaoh in securing their right to take care of their son and brother at the expense of the empire (Ex. 2: 1-10).

The four Hebrew boys, Daniel, Hananiah, Michael and Azariah (Belteshazzar, Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego) – remained faithful to their convictions even in the face of the fiery furnace and the lions’ den (Daniel 1, 3 and 6).

Elijah and Nathan – confronted and spoke truth to power despite their awareness of the cost (1 Kings 18, 2 Samuel 12).

Amos, Hosea and Micah– called Israel to account with the message of justice and love (Amos 5, Hosea 12, Micah 6)

Peter – refused to obey the dictates of the religious hierarchy of his day and declared loyalty to God alone

John – encouraged the church of Asia Minor to remain faithful in the face of the threat of death by the Caesar, assuring them of their vindication

George William Gordon – denied a place in the North Street Congregational Church in Jamaica because of his radical views on freedom for the slaves

Paul Bogle, an elder in the Baptist Church in Jamaica – executed by hanging for his part in the Morant Bay rebellion in search of freedom for slaves

Martin Luther King – assassinated for being a freedom fighter against white supremacy and in search of community for blacks and whites alike.

King says “we shall never be satisfied until justice rolls down like the rivers…”. This spirit of discontent that gave form and content to King’s mission is the very spirit that fuels and propels the church to action today. The church is part of society, with the eyes of the heart open and alert to the death-dealing and life-denying issues of the day. And like MLK, Jnr, the church should never be satisfied until justice…”. And in the words of John Calvin, “The pastor ought to have two voices: one, for gathering the sheep; and another, for warding off and driving away wolves and thieves. The Scripture supplies him with the means of doing both.”

As a mission organisation, committed to mutually challenging, encouraging and equipping churches to share in God’s mission, CWM claims that justice is at the heart of faith; and, therefore, contends that the church is duty bound to advocate for justice as a core function of its calling. The church cannot sit by and watch society disintegrate while taking a neutral stance. Elie Wiesel is right - “We must take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim”. This is where church meets society in what the Presbyterian Church in the Netherlands calls connections and co-creation, a coming together of interests, convictions and even rage and a common agenda to courageously confront power, challenge systems of injustice and call for an alternative. Joining the tradition of John Calvin, we assert that: “All the blessings we enjoy are Divine deposits, committed to our trust on this condition, that they should be dispensed for the benefit of our neighbours”. Our identity and vocation are wrapped up in an epistemology of praxis – acting and reflecting, reflecting and acting as God gives light.

Wayne and I were inspired by our visit to the Hague as well as Rotterdam and to witness the work of the church in community, making this vital connection between church and society. Like the church in the Hague, the St Paul’s Kirk in Rotterdam lives by the principle that “everyone who has a need is welcomed” and that “there is a place for everyone who is interested”. Their mission which includes focussing on the plight of persons living in poverty, undocumented people (refugees) and migrant workers, is intertwined in the theology that all of life is God’s domain, that God, as revealed in Jesus of Nazareth, is concerned about the whole person and all of creation. In our conversation with the leadership of these communities of faith, we were helped to appreciate that humanitarian response to the socially disadvantaged was only a partial response; and that they were committed to advocacy for justice and the transformation of systems that serve the needs of the few at the expense of the many. This, for me, is central to the question of the relationship between church and society; and I offer this as my perspective on the subject.

As a live and practical example of church meeting society, I call attention to the work of a Christian young woman, who has shown considerable interest in the economic empowerment of African Americans. My interest in this work relates to CWM’s present attention on exploring the legacies of slavery through a series of hearings as we retrace the journey of the transatlantic trade of African people. In our journey, we have wrestled with the story of our own complicity as a missionary organisation, how even the very treasurer of the London Missionary Society himself owned 300 slaves in Trelawny, Jamaica. We have agonised over the story of how we have allowed ourselves to be co-opted into the web of the slave trade to the extent that our evangelism and education of the slaves was to make them better slaves, obedient and subservient. And we have accepted the sordid story that even after the abolition of slavery life remained extremely difficult for black people while the slave owners were compensated for their loss of income on account of the abolition act. I have come here from the USA, where the fourth hearing on the legacies of slavery took place; and there we are reminded of the intense fight for civil rights in the 1950’s and 60’s; the many who suffered and lost their lives in the fight; and the continued struggle for freedom, justice and peace to this very day.

Lakesha Womack, in her book, UnLynched (2018), offers a perspective on the power dynamics in society, locating systemic racism at the root of underdevelopment of black people in America, whether in education, economics or family life. In an attempt to problematise the gravity of the plight, she calls attention to a slave owner, Willie Lynch, who proposed mental enslavement as being far more profitable to the slave trade than physical brutality. His last name, now used as a verb, bears the lasting legacy of his successful indoctrination.

In my bag here, I have a fool proof method for controlling your black slaves. I guarantee every one of you that if installed correctly it will control the slaves for at least three hundred years. My method is simple…. I have outlined a number of differences among the slaves and make the differences bigger. I use fear, distrust and envy for control….

Take this simple list of difference and think about them. On top of my list is “age” but it’s only because it starts with an “A.” The second is “COLOUR” or shade, there is intelligence, size, sex, size of plantations and status on plantations, attitude of owners, whether the slaves live in the valley, on a hill, East, West, North, South, have fine hair, coarse hair, or is tall or short…. I shall assure you that distrust is stronger than trust and envy stronger than adulation, respect or admiration. The black slaves after receiving this indoctrination shall carry on and will become self-refuelling and self-generating for hundreds of years, maybe thousands…. It is necessary that your slaves trust and depend on us (whites). They must love, respect and trust only us. Gentlemen, these kits are your keys to control. Use them…. If used intensely for one year, the slaves themselves will remain perpetually distrustful of each other.4

This is a power construct, designed around an ideology of racial supremacy, that uses a theory of mental subjugation and a strategy of divide-and-conquer to maintain control. It is this power construct that locates the church in confrontational theology and praxis; because with such a power construct in operation, there is a clash of values and principles, calling the faith we profess into question.

In closing, I suggest that:

there is an inextricable link between church and society that is both inevitable and necessary; inevitable because the church is part and parcel of society and necessary because the church’s engagement with society is bound up in its very identity and calling as disciples of Jesus Christ.

That which gives credence to the church’s contribution to society is its theology, ethics and values, informed by and grounded in the Word of God and the collective discernment of the community of faith.

Systems and structures that serve to divide and destroy ought to be vehemently opposed by the church, not because the church is anti-society, on the one hand, or irreligious on the other, but because of the Church’s duty to society.

Scripture speaks more poignantly that we ever can. Listen to these words of scripture and consider them:

“Then I will restore your judges as at first, and your councillors as at the beginning. After that, you will be called the city of righteousness, a faithful city. Zion will be redeemed with justice and her repentant ones with righteousness.” (Is. 1: 26-27)

“Seek the welfare of the city where I have sent you into exile; and pray to the Lord on its behalf; for in its welfare you will have welfare.” (Jer 29: 7)

1http://www.churchofscotland.org.uk, accessed on 1 July 2018 2http://www.minnesotaumc.org/church and society, accessed on 1 July 2018 3I have a Dream by Martin Luther King, Jr; August 28, 1963 4This speech was delivered by Willie Lynch on the bank of the James River in the colony of Virginia in 1712. Lynch was a British slave owner in the West Indies. The term "lynching" is derived from his last name. Full text on http://www.lojsociety.org/Lets_Make_A_Slave_The_Making_Of_A_Slave.pdf