Author : Keith Sharp
“We believe in the sacred freedom and dignity of persons and are committed to the redemption of the world in all its dimensions (physical, spiritual, social, economic and political)” (Salvation Army web site, statement on “economic justice”). This is a plain affirmation of the social gospel, the belief that redemption in Christ applies to the physical, social, economic, and political realm. “Therefore lay aside all filthiness and overflow of wickedness, and receive with meekness the implanted word, which is able to save your souls” (James 1:21).
Jesus answered, ‘My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, My servants would fight, so that I should not be delivered to the Jews; but now My kingdom is not from here.’ (John 18:36)
In the period following the Civil War in the United States, a religious movement arose and gained widespread popularity throughout our land. This new philosophy was styled “the social gospe1.” “… in place of the mansions on high, these prophets of a social faith dreamed of a heaven on earth as the goal of the human race” (Hopkins, 128).
As radical as this philosophy sounds, it is nonetheless true that it had and continues to have great influence upon those who have sometimes been called “the heirs of the Restoration Movement.”
The Disciples of Christ responded to the social challenge in unison with the major American denominations. If Disciples leaders were rarely in the vanguard of the social gospel movement, the church was generally represented at every level of Christian social protest (Harrell. 85).
The purpose of this lesson is to discuss the social gospel from several aspects: its nature and history, its impact upon the Lord’s church in the nineteenth century, its influence upon churches of Christ today, and its relationship to the true gospel of Christ.
Nature and History
The social gospel is
a movement in American Protestant Christianity initiated at the end of the nineteenth century and reaching its zenith in the first part of the 20th century and dedicated to the purpose of bringing the social order into conformity with the teachings of Jesus Christ” (Webster. 4:2162).
The three most prominent and influential leaders were Richard T. E1y, Washington Gladden and Walter Rauschenbusch. E1y stated the position he and his fellows occupied.
‘I take this as my thesis’’ Ely stated in his Social Aspects of Christianity: ‘Christianity is primarily concerned with this world, and it is the mission of Christianity to bring to pass here a kingdom of righteousness and rescue from the evil one and redeem all our social institutions’ (Rader. 61).
These men had a distorted concept of Christ. “… they thought of Jesus more as a prophet of social righteousness than as a divine Saviour…”(Olmstead. 490). Some even mourned the death of Christ as the untimely end to a great career of social reform.
Now My soul is troubled, and what shall I say? ‘Father, save Me from this hour’? But for this purpose I came to this hour…. And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all peoples to Myself. This He said, signifying by what death He would die (John 12:27,32-33).
All who dwell on the earth will worship him, whose names have not been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world (Revelation 13:8).
Advocates of the social gospel have the same distorted concepts of the kingdom of God as premillennialists.
The Kingdom of God is humanity organized according to the will of God…. The Kingdom of God is not confined within the limits of the Church and its activities. It embraces the whole of human life. It is the Christian transfiguration of the social order (Mullens. 31)., p. 31).
This false idea of the kingdom is the key to the movement. They denied that the kingdom and the church are the same and contended that the kingdom is physical rather than spiritual. The “kingdom” is the church from the standpoint of its rule (cf. Hebrews 12:22-23,28), and it is most certainly spiritual in nature (Luke 17:20-21; John 18:36).
Practical Results
The social gospel movement is primarily practical, one of action. The most common fruit of the social gospel was the formation of “institutional churches.” “The adjective ‘institutional’ was commonly employed to describe the numerous churches and missions which were expanding their functions to cover the entire life of man” (Abell. 137). Teaching and preaching the word was no longer of primary importance. They concentrated on relief programs, secular education, better housing, voting rights, social equality, orphanages and settlement houses, becoming simply social institutions.
The modern Salvation Army and Methodist Church provide outstanding examples of institutional churches in full bloom. Recreational facilities supposedly built for the poor became centers of “fun and games” for the members. The YMCA and YWCA are outstanding examples of institutions that grew out of and are expressions of the social gospel.
Development
Those who espoused the social gospel thought the world in which we live could and would become perfect. World War I, the Great Depression, and World War II effectively broke the back of the movement. But the practical fruit of the social gospel remains among those who rabidly disclaim its philosophy. Most Protestant denominations and our institutional brethren rail against the materialism of the social gospel but practice every aspect of the “institutional churches.” In the summer of 2009 I mentioned the social gospel to an American “Churches of Christ” missionary in American Samoa. He angrily condemned the materialism of the social gospel. I replied, “You practice everything they do but just justify it in a different way.” He had no reply.
Impact Upon the Lord’s Church in the Nineteenth Century
The leading promoters of the social gospel among disciples of Christ were young, college-trained preachers who never really had any faith in the binding authority of the scriptures.
Most of all, the emergence of the social gospel among disciples was the work of young liberal ministers. A new generation of college-trained, sophisticated, socially conscious preachers, unawed by the conservative traditions of the restoration movement, began exploring new social and theological avenues which led some Disciples into the mainstream of liberal American Protestantism (Harrell. 85-86).
But
The success of the social gospel movement among disciples was made possible by moderate churchmen who broadened their concept of the church to include a social mission…. Of course, most moderates in the church insisted that Christianity should be a balance between social and spiritual work (Ibid. 88-89).
The older, influential, “moderate” preachers accepted part of the fruit of the social gospel while rejecting its philosophy. The younger generation of preachers recognized the obvious inconsistency between the leaders’ preaching and practice and rushed headlong down the “broad way” the old leaders timidly trod.
Probably the most important innovation to come out of the new social liberalism among Disciples was the building of institutional churches. In fact, the idea of making churches centers of community service was one of the most basic contributions of the social gospel movement(Ibid. 100).
Justification
How could they possibly justify in their own minds such obvious departure from the New Testament pattern? They did not believe the New Testament even contained a pattern for the church. They argued on the basis of “the end justifies the means” (cf. Romans 3:7-8).
Alva Taylor clearly described the work of the institutional church for Disciples readers: ‘How then must the church act…. She must do more than build massive stone walls and great organs. She must open her doors, not on Sunday alone but every day and night. Must provide night schools for busy boys and girls, men and women; provide labor bureaus and free libraries, build gymnasiums, yea, entice the masses to her sacred walls (Ibid).
Influence Upon Churches of Christ Today
Just as young, college-trained preachers who never really had faith in the authority of the scriptures led the movement in the late nineteenth century, even so, such young lions of the Mission Magazine variety led the charge into institutionalism among Churches of Christ in the mid twentieth century.
Many in the younger generation, well educated and driven by the social agenda of the period, found the traditional concerns of twentieth century Churches of Christ inadequate and irrelevant to the world in which they lived…. they differed significantly from their parents in the way they read the Bible. They declined to take it as a blueprint that lined out in detail the forms and structures of the primitive church…” (Hughes. 307).
As “moderate” leaders, who rejected the social gospel philosophy but accepted the portions of its fruit that suited them, made possible the triumph of young left-wing preachers of the nineteenth century, so it was in the mid twentieth even until now. In 1987 I debated Mac Deaver on the issue of congregational benevolence. While rejecting outright the social gospel, Deaver contended that “benevolence is a means of evangelism” and proceeded, in answer to my questions, to accept every social gospel practice of the Salvation Army I could think to mention except soup kitchens. His reason for drawing the line on soup kitchens? “Churches of Christ don’t do that.” Human tradition was the only reason he could give (cf. Matthew 15:1-9).
What is the practical fruit among churches of Christ today? By the late twentieth century and early twenty-first, mainstream Churches of Christ, while vociferously condemning the social gospel, have accepted into practice the entirety of its fruit. The Riverside Church of Christ in Gassville, Arkansas, on its web site, advertises, “Each Sunday at Riverside (just after communion), we dismiss the children to the fellowship hall for Kingdom Kids childrens worship…. Riverside is blessed with a very active and vibrant youth group. They engage in service projects and fun activities….” They advertise “Serenity House womens shelter,” “Christian Clinic Diabetic Meals,” “Annual School Supplies drive,” “Christmas dinner & gifts for families,” “No Debt, No Sweat Course,” and “Angel Food Ministry” which “provides area families the opportunity to purchase meals at deeply discounted prices.” Thus, many churches of Christ are becoming indistinguishable from denominaational churches, and are little more than glorified Red Crosses, and YMCAs.
Attempted Justification
How do Christians justify such obvious apostasy in their own minds? They have no knowledge of the New Testament as a binding pattern for all ages (2 Timothy 1:13; Hebrews 8:5). They boast of the great numbers who come, thus contending “the end justifies the means (cf. Romans 3:7-8). And they contend they are doing much good, not realizing that any work the Lord has not authorized in Scripture cannot be good (2 Timothy 3:16-17).
Assessment
What is the relationship of the social gospel to the true gospel of Christ? The social gospel has a different Savior, who saves society rather than the souls of people (Luke 19:10; 1 Corinthians 15:3), an earthly rather than a heavenly kingdom (John 18:36; Romans 14:17; Matthew 16:18-19), a physical instead of spiritual mission and work of the church (Matthew 28:18-20; 1 Timothy 3:14-15; 1 Corinthians 7:20-21; Romans 13:1-2; Philippians 4:15-16; Ephesians 4:12-16; Acts 2:44-45), an earthly rather than a heavenly hope (Matthew 6:19-21; Ephesians 4:4; I Peter 1:3-5 ), and it is in fact a different gospel that will lead to condemnation rather than salvation (Galatians 1:6-9; Romans 1:16; 6:23; John 6:26-27).
Conclusion
Our determination must be to preach the gospel of Christ that saves men’s souls (Mark 16:15-16) rather than the social gospe1 that seeks to change social, economic, and political institutions. We must follow the New Testament pattern for the work of the church (2 Timothy 1:13) rather than becoming just another Salvation Army.
List of Works Cited
Abell, Aaron J. The Urban Impact on American Protestantism: 1865~1900.
Harrell David E., Jr. The Social Sources of Division in the Disciples of Christ, 1865-1900.
Hopkins, Charles H. The Rise of the Social Gospel in American Protestantism: 1865-1915.
http://riversidechurchofchrist.biz/ http://www.salvationarmyusa.org/usn/www_usn_2.nsf/vw-dynamic-index/B6F3F4DF3150F5B5 85257434004C177D?Opendocument Hughes, Richard T.Reviving the Ancient Faith.
Mullens, Leonard. “The Social Gospel: A Definition,” Anchor, summer, 1969.
Olmstead, Clifton E. History of Religion in the United States.
Rader, Benjamin G. “Richard T. Ely: Lay Spokesman for the Social Gospel,” Journal of American History, June, 1966.
Webster’s Third New International Dictionary, Unabridged.
