|
Social Holiness
by
Captain Amy Reardon
In 1930
philosopher Bertrand Russell, critic of religion and
especially Christianity, wrote an essay called Has Religion
Made Useful Contributions to Civilization? This essay is
now a chapter in the collection of his work titled Why I Am
Not a Christian. Among his many intriguing arguments is
this one: “The natural impulse of the vigorous person of
decent character is to attempt to do good, but if he is
deprived of all political power and of all opportunity to
influence events, he will be deflected from his natural course
and will decide that the important thing is good.” Early
Christians had no political power, so they turned their
energies inward. It became their focus to live holy lives,
with, “a conception of personal holiness as something quite
independent of beneficent action… Social virtue came therefore
to be excluded from Christian ethics.”
Those of us who embrace the doctrine of holiness might argue
that what Russell described was not holiness, but piety. True,
inner virtue is part of holiness, but it is not the whole
picture. At least, not as the 19th century pioneers of the
Holiness movement would have defined it.
In the Spring 2004 issue of Christian History & Biography
magazine, William Kostlevy wrote:
“For some critics, the term ‘holiness movement’ has conjured
images of navel-gazing holy rollers too interested in getting
a spiritual thrill or (at most) saving souls to care about
alleviating social distress. This caricature is simply not
accurate. The movement’s most enduring legacy is a nationwide
network of missions to the socially and economically
disadvantaged – primarily in inner-city neighborhoods.”
(Though this particular issue of the magazine is dedicated to
the great holiness preacher/teacher/writer/activist Phoebe
Palmer, the editors simply couldn’t stop themselves from
sprinkling it with stories about the Booths -whose doctrine
was heavily influenced by Palmer - and The Salvation Army.)
Real holiness insists upon what Russell called “social
virtue”. If one follows holiness doctrine through, one will
draw this conclusion. For if it makes sense that Christ can
cleanse a believer from all sin not just in the next life, but
in this life, then it makes sense that Christ wishes to
make his Kingdom come – on earth (in this life), as it is in
heaven. Just as he wants to purge each heart of its evil, he
wants to purge society of collective evil and injustice. The
Christian who truly believes in holiness believes in bringing
about social justice and works toward that end. As Kostlevy
wrote, “Holiness leaders… taught that sanctification does not
stop in the individual heart, but must overflow into ‘social
holiness’.”
The Hebrew word for holiness (qodesh) actually means
separateness – that is to say, separated from this world and
consecrated to God. We often use the word “righteousness”
hand-in-hand with the word holiness, or even as a synonym for
it. Interestingly, the Hebrew word that English Bibles
translates as “righteousness” – tsedeq – is inextricably
linked with the concept of justice. We have come to think of
righteousness as virtuous personal conduct, but it is so much
more. Those who are righteous, as it is biblically defined,
are those who seek justice. They are the people who
demonstrate social holiness.
But what about Russell’s criticism? Did he concoct such a view
out of thin air? Though he was an atheist, it must be noted
that Russell’s writings were even-handed. His observation that
Christians were impotent within society must have been the
result of intentional observation. To some extent, he must
have been looking in the wrong places. Christian missions were
in full swing and impacting their environs within Russell’s
lifetime. Already The Salvation Army had lifted its first
generation of degenerates from the streets and turned many
into decent citizens. But perhaps there weren’t enough
Christians on the streets. Perhaps their light was still only
a flickering candle in a vast darkness.
With the passing of time, that flickering candle was in danger
of being extinguished. For most of the second half of the
twentieth century evangelical churches taught parishioners to
concentrate on their “personal relationship with Jesus
Christ”. That relationship was, and is, crucial. But it was
stressed so strongly that Christians began to forget their
place as God’s agents in this world. In this century, I
believe we are adding a larger vision to our previous scope.
We are recognizing that God expects our relationship with him
to be radiated outward. He expects Christians to change this
planet. It’s really a return to what the late 19th century
holiness leaders already taught and practiced. It is the
synchronization of holiness with righteousness.
I admit to being a little intimidated at the thought of
actually changing society. But there is something thrilling
about it, too. Imagine not only seeing souls saved. Imagine
not just paying the electric bill of a family that has come
upon hard times. Imagine a complete redemption – changing our
world. Christ is capable of it, and with his empowerment, we
can live righteous lives that actually assist in bringing
about justice.
|
