Selective Social Action

     I have recently been looking through church history of the last 100 years. I don't know about you, but I love history. I truly believe that those who don't know their history are bound to repeat the same mistakes. I also believe that as we look at church history we can see some very interesting trends. It would appear that the church is extremely reactive. Rather than being truly centered on the Scriptures we react to whatever is going on around us and find Bible verses to support our reaction. The church's response to social action is an interesting case in point.
     For centuries the church believed it was part and parcel of Christianity to be involved in social action. When I use this term I am referring to the concepts of helping the poor, feeding the hungry, lifting up the sick, assisting the elderly, taking orphans under wing, etc. During periods of Christian revival and renewal we see great social action being part of and flowing out from these spiritual movements. For example during the awakenings of the 18th and 19th centuries Christians recommited themselves to the idea of serving others. In England Lord Shaftesbury helped enact laws protecting children. George Mueller created orphanages, and William Wilberforce, in addition to helping abolish slavery, worked for the protection of animals, a comittment that stemmed from his belief that Christians are stewards of God's creation.
     But the social-gospel movement of the early 20th century changed all this. The social-gospel movement of the (truly) liberal churches taught that social action was the gospel and had little use for justification, sanctification or really any vestige of the true gospel of Jesus Christ. The Fundamentalists (and later Evangelicals) became passionate about sharing the gospel, but showed little to no concern for social action. (Notice the reactionary nature of the fundamentalists/evangelicals.)
     in the 1970's, the Evangelical position has slowly been shaken through the work of men like Francis Schaeffer and John R.W. Stott. However, as the title of this blog indicates, we have reacted in a very selective manner. For example evangelicals became passionate about serving the needs of others overseas (through ministries like Franklin Graham's Samaritan's Purse, and many others), but have shown little interest in serving the needs of those living in the United States. While many Christians have become passionate about abortion and even serving unwed mothers they are not quite so passionate about serving those stricken with AIDS. (By the way, to say that we aren't interested in helping people with AIDS because it is God's curse on homosexuality is the exact same argument the Pharisees used with Jesus when he healed people who were blind or had leprosy. Think about it.)
     So here is my challenge. As we look at the Scripture we see example after example of social action. Jesus ministered to the poor and needy. James 1:27 tells us that pure and undefiled religion before God is "to visit orphans and widows in their affliction." Have we forgotten this? We rant and rave against government welfare, but what are we doing about it? Are we as individuals (and the church as a whole) seeking out the poor and needy and offering financial assistance? If we don't beleive in handouts are we offering to teach others a trade or how to put together a resume? Do we hire someone who really isn't very qualified for the purpose of training them in the business (as a ministry to the poor)?
     Social action as mentioned above is clearly not the gospel and must never be confused with it. However, this kind of action should become a solid part of Christianity once again. After all, doesn't Jesus say that the two greatest commands are to love God and then to love our neighbors as we love ourselves?