PDA

View Full Version : Liberal Christians interested in Social Justice


Treasure the Questions
7th September 2004, 07:25 AM
I hope some of you fall into this category and will contribute to the Social Justice Section. I think Jesus is concerned about unfair trade, injustice in the rules that govern world trade, debt in develping countries and in our inner cities and all the ways we oppress and exploit each other. I believe we should each be doing our bit to put right what we can to proclaim the "year of the Lord's favour" (the year of Jubilee)!

O God,
to those who have hunger,
give bread.
And to those who have bread,
give the hunger for justice. Amen.

A thanksgiving 'grace' said at mealtimes in many Latin American countries including Argentia.

GreenPartyVoter
7th September 2004, 12:43 PM
Where is the Social Justice section? Is this it?

Treasure the Questions
7th September 2004, 01:22 PM
Where is the Social Justice section? Is this it?
The Social Justice section is in For Christians Only (http://www.christianforums.ca/f7) Ministry (http://www.christianforums.ca/f77), or here http://www.christianforums.ca/f360

Hope to see you there? :wave:

Karin

Toney
7th September 2004, 01:23 PM
Did someone say, "Social justice?"

Please excuse me while I wheeze and sneeze for a short while.

One would think, would they not, that correct belief would just automatically lead to social justice? I mean, we believe in the Bible, in Jesus, in the Church or the Body, and the teaching is quite clear, is it not? We got it right, don't we?

So what is wrong with the equation, correct belief + some faith = social justice, for that equation seems bankrupt, does it not? Throughout Christendom we witness mouths going one way and feet going another.

Is this the great evil of secular humanism? I think not. It is the great failure of a Church (read: religious systems) that teaches "correct belief." Correct belief is religious mud and the world is stuck.

So what is wrong with our equation? Simply put, we are not called to correct belief. That is only a means to an end. We debate the game plan, but we never play the game. The game is conversion and we cannot even accomplish that without God's grace! Conversion means turning away from self; salvaging our values, and turning toward God. (See, you can express it without using the word sin!) It is what happened to Paul. It comes suddenly or gradually like a thief in the night to those who truly seek it.

Now here is the good news. We are in a time of grace for a short while longer. And all we have to do is ask for the grace.

Conversion (Metanoia (http://www.stjosephdg.org/parish/about/metanoia.html)) = Social Justice.

Treasure the Questions
7th September 2004, 01:43 PM
You do make some good points, Toney. It is something I struggled with for years. I saw Jesus as a social revolutionary but the churches I attended only seemed to think that the good works we were called to perform were to give money to the church and missionary projects and to tell everyone we could about Jesus.

Perhaps part of me didn't want to know the truth, put if I heard it it was a rare occurence especially in the evangelical churches I went to. I also felt disempowered (is that a word?) because there was nothing I could actually do, except occasionally give a little money if my husband let me.

It's been a revalation to be told by Christians who take their Bibles seriously, if not always literally, that Jesus really meant it when he said the poor are blessed "...but woe to you who are rich". It's taken me a while to work out what I can do about being one of the rich people of this world (as most Westerners are) and I've still got a long way to go, but I have received a sense of empowerment knowing that my small actions can make a bit of a difference to someone somewhere, and it doesn't matter if I can't give to church missionary projects.

I no longer believe in a God who looks down from heaven waiting to catch me do something wrong. I believe in a God who looks down at his child take faltering steps and be glad that I'm taking any steps at all, just like any proud parent when their child learns to walk!

Karin

Toney
7th September 2004, 02:10 PM
I agree. I have a grandson who is just learning to walk. I suppose than means he is learning how to keep his balance and to me balance is the key to living (walking) a spritual life.

The mud I mentioned above can be correct beliefs (super religiosity), or it can be coporal works of mercy without much belief in God (visualize World Peace), but we never acquire essential balance until we 1) stop acting and start listening and, 2) put on the God channel (metanoia). This is the spirituality that Jesus taught and has very little if anything to do with organized religion, which I see as just another door (in some cases an idol) we are somehow supposed to walk through with God's help.

Toney
7th September 2004, 02:49 PM
It's been a revalation to be told by Christians who take their Bibles seriously, if not always literally, that Jesus really meant it when he said the poor are blessed "...but woe to you who are rich". It's taken me a while to work out what I can do about being one of the rich people of this world (as most Westerners are)...

Karin

Karin, I wanted to revisit this part of your post. Certainly, Jesus came to give hope to the poor and oppressed peoples of the world. I agree with you that the rich countries of the world, yours and mine in particular, could and should do more for developing countries. We do a lot, but not enough. I believe, however, that history will conclude that like the great Greco-Roman empire, the great Anglo-American empire (and that is precisely what we are) has furthered the cause of freedom and justice and held true, albeit imperfectly, to our God-given civilizing mission. God bless America and God save the Queen!

Would that we were rich and poor in spirit! If so, we could detach ourselves from our possessions (the definition of poor in spirit) and do far greater things. I believe we will have the opportunity.

Treasure the Questions
7th September 2004, 03:02 PM
I think English, Americans, and even Europeans, have been schizophrenic. There have been some great reformers who persuaded people of the iniquities of slavery, of the importance of treating all human beings with dignity and of allowing the poor and women the right to vote etc.

However, empires are always built on oppression and exploitaiton of those who are weaker. Today our "slaves" work in countries in the developing world, and as often as not we don't realise the people who grew our food and produced our goods were treated abominally and paid a pittance. Our prosperity still depends on slavery, but we just don't see it.

Living in a democracy means that we can influence those in power to a certain extent, although even 1st century Jews had some success with political protest, I'm told.

Toney
7th September 2004, 06:40 PM
Living in a democracy means that we can influence those in power to a certain extent, although even 1st century Jews had some success with political protest, I'm told.

I'm not sure what you mean.

Here is a quote from Heraclitus (http://community.middlebury.edu/~harris/Philosophy/Heraclitus.html): "It should be understood that war is the common condition, that strife is justice, and that all things come to pass through the compulsion of strife."

Political protest can be part of the unstable equation involving the tension of opposites. The Jewish Zealots of the lst century did not have much success at all. Rome destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple, there was the horror of Masada followed by a Second Jewish Revolt only 60+ years later that was even more horrible.

Jesus taught non-resistance of evil. Two good exemplars are Ghandi and Martin Luther King, Jr.

Here is a favourite quote from Ghandi, "Nonviolence is the greatest force at the disposal of mankind. It is mightier than the mightiest weapon of destruction devised by the ingenuity of man." Ghandi was greatly influenced by Leo Tolstoy's The Kingdom of God is Within You.

CaDan
7th September 2004, 07:01 PM
The Social Justice section is in For Christians Only (http://www.christianforums.ca/f7) Ministry (http://www.christianforums.ca/f77), or here http://www.christianforums.ca/f360

Hope to see you there? :wave:

Karin

That is one very INACTIVE forum. :(

Toney
7th September 2004, 08:30 PM
CaDan, Which is the best Kung to start with? I have Judaism: Between Yesterday and Today and Reforming the Church Today from the library.

Reader Nilus
7th September 2004, 09:56 PM
Two venerable organizations that promote Social Justice are the Catholic Worker (http://www.catholicworker.org/)and the Sojourners (http://www.sojo.net/). I am impressed with both.
Jeff the Finn

CaDan
7th September 2004, 11:14 PM
CaDan, Which is the best Kung to start with? I have Judaism: Between Yesterday and Today and Reforming the Church Today from the library.

I think "Christianity" gives the best overview of his thought. You have to watch out for publisher's errors, though.

"Justification" is excellent, but it is VERY HEAVY DUTY theology.

"On Being a Christian" is quite good if you skip over his proof of the existence of God. Perhaps a philosophy professor might be impressed by it; I found it impenetrable. It's somehow based on Kant . . . .

I need to pick up his (relatively) new autobiography, solely because he is actually SMILING on the cover! In every other picture I have seen he looks so dour.

Right now I'm pounding my way through "The Understanding of Faith" by Edward Schillebeeckx. Dense, dense, dense. He literally takes an hour a page to understand. I don't know if it's the translation or what.

The used bookstore near my house just bought "20 or 30" boxes of books from the estate of a deceased priest. They don't have them cataloged yet, but it looks like a gold mine.

Treasure the Questions
8th September 2004, 02:53 AM
I'm not sure what you mean.

Here is a quote from Heraclitus (http://community.middlebury.edu/~harris/Philosophy/Heraclitus.html): "It should be understood that war is the common condition, that strife is justice, and that all things come to pass through the compulsion of strife."

Political protest can be part of the unstable equation involving the tension of opposites. The Jewish Zealots of the lst century did not have much success at all. Rome destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple, there was the horror of Masada followed by a Second Jewish Revolt only 60+ years later that was even more horrible.

Jesus taught non-resistance of evil. Two good exemplars are Ghandi and Martin Luther King, Jr.

Here is a favourite quote from Ghandi, "Nonviolence is the greatest force at the disposal of mankind. It is mightier than the mightiest weapon of destruction devised by the ingenuity of man." Ghandi was greatly influenced by Leo Tolstoy's The Kingdom of God is Within You.I understand that Ghandi was also influenced by what he read in the gospels. I wold say that what Ghandi and Martin Luther King practised was non-violent protest and some would say that is what Jesus taught.

I believe Walter Wink puts forward the suggestion that to turn the other cheek was not a sign of passivity so much as insisting that one should be treated as an equal. The first slap would have been with the side of the hand used for slaves and people of inferior rank. When you offered the other cheek they felt compelled to strike you with the other part of the hand (palm or back), which was reserved for social equals.

To walk an extra mile with a soldiers pack would probably get him into trouble, he was only entitled to force you to carry his pack for one mile. To carry it for two would be a non-violent protest against this unjust law.

To give someone your tunic when they refused to give your cloak back in a court of law would leave you naked in front of everyone: a greater embarrassment to them than you. Jewish law insisted that if you took a poor person's cloak as surety against a loan, you must give it back at night as it was their only protection against the cold. So Jesus was teaching poor people how they could peacefully stand up for their rights.

At Greenbelt I heard how shortly before Jesus was born Caligula attempted to erect a statue of himself in the Temple in Jerusalem. Petronius had the job of bringing the statue to Jerusalem and installing it. He overwintered in Ptolomeus, near Galilee. There 10's of 1,000s of Jews, including whole families gathered to plead with him not to do such an abominable thing. They sent deputations to him with petitions from other people.

It was the time to sow seeds and Petronius knew that if those people did nt return to the land to sow their seeds there would be a famine in the land the next winter. So he wrote to Caligula to say he could not proceed with the task. Caligula wrote back to say he should kill himself or expect to be killed by the bearer of the message.

However, another messenger overtook the first with news of Caligula's death, so all previous instructions were to be ignored!

Therefore Jesus was probably aware that peaceful political protest could succeed, although the success rate was less dependable when government was in the hands of highly volatile personalities.

Apparently, shortly after Jesus' death Pilate smuggled Roman standards (or something of that nature that the Jews thought defiled their city) into Jerusalem. When they found out the Jews were up in arms. Pilate tricked the protesters into meeting with him in the stadium, where he had hidden armed soldiers. He threatened them all with death if they didn't go peacefully. However, they called his bluff - perhaps they thought it a cause worth dying for, and bared their necks, ready to die.

Pilate realised that he could not kill them all and had to give in.

The two men who were speaking on this theme questioned whether 1st century Jews, and even Jesus and his disciples, would have seen a distinction between the spiritual and the secular as some Christians do today.

The point they drew from these illustrations was that people of good will back down under pressure, so we should hold our politicians to account for injustice.

They also encouraged us to exert pressure by the way we spend our money. In Britain the Fair Trade market has grown over the last 10 years so that the main supermarkets stock many Fairtrade products. Some people choose to boycott those companies they see as the most unethical.

Karin

Duggie
8th September 2004, 05:22 AM
[Treasure the Questions]The point they drew from these illustrations was that people of good will back down under pressure, so we should hold our politicians to account for injustice.

They also encouraged us to exert pressure by the way we spend our money. In Britain the Fair Trade market has grown over the last 10 years so that the main supermarkets stock many Fairtrade products. Some people choose to boycott those companies they see as the most unethical.

Karin
I agree, the politicians have failed miserably especially when it comes to promoting fairtrade, child-poverty, exploitation of immigrant workers etc... I think many of us have become so cynical in regard to social justice and it's benefits and results. How many people actually support fairtrade products? You get the occasional celebrity speaking out and bringing some much needed publicity to the cause, but the media and politicians have far more pressing issues at hand. I remember when Claire Short was a minister for overseas development and throughout her post the only time her name was mentioned was during the war, when she attacked Tony Blair's policies. Her job was incredibly important and to be fair to the Labour party they did increase overseas funding. People just didn't care, charity starts at home is their mantra and in some instances I feel they have a valid point. Of course we should stand up for the oppressed, exploited workers in South America or Africa. Of course we should give to organisations like Oxfam and Christian Aid but many of us don't. We have this attitude that the money only falls into the hands of some corrupt dictator, in some far off land. Social justice for me is about getting homeless people off the streets of our wealthy cities, it's about allowing single mothers to get free child care so they can go out to work and pay taxes. If we can't even treat the families fleeing persecution and who subsequently end up on our doorstep correctly. How on earth are we going to buy into this thing called social justice that aims to help others, before we help ourselves. The gap between the wealthy and poor is wider now than ever before and that unfortunately has created a sense of desperation and alienation within our own communities. Social Justice is necessary and as worthy as fairtrade is, we need to focus on what's going on in our streets, towns and cities. :)

Treasure the Questions
8th September 2004, 05:37 AM
We need to do both, Duggie. We need to work for social justice as best we can in our own neighbourhoods, our towns, our own nations and also in the world at large. I see this as our calling as Christians.

Each will have a different ministry, a different emphasis, but just because someone is called to campaign against high interest rates from loan sharks or work to help people in our inner cities doesn't mean they can't buy Fairtrade products, and produce from local producers so as to cut out the middleman's unjust profit (because that's Fair Trade, too) whenever they can afford it.

Just because I find I am most able to support Fair Trade and join in the campaign for Trade Justice, doesn't mean I don't sign a petition to bring down the walls the Israelis have built in Palestine, buy an occasional bottle of olive oil from Palestine, or to call on the government to outlaw exhorbitant rates of interest being charged to poor people.

Karin

Duggie
8th September 2004, 06:40 AM
Your right, of course we can do both and I count myself as one who tries to achieve this. I believe that we can all do something, even if it means only buying our coffee or bananas through fair trade. It all makes a difference, especially to those working in the fields doing the hard labour. It's like diamonds, my wife loves hers so I guess I'm going to sound a little bit hypocritical when I say this, but I get angry when I see these rappers wearing their diamonds and showing off. They have no understanding of the lives lost mining for those expensive stones they wear on their chains. The exploition of these workers is sickening. It comes down to big business and profits and unfortunately the poor suffer. These countries export goods cheaply, yet make so much money when sold on our shores. We the consumers buy them, yet give no thought to the people in the sweat shops or on the fields breaking their backs for very little pay. As Christians and as people, regardless of faith, we should help make lives better. :)

Treasure the Questions
8th September 2004, 06:58 AM
I've never been one for expensive jewellry. The only diamond I have is a very small one on my engagement ring, but I must admit I never gave a second thought to how it was procured. That was 20 years ago.

I've noticed some very nice and inexpensive Fair Trade jewellry in the Traidcraft and Tearcraft catalogues lately, although I found the posts on the Tearcraft earrings were a bit chunky and Tearcraft jewellry wasn't quite to the standard we have come to expect here. Perhaps they will have improved this year. Traidcraft have certainly learnt to produce goods to a higher standard over the last few years.

There is a Fairtrade alternative to so much these days. :clap:

Toney
8th September 2004, 01:19 PM
The point they drew from these illustrations was that people of good will back down under pressure, so we should hold our politicians to account for injustice.
Karin

No argument from me at all.

A couple of picky points, however. Caligua was Emperor after Jesus' crucifixion.

The incident involving Pilate and the Imperial images occured, according to Josephus, the source of this history, at the beginning of Pilate's term in Judea and therefore before Jesus's public ministry actually began.

I live in a fairly conservative area of Colorado. While there is an increasing awareness of fair trade issues and responsibility here, it is miniscule compared to awareness in the UK I fear. There is a Starbucks on every corner it seems, but even Star$$$ (http://www.coffeeresearch.org/politics/Starbucks%20Fairtrade.htm) is jumping on the bandwagon.

Treasure the Questions
8th September 2004, 02:39 PM
I'm relying on notes I made at the Greenbelt festival, so I may have got a few details wrong. I'll probably get a recording of the talk at some stage. If they got it wrong I might mention it to them. Good to keep these guys on their toes.

I think Fairtrade was fairly slow to take off here. Some suppliers have been going 25 years and I wasn't aware of it in those days. Recently it has mushroomed perhaps because the quality has improved dramatically.