The Gospel Social
Pursuing social justice without compromising the gospel.
After two posts explaining the name and mission of our organization, it will be helpful to preemptively answer well-meaning questions that might emerge. The first I wish to address is our emphasis on social change itself. Any Christian organization that openly champions cultural justice and mercy opens itself to the social gospel critique.
In its original form, the social gospel was a 19th-century theological movement emerging from progressivism within Protestant Christianity that righty sought to recapture the social horizon of the Christian mission but wrongly reframed the gospel as social reforms. However, it has since morphed into a generic label to describe those Christians who emphasize the work of social justice but tend to neglect the primacy of gospel evangelism. Christian apprehensions surrounding the social gospel have only intensified as cultural conservatives cast aspersions on “social justice warriors.” Because Christ for Kentucky is explicitly devoted to the common good of the Commonwealth, I suspect some may dismiss our organization as merely a social gospel philanthropy.
First, I will note there are common good initiatives that conveniently evade the social gospel critique. For example, justice for the unborn is not treated the same as racial justice. Nevertheless, I want to be charitable toward those who rightly wish to guard the fidelity of the gospel against misappropriation.
Critics are right to observe that social justice is now so paramount in our society that it has become its own social religion, and there are those, particularly the rising generation of Christians, who have allowed this cultural moment to redefine the Christian faith as such. Fair enough. But in our zeal to oppose this redefinition, I am concerned that we are neglecting, perhaps even scorning, the Biblical and historical truth that Christians are a people who labor for society’s common good through works of justice and mercy on behalf of our neighbors.
Christianity is all about good deeds in this world, but it uniquely matters how Christians approach those good deeds. Ours is the only religion that argues they do not accomplish salvation. Every conventional religious concept is the same. There are tenets to believe and virtuous acts to perform, and if one is faithful in those beliefs and practices, they are rewarded with some form of salvation. The particularities of demands and rewards will vary depending upon the religion, but that formula is the same for every religion.
Except one. Only Christianity claims that salvation is not achieved by our good works but by the work of our Savior. Jesus lives the perfect life we should have lived, dies the condemnable death we deserve to die, and then offers his life and death to us as a free gift to undeserving sinners. We do nothing to earn our salvation, but Jesus does everything required on our behalf. Therefore, by trusting in Jesus, we receive, not perform, our salvation.
This is why Christians have a more complicated relationship with religious works, and that complication has existed since Christianity’s inception. Already in the New Testament, we find Paul passionately arguing against any hint of salvation by good works, along with James equally passionate about the necessity of good works. But this apparent tension between Paul and James is easily resolved by observing the order in which Scripture speaks of good works. They proceed from salvation rather than precede it. Christian virtue is the fruit, not the root of salvation. We are saved by faith alone in Jesus, but that faith is never alone. It always manifests in good works such that without good works, it is right to conclude the absence of authentic faith.
Good works proceed from salvation, rather than precede it. Christian virtue is the fruit, not the root of salvation.
Evangelicals understand this dynamic but tend to interpret these authenticating good works as individual piety. Meaning, the fruit of saving faith is personal holiness and repentance. While that is undoubtedly true, what is interesting about the works James emphasizes is they are less individual and more social, such as care for the widowed and orphaned. And Jesus is even stronger in his social emphasis than James. On our day of judgment, Jesus will not ask, “Do you have faith in me?” He will survey the fruit of our life for unmistakable evidence of that faith. And the evidence he searches for is care for the least of these. In fact, he inextricably unites himself with the least of society by saying, “Whatever you did for the least of these, you did for me.”
Thus, the gospel in its purest form is the good news that the Savior Jesus offers his life and death as a vicarious gift of salvation to sinners who cannot earn salvation by good works, but that gift inevitably yields good works by the recipients of salvation, particularly good works that benefit our neighbors. While I am sympathetic to concerns surrounding the social gospel, speaking candidly, my greater concern is that in our zeal to protect against it, we neglect the fact that the gospel always manifests socially.
Christ for Kentucky is a ministry devoted to the common good of the Commonwealth. This will require us to be fervent evangelists equally concerned with social justice. Does that mean we are a social gospel organization? No. In the strongest possible terms, no. But we are a gospel social organization. Just flip the wording, and you are faithful to Scripture and uncompromising on the gospel.
If you would like to listen to the long-form audio version of these articles, subscribe to the Every Square Inch Podcast.