This is
the name of a most challenging book published last summer by
Holt, Rinehart and Winston. The author is William Stringfellow,
one of the leading Episcopal laymen of the day, and a lawyer
with an international reputation in his field. He articulates a
question that is coming increasingly to trouble the minds of
thoughtful denominational leaders — and which has most serious
implications for the churches of Christ.
Mr. Stringfellow
examines the whole idea of modern religion's involvement in the "social"
questions that trouble our generation. The churches of our day, he
opines, are engaged in everything from playgrounds to politics, and from
rental housing to racial revolutions. But have they put their eggs in
the wrong basket?
He thinks maybe
they have.
This book clearly
warns the churches against plunging into "all sorts of social work and
social action" and thereby neglecting their basic reason for existence,
"the proclamation and celebration of the gospel." In their efforts to
alleviate man's physical distress, and to relieve his want and hunger,
Stringfellow argues that the churches have so "watered down" the gospel
as to make it lose its power.
He Writes:
"If
the gospel is so fragile that it may not be welcomed by a man who, say,
he's hungry, unless he first be fed, then this is no Gospel with any
saving power; this is no word of God which has authority over the power
of death.
"The
Gospel, if it represents the power of God unto salvation, is a word
which is exactly addressed to men in this world in their destitution and
hunger and sickness and travail and perishing — addressed to them in a
way which may be heard and embraced in any of these, or in any other,
afflictions."
Stringfellow, who
left Harvard Law School several years ago to live and practice his
profession in the Harlem ghetto of New York City is particularly
critical of what he calls the "urban church concept" of Christianity.
"The premise of most urban church work," he declares, "is that in order
for the church to minister among the poor, the church has to be rich,
that is, to have specially trained personnel, huge funds and many
facilities, rummage to distribute and a whole battery of social
services. Just the opposite is the case. The church must be free to be
poor in order to minister among the poor.
"The
church must trust the Gospel enough to come among the poor with nothing
to offer the poor except the gospel."
A church rich and
affluent can hardly do that; a church poor and humble can. The gospel of
Christ, as it is, is adapted to man as he is — miserable, hungry,
frustrated, lonely, overburdened with grief, anxiety, and a sense of
futility.
The churches of
Christ have traditionally understood this. There has been very little of
the "social gospel" emphasis among them. Not until lately. But now we
are witnessing a significant change. A strong undercurrent of "social
gospelism" is becoming quite evident. A tremendous proliferation of
"orphan homes" just when the denominational churches and social welfare
agencies were turning from them to other and more acceptable forms of
child care was but the beginning, and was but a symptom of the real
trouble. Vast sums have been spent and are being spent in a wide variety
of "social project" efforts among the Churches of Christ. They range all
the way from summer camps to homes for unwed mothers to rehabilitation
farms for wayward boys and hobby shops for restless housewives. There is
a subtle (and probably unrecognized) loss of faith in the power of the
gospel. These social projects are not the spontaneous fruit coming from
the hearts of dedicated Christians; they are supervised "organizational
projects" of congregations. And they are frankly being promoted as
"bait" to intrigue the interest and soften up the resistance of the
non-Christians! The ill-housed, ill-clad, and ill-fed are not going to
be interested in the gospel; we must first see that they are
well-housed, well-clothed, and well-fed!
Denominational
churches have tried this approach. And now Stringfellow's is only one
thoughtful voice among many that are being raised to question the
assumption. At the very time when our brethren are turning toward these
social projects, the discerning ones in denominational circles are
questioning the validity of this entire point of view. It is built on a
false premise . . . or so Stringfellow contends.
We believe the
conservative congregations will not quickly adopt the "social gospel"
approach to win people to Christ. And it is quite possible that many
even in the more liberal churches will question it. But for all of them,
both conservative and liberal, this new book by William Stringfellow
ought to be "required reading."
—
Gospel Guardian,
November 19, 1964
