THE SOCIAL GOSPEL

In the early part of last century our denomination neighbors were busy absorbing the liberal theology flowing from their seminaries.  One prominent aspect of that approach to Christianity was the "Social Gospel."  This concept was based on the belief that "man was to be perfected through change in society" "That...belief lead some to engage in active social work as a means of Christian witness" (New International Dict. Of the Christian Church, Revised by J. D. Douglas).  It blossomed in churches, "most of which were influenced by liberal theology and progressive social thought." (Dict.  Of Christianity in America by D.C. Reid et al.). "the Social Gospel is often identified with theological liberalism..." Although, as a movement, the Social Gospel has disappeared, "its influence remains both in the more liberal mainline denominations and in ...American evangelicals since the 1960s" (New Dict. Of Theology, S. B. Ferguson, et al.).  The last sentence tell where we enter the picture. As some of our schools, preachers and churches have become more liberal in their theology, they have embraced the ideas of the Social Gospel in their local work and in their foreign mission endeavors.

One sure indicator of this approach is when a church puts more emphasis on providing social services to people than it does to teaching them the gospel and bringing them into the kingdom of Christ.  One need only look at the large number of our churches who are stagnant in terms of evangelism, with no outreach and ingathering of souls. Yet they console themselves by pointing to the contributions they make to the many social-service organizations operated by our brethren.  Look at our church newspapers and notice the missionary reports. One missionary team has a well-drilling ministry, another offers lengthy studies in disease and first-aid.  There are AIDS ministries and drug rehab programs. We read of literary programs and job-training programs. Educational projects are springing up as well as medical clinics. A few years back there was a dairy cattle breeding program. Another was providing sewing machines.  We see the same problem here at home when misguided folks insist that the church's benevolence in no way be tied to teaching the recipient the gospel and urging them to turn to the Savior.

In one case a discussion was in progress about providing prenatal care for poor mothers. When reminded that no provisions had been made to teach them the gospel one deacon responded that "You know, you can't teach those people." This is flawed thinking.

 Lest I be thought an ogre for questioning these benevolent works, let me hasten to add that all of them are good and beneficial.  But any or all of them, alone, will not save the souls of those who benefit by them.  Only the gospel of Jesus is God's power unto salvation (Rom. 1:16).  If we send missionaries and money to a distant land and dig the people a well, educate them and bring them good health and fail to teach them the gospel they will live longer, more healthy and enjoyable  lives and then die lost. They will be facing an eternity separated from God. The issue is one of priority.

Christ commissioned his church to send missionaries to lost souls, first and foremost to teach them about the Lord and his will for their lives (Matt. 28:19-20). We go to bring them into a saving relationship with him through faith and obedience to His will.  Ancillary to that we assist them in other ways by ministering to their poverty and illness and sharing with them the knowledge we have that will improve their lives.

We should learn from the mistakes of our neighbors.  Those churches that embraced the Social Gospel eventually lost all interest in teaching the gospel and converting the lost to Christ. In many cases their mission endeavors folded for loss of faith and lack of interest.  Their churches are now in serious decline.  Remember, our marching orders are "Go preach the gospel to every creature" (Mk. 16:16).