Purity vs. Social Justice vs. Redemptive Love

[Bootstrap]

This has been helpful. I need to rethink this - more tomorrow.

[Gene]

In my experience, every culture and sub-culture will have its "purists." Typically old guys with gray beards who resists any kind of innovation or outside influence.

Hey!! No need to get personal here.

[steve-in-kville]

In my experience, every culture and sub-culture will have its "purists." Typically old guys with gray beards who resists any kind of innovation or outside influence.

Hey!! No need to get personal here.

Yeah, I was definitely stereotyping there

[Bootstrap]

This has been helpful. I need to rethink this - more tomorrow.

Coming back to this thread ... later than I had planned ...

Petr and Mike were particularly helpful in clarifying my thinking. I can see how some of my posts sounded like there might be three factions, but I was actually thinking of two: plain Mennonites often seem to emphasize purity, non-plain Mennonites often seem to emphasize social justice (biblical or otherwise), and no group seems to fully live out redemptive love as I understand it. And maybe that's usually a little beyond our grasp.

I am in a denomination that often focuses entirely on social justice and not enough on holiness. In the 1970s, when I first became Mennonite, I think it had a much better balance.

I don't know that any of our wineskins can embody redemptive love, that may be a challenge to all of us, in any denomination, in any age. And I really doubt that redemptive love can be a factional identity. If it is, then it is probably hypocrisy.

But on MennoNet, I often feel like we're having a fight between purity and biblical social justice, as if they opposed each other. And I don't think that's what the Bible teaches. In Scripture, holiness and justice both flow from the character of God. When we treat them as opposites, something has gone wrong in our reading of the Bible.

[Neto]

This has been helpful. I need to rethink this - more tomorrow.

Coming back to this thread ... later than I had planned ...

Petr and Mike were particularly helpful in clarifying my thinking. I can see how some of my posts sounded like there might be three factions, but I was actually thinking of two: plain Mennonites often seem to emphasize purity, non-plain Mennonites often seem to emphasize social justice (biblical or otherwise), and no group seems to fully live out redemptive love as I understand it. And maybe that's usually a little beyond our grasp.

I am in a denomination that often focuses entirely on social justice and not enough on holiness. In the 1970s, when I first became Mennonite, I think it had a much better balance.

I don't know that any of our wineskins can embody redemptive love, that may be a challenge to all of us, in any denomination, in any age. And I really doubt that redemptive love can be a factional identity. If it is, then it is probably hypocrisy.

But on MennoNet, I often feel like we're having a fight between purity and biblical social justice, as if they opposed each other. And I don't think that's what the Bible teaches. In Scripture, holiness and justice both flow from the character of God. When we treat them as opposites, something has gone wrong in our reading of the Bible.

Some people may infer that by your choice of the 'vs.' conjunction you intended to imply a sort of 'either/or' dichotomy. But since I became a pacifist first, I understand the pull that can exist between 1 & 3. And that pretty much falls into your number 2. (It was, in fact, social justice concerns that drew me out of patriotism.)

Toward the end of my pacifist phase I became increasingly conflicted between the two 'extremes' - separation vs social justice. I realized that once I reached voting age - voting age was 21 at that time, and I was not yet there - I would fall neatly into both political extremes. It was the 'separation of the Christian from the State' that ended the largest part of the conflict. Now, at 70 years of age and never having registered to vote, Yes, I do still at time feel conflicted. Just plain empathy and the sad condition of the world does still put a draw on me, to attempt to bring about justice through political means. But I also understand where it would take me - no where good. I DO recognize that there are Christians, perhaps the majority, who feel that they can manage the conflict. I cannot, and am also convinced that it would be a sin for me to muddle into that mire in order to try.

[JohnH]

...

I was actually thinking of two: plain Mennonites often seem to emphasize purity, non-plain Mennonites often seem to emphasize social justice (biblical or otherwise), and no group seems to fully live out redemptive love as I understand it. And maybe that's usually a little beyond our grasp.

I would disagree with the characterisation that plain Anabaptists "emphasise purity" and de-emphasise biblical "social justice" (whatever that is).

Plain Anabaptists endeavour to live in such a way that they bring about Christ's kingdom in the domain and sphere of influence they control. For example, they try not to renege on debts, try not to take advantage/rip off workers, and so on. They do not, however, seek to acquire or influence the state to achieve those ends.

If one gets busy defining redemptive love as "pursuing the general goals and intents of the Democratic Party", the one will indeed be disappointed with plain Anabaptists.

[barnhart]

...
I became increasingly conflicted between the two 'extremes' - separation vs social justice. I realized that once I reached voting age - voting age was 21 at that time, and I was not yet there - I would fall neatly into both political extremes. It was the 'separation of the Christian from the State' that ended the largest part of the conflict. Now, at 70 years of age and never having registered to vote, Yes, I do still at time feel conflicted. Just plain empathy and the sad condition of the world does still put a draw on me, to attempt to bring about justice through political means. But I also understand where it would take me - no where good. I DO recognize that there are Christians, perhaps the majority, who feel that they can manage the conflict. I cannot, and am also convinced that it would be a sin for me to muddle into that mire in order to try.

I sympathize with this conflict, believing simultaneously that seclusion and activism do not reflect the true nature of the calling of the church, seeing the dangers inherent in both, feeling the gravitational pull of both while constantly looking to navigate between them.

The sermon this week at our church centered around the concept of purity and contamination in the old covenant and the the new. There is built in to the new covenant the reality that light overcomes darkness, that Jesus' and his kingdom overcome the sin and evil of the world. In the old covenant there was a degree of separation from sin, disease and the world that the righteous were obligated to maintain, like the priest and the levite in the parable walking by the man beaten and left for dead.

After giving his most powerful declaration of the new kingdom, Jesus walks down the mountain and meets a leper who kneels before him saying "Lord, if you are willing, you can make me clean." Ithink the symbolism of Jesus' response is quite intentional, he moves to him, touches him even though this was forbidden by law and custom, says "I am willing, be clean" and the man was healed. He went on to eat with sinners and touch dead people and the women with bleeding to heal them. The law of purity and contagion seems reversed.

Blessed are those active on behalf of the needy and marginalized without falling into the trap of governance and control, for theirs is the path of Jesus.

[JohnH]

Blessed are those active on behalf of the needy and marginalized without falling into the trap of governance and control, for theirs is the path of Jesus.

Is this actually the message of the gospel?

If it is, who are the most needy and marginalised amongst us?

[Bootstrap]

I would disagree with the characterisation that plain Anabaptists "emphasise purity" and de-emphasise biblical "social justice" (whatever that is).

I could be wrong about plain Anabaptists. Maybe I’m reacting to certain posts and not the whole tradition. And I don't want to caricature anyone.

But justice and righteousness are central themes in Scripture. In the New Testament, righteousness (δίκαιος) describes someone rightly aligned with God: living in obedience to Him, acting justly toward others, and remaining faithful under pressure. This includes advocating for the vulnerable. It is the same word the Septuagint uses to translate passages like Jeremiah 22:16, where knowing God is tied to defending the cause of the poor and needy.

Jesus said our righteousness must exceed that of the Pharisees, and he rebuked them for neglecting justice and mercy. In Matthew 23 and Matthew 25, we see that this greater righteousness includes the things mentioned in the previous paragraph.

I think the Bible Project explains this well:

https://bibleproject.com/videos/justice/

[JohnH]

I would disagree with the characterisation that plain Anabaptists "emphasise purity" and de-emphasise biblical "social justice" (whatever that is).

I could be wrong about plain Anabaptists. Maybe I’m reacting to certain posts and not the whole tradition. And I don't want to caricature anyone.

But justice and righteousness are central themes in Scripture. In the New Testament, righteousness (δίκαιος) describes someone rightly aligned with God: living in obedience to Him, acting justly toward others, and remaining faithful under pressure. This includes advocating for the vulnerable. It is the same word the Septuagint uses to translate passages like Jeremiah 22:16, where knowing God is tied to defending the cause of the poor and needy.

Jesus said our righteousness must exceed that of the Pharisees, and he rebuked them for neglecting justice and mercy. In Matthew 23 and Matthew 25, we see that this greater righteousness includes the things mentioned in the previous paragraph.

I think the Bible Project explains this well:

https://bibleproject.com/videos/justice/

It’s a long trip from the New Testament to claiming I need to generally support the policy goals of the progressive left, though.

You seem to be operating from an assumption that plain Anabaptists don’t feel they need to engage in justice and mercy. They do. They just don’t think they need to take over the government and use the government to dispense justice and mercy.

Instead plain Anabaptists would debate amongst themselves if they should even go to the government to seek justice for themselves. This is in sharp contrast to MC USA’s habit of filing lawsuits.