Solidarity, Sovereignty & Depravity
As you may know, we’re working our way through the Isaiah Vision in our adult Sunday school class. Today we read the section on solidarity. Essentially it says that all help (and all invitations to discipleship and worship) must be offered to those in need in a sense of solidarity rather than a sense of pity or superiority. That can be particularly difficult for those of us with Dutch backgrounds living in Dutch ghettos - as one who has hopped from Dutch ghetto to Dutch ghetto, I’d know.
The problem is, I think, not that we’ve become more proud and self-righteous than our ancestors (although that may very well be true) but rather that we’ve begun seeing humanity in a different category than we used to. In “the old days” (for lack of a better term) I think reformed folk were more prone to imagining humanity within two basic bookends: Human total depravity and divine sovereignty.
With those two book-ends holding everything together, we find all of humanity in the same basic category: totally depraved and entirely worthy of damnation. That may be psychologically difficult for some people, but at the very least it forces us to recognize that “we’re all in the same basic boat” (i.e. solidarity). From that perspective, any help we offer others and any invitation we offer them (to engage the faith, worship, discipleship, etc.) is offered from the perspective of non-sovereign, equally-as-depraved individuals who are equally-as-worthy-of-damnation (i.e. solidarity).
Unfortunately, depravity and damnation (and for that matter, sovereignty) aren’t particularly popular themes anymore. Or to be more precise, they’re no longer “universal” themes. What I mean by that is that Christians (at least many of the evangelical variety) tend to view themselves as “saved” and others as “unsaved.” This may be true, but it sets up a system that divides humanity into categories of “good” (us) and “bad” (them) rather than depraved and non-sovereign (all of us).
In other words, we no longer view all of humanity as being “in the same boat,” and thereby loose our solidarity with one another. This makes any help the church offers “welfare” or “handouts” from “superior” people to “inferior” ones. It also makes the church entirely ineffective. Think about it for a second. Almost any of us would rather live miserably and maintain our dignity than live in comfort and give it up. Dignity goes out the door whenever solidarity ceases to exist.
Solution? Recapture sovereignty and depravity. Why? Because if Christians begin seeing themselves as depraved and the recipients of undeserved grace, they’ll once again begin seeing the rest of the world as people “in the same boat.” That makes us better capable of helping those around us (and indeed, better capable of accepting help from those around us!)
Grace and Peace,
`tim
4 Responses to “Solidarity, Sovereignty & Depravity”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
November 8th, 2007 at 3:37 am
So, do you see this Saved vs. unsaved attitude as a corruption or a derivation of the Calvinist concept of Predestination? It seems to me that the original intent may have been something along the lines of “we don’t know who’s chosen, so we should all be good to one another”, but it’s easy enough to draw that argument out to “we are good and pious and therefore chosen”. Of course, growing up PCUS/PCUSA, there simply wasn’t much talk at all about Predestination aside from passing reference (In SC, there was much more talk about the Biblical basis for opposing interracial marriage).
The sovereignty/depravity argument, though, sounds not terribly far removed from the Buddhist concept of anatman, at least in terms of aim - i.e., because there is no real or essential “I” or “you”, I cannot do anything to you that I am not also doing to myself and should therefore treat you with kindness. Of course, I believe the same fundamental concept of kindness exists in most religious traditions. It’s just not followed as it should be.
November 8th, 2007 at 9:56 am
It’s a good question. I’d say the “saved, unsaved” question is definitely a corruption. I’m not convinced, however, that it originally arises out of any real connection with Calvinism or predestination. Instead, I think it’s probably the fruit of the early-American tent meetings, revivals, etc. It comes into the reformed tradition through there, and in the contemporary world, probably through the para-church movement (InterVarsity, Campus Crusade, Youth For Christ, etc.) which may have some redeeming values but often have a definite “transactional” approach to Christianity (pay..oops “pray” the prayer, get heaven).
As far as anatman… There is a sense where I agree, and yes, it’s common in a lot of religions. It’s the basis of anatman, but also probably the root of the concept of Karma and even the Wiccan “Threefold law.” The Christian view is different though, in that our connection is through divine image and a universal mother/father (at least theologically, if not physically and genetically) rather than a universal soul or a common existence.
I hate to say Christianity assumes a certain sense of individualism (since individualism is one of the deepest sins contemporary society engages) but I guess I do think so. Are we all somehow connected? Yes, in some ways (and for Christians even more so through our unity in/with Christ) but we’re distinct individuals too.
Your raising of anatman though, does bring up the idea that what we do directly effects one another - I DO believe that. My sinfulness or holiness DOES have a direct effect on that of those in the community and church around me). Good point.
Grace and Peace,
`tim
November 9th, 2007 at 2:56 am
I didn’t mean to imply that the two approaches were the same thing, but I think you clarified nicely. Eloquence tends to go out the door at 2:30AM, I’m afraid. My natural tendency is to think of it in terms of evolutionary biology - analogy rather than homology, a case of convergence. In any event, I think that harnessing that notion of helping others simply because we are all human is where our greatest hope lies as much for interdenominational as for interreligious cooperation and understanding.
November 9th, 2007 at 11:54 am
I agree with you… and this could have implications on so much… environmentalism… law… justice… charity… etc. etc. This “we’re all in the same boat” concept would make a good foundation for world living, huh?!
Grace and Peace,
`tim