Fall 1989 Quarterly Review - Theological Resources for Ministry

8/9/2019 Fall 1989 Quarterly Review - Theological Resources for Ministry

1/114

VOL. 9 , NO . 3 FALL 1989A Journal of Scholarly Reflection for Ministry

Q U A R T E R L Y R E V I E W

Action, Contemplation, and Lining in B etweenKenneth H. Carter, Jr.

Wesley's Preferential Option for the PoorTheodore W. Jennings, Jr.

Poverty and Punishment in the Book of ProverbsJames L. Crenshaw

The Style and Substance of United MethodistTheology in TransitionMary Elizabeth Moore

Tradition M eets Revision: The Impact of the W esleyHymn Corpus on the N ew United M ethodist HymnalCraig Gallauiay


2/114

Q U A R T E R L Y R E V I E WA Journal of Scholarly Renectlon for M inistryA publication of The United Methodist Pu blishing HouseRobert K. Feaater. President and Publisherand the United Methodist Bofird of HlEher Education and MinistryRoger W. Ireson, General SecretarySenior Editor, F. Thom as TrotterEditor, Sharon J. HelsEditorial Director, J. Richard PeckComposition Editor. Sheila W. M cGceCopy Processor, Melba D. L ancasterEditorial BoardLIqydR Bai leyDuke Divinity SchoolWilfred BaileyCasa View United Methodist ChurchDallas. TexasFred B. Craddock

Candler School of TheologyEmory UniversityPamela CoutureCandler School of TheologyEmory Un ivers i tyBri taGi l l -AustcmAndover Newton Theological SchoolJanice Rif f i le l lu ieManchaca United Methodist ChurchManchaca, Texas

Leander KeckYale Divinity SchoolCornish Rop?rsSchool of Theology at ClaremontRoy I. SanoBishop, Denver AreaUnited Methodist ChurchJudy SmithGeneral Board of Higher Education and MinistryJoh n L. TopolewBkiDistrict SuperintendentWyom ing ConferenceDon TreesoGeneral Board of Higher Education and MinistryWil l iam H.Wil l imonDuke University Chapel

Quarter ly Review (ISSN 0270-9287) provides cont inuing educat ion resources for lay andprofessional ministers in The United Methodist Church and other churches. QR intends to be aforum in which issues of slgnincancc to Christian ministry can be raised and debated. Publicationof an article in QR does not imply end orsemen t of its views by the editors.Articles for consideration are welcome from lay and professional ministers. United Methodists,and others, and should be mailed to the Editor. QR, Box 871, Nashville, TN 37202. Manuscriptsshould be in English and typed double-spaced. Including notes. Writers are strongly encouragedto enclose a copy of the manuscript on 5.25* 256Kdlskette. MS/DOS format, ASCII document fi le.(To follow ASCII format, single-space text, double-space between paragraphs, and remove specialtext styles.)QR Is published four times a year, in March, June, September, and December, by the Unite('Meth odist Board of Higher Ed ucation and Min Istry and The Un ited Metho dist P ublis hin g Hou seEditorial Offices are at 1001 19th Avenue, South, Box 871. Nashville. TN 37202. Second-clasjpostage paid at Nashville. Tennessee.Q R ls available at a basic subscription price of $1 5 for one year. $2 6 for two years, and $33 forthree years . Subscript ions may be obtained by sending a money order or check to the Busin essManager . QR, Box 80 1. Nashvi l le . TN 3 7202 .Postmaster Address changes should be sent to The United Methodist Publ ishing House . Box8 0 1 . Nashvi l le , TN 37202.Subscribers wishing to notify publisher of their change of address should write to the BusinessManager, QR, Box 801, Nashville, TN 37202. An Index Is printed In the winter Issue of each year

( n u m b e r 5 for 1931 o n l y ; n u m b e r 4 t h e r e a f t e r ) . QR is printed on acid-free p a p e r .Quarterly Review: A Journal of Scholarly Reflection for Ministry

FaU 1989Copyright 2989 by The United Methodist Publishing House

and the United Methodist Board of Higher Education and Ministry


3/114

V O L . 9 , N O . 3 F A L L 1 9 8 9

C O N T E N T S

Action, Contemplation, and Living in BetweenKenneth H. Carter, Jr. 3Wesley's Preferential Option for the PoorTheodore W. Jennings, Jr. 10Poverty and Punish m ent in the Book of ProverbsJames L. Crenshaw 30Th e Sty le and Substance of Un ited Meth odist Theologyin TransitionMary Elizabeth Moore 44Tradition M eets R evision: Th e Impact of th e W eslHymn Corpus on the New United Methodist HymnalCraig Gallaway

ey

Q R L e c t i o n a r y S t u d yThe Lost Parable of the Generous Landowner an4 OtherTex ts for Imaginative P reach ingPaul Scott Wilson 80

R e v i e w a n d C o m m e n tNineteenth Century Rel ig ious Thought in the WestReviewed by Frederick J. Streng ! . . . 100

64 i


4/114


5/114

QR 9 /3 (19 89 ) 3 -9

A c t i o n , C o n t e m p l a t i o n , a n d L i v i n gi n B e t w e e n :A M e d i t a t i o n o n C h r i s t i a n L i v i n g

K e n n e t h H . C a r t e r , J r .

I n t r o d u c t i o n : T o B e o r T o D o ?We are saved by grace. W e shall be judg ed by our works. Goye into all the world. Come apart to a lonely place. Give a cupof cold water. Pray without ceasing. As we l isten for the cal lwh at are we l ikely to hear? In tim es of prayer, we are mad e t ofeel gu ilty for aband oning t h e world in all of its ne ed . In our act s

of compassion we are reminded of the peri l of the neglectedinner l i fe . It is almost as i f th ere is a double-m inded ness builtinto the design of the spiritual life.Take the pastoral ministry, for example. It is a profession inwhich one can do almost nothing: stories are told about thosepastors who lose them selves in their work qui te l i tera l ly - theyhide , or mak e the m selve s scarce during the w eek. M y brother'swife asked m e onc e, quite hon estly , "What do yo u do during th eweek?" And yet pastoral ministry can also be th e opp osite: onecan work oneself to death; the pastor can serve without evertaking a vacation or a day off; the day can begin early and endK e n n e t h J . C a r te r , J r . i s a s s o c i a t e p a s t o r o f C h r i s t U n i t e d M e t h o d i s t C h u r c h ,G r e e n s b o r o , N o r t h C a r o l i n a . H i s e ss a y , "T h e T h e o l o g i c a l E t h i c s o f S t a n l e yH a v erwa s ," a p p ea red i n Q / ? , w i n ter , 1 9 8 6 .


6/114

late. In the pastoral ministry, there are both scoundrels andsaints, char latans and sei-vants. A wise p astor pu t it thi s way: "Irealized early on that the re is a hig h road and a low road." T he rei s deta i led exeges i s and the snappy sermon conversat ionstarter, involvem ent in th e l ife of a peop le or surface level tha tnever moves beyond the perfunctory. The pastoral ministry isan enigma.At the core of this enigma is the perennial struggle that hasengage d God's people from th e beginning; how m uc h of w ha t Iam involved in is my own doing (personal agency), and howmuch is a gift from God (Grace)? Is the faithful life primarilyone of action or contem plation? Is it m ore impo rtant to be or todo? There is a middle way that most of us f ind ourselves on,betw een pride and s loth , betw een frenet ic act iv ity and hu shedstil lness . Yet at t im es we f ind our selves look ing in one directionor the other, feehng inadequate for either a) not devotingenough time and energy to pastoral call ing or b) spending toolitt le t ime in the study or c) neglecting our families .

T h e G o o d S a m a r i t a na n d t h e B l e s s e d C o n t e m p l a t i v eAcknowledging a pastoral dilemma is one thing; seekingsom e sort of resolutio n is quite another. T he scriptu res, on f irstglance, are not much help. Two of the most familiar stories inthe Bible are found in the ten th chapter of Luk e's Gospel, s ideby side: the parable of the Good Samaritan, and the tell ing ofJes us' vis it to the ho use of Mary and Martha. Th e f irst pericopeis a celebrated su m m on s to action, a call to faithfuln ess in l ife:the priest and the levite are unable, despite their religioustraining and s tanding, to rescue the wounded man who hadfallen among thieves; the Samaritan, outside the law and thereligious tradition, proves to be a neighbor to th e bea ten m an."Does your faith work?" we ask th ose wh o listen to our serm ons."Does i t help that wound ed person who m we enco unte r a longour daily joui neys?"This is unambiguous enough. But on to the next passage:Je su s com es to the ho m e of Mary and Martha, wh ere Mary sitsat his feet to listen while Martha is "distracted" with the busi-


7/114

ness of providing hospitality. Jesus'judgment is clear: Marthais anxious, troubled about many things, but Mary is s ingle-minded in her attention to that which cannot be taken awayfrom her (the contemplation of his teaching).A M e d i e v a l D e t o u r

St. Thomas Aquinas, in his discussion of the active andcontemplative l ives , depended heavily upon the story of Maryand Martha in claiming a superiority for the contemplativerather tha n the a ctive life. For Tho m as, life wa s jud ged according to its end, and the gr eatest en d for hum anity w as the hopeof the "Beatific Vision." This greatest end, which Thomas alsodescribed as happiness was approached by two means, actionand contemplation. Or, l ife has two elements, the active andthe contemplative. Within the intellect there is a twofolddivis ion which corresponds to the two lives: Th e contem plativeintellect , which has as its end the knowledge of the truth, andthe practical intellect , which is related to external actioniSumma Theologica 2-1. 179.2).I n h i s t r e a t m e n t o f c o n t e m p l a t i o n , T h o m a s e m p l o y sGregory's definition of the contemplative life: "The contemplative life is to cling with our whole mind to the love of God andour neighb or, and to desire no thi ng b eside our Creator" (2-1.179,2). The love of God, on the one hand, and the love of theneighbor, on the other, pose a dilemma for Aquinas, however,for the former is more suited to the contemplative vocation ofm en and wo m en, wh ile the latter necessarily issu es in externalactivity,Thomas' discussion of action and contemplation proceedsalong two lines. First , he discusses th e relation betw een the twoas th ey occur in ordinary hu m an life. Th om as is willin g to allowfor the exigencies of human existence; while he generallyclaims that contemplation is more excellent than action, hedoes allow for exceptions. Thus, "it may happen that one manm erits more by the works of the active life than ano ther by theworks of the contem plative l ife" (2-1.182.2) . Th is mig ht be dueto the " immoderat ion" o f one 's contemplat ion; however ,Th om as also alludes to the p ossibility of individual differences


8/114

among persons: "He that is prone to yield to his passions onaccount of his im pulse to action is s imply mo re apt for th e activelife by reaso n of hi s re stle ss spirit" (2-1.182.4). O the rs, h owe ver,"have the mind naturally pure and restful, so that they are aptfor contemplation, and if the y were to apply them sel ve s w hollyto action, this would be detrimental to them" (Ibid.). In comme nting on the se d if ferent apt i tudes , Thom as judg es th emboth to be noble and proper. Action p repares us for con temp lat ion, and contemplation trains us also for "works of the activelife."Thom as also discu sses the relation of action and contem plation within the context of human need. Not only are differentpersons disposed to different styles of activit ies , but we mustalso encounter d if ferent c ircumstances . The "demands ofcharity" m ight call us to help the neighbo r in nee d; in this waythe active life is preferable to the contemplative life "in arestric ted se ns e and in a particular case" (2-1.182.1). Th e activelife, nevertheless , is one of "bondage," and because of humannecessity we are to engage in good works only as they disposeus to the l ife of contem plation.Thomas goes further in his analysis of the active and contemplative practices to their "generic" or "essential" relationship. Here the contemplative l ife is superior to the active l ife.Thomas depends heavily upon the previously noted story ofMary and Martha (Luke 10:38-42); Mary, wh o sits a nd listen sat the fee t of Jes us, personifies th e l ife of contem plation; whileMartha, who scurries about performing acts of hospitality,exemplif ies the active Ufe. Contemplation, Thomas argues, ismore ex cellen t on several grounds: one acts according to on e'shighest principles (the intellect) and toward the most properobjects (intelligibles); contemplation is more "continuous" andm ore "delightful" th an action ; it is m or e "self-sufficient" an d l es sdepe nden t on externa ls than action, and is done for its own sakeand not for some further end (for it is an eternal pursuit).David Burrell in Aquinas: God and Action, has noted thatThomas's , in treatment of the relation between action andcontem plation, depend s mor e on Gregory and on th e scripturesthan on Aristotle:


9/114

A q u i n a s d e a l s w i t h t h e i s s u e o f t h e a c t iv e o r c o n t e m p l a t i v el i f e w i th ou t a h in t of th e conf l i c t Ar is tot le f ee l s in th e Ethics,T h e G r e e k p h i l o s o p h e r o b v i o u s l y p r i z e s t h e hom o politicus,d e e m i n g i t n e c e s s a r y t o r e a l i z e o n e ' s h u m a n i t y f u l l y . . .A q u i n a s , h o w e v e r , q u o t e s G r e g o i y m o r e t h a n A r i s to t l e , a n dg l o s s e s L u k e 1 0 : 4 2 ( t h e a c c o u n t o f M a i y a n d M a r t h a ) a s h i scentral t ext (pp . 165-166) .

Burrell crit icizes Thomas for an inadequate accounting ofthe active l ife with respect to human needs. Citing Paul'sdilem m a in th e Lette r to th e Ph ilippians ("I wa nt to be goneand be with Christ , wh ich would be mu ch th e better , but for m eto stay alive in this body is a more urgent need for your sake,"1:23-24), Burrell maintains that Thomas errs in "too neatlyresolving the dilemma of the active and the contemplativelives"; in this way, Burrell suggests, Thomas "sounds moreGreek and less Christian than Aristotle" (p. 166). This is perhaps due to the nature of the concerns of Aristotle and Paul;th e former was engaged in th e work of th e polls , wh ile th e latterwas invo lved in the deve lopment o f new Chris t ian communities . In sum, Thomas was will ing to grant a place for theactive l ife, but only as it is related to and enriches the contemplative l ife.

A c t i o n , C o n t e m p l a t i o n ,a n d t h e D a n g e r s o f S p e c i a l i z a t i o n

We might f ind reasons other than philosophical and scriptural to question Thomas' evaluation of the active and contemplat ive l ives . Rem em ber that Th om as was a contemplat ive,one dedicated to the l ife of the mind and its quest for theknowledge and apprehension of God. In our age of specialization, we would f ind Thomas a place in the seminary or at aretreat center, where he could proceed in the writing of hisSumma u n h i n d e r e d b y t h e n e e d s a n d d e m a n d s o f t h emark etplace, i.e., ordinary m en and wo m en. After all , one m igh task how much intellect it really takes to organize a churchSoftball team, or to participate in the parish bazaar, or even toadminis ter the church school? The se rather mund ane aspects


10/114

of the ministry are best left to others, we say tacitly; many arecalled, few are chosen. Thomas would be "above" the parishministry.All of which leads to the dangerous outcome of the age ofspeciaUzation, of the divorce betw een a ction and co ntem plationwhich occurs in the "study" or does not occur there. FredCraddock offers a chilling portrayal of an all too frequentoccurrence;

When the life of study is confined to "getting up sermons,"very likely those sermons are undernourished. They are thesermons of a preacher with the mind of a consumer, not aproducer, the mind that looks upon life in and out of booksin terms of usefulness for next Sunday. The last day of sucha ministry is as the first, having enjoyed no real lasting orcumulative value in terms of the minister's own growth ofmind, understanding, or sympathy. (Preachingy p. 6 9 )The encouragement of such practices is the result of a kindof unconscious conspiracy on the part of some of the laity,denominational programs and officials, and, unwittingly, thepastor. Many people have l itt le insigh t into the am oun t of t imenec essary for the m ost basic public tasks of th e pastor: preach

ing, teaching, counseling. Small provisions of time or space aremade for the life of prayer, study, reflection and introspection--a visit to the n ear est parish will usua lly bear this o ut.To suggest that it ought to be otherwise is to swim againstthe tide. My friend Ralph Wood, a professor at Wake ForestUniversity, gave the charge to the congregation upon the installation of a new pastor. "Do not se ttle for Time and Newsweekreports on current events ," he advised the congr egat ion."Refuse sermon il lustrations drawn entirely from televis ionsit-coms and ACC athletics . Reject every gimm ick, and howl a tall sentim entality. Cry out, instead , for the tran scen den t wordof grace." Such a Word is possible, he later noted, only whenthere has been ample regard for the disciplines of study andprayer, reflection and contemplation, by pastor and parishalike.


11/114

Ours is the m alaise of spl it personality . W e are either pietistor inte l lectual , c ircui t r ider or contemplat ive , act iv is t orscholar. Yet the cure is perhaps seen in those two famil iarstories laid side by side in Luke's Gospel . Together they forma whole, or what scripture scholars have called a "chiasticstructure." Th e l iterary con nec ted ness of th e stories about theGood Samaritan and Mary and Martha is indicative of the bondbetween contemplation and action, love for God and neighbor,prayer and service. The pastor must always recognize thisunity, while also acknowledging that most days find us somewh ere in between . The re lat ion betwee n act ion and contemplation has puzzled Christians for centuries, and wil l continue todo so unti l we are found to be in the p resen ce of God, w her e allour labors will be praise, and w he re our actions and cont em plations wil l be one in the God who is One. In the meantime wel ive somew here in betwe en with St . Paul and St . Thom as, wi thMary and Martha, and with th e lawyer] th e m an who fel l am ongthieves, and the Good Samaritan.


12/114

QR 9/3 (1989) 10-29

W e s le y 's P r e f e r e n t i a l O p t i o n f o r t h e P o o r

T h e o d o r e W . J e n n i n g s , J r .

One of the bases for today's Hberation theology is the comm itm en t to a preferential o ption for the poor, ^ Such an optionentails the commitment to make solidarity with the poor thefoundation and goal of pastoral practice.^ Thu s the auth entic ityof Christ ian existence and of ecclesial l i fe is determined byme asuring it against its m ean ing for the situation of tho se w hoare impoverished. This commitment to the poor as the normagainst which to measure Christ ian l ife is then also employedas a yardstick for mea sur ing th e ec ono m ic and political life ofnations. Th e t es t of just ice is: how does th is affect th e poor?Those theologians who are known as l iberation theologiansdo not claim that this position is an innovative approach to thebibhcal witness or the Church's theological heritage. Indeedthey cla im essent ia l cont inuity with so me signif icant e lem entsof Christ ian tradit ion. For Catholic theologians this is oftenrelated to the encyclicals on social and econom ic justice datingfrom the previous century as well as signif icant elements ofp a t r i s t i c t h e o l o g y . A m o n g P r o t e s t a n t s t h e M e t h o d i s ttheologians of l iberation have an especially strong claim to

T h e o d o r e W . J e n n i n g s , J r . i s a m c m b c r o f t h e F l o r id a A n n u a l C o n f e r e n c e . T h i se s sa y w a s f ir st p r e se n t e d in 1 9 8 7 a t t h e Ox f o r d In s t i t u t e o f M e t h o d i s t S t u d ie s .


13/114

represent the heart and center of their own theological tradition as this com es to expression in th e l ife and w ritings of Jo hnWesley.^Th is connection was long obscured by the focus upon politicalquestions and the widely shared behef that Wesley's pol iticalviews were essential ly reactionary. Wesley's support for constitutional monarchy, his personal loyalty to the king, and hiscritique of the position of the American rebels have served tomake Wesley's social ethic suspect, even when it is acknowledged that he became a relentless critic of both slavery andcolonial ism. Much of the debate about the significance ofWesley's social ethic has focused on the question of the effectof Methodism on the revolutionary situation of England in thelate 18th and early 19th century.Wesley's own reflections on the Christian l i fe seldom bringhim in to contact with wha t are cal led political issues.^ Bu t th eissu es of economic l i fe are often at the forefront of his tho ugh t.And th e fruit of th es e reflections is the dev elopm ent of a radicaleconom ic ethic wh ich en tai ls a preferential option for th e poor.If th e significance of this dimen sion of W esley's th ou gh t hasbeen obscured by a focus on political rather than economicissue s, th en th e conte nt of W esley's econom ic ethic is distortedby a reading of Wesley which systematical ly ignores the basicper tinen t texts. Im patient to arrive at a sum ma ry stat em en t of

Wes ley ' s economic e th ic , commenta tors have f ixed uponWesley's sermon. On the Uses of Mon ey, with its celebratedthree rules, "earn all you can, save all you can and give all youcan," as the d efinitive s yn ops is of W esley's views, ^ These threerules are then taken to be an example of Wesley's classicProtestant ethic of di l igence and frugality , an ethic whichenab les M ethod ists to join the ranks of socio-economicallyupwardly mobile; training the poor to be rel iable workers(di l igence) and tradesmen to become effective entrepreneursand managers (frugality), Thus Wesley is taken to be the example par excel lence of the thesis of Weber and Tawney thatPro testan tism is the handmaid of capitalism. Th e plausibi l ityof such a view is stre ng the ne d by the anecdotal ev idenc e ofMethodist economic mobil i ty in Third World contexts^ and bythe posi tion of the M ethodist church es in the U nited State s as


14/114

bastions of middle class respectabil i ty . These results are thenread back into Wesley himself as the consequence of his positions on these issues. The only difficulty of such "eisegesis" isthat W esley's own tex ts contradict the se views at almost everypoint.In order to see W esley's view s in the round it is necessa ry topay attention to the scores of essays and sermons in which hedirectly addresses questions of economic justice as well as themany references to these issues in his letters and Journal.When this is done it becomes clear that the famous sermon onThe Uses ofMoney, so far from being represen tative of W esley'sviews , is an anomaly, and that Wesley himself engaged in anenerget ic and pers is tent (a l though ul t imate ly doomed) attem pt to counteract the com mo n interpretation of th is sermon.

C o m m i t m e n t t o t h e P o o rWhen Wesley attempted, toward the end of his career, toplace Methodism in the story of the history of salvation, heremarked:

N e v e r in a n y a g e o r n a t io n , s in c e t h e a g e o f t h e A p o s t l e s , h a v et h e s e w o r d s b e e n s o e m m in e n t l y fu l fi ll e d, " Th e p o o r h a v e t h egospe l preached to them" as i t i s a t th is day . (The Signs ofthe Times VI, p . 308) ^

W esley does not regard this fact as fortuitou s. It is th e resu ltof a conscious policy. Thus he claims that he avoids the rich:M any of th e r ich and hono ura ble we re ther e; so tha t I foun dthat i t was t ime for me to f ly away . (Journal April 15, 1745)

And h e explains that th is is theological ly necessary:Rel ig ion must not go from the greates t to the leas t , or thep o w e r w o u ld a p p e a r t o b e o f m e n . (Journal M a y 2 1 , 1 7 6 4 )

Th us he can say to others:Th e h o n o u r a b le , t h e g r e a t , w e a r e t h o r o u g h ly w i l l in g t o l e a v et o y o u . O n ly l e t u s a lo n e w i t h t h e p o o r , t h e v u lg a r , t h e b a s e ,t h e o u t c a s t s o f m e n . (A Farther Appeal VIII, p . 239)


15/114

It is clear then that Wesley sought in principle to directhimself to the poor.W hat is the basis of th is intention? T her e are passag es w her eW esley seem s to have a sentimen tal a ttachm ent to th e poor .Such sentimentahty could produce a regard for the poorwhich avoids coming to terms with the horror of their pl ight,or wh ich fails to attem pt to design effective rem edie s for th eircondition.But Wesley was far from ignorant of the plight of the poor.Ind eed he m ade it a regular practice to acquaint him se lf d irectly with their si tuation. He was not content to preach to them,even though his favorite venues for preaching (open fields,market places, public hangings, etc.) made certain that hewould reach them in ways closed to those who stayed within

the bounds of churches and meeting hal l s . Instead Wesleymad e a point of visit ing the poor and even of lodging with the m .Th e practice of visitin g th e poor on a regular basis go es backto Wesley's Oxford days. He regarded it then simply as anessential aspect of that holiness without which none can seeGod. H e could no more im agine a w eek w itho ut visiting th ehovels of the poor than he could a week without participationin the Eucharist.Nor did Wesley regard this as wha t we m igh t call "a coun selof perfection." Indeed in the ordinary sen se of this te rm eithe rnothing or everything was a counsel of perfection, since forWesley there was no possibility of salvation without "perfection" in love. He insisted to al l those who placed themselvesunder his direction that visiting the poor was an essentialmeans of grace and an indispensible form of obedience to thecomm and of Christ.

Th e w a lk in g h e r e in i s e s s e n t ia l l y n e c e s s a r y , a s t o t h e c o n t inuance o f that fa i th whereby we are saved by grace , so tot h e a t t a in m e n t o f e v e r la s t in g s a lv a t io n . (On Visiting the SickVII. p . 117; see also On Zeal VII, p. 60)

Because of this practice Wesley's view of the poor did notrem ain at th e level of sentim ental ity . He knew th e cond ition ofthe poor and could speak eloquently of what it meant to lackbread:


16/114

G o d p r o n o u n c e d i t a s a c u r s e u p o n m a n , t h a t h e s h o u ld e a r ni t "by th e sw eat o f h is brow." B ut h ow m an y are ther e in t h isChris t ian country , that to i l , and labour and sweat , and havei t n o t a t l a s t , b u t s t r u g g le w i t h w e a r in e s s a n d h u n g e rtoget her? Is i t not w or se for one , a f ter a hard da y 's labour , tocome back to a poor , co ld , d ir ty , uncomfo i tab le lodg ing , andto f ind there not even the food which i s needfu l to repa ir h isw a s t e d s t r e n g t h ? Y o u t h a t l i v e a t e a s e in t h e e a r t h , t h a t w a n tnoth ing but eyes to see , ears to hear , and hearts to unders t a n d h o w w e l l G o d h a t h d e a l t w i t h y o u , i s i t n o t w o r s e t oseek bread day by day , and f ind non e? Perh ap s to f ind th ecomfort a lso of five or s ix ch i ldren c iy ing for w ha t he ha s notto g ive ! W ere i t not that he i s res tra in ed by an un se en hand ,wo uld he n ot soon "curse God and d ie?" O w an t o f bread!W a n t o f b r e a d ! W h o c a n t e l l w h a t t h i s m e a n s u n le s s h e h a t hfelt i t himself? (Heaviness Through Manifold TemptationsV I, p. 96)

B e c a u s e h e k n e w t h i s c o n d i t i o n i n t i m a t e l y h e c o u l dauthoritatively repudiate the Anglican and Puritan l ibel thatth e poor were poor because th ey were idle:On Friday and Saturday , I v is i ted as ma ny m ore [o f th e po or]as I cou ld . I found t he m in the i r ce l l s und ergr oun d; o the rs int h e i r g a r r e ts , h a l f - s ta iv e d b o t h w i t h c o ld a n d h u n g e r , a d d e dt o w e a k n e s s a n d p a in . Bu t I f o u n d n o t o n e o f t h e m u n e m p lo y e d , w h o w a s a b le t o c r a w l a b o u t t h e r o o m . S o w ic k ed ly , dev i l i sh ly fa lse i s tha t com m on object ion , "They arepoor , on ly bec au se the y are id le," If yo u sa w th es e th i ng s w ithy o u r o w n e y e s , c o u ld y o u la y o u t m o n e y in o r n a m e n t s o rsuperf lu i t ives? (Journal F e b . 9 - 1 0 ,1 7 5 3 ; I I , p . 2 7 9 - 8 0 )

Thus Wesley suggests that there i s another va lue to theconstant practice of acquaintance with the condition of thepoorest of people:One great reason why the r ich in genera l have so l i t t les y m p a t h y f o r t h e p o o r , i s , b e c a u s e t h e y s o s e ld o m v i s i t t h e m .(On Visiting the Sick VII, p. 119)

W esley's practice of visiting th e poor, w hich h e con tinu ed forthree quarters of a century across the length and breadth of


17/114

England, gives his view of poverty and wealth , labor and exp enditure a definiteness and vigor far removed from mere sentimental ity .An immediate conseq uence of this int imate awaren ess of thecondi t ions o f pover ty was the de terminat ion to deve lopprogram s of aid for th e poor.O n t h e f o l l o w in g d a y s , I v i s i t e d m a n y o f o u r p o o r , t o s e e w i t hm y o w n e y e s w h a t t h e i r w a n t s w e r e , a n d h o w t h e y m i g h t b eef fec tua lly re l ieved . (Feb . 13 , 17 85 ; IV, p . 296 ; cf. Feb . 8 ,1 78 7;IV, p . 358) .

One level of response was the practice of "begging for thepoor." Here is one i l lustration of this practice wh ich com es fromW esley's 82nd year:A t t h i s s e a s o n [ C h r i s t m a s ] w e u s u a l ly d i s t r ib u t e c o a l s a n db r e a d a m o n g t h e p o o r o f t h e s o c i e t y [ o f L o n d o n ] . Bu t I n o wc o n s id e r e d , t h e y w a n t e d c lo t h e s a s w e l l a s fo o d . S o o n t h i sa n d t h e f o u r f o l l o w in g d a y s , I w a lk e d t h r o u g h t h e t o w n , a n db e g g e d t w o h u n d r e d p o u n d s in o r d e r t o c lo t h e t h e m t h a tn e e d e d i t m o s t . B u t i t w a s h a r d w o r k , a s m o s t o f t h e s t r e e t sw e r e fi ll e d w i t h m e l t in g s n o w , w h i c h o f t e n l a y a n k le d e e p ; s ot h a t m y fe e t w e r e s t e e p e d in s n o w - w a t e r n e a r ly f r o m m o r n in g ti ll e v e n in g . ( J a n . 4 ,1 7 8 5 ; I V , p . 2 9 5 ) .

Wesley made a point of the fact that he took up col lectionsfor the need y and never for himse l f or his m ovem ent.Even here Wesley's practice far exceeded what is normallythought of as alms giving and charity. But he went muchfurther than this . H e sought to help th e poor help th em selves .Thus he organized cl inics, cooperatives, and credit unions toenable the poor to escape the degradations and indignities ofimpoverishment.Even at this level one could dismiss this as "social service"which stands at the margin of the m ain busin ess of Meth odism.Bu t W esley sought to make th e welfare of th e poor th e criterionof every aspect of the Methodist movement. This is alreadyobvious in his choice of venue for preaching. It is also themotivation for his pub lishing of small tracts and abrid gem entsand indeed whole l ibraries. It is the criterion for the building


18/114

of m eetin g places wh ich were to be cheap so as not to ma ke th eM ethodists beho lden to the r ich:L e t a l l p r e a c h in g - h o u s e s b e b u i l t p la in a n d d e c e n t ; b u t n o tm o r e e x p e n s iv e t h a n i s a b s o lu t e ly u n a v o id a b le . O t h e r w i s et h e n e c e s s i t y o f r a i s in g m o n e y w i l l m a k e r i c h m e n n e c e s s a iyt o u s . Bu t i f s o , w e m u s t b e d e p e n d e n t u p o n t h e m , y e a a n dg o v e r n e d b y t h e m . A n d t h e n f a r e w e l l a l l M e t h o d i s t d i s c ip l ine , i f not doctr ine too . (Large Minutes VIII, p . 332)

Desp ite the fact that the se instruct ions were inc luded in th edocument from which the Methodist Book of Discipline isderived, i t m ust be admitted that the M ethod ists have been nomore wil l ing to be instructed by Wesley on the manner ofbuilding churches than they have in the essentials of Christianstewardship. The result , just as Wesley saw, is the loss both ofMethodist discipl ine and of doctrine.In any case the poor wer e never to be burd ened w ith t he costof maintaining even the modest chapels that were built:

W e m u s t b e w a r e o f d i s t r e s s in g t h e p o o r . O u r s u b s t a n t ia lb r e t h r e n a r e w e l l a b l e t o b e a r t h e b u r d e n . (Letter to JosephBenson, Ju ly 31 , 1776; XII , p . 424 )

It was eve n to be m ade th e basis for th e ch oice of lead ershipin the classes:P u t t h e m o s t in s ig n i f i c a n t p e r s o n in e a c h c la s s t o b e t h elead er o f i t. (Letter to Mr. John Criket, F e b . 1 0 , 1 7 8 3 ; X I V , p .3 6 1 )

Thus every a spec t o f Methodi sm was subjec ted to thecriterion, how wil l this benefit the poor? Solidarity with thepoor was not to be a side issue, but th e te st of every dim ensionof activity.It should then come as no surprise that Wesley could applythis same criterion to the questions of public policy. His essayThoug hts on the Present Scarcity of Provisions [1773] (XI, pp.53-59) takes as i ts starting point the pl ight of the poor andmakes concrete recommendations with respect to such thingsas tax and trade policy with th e sing le aim of imp roving th e lotof the poor.


19/114

S t e w a r d s h i p f o r t h e P o o rW hile Wesley do es mak e forays into th e area of public policyon the basis of the principle of sol idarity with the poor, hisstren gth in this as in other m atter s l ies in th e area of a theological reflection on co ncrete iss ues of Christian hfe. Jus t as We sleydoes not develop a Christology except in connection with theclarification of issu es in C hristian living, so also hi s "evangelicaleconomics" comes to expression not in theoretical reflectionson property and production bu t in th e conte xt of clarifying wh atit m ean s to actualize scriptural hol in ess in everyday l i fe .The preferential option for the poor then becomes a reflection on the form or style of l i fe consistent with this commitment . Thi s re f l ec t ion i s genera l ly deve loped under such

head ings as stewardship and riches^' and in treat m en ts of suchiss ue s as th e drink ing of tea^' and th e q ue stion of dress.Interpre ters of W esley often do not real ize th e radical characterof Wesley's economic views because they disregard the verytexts within which W esley regularly develops th ese v iews.Wesley 's ca l l s for s tewardship are often understood inmodern terms as referring to the level of financial supportgiven to the church in order to underwrite i ts budget forb u i l d i n g s , p e r s o n n e l , a n d p r o g r a m . T h i s d e f i n i t i o n o fstewardship has become so self-evident, especial ly in Protestant Christianity, that i t is difficult to see th at so m eth ing quitedifferent is involved in Wesley's view. The call for stewardshipis never connected by Wesley with any campaign to subscribethe budget of his movement. Rather, i t is always stewardshipfor the poor.1) Wesley maintains that we are to be stewards "for God andthe poor,"

B e a s t e w a r d , a fa i th f u l a n d w i s e s t e w a r d , o f G o d a n d t h ep o o r; d i f fe r in g f ro m t h e m [ t h e p o o r ] in t h e s e t w o c i r c u m s t a n ces on ly , th at yo ur w an ts are f irs t suppl ied , out o f th e p ort io no f y o u r L o r d ' s g o o d w h ic h r e m a in s in y o u r h a n d s ; a n d , t h a ty o u h a v e t h e b l e s s e d n e s s o f g iv in g . (Sermon on the Mount,viii, V, p. 377)

2) I am to regard my self as anoth er of th e poor,


20/114

Y o u m a y c o n s i d e r y o u r s e l f a s o n e in w h o s e h a n d s t h eP r o p r ie t o r o f h e a v e n a n d e a r t h , a n d a l l t h i n g s t h e r e in , h a slodged a part o f h is goods , to be d isposed o f accord ing to h isd i r e c t io n . A n d h i s d i re c t io n i s , t h a t y o u s h o u ld l o o k u p o ny o u r s e l f a s o n e o f a c e r t a in n u m b e r o f in d ig e n t p e r s o n s , w h oare to be prov ided for out o f that port ion o f h is goodsw h e r e w i t h y o u a r e e n t r u st e d ." (The More Excellent Way, VII,p. 3 6 )

3) Ever ything beyond w hat is nece ssary for hfe belo ng s to th epoor. God gives m e wh at I have so th at I may give i t to th e poor.D o n o t y o u k n o w t h a t G o d e n t r u s t e d y o u w i t h t h a t m o n e y( a ll a b o v e w h a t b u y s n e c e s s a r i e s fo r y o u r f a m i ly ) t o f e e d t h eh u n g r y , t o c lo t h e t h e n a k e d , t o h e lp t h e s t r a n g e r , t h e v d d o w ,the fa ther less ; and indeed , as far as i t wi l l go , to re l ieve thew a n t s o f a l l m a n k i n d . (Danger of Increasing RicheSy VII, p .3 6 2 )

Th us th e basis of an "evangelical economics" is stewa rdshipfor the poor.It may be helpful to clarify the meaning of poverty in thiscontext. As we have seen in Wesley's reflection on the scarcityof provisions and in his articulation of the cry for bread, theproblem of poverty is seen in term s of an absolute lack. Tha t is ,there are some wh o lack wh at is necessary to hu m an l i fe. Th eylack food, shelter, m edicin e and so on. This is not a question ofrelative poverty (some are richer than others) but of absolutepoverty (the lack of resources for a minimum of health anddecency). Similarly the problem of wealth is understood absolutely as the possession of more than is necessary for l i fe . Itis the question of surplus.Now surplus is a problem in two ways. First, i t leads toviciousn ess both relatively and absolutely. R elatively, in that Ithink myself better than others (pride) and absolutely, in thatit makes me look for my welfare in the world of getting andspending .Bu t i t is no t only th e effect of surplu s wh ich is evi l . Th ere isa sens e for W esley, as for several of th e ear l iest theo logian s ofthe church, in which any surplus is a violation of the rights ofth e poor."^ G iven th at o ur ec on om ic life is to be go ver ne d b y


21/114

the welfare of the poor, the attempt to acquire more than isnecessary, andespecially the attempt to consume, is to beunderstood as robbery. Thus consumption or needless expenseis simply the robbery of the poor.

. . . the more you lay out on your own apparel, the less youhave left to clothe the naked, to feed the hungiy, to lodge thes t rangers , to relieve those that are sick and in prison, and tolessen the nu mberless afflictions to wh ic h we are exposedinthis vale of tear s Eveiy shilling whi ch you save from yourown apparel, you may expend in clothing th e naked, andrelieving the various necessities of the poor, whom ye "havealways with you." therefore, every shil ling whic h you need-lessly spendon your own apparel is , in effect, stolen from Godand the poor!. . . .When you are laying out that money incostly apparel which you could have otherwise spared for thepoor, you thereby deprive them of what God the proprietorof all, had lodged in your hands for their use. If so, what youput upon yourself, you are, in effect teari ng from th e back ofthe naked; as the costly and delicate food wh ic h you eat, youare snatch ing from the mouth of the hu ng iy . (On Dress VII,p . 20 [italics s u p p l i e d ] ; see also Wesl ey' s Adyfce toMethodistson DressX I , p p . 4 7 0 - 4 7 1 ; and hi s Farther Appeal VIII, p. 190)

Wesley's view of what we would call consumerism is as strictas a commandment: "Everything about thee which cost morethan Christian duty required thee to lay out is the blood of thepoor." (On Dress VII, p. 21)

But how then are we to understand surplus? How are we todeal with it? How are we to escape its snare? The answer ofcourse is to give it away. And to whom is it to be given? To thedestitute. In order to do this I must practice frugality. Herefrugality has nothing to do with a kind of asceticism. It is whatenables me to aid the poor.

One of the ways in which Wesley's reflections on consump-tion are distinguished from those of the Puritans and theQuakers is that for Wesley this is always related to the question,how may I respond to the need of the poor. Thus for example,while Wesley did not engage in a campaign of teetotalism hedid engage in one to eliminate tea from the diet. Why?


22/114

a) Beca use in this way th e poor could be help ed to savetheir own resources:If the y used E nglish herbs in its stead, (which wouldcost either nothing or what is next to nothing,) withthe sam e bread, butter and milk, they would save justthe price of the tea. And hereby they might not onlylessen their pain, but in some degree their povertytoo. (Letter to a Friend Co ncerning Tea, Dec . 10,1 748 ,XI, p. 505)

b) Because in this way one could save money for theaid of th e poor:I wil l compute this day what I have expended in tea,we ekly or yearly. I will immediately enter on cheaperfood. And wh atever is saved hereb y, I will put into thepoor-box wee kly, to feed th e hungry and cloth e thenaked. (Ibid., p. 506)

Thus the point of these disciplines was the aid of the poor.This point comes to be lost in Victorian Methodism, whichpractices abstinence on moralist ic grounds and frugality onpersonal economic grounds.This concrete starting point in the plight of the poor forW esley's evangelical econom ics leads him to deny the principleof private property. Whe reas Jo hn Locke had argu ed tha t laboras the mingling of sweat with the earth produces an absoluteright to the property thereby produced, W esley rejected th is asa kind of econom ic deism . For W esley the rights of the Creatorremain unaffected by hum an labor. In the following passage h eputs the issue in the context of a common objection to hisinsistence on the necessity of stewardship for the poor:

N a y , m a y I n o t d o w h a t 1 p l e a s e w i t h my own? H e r e l i e s t h eg r o u n d o f y o u r m is t a k e . I t i s n o t y o u r o w n . I t c a n n o t b e ,u n le s s y o u a r e L o r d o f h e a v e n a n d e a r t h . (Danger of Increasing Riches VII, p. 362)


23/114

Th us in principle G od is th e so le owner (against Locke ). AndGod lodges all in our hands for the benefit of the poor.^^It is then but a short step, although a controversial one, forW esley to adopt the m odel of the Pe ntecosta l com mu nity (Acts2:44-45; 4:32-35) for Christ ians. This community of goodsaimed at the benefit of the poor. This was W esley's mo tivationfor going to live with th e Ind ians (XII, p. 39). Th er e is th e reportthat he attem pted to ma ke it a rule for his preach ers. It iseven referred to in his early sermons (Scriptural ChristianityV, pp. 41-42) . But it begins to come to the fore in his exegesisof Acts in his Explanatory Notes Upon the New Testament?'^Here h e maintains that having all th ings com mon an d m akingdistribution to the poor was not to be understo od as exception albut as the ordinary working of th e Spirit . Thu s he w rites:

A nd i f the w h o l e ch urch h ad cont i nu ed i n th i s sp ir i t , th i susage m ust have cont i nued through a l l the ages . T o a f f i rm ,there fore , tha t C hr i s t d i d no t des i gn i t shou l d cont i nue , i sne i ther m ore nor l e s s than to a f f i rm tha t C hr i s t d i d no tdes i gn th i s m easure o f l ove shou l d cont i nue . (Notes A c t s2:45)

To say that Christ did not intend a full measure of love tocontinue in his church would be to reject Wesleyan doctrineroot and branch. Fare we ll th en all talk of ho lin es s, of sanctifica-t ion, of deliverance from sin, not to me ntio n p erfection in love.What would be left is but the fading Cheshire grin of animaginary Aldersgate^^ haunting the corridors of yet anotherecclesial inst itution catering to the mores of the middle-class.W esley repeats this insistence on the cont inuing pert inenceof Pen tecostal com m unism in his no te to Ac ts 4:32: "So long asthat truly Christ ian love continued, they could not but havea l l th in g s in com m pn ," And again not ing the connect ionbetween the presence of grace and the abol i t ion of wantthrough the practice of communism, Wesley again insists:

A n d i t [ the abo l it i on o f w an t thro ug h the prac t i ce o f com m u n i s m ] w a s t h e i m m e d i a t e , n e c e s s a r y c o n s e q u e n c e o f i t[grace]; yea , and m us t be , to the en d o f the w or l d . In a l l age sand na t i ons , th e sam e cause , the s am e degree o f grace , cou l d


24/114

n o t b u t , in l ik e c i r c u m s t a n c e s , p r o d u c e t h e s a m e e ff e ct .(Notes Acts 4 :34)

"In all ages and nations" thu s does We sley dism iss the idea ofthe l imited relevance of Pentecostal comm unism.Wesley subsequent ly makes c lear that he bel ieves that thispractice is to be strongly recommended to Christ ians. Wesleysupposes that the Methodist movement wi l l produce not onlya spread of the gospel throughout the earth but also, andtherefore, bring in the communist society. Thus speaking ofthe spread of the gospel by Methodism he writes:

Th e n a t u r a l n e c e s s a r y c o n s e q u e n c e o f t h i s w i l l b e t h e s a m ea s i t w a s in t h e b e g in n in g o f t h e C h r i s t i a n c h u r c h . N o n e o ft h e m w i l l s a y , t h a t a u g h t o f t h e t h i n g s w h i c h h e p o s s e s s e s i sh i s o w n ; b u t t h e y w i l l h a v e al l t h i n g s c o m m o n . N e i t h e r w i l lt h e r e b e a n y a m o n g t h e m t h a t w a n t . F o r a s m a n y a s a r ep o s s e s s e d o f l a n d o r h o u s e s w i l l s e l l t h e m ; a n d d i s t r ib u t io nw i l l b e m a d e t o e v e r y m a n , a c c o r d in g a s h e h a s n e e d (TheGeneral Spread of the Gospel VI, p . 284)

From this actualization of Christ ian identity would come theconversion of persons of other faiths to Christianity, for theywould no longer have the excuse of Christ ian misconduct topreven t th e reception of th e gospel (Ibid., VI, pp. 285-2 87). It isnoteworthy that Wesley bel ieved that the adherents of otherfaiths would be converted because of the Christ ian practice ofPentecostal comm unism. This i s a mission strategy which mayhave been overlooked by our Board of Global Ministries!For W esley the practice of a l i festyle which m ak es the plightof the poor the l itm us te st of our relation to property, to g ett ingand spending, is a natural development of the general themeof the priority of th e poor.T h e P l a c e o f W e s l e y ' s E v a n g e l i c a l E c o n o m i c s

Just how important to Wesley was this insistence uponsolidarity with the poor and the practice of an evangelicaleconomics? The m ain elem ents of W esley's v iews on this subjec t are already worked o ut during the t ime before h is miss ionary jour ney to G eorgia. H is own person al discipline of visitin g


25/114

th e poor, of seek ing to aid the m concretely, of cutt ing off everyn e e d l e s s e x p e n se i n o r d e r t o m e e t t h e i r n e e d s^ ^ w e r edeveloped the n and rem ained una ltered for his entire l i fet ime.But the period following his return from Georgia saw otherissues take center stage. The whirlwind launching of theMethodis t movement , the a t t empts to sa feguard i t f romquietistic and Calvinistic distortion, the attempt to fend off thebitter wave of persecution and then the subsequent work ofconsolidating the movement in the face of his (as he alwaysbel ieved) imminent demise, a l l combined to put the theme ofevangelical economics on the back burner. His sermons on theSermon on the Mount and on the danger of riches, his Notesreferring to Acts, his reputed attempt to make community ofproperty the rule at least for pastors of the societies all showthat Wesley had not changed his mind on these matters , butthey lack the degree of prominence which they come to havei n t h e l a s t q u a r t e r c e n t u r y o f W e s l e y ' s su p e r v i s i o n o fMethodism.

Now th is period (roughly from 1738 to 1760) of relative quie ton the economic front corresponds fatefully to the period ofwhat we may call the "canonical Wesley." The first volume ofth e Journal, the Appeals, the so-called Standard Sermons andth e Notes all come from this period. Again all of th e ele m en tsare present, but they are muted relative to their subsequentsignif icance. Thus Methodists who stopped at this point couldignore Wesley's sparse references to these themes in thesetexts , and so come to suppose that Methodism could be simplyanoth er version of th e Pro testan t work ethic with a more or les sstrong flavoring of compassion for the poor.

This result began to manifest i tself in the Methodist movem en t in the sixt ies. It is about the n that Wesley's ton e sudd enlyand irrevocably changed. In 1759 he wrote:W e on the contrary , s evere l y condem n a l l those w ho do no ttake care of every th i ng on ear th w h er ew i th G od ha thentrus ted them . T he consequence o f th i s i s , tha t theMethodists , so ca l l ed , do not "neglect their af fa irs and impov eri sh the ir fami l ies;" bu t by di l igence in bu sin es s "provideth i n gs hon es t i n th e s i gh t of a ll m en . " Inso m u ch , tha t m ul t i -


26/114

tud es o f th em , w ho , i n t i m e pas t , had scarce food to ea t orra im en t to put on , have no w "all th ing s need ful for l i fe andgod l ines s ;" and tha t for the i r fam i l ie s , a s w e l l a s t he m se l v es .{Letter to the Rev. M r. Dowries, [1759] IX, p . 99) .

And the n, as if realizing the horrifying imp lications of wh athe had said, he begins to regularly admonish the Methodists:O n the thr ee fo l low i ng days I spoke severa l l y to th e m em be rso f the soc i e ty . A s m a ny o f th em i ncrease i n w or l d l y goo ds ,th e grea t dang er I app rehen d n ow i s , the i r re l aps i ng i n to t hesp i r i t o f the w or l d . A nd then the i r re l i g i on i s bu t a dream .(Oct . 12-21 ,1760, III , p . 23; see a l so July 11 ,1764, III , p . 187;O ct . 20 , 1 76 4 , [p . 20 0 ] ; Ju ne 28 , 1765 [p . 22 7 ] , e t c .)

Once the i ssue is jo ined Wesley becom es relen t less in hiscrit ique of the movement he was st i l l leading.The problem is that Methodists are becoming prosperous!Now for a more conventional representative of the Protestantwork ethic, l ike Richard Baxter, th is could be take n as a sign ofdivine blessing. B ut not so for Wesley. It was on e thin g to seekto escape the degradations of poverty. It was quite another toseek to beco me prosperou s. For poss ession wa s th e mark not ofdivine blessing but of satanic temptation. Thus nearly onehundred and f ifty years before Weber discovered a connectionbetw een p rotestant ism and capital ism W esley wrote:

Therefore do I not see how i t i s poss ib le , in the nature ofthings , for any revival of re l ig ion to cont inue long. Forre l i g i on m ust neces sar i l y produce bo th i ndus t i y andfruga li ty ; and the se can not bu t produce r i ches . B u t a s r i chesincrease so wi l l pr ide , anger , and love of the world in a l l i t sb r a n c h e s . {Thoughts Upon Methodism [1786] XIII, p. 260. )

Indeed as W esley note s in another sermonic essay, what i s atstake her e is th e very self-consistency of Christ ianity itself:D oes i t no t s eem (and ye t th i s cannot be ) tha t C hr i s t i an i ty ,t rue scr i p tura l C hr i s t i an i ty , has a t endency , i n proces s o ft i m e , to underm i ne and des troy i t s e l f? F or w herever t rueC hr i s t i an i ty spreads , i t m us t cause d i l i gence and f ruga l i ty ,w h i ch , i n the na tura l course o f th i n gs , m u s t bege t r i ches ! and


27/114

r iches natural ly beg e t pr ide , love of th e wo r ld , an d ever yt e m p e r d e s t r u c t i v e o f C h r i s t i a n i t y . N o w , i f t h e r e b e n o w a yt o p r e v e n t t h i s , C h r i s t i a n i t y i s i n c o n s i s t e n t w i t h itself, a n do f c o n s e q u e n c e c a n n o t s t a n d , c a n n o t c o n t i n u e l o n g a m o n gany people ; s ince , wherever i t general ly prevai l s , i t saps i t so w n f o u n d a t i o n . (Causes of the Inefficacy of ChristianityVIII , p. 290)

Thus for Wesley the very prosperity which we often take tobe a sign of success was understood as a practical reductio adabsurdam of the gospel.Bu t this only could be true if solidarity with th e poor and t hel i fes ty le con s is tent with that comm itmen t were norm ative forChristian existence.

During this last quarter century Wesley wrote a number ofhistories of Methodism. Some of these essays seek to placeMethodism in the scheme of world his tory as a movementcalled into being to bring about a fundam ental chan ge in history(for example, Of Former Times, The Signs of the Times, or Atthe Foundation of City Road Chapel). But there were otherrelated sermons which sensed that Methodism might not l iveup to its God-given vocation (On the Causes of the Inefficacy ofChristianity, On God's Vineyard, On the Wisdom of God's Counsels, and Thoughts Upon Methodism), In every case, that whichthre aten s M ethod ism with ruin is prosperity, the tu rn from th epoor to the consolidation of middle class status. It must beemph asized here that Wesley a lways at tr ibutes th is impe ndingcollapse to a failure to actualize his economic ethic. This isalways the cause, and it is the only cause. Moreover there isalways one and only one remedy: give all to the poor.

Again and again Wesley ham me rs on this them e. And oftenit is couched as an attem pt to overcome th e m isreading of thatold nem esis , the serm on on The Uses of Money.B u t h o w m a n y h a v e y o u f o u n d t h a t o b s e r v e t h e t h i r d r u l e ,"Give a l l yo u can ." H av e you reas on to be l ieve , t ha t f iveh u n d r e d o f t h e s e a r e t o b e fo u n d a m o n g f if ty t h o u s a n dM e t h o d i s t s ? A n d y e t n o t h i n g c a n b e m o r e p l a i n , t h a n t h a t a l lw h o o b s e i v e t h e t w o fir st r u l e s w i t h o u t t h e t h i r d , w i l l b e


28/114

t w o f o l d m o r e t h e c h i l d r e n o f h e l l t h a n e v e r t h e y w e r e b e f o r e .(Causes of the Inefficacy of C hristianity VII, p. 285-286)Are the se s im ply the fading opinions of a que rulo us old man?

Is this insistence on the practice of evangelical economics thefetish of one who has already said all he has to say aboutimportant matters and is now reduced to the picking of nits?It is impo rtant to recall tha t Wesle y deployed h is evangelicaleconom ics at the sam e t ime that he was express ing his matureunders tand ing o f Chris t ian doctr ine , inc lud ing-preven ientgrace, his basic defense of Arminianism, and sanctif ication asthe process of growing in grace, of growing in love, tha t is , hi smost important theological contribution. At this t ime, too,Wesley was most keenly interested in natural sc ience andcultural anthropology, as well as global issues of s lavery andcolonial ism and hum an rights .W e s l e y ' s i n s i s t e n c e o n e v a n g e l i c a l e c o n o m i c s a n d h i scrit ic ism of those Methodis ts who even then were making apreferential option for the middle class were not products ofg l o o m a n d s t e r i l i t y a n d s h u t t i n g d o w n . I n s t e a d t h e ydemon strate Wesley's greatest v i ta l i ty , th e t im e of h is gr eatestopt imism, and his greatest o penn ess to the world .And i t i s precisely in th is context th at W esley m aintains thatthe poor are the test of all that we do, that the welfare of thepoor is to be the criterion of personal l ifestyle, of churchprogram, of government policy.The preferentia l opt ion for the poor is not o ne th em e amo ngothers, not something that can be relegated to the occasionalforay into social questions, or ignored in pursuit o f m ore important things l ike church growth or evangelization, personalholiness, or final salvation. It is the test and norm for all ofthese .

C o n c l u s i o nIn spite of Wesley's consistent and urgent call , Methodistshave in gener al been char acterized not by a preferen tial optionfor the poor but by an option for the midd le class . W esley sawthis in hi s own day and he did not shrink from drawing the m ost


29/114

sobering conclusions from it-- it threatened the very ex i s tenceof Methodism.If W esley's own yardstick wer e to be applied to th e variousdenom inat ions wh ich derive from his labors he wou ld und oubtedly regard Methodism as a failure, a "dead sect having theform withou t the power of religion."^'*In a note which Wesley added to the discussion of the ex-amp le of the Quak ers in the Farther Appeal he wri tes what maystand as his curse upon Method ism, a curse which falls , I fear,on us:

Lay this deeply to heart, ye who are now a poor, despised,afflicted people. Hitherto ye are not able to relieve your ownpoor. But if ever your substan ce i ncr ease, see th at ye be n otstraigh ten ed in your bowels, tha t ye fall not int o th e sam esnare of th e devil. Before an y of you ei th er lay up tr ea sure son eart h, or in dul ge n ee dless exp en ses of any kind, I pray th eLord God to scatter you to the corners of the earth, and blotout your name from under heaven! (VIII, p. 187)

N o t e s

1. For t h e b e s t s u m m a r y s t a t e m e n t o f l i b e r a t i o n t h e o l o g y w r i t t e n by t w o ofi t s m o s t d i s t i n g u i s h e d p r a c t i o n o r s see L e o n a r d o B o f f a n d C l o d o v i a Boi^ Introducing Liberation Theology (O rb i s : M a ry k n o U, 1 9 8 7 ) .

2 . T h u s l i b e r a t i o n t h e o l o g y is, above a l l , a p a s t o r a l t h e o l o g y . In th i s r eg a rds e e the i n f l u en t i a l r e f l ec t i o n s of J u a n L u i s S e g u n d o The Hidden Motives ofPastoral Action (O rb i s : M a ry k n o l l , 1 9 7 8 ) .

3 . In E n g l i s h , s e e J o s e M i g u e z B. " W es l ey ' s Do c tr i n e of S a n c t i f i c a t i o n f r o ma L i b era t i o n i s t P ers p ec t i v e" in Sanctification and Liberation e d i t e d byT h e o d o r e H. R u n y o n ( A b i n g d o n : N a s h v i l l e , 1 9 8 1) as w e l l as R u n y o n ' s i n f l u e n t i a l i n tro d u c to ry e s s a y in the s a m e v o l u m e , " W e s l e y and th e T h e o l o g i e s ofL i b era t i o n . " T he m o s t i m p o r t a n t e s s a y s by s e v e r a l L a t i n A m e r i c a n M e t h o d i s tt h e o l o g i a n s on t h i s i s s u e are to be f o u n d in La tradicion protestante en lateologia lationoamerica (Primer intento: lectura de la tradicion metodista.)ed i t ed b y J o s e Du q u e (DE I S a n J o s e , Co s t a R i ca , 1 9 8 3 ) . T h i s co l l e c t i o n i n c l u d ess ev era l e s s a y s by M i q u c z as w e l l as c o n t r i b u t i o n s f r o m E l s a T a m e z , M o r t i m e rAr i a s , andE m i l i o C a s t r o a m o n g o t h e r s .

4 . T h i s d e b a t e u s u a l l y c o n c e r n s th e e f f ec t of M e t h o d i s m r a t h e r t h a n t h ea c tu a l p o s i t i o n s o f W es l ey h i m s e l f . Se e E l i e H a l e v y The Birth of Methodism inEngland ( C h i c a g o : U n i v e r s i t y of C h i c a g o P r e s s , 1 9 7 1 ) , B e r n a r d S o m m e l TheMethodist Revolution (New Yo rk : B a s i c B o o k s , 1 9 7 3 ) a n d E . P. T h o m p s o n TheMaking of the English Working Class ( L o n d o n : V i c t o r G o l l a n c z , 1 9 6 4 ) .


30/114

5 . D e s p i t e a n u m b e r o f e s s a y s o n t h e q u e s t i o n o f t h e p o l i t i c a l s i t u a t i o n o ft h e l a t e 7 0 ' s , o n l y o n e (Some Account of the Late Work of God in North America[ V II , p p . 4 0 9 - 4 1 9 ] i n t e g r a t e s t h i s w i t h W e s l e y ' s d i s t i n c t i v e t h e o l o g i c a l p o s i t i o n s .6 . F o r e x a m p l e s e e J o h n C . C o r t Christian Socialism ( O r b i s , M a i y k n o U ,1988) , pp . 17 , 35 and passim. E v e n a c a r e f u l i n t e r p r e t e r l i k e M a n f r e d M a r -q u a r d t w h o r e c o g n i z e s t h e r a d ic a l i m p l i c a t i o n s o f W e s l e y ' s e c o n o m i c v i e w s f a ll si n t o t h e t ra p o f t a k i n g t h i s s e r m o n a s t h e d e f i n i t iv e s t a t e m e n t o f W e s l e y ' sv i e w s ; s e e M a n f r e d M a r q u a r d t Praxis und Prinzipien der Sozialethik John

Wesleys ( G o c t t i n g e n : V a n d e n h o e c k & R u p r e c h t , 1 9 7 7 ) , p p . 39ff.7 . M a x W e b e r The Protestant Ethic and the Rise of Capitalism ( N e w Y o r k :Scr ibn cr ' s , 19 58) ; R . H. Tawney Religion and the Rise of Capitalism ( N e w Y o r k :H a r c o u r t B r a c e , 1 9 2 6 ) .8 . F o r a n i l l u s t r a t i o n o f t h e w a y i n w h i c h M e t h o d i s m t i e d i t s e l f t o t h i s e t h o sin Mexico (wi thout , a t f i r s t , for fe i t ing a more rad ica l soc ia l e th ic ) , s ee JeanP i e r r e B a s t i e n Protestantismo y sociedad en Mexico ( M e x i c o : C U P S A , 1 9 8 3 )e s p . p p . 6 7 - 1 0 4 a n d 1 6 9 - 2 0 2 .9 . V o l u m e a n d p a g e n u m b e r s r e f e r t o t h e 1 4 v o l u m e J a c k s o n e d i t i o n of^ Th eWorks of John Wesley.10. T h i s i s o n e o f t h e c o n c e r n s o f T h o r H a l l i n h i s p a p e r " H o w A d v a n c e dW a s W e s l e y ' s S o c i a l C o n s c i o u s n e s s ? " p r e s e n t e d a t t h e A A R , 1 9 8 6 . I t w i l l b ea p p a r e n t t h a t I t h i n k W e s l e y ' s so c i a l c o n s c i o u s n e s s w a s s o m e w h a t m o r ea d v a n c e d t h a n P r o f e s s o r H a l l b e l i e v e s .11. S e c , f o r e x a m p l e , W e s l e y ' s d e f e n s e o f t h e O x f o r d M e t h o d i s t s i n t h ein troduct ion to the f i r s t "Extract" from the Journal ( O c t . 1 8 , 1 7 3 2 , 1 , p p . 9 - 1 0 ) .12. S e e , f o r e x a m p l e , A Plain Account of the People Called Methodists (VIII ,p . 2 6 8 ) .13. The Danger of Riches (VII , pp. 1-15); On Riches (VII, pp. 214-224); On

the Danger of Increasing Riches ( V I I , p p . 3 5 5 - 3 6 5 ) .14 . A Letter to a Friend Concerning Tea, ( X I , p p . 5 0 4 - 5 1 4 )15 . Advice to the People Called Methodists, With Regard to Dress (XI , pp .4 6 6 - 4 7 7 ) ; Thoughts on Dress ( X I , p p . 4 7 7 - 4 7 8 ) ; On Dress (III , p . 15-26).1 6 . N o t e t h a t t h e Social Creed as we l l as The Social Principles o f t h e U M Cs p e a k o f s t e w a r d s h i p i n r e l a t i o n t o G o d b u t n o t t h e p o o r .17 . T h i s is W e s l e y ' s p o i n t n o t o n l y i n t h e s e r m o n s o n r i c h e s c i t e d a b o v e , b u ta l s o i n h i s r e fl e c t i o n s o n M a m m o n a n d w o r l d l i n e s s .1 8 . S o , f o r e x a m p l e , B a s i l , i n h i s s e r m o n , "I W i l l P u l l D o w n M y B a r n s " a v e r s :" H e w h o s t r i p s a n o t h e r m a n o f h i s c l o t h i n g is h o n o t a r o b b e r ; a n d h e w h o d o e sn o t c l o t h e t h e n a k e d w h e n h e c o u l d , s h o u l d h e n o t b e c a l l e d t h e s a m e ? T h a tb r e a d y o u h o l d i n y o u r c l u t c h e s , t h a t b e l o n g s t o t h e s t a r v i n g . T h a t c l o a k y o uk e e p l o c k e d a w a y i n y o u r w a r d r o b e , t h a t b e l o n g s t o t h e n a k e d . T h o s e s h o e st h a t a r e g o i n g t o w a s t e w i t h y o u , t h e y b e l o n g t o t h e b a r e f o o t e d . T h e s i l v e r y o ub u r i e d a w a y , t h a t b e l o n g s t o t h e n e e d y . W h o m s o e v e r y o u c o u l d h a v e h e l p e d ,

a n d d i d n o t , t o s o m a n y h a v e y o u b e e n u n j u s t . " The Sunday Sermons of theGreat Fathers t r a n s l a t e d a n d e d i t e d b y M . F . T o a l ( R c g n c r y : C h i c a g o , 1 9 5 4 ) , p .3 3 2 .19 . N o t e t h a t W e s l e y i n h i s e s s a y s a g a i n s t t h e r e b e l s ( e . g . . Thoughts Upon

Liberty, Some Observations on Liberty a n d o t h e r s i n v o l u m e X I o f t h e J a c k s o ne d i t i o n o f t h e Works) d o e s s e e m t o a d m i t f o r t h e s a k e o f a r g u m e n t t h a t t h e yh a v e s o m e p r o p e r t y r i g h t s . H e d o e s s o i n o r d e r t o s a y t h a t t h e y h a v e n o t b e e n


31/114

a r b i tr a r il y s u b j ec t t o d i s p o s s e s s i o n b y t h e C r o w n . T h e a r g u m e n t a c c e p t s t h en o t i o n o f l i b er ty v i s a v i s th e s ta te . B u t i t c er ta i n l y d o es n o t a d m i t l i b er ty v i s av i s G o d . T h e r e a r e l i m i t s t o h o w f ar W e s l e y w i ll a c c o m m o d a t e h i m s e l f t o D e i s tp r i n c i p l e s ev en i n d e fe n s e o f th e Cro w n .2 0 . S e e T h o m a s W . M a d r o n " J oh n W e s l e y o n E c o n o m i c s " i n R u n y o nSanctification and Liberation p p . 1 0 8 - 1 0 9 . B u t M a d r o n s e r i o u s l y u n d e r e s t i m a t e s t h e i m p o r t a n c e w h i c h t h e la t e r W e s l e y a t t r ib u t e d t o t h i s e x a m p l e ,

2 1 . ( B a k e r B o o k H o u s e : G r a n d R a p i d s , 1 9 8 1 ) T h e r e a r e n o p a g e n u m b e r s ,h e n c e r e f e r e n c e s a r e t o t h e c h a p t e r a n d v e r s e o f t h e N T t e x t i n q u e s t i o n .2 2 . S ee m y e s s a y , " J o h n W es l ey Against Al d ers g a te" i n Quarterly Review(F a l l 1 98 8 ) , p p . 3 -2 2 , a n d m y re s p o n s e to K en n e th C o l l i n s ' o b je c t i o n s " T h eC o n t i n u i n g C o n f u s i o n A b o u t A l d e r sg a t e " i n t h e W i n t e r i s s u e o f t h e s a m ep u b l i c a t i o n .2 3 . W es l ey ev en g a v e th i s a s h i s r ea s o n fo r l e t t i n g h i s h a i r g ro w l o n g . (S ee

Letter to his brother Samuel, N o. 17 , 1731 , XII , p . 21 . )2 4 . T h i s m u c h q u o t e d p h r a s e ( f r o m Thoughts Upon Methodism) re fer s n o tto a l o s s o f ev a n g e l i ca l f e rv o r b u t to a g ro wi n g " p re feren t i al o p t i o n fo r th em i d d l e c la s s" a s I h a v e s h o w n i n " F o rm W i th o u t P o w er" Circuit Rider( f o r t h c o m i n g ) .


32/114

QR 9 /3 (1989) 30-43

P o v e r t y a n d P u n i s h m e n ti n t h e B o o k o f P r o v e r b s

J a m e s L . C r e n s h a w

Th e Book of Proverb s has always stood as a didactic obstaclein the path of biblical salvation faith. Israel's priests andprophets saw Yahweh served when the r ich and powerfulupheld the rights of the poor. Her sages, however, examinedwealth and poverty as if they were separate moral states , insome cases mandated by God. Poverty, l ike wealth, had apurpose. A look at proverbs concerned with the rich and thepoor can provide a counterweight to the claim that there is asingle biblical outlook on poverty. In the process, we will alsoexpose the an cient roots of som e current econom ic v iews .

R e t r i b u t i o n a n d I t s D o w n f a l lThe poor f it badly in the scheme of things devised by theauthors of Proverbs, Job, and Ecclesiastes , who enjoyed theprivileges besto we d on society's influential lead ers. As advisorsto kings, friends of aristocrats , and professional teachers, thewise l ived a protected exis tence. T hey ev en convinced them selves , and perhap s other s also, that su ch luxury was their properreward for th e virtuou s lifestyle t he y had adopted. This l ine ofreasoning necessa rily implied a les s tha n enviable existe nce for

those unfortunate persons who chose a way of l ife contrary tothat of th e teach ers. Th ese fools exhibited lack of morality thatJames L. Crenshaw is professor of Old Testament at Duke Divinity School.


33/114

was matched by a shortage of the things that contributedpleasure and at least a mo dicum of happine ss .The argum ent we nt in the other direct ion, too . Peo ple w hofound themselves in a miserable s ituation must surely havepossessed some character f law, sometimes vis ible but oftenconcealed from public scrutiny. Conversely, individuals whorose high in social standin g and acquired the a dva ntag es of rankwere naturally though t to have superior moral character.The fundamental premise that produced these conclusionswas theological. The creator of the universe took an activeinter est in its just order, pun ishing iniqu ity and rew ardingvirtue. Ethical decis ions affected the essential order of theuniverse, either threatening its inner harmony or contributingto its stability. Choosing a pattern of life that elicited divinefavor transformed the pursuit of pleasure, eudaemonism, intoreligious performance,Over the years thi s conviction becam e dogma, for sufficientevidence of both aspects of the theory seemed present insociety generally. The teachers who promulgated this ideafound sufficient data to subs tantia te the ir claims, for th ey w ereeager to confirm their own favored status, and in doing so the ycondemned those less fortunate than they. The ambiguousassert ion that d iv ine sol ic i tude never fa i ls deserving individuals (Ps. 37:25) cruelly dismisses the poor as morallydeficient while at th e sam e time lauding God*s providential carefor the wealthy.In the end the teachers actually defended the poor, but notbefore their own world came crashing down. The story of Job'sfall from an exalted posit ion to the ash h eap forced th e wise toreass ess both s ides of th e equation the y earlier champion ed. Itbecame painfully clear to them that notable exceptions to thetheory of reward and retribution occurred at least on the s ideof virtue. That concession led them to revise their understanding of vice and to adm it that no t all miserable perso nsdeserved what befell them.

Once the sages acknowledged except ions , the ir en t irescheme became problematic. Not every deserving person faredwell , and not all vil lains received just pu nish m ent. Th e earliersimplicity and optim ism van ished, for now every individual case


34/114

requ ired carefu l s tudy to determine whether or not theperson's character accorded with external circumstances. Thecollapse of a cherishe d conviction precipitated a religious cris is ,one which pushed beUevers over the threshold into the comforting (?) arm s of a theophanic creator (Job) and skeptics intothe e m pty abyss of a distant despot (Ecclesiastes) .Th us Israelite sages viewed p overty in the l ig ht of a retributive world view, with t he em pha sis fall ing on a neg ative a ssessment of the poor. The teachers acknowledged an obligationtoward the unfortunate, but they harbored suspicion that thepoor deserved their misery, which resulted from indolence.Idealizing the poor as special favorites of God, as, for example,in Amos' identif ication of the righteous with the poor, andJe sus ' pro nou ncem ent that th e poor are blessed (Lk. 6:20), didnot find expression in wisdom literature. T he wise wou ld hardlyhave rejoiced to be called Ebion ites (the poor ones) , as a latersect seem s to have done.This att itude to poverty and its victims remains relativelyconsistent with the different expressions of wisdom in theHebrew Bible and the Apocrypha, Furthermore, that understanding of the poor coincided with the sages' teachings inEgypt and M esopotamia. On e exceptio n is an Egy ptian text, theInstruction of Ani. Social turmo il in Egypt produced this piou s

wisdom text, wh ich co m es perilously close to claim ing a specialrelationship between the deity and individuals in humble circumstances .

T h e P o o r i n C o l l e c t i o n s o f P r o v e r b sThe book of Proverbs gathers together several collections ofsayings from various periods and localit ies . It contains at le astthree collections of foreign extraction (22:17-24:22; 30:1-14;

31:1-9), each of wh ich has an identifying co m m ent, in on einstance mistakenly inserted into the init ial saying (22:17).T h i s s m a l l u n i t r e s e m b l e s t h e E g y p t i a n I n s t r u c t i o n o fAmenemopet , an earl ier text that has th irty chapters . Theother two collections derive from Aramaic wisdom, the f irstfrom an otherwise unknown Agur and the second from the


35/114

mo ther of a king wh ose nam e, Lemu el , is g iven but about wh oserule no further evidence has survived.The remaining col lect ions are associated with the nameSolomon, for the most part (1-9; 10:1-22:16; 25-29); exceptionsare 24:23-34; 30:15-33; 31:10-31). Th e tra dition in I Kings 4:29-34 [ E W ] credits this monarch with except ional l i terary product ivity, but virtually nothing in the collect ions attributed toSolomon agrees in content with this description of proverbsabout trees, beasts, birds, repti les, and f ish. Perhaps Solomonachieved this association with wisdom collect ions as a rewardfor sponsoring the wise, although the subject matter rarelyrelates to special interests of royalty. An alternative explanat ion for the tradit ion of Solom onic wisdom relate s it to his va stwealth , which m ust have sugg ested to many that he was except ionally wise. Such reasoning was inevitable so long as thetheory of reward and retribution f lourished. The close juxtaposit ion of wealth and wisdom in the closing observations ofthe story about the Queen of Sheba lend credibil ity to thishypothesis .

The specif ic origins of the several collect ions are obscure,although their probable provenance and relative dating seemreasonably clear. The oldest units (10:1-22:16; 25-29) derivefrom actual family co nte xts, for the, m os t part im par ting par ental teachings. Ne verth eless , the presen t form of th es e proverbslend s itself to wider u se, possibly in Israelite schoo ls, for wh ichevide nce has van ished, exc ept for a single witn ess in the secon dcentury B . C . E . That sole example was Jesus Eleasar ben Sira,ca l l ed S irach for conven ience . The la tes t co l l ec t ions inProverbs (1-9; 31:10-31) differ im nien sely from earlier s en ten ces, or aphorism s, employing elaborate paragraphs replete withimperatives, exhortations and threats, or using an alphabeticdevice that is known as an acrostic. One miscellaneous collect ion (30:15-33) makes generous use of numerical sayings, bothas heigh ten ing ("Three thing s are too wonderful, for m e, four Ido not understand"), and an absolute num ber ("Four th ings onearth are small"). Th ese collect ions have m aterial tha t p reda tesIsrael's monarchy as we ll as some from as late as th e post-exil icperiod.


36/114

Some interpre ters have a t tempted to trace a growingrel igious influence on the sayings, assuming that the earl iestsages were wholly secular. That effort has not been entirelysuccessful , for a rel igious element probably existed from thevery beginning, perhaps becoming more explicit in the latestexten sive col lection (1-9).The astonishing thing in Proverbs 1-9 is i ts virtual si lenceabout th e poor. Th e lone ex ception , 6:6-11, for w hic h th ere is apartial parallel in 24:30-34, describes the calamitous results oflaz iness-poverty wi l l overwhelm the indolent one .

Go to th e ant , 0 s luggard:c o n s id e r h e r w a y s , a n d b e w i s e .W i t h o u t h a v i n g a n y chief, off icer or ruler,s h e p r e p a r e s h e r f o o d in s u m m e ra n d g a t h e r s h e r s u s t e n a n c e in h a r v e s t .H o w lo n g w i l l y o u l i e t h e r e , 0 s lu g g a r d ?W h e n w i l l y o u a r i s e f r o m y o u r s l e e p ?A l i t t le s leep , a l i t t le s lumber ,a l i t t le fo ld ing o f the hands to res t ,a n d p o v e r t y w i l l c o m e u p o n y o u l ik e a v a g a b o n d ,a n d w a n t l i k e a n a r m e d m a n .

Th is sharp warning adopts a sim plistic approach to th e problem posed by need y m emb ers of soc iety , a response that manycitizens of our own tim e readily endorse. By thi s reasoning, th epoor only get what they deserve, the just fruits of their ownlaziness. If 3:27 ("Do not withhold good from those to whom itis due, when it is in your power to do it") actually refers tosomeone who i s des t i tute , f rom whom the wi thho ld ing o fpromised assistance might have drastic consequences, the collection would escape th e charge of un m itigated bias against t hepoor. Outside 1-9, only two sayings come close to this negativeattitu de toward th e less fortun ate. In 10:4 ("A slack hand cau sespoverty, bu t th e hand of th e di l igent m ake s rich") th e implicitteaching of 6:6-11 becomes expUcit; not only do the indolentsuffer need, but the industrious acquire riches. Another explanation for poverty occurs in 21:17 ("He who loves pleasurewill be a poor ma n; h e w ho love s w ine and oil will no t be rich").


37/114

which notes the way individuals squander resources in pursuitof pleasure.If we are correct in assum ing that the stud ents to w ho mthese sajdngs were ul t imately directed came from wealthyfamil ies in Judean society , one wonders why the teacher didnot try to inst i l l a sen se of charity in the se yo un g m en . (I a ssu m ethat these students were all males, for they are enjoined to befaithful to the wives of their youth and to spurn the sweetseduct ion of the foreign woman.) On the assumption that thepoor were s imply mahngerers, d id teachers think they wouldincur God's wrath by help ing lazy people? Th is sort of thin kin gcertainly led to am biguou s att itude s toward physicians, at leas tin the early second century before the Christ ian era, contraryto the negative view implied in Sirach 38:15 ("He who sinsbefore h is Maker, may h e fall into th e care of a physician"). B enSira s t rugg les might i ly to defend the medica l profess ionagainst charges of interfering with divine punishment for evil ,namely that by endeavoring to cure the sick, doctors riskedshortening the divinely decreed period of aff l ict ion that befells inners.

O n K i n d n e s s t o t h e P o o rTh at explanation for th e absen ce in Proverbs 1-9 of any se ns eof obligation toward alleviating th e circum stance s of th e p o o r-that they have personal ly merited their lowly status-dependson an increased em ph asis on individual retribution, as opposed to a social retribution, that is, the poor must be seen asan aggregate of individual sinn ers, not m ere ly as a m ore or lesssuspect segment of Israelite society.In any event, the earlier "Solomonic" collect ions openlypraise kind actions toward the poor. Th e profit motiv e surfacesin 19:17 ("He who is kind lends to the Lord, and he will repay

him for his deed"), a saying that presupposes the act/consequence scheme and uses it to good advantage. Those who do agood deed on behalf of the poor, the proverb insists, put theLord in their debt and even tually receive p aym ent from above.Similarly , 28:27 states that g i f t s to the poor pay worthydividends, and 28:8 even asserts that those who lend money on


38/114

interest wil l lose it to those who show generosity toward theneedy. Such a statement as 21:13 fails to escape charges ofself-interest, for it claims that an attentive ear and appropriateaction in the cause of the poor ensure the same result i f thesituation is ever reversed.The high est stage of b lesse dne ss i s promised tho se wh o showkindness to the poor. Two different verbs indicate the happine ss resu lt ing from suc h considerate action, th e f irst em phasizing the personal disposit ion and the second stressing others*praise. In 14:21 the charitable person is assured happiness,whereas 22:9 suggests that the needy with whom one hasshared bread wil l sing the praises of their benefactor. Theremarkable woman whose praises are heralded in 31:10-31includes the "poor and needy" in her l ist of persons who comeunder her care. For the sum total of her actions, this virtuouswife receives praise from her children and husband. Curiously,the only other use of this combination, "poor and needy," appears in another late collect ion, the sayings of Agur. Foursayings, each beginning with the word "Generation," describeloathsome individuals who dishonor their parents, practicehypocrisy , th ink too highly of themselves , and consume thepoor and needy. A different word in the init ial posit ion doesoccur in 14:31, which announces that insult ing the poor (dal)actual ly demeans the one who made that person, whereasshow ing compassion for the n eed y honor s "him." Alth oug h thepronoun could refer to the needy person, it may also apply toGod, for wh om the B ible us es m ascul ine pronouns. B y deeds ofkindness , one honors th e C reator.

This tendency to associate God with the poor extends tospecif ic behavior such as ridicule. Whoever mocks the poorinsu lts that person's Maker, according to 17:5, and anyo ne cruelenough to rejoice when calamity strikes (presumably the samepoor person) wil l pay for such malice. In some instances thewise came very close to urging love for one's enemies; perhapsthe motive was conservative self-preservation, but whateverthe reason, the teachers decried violence of any kind. Themetaphor about heaping coals of f ire on an enemy's head byacts of kin dne ss (25:21) rem ains obscure, altho ugh an E gyptianritual of repentance may throw hght on it .


39/114

N ot every l inking of th e poor and deity served to protect th elowly against potential oppressors. In 29:13 the neutral statem en t asserts that a s ingle sovereign empow ers both oppressorand victim. No moral jud gm ent ap pears in th e

Documents

Fall 1989 Quarterly Review - Theological Resources for Ministry