MYRON AUGSBURGER: LIVING WHAT WE BELIEVE

PERFECT LOVE AND WAR. The following are excerpts from Myron Augsburger's 1973 presentation to a symposium reflecting on the relationship of Christian holiness to issues of war and peace. The conference content was compiled and edited by Paul Hostetler and published in 1974 by Evangel Press under the title Perfect Love and War. Augsburger was President of Eastern Mennonite College at the time of his presentation.

BEHAVE YOUR BELIEFS. "The new life in Christ has upon it the very stamp, or character, of Christ. The ethical dimensions of life are not just adjuncts to one's piety, not dimensions of works that one adds to faith, but are rather expressions of our relation to Christ. This is to say that we relate our ethics to Christology (the study of the person and attributes of Christ) in the same way we relate salvation to Christology. We behave our beliefs, expressing what it means to live under the lordship of Christ in the total life. There is no part of the Christian's life in which he may abdicate his moral responsibility to someone else, including the state. Each believer is responsible to live the holiness of love imparted to us by the Spirit of Christ."

CHOOSE WHICH KIND OF SUFFERING. "[Jesus Christ] reverses the old 'eye for an eye, tooth for tooth' attitude. He tells us we are to love our enemies In answer to the question of whether this will work in our world, Jesus showed us that we do not have to live; we can die. The ultimate expression of this was the cross itself. Sometimes in dying we do more to the world than we could by living. So we do not answer this issue on the basis of whether someone will have to suffer. Of course they will, one way or the other. The question is on the basis of which kind of suffering -- that which is imposed by war (as though this will bring an end to war) or the suffering which comes because of love? Redemptive suffering is that which comes by love."

BECOME A CONSCIENCE TO SOCIETY. "We regard membership in the kingdom of Christ as our primary loyalty. The question of committing one's self in ultimate loyalty to Jesus Christ means that the Christian can do no less than become a conscience to society where that society operates beneath the level of the will of Jesus Christ. As members of the kingdom of heaven, obedience to Christ is the basic aspect of our approach to the question of war."

ACT FOR THE SANCTITY OF HUMAN LIFE. "As Christians we must behave in accordance with belief in the sanctity of human life. We treat every person as an end in himself and not as a means to an end. Believing in the sanctity of human life means that we must also avoid the deterioration that happens to any peoples who take the course of violence as an answer to the world's ills. We cannot justly be involved in anything which interrupts man's opportunities for a full life, be it social injustice, be it violence, be it the problem of war, or be it the problem of poverty."

WITNESS TO THE MEANING OF LOVE KNOWN IN THE CROSS. "The New Testament calls us to let the church be the church. First, it asks us as the church to give ourselves to prayer for rulers and those in authority. Second, we are to give ourselves in sacrificial living and witnessing as an extension of the meaning of love known in the cross of Christ. If our commitment to holiness is genuine it will involve love for all, justice that works to correct the ills, mercy that moves beyond the issue to the person, honesty in our understanding of ourselves in the process, and joy that keeps our spirits free. We are called to yield ourselves 'servants to righteousness unto holiness.' (Romans 6:19)."

RECOVERING A HOLINESS SOCIAL ETHIC

MY FAITH ROOTS. I grew up in a Protestant Christian faith tradition that traces its roots in the ministry of John Wesley’s 18th-century Methodists and the 19th-century American holiness movement. One of the privileges of a theological education is the awareness--and hope for recovery--of a definitive holiness social ethic that has all but dissipated today. It is this deeper heritage, instead of contemporary shallowness, that fuels my daily service.

NOT JUST WITH WORDS. Church of the Nazarene founder Phineas F. Bresee and Free Methodist Church founder B.T. Roberts not only believed that ministry to the urban poor was important, they intentionally stood with the poor in blighted communities. They defended the poor, advocated against the injustices that fueled poverty, and developed spaces of belonging and access in which the poor were not only welcome but at home.

CHALLENGING SOCIAL INJUSTICES. Both leaders challenged their church brethren to move from merely preaching a holiness of heart (spiritual) to expressing holiness of life (social, material) in solidarity with the marginalized. Such late 19th-century Wesleyan holiness revival advocates not only perceived evil lurking in worldly entertainments and personal vices, but saw the social injustice in condoning unbridled capitalism, in the denial of workers rights, and in rapacious stock market schemes.

BECAUSE OF THE POOR. Bresee and Roberts called for radical simplicity of church facilities, not only because the ostentatious styles were a put-off to the poor, but the sheer cost of unnecessary embellishments were poor stewardship of resources of God’s people. Tithes and offerings should be used to serve the poor, not build impressive structures. Likewise, words, dress, and lifestyle were to be simple...because of the implications for the poor.

A WITNESS DISSIPATED. Over time, radical solidarity with the poor deteriorated into mere charity and infrequent compassion. Holiness groups pulled back from challenging oppressive social structures and marketplace practices. They became known as people who didn’t smoke, dance, drink alcohol, wear jewelry, gamble, or frequent movie theaters. This caricature became the extent of the holiness social ethic.

WHAT WE KEPT AND DISCARDED. I have repeatedly asked: Have holiness folk held on to distinguishing aspects of early Nazarenes and Free Methodists that are not eternally important and at the same time discarded some critical stands in relationship to social ethics that may be critical to reclaim? And I answer my own question with a resounding “Yes!”

FOUR WITNESSES TO RECLAIM: I think the holiness churches have four major witnesses to a holiness social ethic to reclaim in this and the coming generation:

1. SOLIDARITY WITH THE POOR. Re-commit to a radical solidarity with and service among the urban poor of North America. This is our heritage...and calling. I personally wonder if Wesleyan theology and practice make much sense outside this context.

2. RADICAL SIMPLICITY. Re-commit to a radical simplicity of lifestyle, particularly in light of a global economy, in which American consumerism and unbridled, trans-national capitalism directly feeds injustices for laborers and the poor around the world. With what is saved: give, share, redistribute more equitably.

3. PROTEST STOCK MARKET PRACTICES. Re-commit to a radical protest against the stock market because of its rapacious direct, indirect, and residual impact of injustice to common laborers and the poor in America and around the world. Holiness folk should expose stock market practices, companies, and funds that degrade human life and community everywhere. If it is necessary to participate in stock investments at all (as most do indirectly through retirement accounts), utmost care should be taken to examine local labor and market practices of every company in which one is investing…and call for social responsibility.

4. AGAINST ALL FORMS OF VIOLENCE. Re-commit to a radical stand against violence against human beings in all its forms. This is a stand against the violence of war, to be sure. It is also a rejection of the language and norms of violence in our society. Alternatively, it is a pursuit of methods of conflict resolution and shalom-bearing that are a positive testimony to the power of a holy God whose way is love.

CHOOSING WAR?

"Very few people choose war. They choose selfishness and the result is war. Each of us, individually and nationally, must choose: total love or total war." - Dave Dellinger

THE SOCIAL ETHICS OF EARLY HOLINESS GROUPS

Perhaps Donald W. Dayton describes the distinctives of holiness groups and their contribution to social ethics in America better than anyone else:

"The Holiness movement differs from fundamentalism and evangelicalism in that it is more oriented to ethics and the spiritual life than to a defense of doctrinal orthodoxy. Indeed, one of the distinctive features of the Holiness traditions is that they have tended to raise ethics to the status that fundamentalists have accorded doctrine. This theme was certainly explicit in the early abolitionist controversies and has consistently re-emerged since. The emphasis given the doctrine of sanctification has led naturally in this direction."

"The Holiness ethic has been described as the 'revivalist' ethic of 'no smoking, no drinking, no cardplaying, no theatergoing.' Such themes have, of course, characterized the Holiness movement -- as have large doses of anti-Catholicism and anti-Masonry. Some of these concerns are still worth some defense, but the Holiness churches have been slandered by observers who fail to penetrate beneath these themes."

Dayton cites the heart-and-soul engagement by holiness movement advocates in the late 19th and early 20th centuries of the following ethical concerns:

• Abolitionist movement
• Women's sufferage and ordination of women to ministry
• Involvement with and ministry to the poor and oppressed
• Peace advocacy
• Simplicity
• Radical equality

Of the early holiness leaders' penchant for peace, Dayton notes:

"Thomas Upham, one of the more mystically inclined of early Holiness teachers, wrote in 1836 the important Manual of Peace, opposing the military chaplaincy, advocating "tax resistance," and calling for the abolition of capital punishment. Almost totally ignored in the literature of pacifism are the several 'peace churches' produced by the movement."

Dayton also laments the decline of such social ethic distinctives in the middle and late 20th century.

Dayton's article, "The Holiness Churches: A Significant Ethical Tradition" is available online: click here.