That being said, I have my concerns. Both men offer simplistic soundbites and surface understandings. I have written before about Jim Wallis. Those familiar with my blog know my criticisms. Glenn Beck however is a newcomer to my comments. My wife got me to listen to him years ago, and he can be entertaining and thoughtful. However, I frankly don't trust Glenn Beck on matters of religion. Hurried show-prep read through the lens of Mormonism is a bit suspect.
Beck has equated "social justice" with Communism and Nazism. He claims that "social justice" and "economic justice" are codewords for "the redistribution of wealth." However, Beck ignores a long tradition of Christian teachings on social issues. The term "social justice" has been adopted by the overwhelming majority of Christians including the Roman Catholic Church. To be fair and to give Beck some credit, there are folks who lurk in the shadows of "social justice" who believe with all sincerity in "the redistribution of wealth." In fact, there are some within the church who seem more influenced by the Communist Manifesto than the Sermon on the Mount. Rather than telling parishioners to run, as Beck reportedly has, church members need to get facts and ask questions. Particular political positions need to be examined in the light of Scripture, church tradition, and common sense.
Recently, Beck brought on a gathering of religious folk on his show. In that conversation, I think he revealed a very basic and culturally, a very American attitude toward faith. He states,
...The reason why I want to talk to some preachers is George Whitfield.Lay aside whether or not this is an accurate understanding of George Whitfield. Beck understands faith as a personal issue, an individual thing. My religion is between God and me. As a result, there is no "social justice". There is no sense of God redeeming the community or the political order.
We learned about George Whitfield on the show about a month ago. This guy came before the American Revolution. He had to bring people and open their eyes and say, wait a minute. God is personal. He works through me, and it's an individual thing. And it's not collective salvation. It's up to me to do these things.
There needs to be another Whitfield. And so we're talking tonight about the role of faith...
Again, my tradition is very different from Glenn Beck, but I also am thankful that salvation is not collective. Jesus Christ redeems me--not my race, my tribe or the blood coursing through my veins. I celebrate the fact that God loves this particular and individual person. Like John the Baptist said, "..and do not begin to say to yourselves, 'We have Abraham as our father.' For I tell you that out of these stones God can raise up children for Abraham" (Luke 3:8). God touches us individually, and we respond as individuals.
However, the temptation contained in this theology is a rampant individualism. If my faith is all about me and Jesus having warm fuzzies, then nothing else matters. My religion may make me a better person, but my God has little to say about politics, work or family life. Church is no long about a community embodying Christ in this world. Instead, we are a group of individuals gathered for our own individual needs. Individual Christians are no longer a people with a message that "God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ." We become either chaplains, endorsing the existing order, or we hide from the existing order in our own cultural ghetto.
Beck's argument against Jim Wallis and those who carry the flag of "social justice" seems to be: "Faith is personal. Talking about the collective concern of justice in society is thus out of bounds." However, Beck every night complains about the injustices in society. By Beck's own argument, the modern prophet who speaks for the just and against the unjust cannot stand on his or her faith.
Rather than a ad hominem condemnation of social justice, Beck would do better by arguing that his policies would benefit society including the poor, the orphan and the widow. He should make the argument that Wallis, however well-intentioned, would make society more unjust. If he can't make that argument, then perhaps he should rethink his position or at least be quiet.