Few institutions have escaped the wrath of Glenn Beck over the years, but for the past several months, the conservative commentator's attacks have taken a surprising turn- Beck is targeting many Christian denominations and other religions.
Beck has become convinced that the term "social justice" is a code word used by institutions, including religion, for Communism and even Nazism.
In March, Beck had this to say on the subject:
I beg you, look for the words 'social justice' or 'economic justice' on your church Web site. If you find it, run as fast as you can. Social justice and economic justice, they are code words. Now, am I advising people to leave their church? Yes!
Beck's call for Americans to flee from churches which use the forbidden code words drew sharp criticism from many religious leaders. Such criticism only appears to have encouraged Beck as his attacks are becoming increasingly common and pointed. For example, Beck had this to say last week:
I have taken a lot of hits from people like Rev. Jim Wallis on "social justice." But I needed you to know there is a poison in some of our churches. Social justice — the way Jim Wallis and Jeremiah Wright understand it — isn't in the gospel, neither is redistribution of wealth.
Jesus never said, "Take from the rich and let the government redistribute it." Take the parable of the Good Samaritan. The Samaritan chose to take it upon himself to help; he took on the bills himself. The government never told him to do it. Anything else is a perversion of Christianity and the perversion of the principles of God.
By arguing that a person should leave any church that preaches "social justice," Beck is implicitly arguing that a "social justice" religion cannot be true. This suggests that Beck believes economic constructs have not merely a temporal aspect, but a spiritual aspect as well. If "social justice" represents an evil economic construct which renders a church false, one assumes that promoting the antithesis of social justice (presumably laissez faire economics) in a church is a sign of that church's correctness.
Commingling economic theory with religious theory isn't particularly rare. Many churches infuse some degree of economic theory into religious doctrine (or vice versa) in various ways. In most mainstream Christian churches with which I am familiar, however, the prevailing "economic theory" is one which ignores self-interest in favor of communal interest. Take Beck's own Mormon church, for example. Joseph Smith, the prophet Mormons believe restored the true gospel to the Earth, instituted what became known as the "Law of Consecration" while the Mormons were congregated in Kirtland, Ohio in the 1830's. Under that law, Mormons voluntarily gave their property to the church, and the church then assigned an amount of property back to the members in proportion to their needs, family and circumstances. The Law of Consecration was eventually abandoned as a practice when Joseph Smith determined the Mormons were incapable of living the law fully, but it has never been abandoned as a doctrine. In fact, Mormons believe the law will once again be instituted when Christ returns and his followers are better able to set aside base self-interest in favor of their neighbor's interests.
Mormons are certainly not alone in promoting communal interest over self-interest. As a religious concept, denial of self gratification is often taught as a higher law. "Social justice" correlates to denial of self-interest. Free market capitalism, on the other hand, flourishes by exploiting self-interest. Rather than attempt to change the natural human tendency towards self-interest, free market capitalism acknowledges that such a tendency exists and works within that framework to create wealth (and eventually helps others under the premise that a rising tide lifts all boats).
Even where church teachings fall short of preaching economic concepts as radical as the Law of Consecration, they often nevertheless promote "social justice" in the form of a safety net which operates no matter the prevailing economic structure. That safety net is most often taught through the concept of "charity." Rather than enjoy the full measure of one's wealth, religious adherents are taught to give to those less fortunate. Again, this is entirely sensible when one realizes that churches aren't promoting an economic doctrine because the economic doctrine itself has any spiritual value, but rather because the attitudes and incentives which correlate with that economic doctrine do have spiritual value.
Of course, teaching religious followers to deny one's self-interest does not necessarily mean that those followers must then mandate denial of self-interest as a matter of law. Most churches, in fact, are relatively (if not entirely) silent on which economic structure a government should adopt. Religious denominations are able to operate within the United States while simultaneously operating within Sweden, Russia and Venezuela without giving a second thought to the vastly different economic structures of those host nations. Again, this is because churches are usually more interested in promoting a changed attitude (such as denial of self-interest) rather than a changed economic system. Most churches actively promote charitable giving, for example, but no church of which I am aware actively promotes laws which would require charitable giving. Similarly, Mormons can (and most do) believe in the Law of Consecration, and look forward to a day in which it may be reinstituted, but virtually none are communists who would impose a temporal form of the Law of Consecration by fiat.
To summarize, most churches promote some degree of "social justice" because it is an expression of the attitudes and incentives churches often promote as spiritually superior (charity, love of others, denial of self-interest, etc.) than base human attitudes and incentives which occur naturally (self-preservation, greed, pride, etc.). A church's promotion of "social justice" is not, however, synonymous with promotion of an entire economic system which mandates social justice. Social justice teachings are adaptable to any form of economic structure adopted by a host nation, including free market capitalism (as should be clear- "social justice" religions thrive in the United States alongside capitalism).
While churches can and usually do separate religious economic doctrines from legally-implemented economic doctrines, Beck himself seems incapable of such separation. Any church which promotes Beck's despised form of economic theory, therefore, is a false church! Perhaps that's why Beck is so concerned that religious adherents would institute a new form of economic structure if given the opportunity- that's what Beck would do. Beck fails to realize the obvious- that churches are promoting spiritual values and attitudes, not economic structures (economic structures are mere expressions of those values). Beck, on the other hand, is promoting an economic structure as a religious belief (i.e., leave your church if they disagree!), and missing the values and attitudes. He's entirely backwards. But Beck shouldn't take my word for it. He should listen to his own church.