Corporate and Individual Responsibility: An Introduction

I want to write some posts about corporate and individual responsibility in the Bible. This is an extremely thorny issue. At the moment, I am only beginning my investigation of the biblical texts. Thus, this post will raise more questions than answers. In the future, I will be focusing major attention on Ezekiel 18, and what it does and does not say. Other related passages are Joshua 7 (the account of the failed attack on Ai), 2 Samuel 21, Deuteronomy 24:16, 2 Kings 14:5-6, Daniel 9, and Exodus 20:5-6. Assessing how these texts relate to each other to form a coherent picture is a very thorny task. The reason I am addressing this issue is that the PCA has addressed and will be addressing corporate responsibility regarding the race issue.

What are some categories that the Bible uses to address the question of corporate and individual responsibility? The first category is a distinction between guilt and consequence. Obviously, guilt is one consequence of sin. However, there are other consequences that can be incurred by someone who has no direct guilt. This might be a helpful way of understanding why it is that 36 men get killed in the attack on Ai for something that they themselves did not do. One might say that Achan murdered those 36 men by transgressing the ban.

A second category distinction is between human retribution and divine retribution. Who assesses the punishment, in other words? Does human retribution apply to corporate guilt, or that only the purview of God? Bear in mind that this particular distinction is not the same question as repentance, and whether repentance needs to be corporate or individual.

A third category distinction is between sins of omission and sins of commission. This one should be familiar to most of my readers. A sin of omission is something that we (or I) should have done but failed to do, whereas a sin of commission is something that we (or I) should not have done, but did anyway. This has a bearing on possibly composite sins. On the racism issue, for instance, if a church committed racist acts, and the presbytery of which it was a part failed to discipline that church for said actions, then the presbytery incurs the guilt of omission. While the presbytery may not, as a whole, have committed the action itself, it is still responsible for its required and biblical response. The same is true on a denominational level.

The fourth, and perhaps stickiest question of all, is the question of covenantal continuity. There is a tension between the continuity (on the one hand) that the true church has with itself in all generations, regardless of denominational boundaries; and the discontinuity of governing bodies that are directly responsible for the discipline of members within its scope. In the case of the PCA churches that Sean Lucas has in mind, for instance, the question will revolve around some of these questions: have these churches ever repented? Did the southern presbyterian denomination repent before the founding of the PCA? Is there continuing sin on the matters of racial equality? If so, what is the responsibility of current bodies within the PCA, and is the whole denomination at fault, or only some presbyteries?

A fifth question to ponder is a very important question: what constitutes racism? I have addressed this question briefly before. Having read a bit more, and done a bit more thinking, there are some things I might say differently. For instance, the question of how the biblical passages relate is a far more difficult question than the previous post would seem to indicate. I still hold to my position on affirmative action being inherently racist. I also hold that evolution and a theory of polygenesis (that we do not all come from Adam and Eve) open the door to racism.

Why talk this way about all these careful distinctions? One reason is that we want to tell the truth. It is not truth to confess to sins for which we have no guilt any more than it is truth not to confess for sins of which we are guilty. We need to assess carefully and biblically what guilt we have in the question of racism. Whatever truth of guilt we have can then lead us to repentance and restoration.

I attended recently a memorial service for the Charleston Nine at a black church in Winnsboro. It was a wonderful experience. I was afraid at first that the talk would all be about social justice. Instead, it was focused on Jesus Christ and the gospel, while mentioning racial issues in the context of the gospel. Yes, there was much talk about the unity that the church has in Christ, as was appropriate. But it did not sideline the gospel, for which I was very thankful. As was mentioned by my black brothers at GA this year, any repentance that we do needs to have feet, so that actual change can happen in our churches. Some churches are further ahead in this process than others. Some degree of compassion and understanding will need to be present.

8 Comments

  1. davidgrissen said,

    September 25, 2015 at 2:00 pm

    Excellent thoughts and good questions raised. Thank you!

  2. roberty bob said,

    September 26, 2015 at 5:14 pm

    You are wondering whether the southern presbyterian denomination repented of her racist acts and attitudes before the PCA was founded.

    I am wondering whether the PCA, at her founding, repudiated the racist acts and attitudes of the southern presbyterian denomination from which she was withdrawing. If so, then I do not see the PCA bearing denomination-wide guilt for the sins of her forefathers.

    How far back does the ring of guilt go? Good question. I wonder whether the West Africans sold by their own neighboring tribes to the European slave traders judge their fellow West Africans guilty for their part in the slave trade? It takes a wide net to cover the whole systemic evil of the 17th – 19th century slave trade! As we look back on that bygone era, are we alert to the human trafficking [slave trade!] that takes place before our very eyes? There is as much slavery going on today as there ever was yesterday.

  3. M.Colvard said,

    September 28, 2015 at 10:40 am

    Roberty,

    Can you cite any reference that the PCA repudiated racist acts/attitudes or any anecdotes to that effect at its founding? Nothing that I have read would indicate an overt repudiation, but I’m happy to be corrected.

  4. greenbaggins said,

    September 28, 2015 at 11:20 am

    Mr. Colvard, I don’t know if this is what you’re looking for, or whether you’ve read it before or not, but there is this:

    https://greenbaggins.wordpress.com/2015/06/16/what-is-racism/#comment-129251

    I have heard that the founding TE’s were offered a sum of $100,000 on condition that it be a white man’s church, whereupon they all got up and walked out.

  5. M.Colvard said,

    September 29, 2015 at 11:47 am

    Great, thanks greenbaggins! These were really helpful documents. It certainly doesn’t solve the larger issues of repentance, confession, etc., but at least there is an establishment that the founders acknowledged there was a proverbial elephant in the room and there was a need to remove said elephant. It seems to me that this topic is especially important not only for our churches and denomination, but also as individuals; what ought I to be confessing? How ought I to be confessing?

  6. Reed Here said,

    October 2, 2015 at 11:13 am

    Interesting. This past July I completed an 18 sermon series on repenting from sins of the past. Our congregation is now in a period of pursuing the fruits of repentance for these things.

    Your categories of questions are helpful. While I haven’t got Ezk 18 put to bed yet, one thing I’ve considered is whether or not Ezk 18’s individualism is speaking of the consummation of judgment, the day of judgment? If so then this would not contradict some aspects of temporal corporate guilt and judgment.

  7. Reed Here said,

    October 2, 2015 at 11:15 am

    For me, the simple fact that what I’ve labeled corporate-generational repentance in response to corporate-generation guilt is enough to compel me to seek the humility necessary to pursue this form of repentance even while I seek the wisdom to understand it all. The denials of this issue in some quarters have been quite disturbing.

  8. Kurt said,

    October 2, 2015 at 12:47 pm

    There are so many questions that need to be answered. I hope there is not a rush to judgment before we understand the limits and bounds of corporate confession. If we confess that we should have marched in protest for civil rights, then should we confess that we should have protested the fire bombing of Germany, or the destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Granted, some believe those things were justified. But where are the breaks on this thing?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: