A RESPONSE TO DAVID CUBIE

In the recent issue of The Preacher's Magazine, Wesley Tracy, in his fine editorial, discusses change. He states there is a danger when an article begins with "We live in a time of change"-the danger of yawns and disgust! I hope that is not the result here, because he goes on to say that whether we like it or not... we must face and cope creatively with change.1 This is precisely what Dr. David Cubie has creatively attempted to do. What has been given here is only part of a much larger and thorough work entitled Sanctification and Revolution-Social Transformation toward a New Age. Though he does not use the words of Wesley "I look upon the world as my parish"-our author has undertaken an ambitious, but relevant task of developing a Wesleyan theology of the Kingdom and attempting to relate the Biblical doctrine of sanctification to the broad social needs of this age. For this excellent work he is to be heartily commended.

Dr. Cubie is perceptive and sensitive to the troublesome revolutionary times in which we live and aptly understands the cutting edge of today's liberation theology. In the larger paper he sets out to explore "the relation ship between social transformation, the concern for liberation theology, and the doctrine of sanctification." He desires that his material will cause those of us in the Wesleyan tradition to be more deeply sensitive to the broader scope of the social struggles of the poor and oppressed and catch a glimpse of the possibilities of divine grace for social transformation.

At the heart of his treatment is the present paper on developing a Wesleyan theology of the Kingdom. Against the background of the ideas of sociology, psychology, humanism, et. al, the Church faces the need for and the possibility of social change. Since all would agree that individual man and society are sinful Dr. Cubie poses two questions:

l. Is society capable of transformation towards an ideal norm?

2. Regarding the Wesleyan doctrine of sanctification what is the potential for social reformation?

Our author has a clear perception of the philosophies and failures of the likes of humanism and Marxism to bring about needed change. He also sounds a proper note of warning and indictment against the Church in con forming to the status quo. The Church, though teaching personal experience and inner transformation, has not adequately proclaimed the possibility of transforming society.

Against this there is the proclamation that God's purpose is to change men from being sinful into being holy. Christlikeness in unity is properly perceived as the ultimate goal with love as the only way in which unity can exist. Love is the force which seeks to change those structures and concepts which are not of love. This proclamation is set in the tension between false views of social change on the one hand, and the eschatological hope of final, eternal change on the other. It is here that Dr. Cubie is grappling with a proper Wesleyan theology of the kingdom and bringing that to bear upon sinful humanity for proper social change. There is a vast area of concern between the present experience of sanctification coupled with a life of holiness based upon Christ's words "You, therefore, must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect" (Mt. 5.43-48, RSV), and the final eschatological hope echoed in 1 Jn. 3.2

As I understand it a theology of the kingdom involves the present social age, but obviously reaches into a total future fulfillment. Dr. Cubie is reaffirming and broadening our horizons by showing the ramifications of sanctification in contemporary society and relating that to eschatological hope. He sounds a strong, Biblically based note for true social change. New Testament righteousness and holiness are possible through God's grace and not man's self efforts. This is the sharp spear of truth that must be hurled at false humanism and pessimism. The ethic of the kingdom, which is holy love, transcends human abilities, but it must be seen as a command and a promise that can, by God's grace, be fulfilled.

I sensed that Dr. Cubie's main concern is to bring a theology of the kingdom to bear on present day society. A correct thesis is set forth when love is presented as the supreme ethic of the Kingdom. The eschatological fulfillment of that love is the perfection of social relationships. This, of course, means identifying with others, breaking down all barriers and removing all hostility. Though we have not yet arrived and there is a better day coming, I find difficulty discerning the difference between Dr. Cubie's understanding of the present possibilities and responsibilities and the kingdom's coming.

Though I am in basic agreement with the essential theme of the paper and share in its burden, there is one area of concern. It is true the church is the "salt of the earth" (Mt. 5.13) and should embrace and work towards the goal of the kingdom, i.e., the universal sway of love. Theology of the kingdom in relation to sanctification involves unity, and Dr. Cubie's position is that the international churches can become vehicles for unity in the world. Denominations serve to unite mankind. It is agreed that the multiplicity of denominations are forces to remove ethnic and cultural barriers. However, I have serious difficulty with the seeming equation of church unity with social change effected by sanctification. I fully agree with the author's statement-"The day must come when denominational, ethnic and national barriers are broken down" but I must ask, When is this to be? Does a proper Wesleyan theology of the kingdom, the fullness of sanctification make it a realistic goal in these times? How is this to be worked out? Can the Church Universal really be one in unity and be the vehicle of true social change on a Biblical basis when much of modern Christianity neglects, denies and actively opposes the Wesleyan doctrine of sanctification? Dr. Cubie asks, "Does the unity of the church wait for the unity of the kingdom?" Good question! It needs, however, to be further explored and delineated so that a more adequate answer could be hammered out which would better explain the relationship between the power of sanctification in social change now, and the ideal, perfected Church in the millennium.

Dr. Cubie has served us well in this paper by calling attention to the needs of humanity in these "changing times," and the hope and possibility of what sanctification can do. He has given a clarion call to those in the Wesleyan tradition to a sharper belief in the power of love and to have a loftier vision of that love doing for both the Church and the world what Christ desires. I, for one, feel we should listen!

_____

1Wesley Tracy, The Preacher's Magazine (Kansas City: Beacon Hill Press of Kansas City, Dec.-Jan. 1982-83).