William Wilberforce

Pr. Jeff Fromholz07 de nov de 2007

LESSONS FROM WILLIAM WILBERFORCE

LEADER’S GUIDE

A Passion for Social Change

Why is it so difficult—and so important—for Christians  to work together for good?

In the 19th century, radical political change came from an unlikely source. A young and sickly parliamentarian named William Wilberforce managed to bring the British slave trade to public attention and, before his death, achieve his goal: the abolition of slavery. But how was such change accomplished?

Lesson #1  Scripture: Nehemiah 1:1–11; Isaiah 61:1; Micah 6:1–8; Mark 2:1–12; Romans 12:9–21  Based on: “Every Arrow Needs a Bow,” by John Hart, CHRISTIANITY TODAY, July 1998

PART 1

Identify the Current Issue

Note to leader: Prior to the class, provide for each person the article “Every Arrow Needs a Bow” from CHRISTIANITY TODAY magazine (included at the end of this study).

Christians have different visions of how to transform the political structures of the world. Some argue that change needs to come from the top down, with righteous leaders and believers in positions of power. Imagine how thrilled many Christians were when Rwanda’s president Paul Kagame joined Rick Warren, pastor and author of The Purpose-Driven Life, in proclaiming Rwanda “the world’s first purpose-driven nation.” Others believe that true political transformation swells from the ground upward, as average people’s work and prayers rev the engines of political change.

Whether believers want to occupy political office or preach to it, all agree that the significance of the Christian message is anything but private. William Wilberforce and like-minded believers were committed to living the Christian life in public service both inside and outside government. As Christopher Hancock writes, Wilberforce helped form such broad ranging groups as the Society for Bettering the Cause of the Poor (1796), the Church Missionary Society (1799), the British and Foreign Bible Society (1806), the Africa Institution (1807), and the Anti-Slavery Society (1823). His was a spiritual and social gospel that sought to bring “good news” to all aspects of people’s lives.

Discussion Starters

[Q] What kind of political change would you seek to accomplish with the gospel?

[Q] Christianity is divided over how Christians ought to relate to civic powers. What does your church teach?

[Q] People say that the two things not to mention in polite company are politics and religion. How is the combination of politics and religion considered even more taboo in today’s society? Give some examples of how the combination may make people feel uncomfortable or comforted.

PART 2

Discover the Eternal Principles

Teaching point one: Change begins with a broken heart.

The human brain is a wonderfully complex organ, processing different kinds of information in different areas. For example, the right side of the brain controls the left side of the body and usually processes emotion. Scientists find ways to map where thoughts are processed, answering such questions as: “Where is romantic love located? It’s not actually your heart … it’s the basal ganglia region of the brain.” But have you ever noticed that some information, however important, never seems to register both intellectually and emotionally? The reality of poverty, war, and injustice in today’s society can seem like trivia, information that remains disconnected from reality.

Wilberforce’s work to end slavery took him 46 years—a lifetime of hard work, effort, and grief. But the momentum behind these monumental efforts began, not with intellectual facts, but with emotional reality: “So enormous, so dreadful, so irremediable did the trade’s wickedness appear that my own mind was completely made up for abolition. Let the consequences be what they would; I from this time determined that I would never rest until I had effected its abolition.”

The desire to work for God’s kingdom must begin with a broken heart.

Read Nehemiah 1:1–11.

[Q] Living in comfort and security in the Persian capital, the Israelites’ problems in Jerusalem must have seemed far away to Nehemiah. What do we learn from his reaction to their difficulties?

[Q] Note the wording of his prayer. How does Nehemiah see the Israelites’ problems in relationship to his own?

Christians often think of their own problems and personal sin as paramount. But Nehemiah’s confession seems to focus less on individuals and more on community.

[Q] How can shifting my to we change the focus of the Christian life?

[Q] In what ways is thinking about communal sin important for Christianity? What would be the problem of focusing solely on communal sin?

Leader’s Note: “We” emphasizes that God came to save the world and that we have certain responsibilities to the world as Christians. However, “my” language helps Christians focus on their own mistakes and spiritual journeys, seeing God’s connection to the world as intensely personal as well. But either one without the other weakens the impact Christians can have.

Nehemiah, as cupbearer to the Persian King Artaxerxes, enjoyed stability and social status. And yet he asked permission to leave it all to return to Jerusalem to help rebuild the wall (Nehemiah 2).

[Q] When was you last time you focused on problems and issues that were not your own? What was the result?

[Q] How can we learn to think of the world’s problems not as theirs but as ours?

[Q] Before Nehemiah took any action to help his people, he sought God. Give an example of how this approach can serve to check our own ambitions.

Christians’ desire to help others is rooted in the fact that while we didn’t deserve anything, Christ still died on the cross to save us from our sins. Think of someone you admire who has sacrificed much for others.

[Q] After doing something wonderful, was it hard for them to stay humble? How hard is it to keep a broken heart like Nehemiah’s for others once you start helping?

Teaching point two: Change is rooted in passion, not numbers.

Passion is sought in all corners of our society. In Donald Trump’s book How to Get Rich, he advises people to “Do what you love. No matter what you do, you have to be passionate about it.” Internet gurus promote “passion consultants” to help people find their inner fire. Passion University in San Francisco even promises to teach and certify people in living holistically passionate lives.

As John Hart describes, passion is a potent tool for religion too: “The great spiritual movements that have shaped societies and their political institutions have almost always been marked not so much by numbers, but by intensity. The First and Second ‘Great Awakenings’ in American history were great not so much because of their size as because of the depth of change that ‘awakened’ individuals sustained. For that matter, evil spiritual movements like Lenin’s and Hitler’s follow the same model. For good or ill, small groups of highly committed individuals are the engines that drive revolutions.”

Wilberforce and his close community of friends drove a revolution of Christian social causes. At one point, he was active in 69 philanthropic causes, fighting for the welfare of single mothers, soldiers, animals, children, and orphans.

Read Mark 2:1–12.

[Q] The paralytic man’s encounter with Jesus did not just happen on its own. Discuss all the steps it likely took to make it happen. Who did the work? How did Jesus respond to these efforts?

[Q] Whose faith did Jesus see and reward? Note the wording in verse 5. What does this suggest about what God values?

[Q] Some Christians argue that the church’s focus ought to be on saving souls rather than improving people’s quality of life. How does this passage reflect Jesus’ priorities? Do you think it is an either/or equation?

Read Isaiah 61:1. In the Book of Luke, Jesus applies these words to his own mission.

[Q] In your experience, what is the church’s track record in making this mission their mandate?

[Q] Look at the action words in this passage. How do these actions require your passion?

Teaching point three: Ultimately, political transformation can never replace the transforming power of God.

In the philosopher Plato’s most famous work, he offers a blueprint for the “perfect” republic. Political leadership would require superior intellectual knowledge, not superior force. Each station in life would require special gifts, and harmony would rule the relationship between the state and the individual. It’s tempting to think that having the right rules in place would create a great society and the world would operate like a well-oiled machine. But even if perfect laws were in place, as Hart describes:

the transforming power of God comes through love, not laws. As important as they are, just laws cannot substitute for a body politic that loves justice. Laws do not exercise jurisdiction over the soul, while love penetrates the soul. “It is not revolutions and upheavals that clear the road to new and better days, but someone’s soul, inspired and ablaze,” wrote Boris Pasternak.

Read Micah 6:1–8. In these difficult days for the southern kingdom of Judah, Micah witnessed the moral and political decay of God’s chosen people. Alternating between oracles of hope and doom, Micah prophesied God’s judgment on Judah.

[Q] In this courtroom scene, what is the nature of God’s judgment of his people?

[Q] How does Micah, serving as interlocutor, describe God’s desires for them?

During this time of crisis, refugees from the north flooded Jerusalem, overwhelming the city with countless poor and needy people.

[Q] What do you think God would want the Judeans to do based on this passage?

[Q] Even in a society governed by perfect laws, why is it not enough to love justice? How do Micah’s words qualify and expand what “He has showed you”?

Read Romans 12:9–21. Paul offers radical teaching on how believers are supposed to love.

[Q] Can these teachings be legislated? If so, which ones? If not, how does this passage challenge us to know our work does not end with political transformation?

Consider St. Ignatius of Loyola’s famous prayer:

Dearest Lord, teach me to be generous; teach me to serve you as you deserve; to give and not to count the cost; to fight, and not to heed the wounds; to labor, and not to seek to rest; to give of myself and not to ask for reward, except the reward of knowing that I am doing your will.

[Q] How do these words form a prescription for love rather than a law to be followed?

PART THREE

Apply Your Findings

In the early 18th century, an unlikely religious group climbed to the height of economic and political power in the new colony of Pennsylvania. Quakers, whose commitment to plain dress, simple living, and pacifism made them cultural outsiders, suddenly found themselves with the ability and will to rule. At first, it seemed easy to be both a committed Quaker and a maker of public policy. As Pennsylvania’s most important merchants, farmers, and politicians, it seemed right that they should spread Christ’s light into the broader culture.

But politics soon demanded spiritual compromise. People began to call for the Quaker-dominated government to fight Native Americans along Pennsylvania’s increasingly volatile frontier, a clear violation of Quaker pacifism. Further, prosperity was making it harder to convince fellow Quakers to keep their clothing simple and their possessions few. As tensions between political office and religious life mounted, most Quakers resigned from politics. Some heralded their exodus as the preservation of religious purity, while others called it a loss for the state. With the Quakers gone, few remained to challenge the peddling of slaves and guns or military action against the Native Americans.

The relationship of Christianity to political power is complicated by the reality of compromise. Politicians constantly barter and bargain for compromise on a variety of issues, while Christianity hopes to attain purity above all else. Wilberforce himself fought for a 10-hour work day and felt let down when he settled for 10 and a half.

[Q] When do you think it is better to compromise? What kinds of issues do you feel can’t be compromised?

[Q] What actions could you or your church take to raise an issue of concern to the political community?

[Q] What approaches have Christians taken in the past that show passion as well as love?

[Q] Give some examples of how Christians have ruined their reputation by fighting for issues at all costs.

Action Point: The song “Canticle of the Turning” promises that God is ready to change the world. What “great things” do you wish would come about with your help?

Though I am small, my God, my all, You work great things in me. And Your mercy will last from the depths of the past to the end of the age to be. Your very name puts the proud to shame, and to those who would for You yearn You will show Your might, put the strong to flight – for the world is about to turn.

Optional Activity: End your meeting by reciting together either St. Ignatius of Loyola’s prayer or “Canticle of the Turning.”

—Study prepared by Kate Bowler,  graduate student in religion at Duke University.

Recommended Resources

HYPERLINK "http://www.christianbiblestudies.com" ChristianBibleStudies.com  -Christian Vision Project course

The Church in Transition: The Journey of Existing Churches into the Emerging Culture, Tim Conder (Zondervan, 2006; 0310265711)

The World Calling: The Church’s Witness in Politics and Society, Thomas Ogletree (Westminster John Knox Press, 2004; ISBN 0664228747)

Amazing Grace: William Wilberforce and the Heroic Campaign to End Slavery, Eric Metaxas (HarperCollins, 2007; ISBN 0061173002)

Real Christianity, William Wilberforce and Bob Beltz (Regal Books, 2007; ISBN 0830743111)

William Wilberforce: The Freedom Fighter, Derek Bingham (Christian Focus Public, 1997; ISBN 1857923715; ISBN 1591603692)

William Wilberforce and the Abolition of the Slave Trade, CHRISTIAN HISTORY & BIOGRAPHY 53

ARTICLE

Every Arrow Needs a Bow: William Wilberforce

William Wilberforce and the Power of Community.

By John Hart, for the study “A Passion for Social Change.”

Many political observers agree that at no other time in the past 30 years have Christians enjoyed so much political influence, yet suffered so much political frustration. Religious conservatives, who went to great lengths to secure a “place at the table,” now feel disappointed in the results and betrayed by those with whom they sit. James Dobson, for example, has seriously considered leaving the Republican party and taking his four million listeners with him. Despite the church’s vast investments in the political arena, Dobson and his cobelligerents say, our culture continues to spiral downward. Meanwhile, activists on the religious left are dismayed that increased access to the White House kaffeeklatsch has brought few concrete results for their own agenda.

Perhaps this paradoxical state of access without success can draw our attention to a 28-year-old Member of Parliament who wrote in his diary: “God Almighty has set before me two great objects, the suppression of the slave trade and the reformation of manners [morals].” The year was 1787, and the young parliamentarian was William Wilberforce. His success in these “two great objects” is perhaps the most remarkable achievement of any single statesman.

In 1787, the odds of Wilberforce, or anyone, abolishing the slave trade seemed miniscule. Public opinion and the economic self-interest of his own nation were overwhelmingly against him. The typical citizen considered slaves to be nothing more than property, and the trade was as entrenched in the economy of the British Empire as the military-industrial complex is in ours. To detach the British economy from slavery, thus cutting off the economic lifeblood of his constituents, would have seemed to pundits in 1787 a perfect way to commit political suicide. Ten days before his death, an elderly John Wesley wrote to the young Wilberforce: “Unless God has raised you up for this very thing, you will be worn out by the opposition of men and devils. But if God be for you, who can be against you.” God was indeed with him. Wilberforce persisted through vicious insults and physical assaults before he miraculously succeeded in his crusade 46 years later, only three days before his own death.

Wilberforce’s success in reforming the “manners” of England was equally astonishing. English culture in 1787 was similar to postmodern America in its callousness, indifference, and hedonism. The Empire’s cultural elite had made great strides in normalizing debauchery. Yet, somehow, Wilberforce made goodness fashionable through a series of imaginative efforts toward cultural renewal. His biographer, John Pollock, credits him with establishing the Victorian virtues of character, morality, and justice.

Wilberforce’s success can, in part, be credited to his enormous talents: his brilliance, wit, and soaring oratory. He could have become prime minister had he “preferred party to mankind,” notes one historian. However, another vital component to Wilberforce’s success was the support provided by his community of friends in the Clapham Fellowship. If Wilberforce was the arrow that pierced the heart of the slave trade, the Clapham Fellowship was the bow that propelled him. As Pollock writes, “Wilberforce proves that one man can change his times, but he cannot do it alone.”

In Clapham, a town a few miles south of London, Wilberforce and his closest friends lived together in community. Among those who lived in Clapham were spiritual advisors and colleagues in Parliament such as John Newton, author of “Amazing Grace,” George Whitefield, John Wesley, Henry Thornton, and their families. Their houses were joined by a garden that none of the families bothered to divide. Each family lived by an open-door policy and often strolled into one another’s homes uninvited. The families often shared meals together, housed guests, and watched their children play with one another.

Overflowing joy marked their community life. The nephew of Henry Venn, one of the spiritual elders at Clapham, recalled his upbringing: “These wise men never endeavored to mould our uninformed opinions into any particular mould. Indeed, it was needless for them to preach to us. Their lives spoke far more plainly and convincingly than any words. We saw their patience, cheerfulness, generosity, wisdom, and activity daily before us, and we knew and felt that all this was only the natural expression of hearts given to the service of God.”

There were at least three qualities of the Clapham Fellowship that contributed to their incredible success.

First, they were radically committed to, and unified in, the person of Jesus Christ. Doug Holladay, former Reagan advisor and Wilberforce expert, notes how this principle set Wilberforce apart from his religious contemporaries: “Rather than ascribing to lifeless dogma or dull, conventional religious thinking, Wilberforce and his colleagues were motivated by a robust personal belief in a living God who is concerned with individual human lives, justice, and the transformation of societies.”

Their intense focus on Jesus Christ also prevented denominational differences, not to mention personal ambition and ego, from dividing the community. The Clapham fellowship lived by Wesley’s maxim: “In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; in all things, charity.” And this was no mere slogan: tensions developed in their relationship that would have splintered most associations, even Christian associations, had they not been so radically centered on Christ.

Second, their intentional relationships with one another were their greatest resource. Their colleagues in Parliament described Wilberforce and his cohort as “The Saints,” a term that mixed derision and respect. The Saints—once described as “a meeting that never adjourned”—provided one another strength, accountability, and vision. Though they brought tremendous individual passion to their political causes, The Saints did not pursue their projects at the expense of their friendships. Former United States Senator Mark Hatfield writes that Wilberforce inspired him to reevaluate his career:

“One of the most compelling and encouraging characteristics I find in Wilberforce’s life was the early resolve to focus his legislative and personal agenda on building relationships,” Hatfield writes. “This took the place of power manipulation and legal machinations. In other words, he sought to continue the incarnation of the Word in loving acts of mercy, justice, and charity to those around him—even if they were his adversaries. If Christians in political life cannot be witnesses in this most basic manifestation of the living Word on a day-to-day basis, then the whole concept of public service is a mockery.”

Dr. Richard C. Halverson was also struck by this dimension of Wilberforce’s life: “There is no limit, no limit, to what God Almighty can do through a group of two or three people who are committed to loving God and one another for life,” Halverson preached on many occasions. “And long after the history of all the big things that make the front pages are forgotten, what God has done through you and a few people will be history.”

Third, the Clapham Fellowship had a clearly defined vision for broad cultural engagement. “I am in hopes that some good may come out of the Clapham system,” Clapham resident and MP Henry Thornton wrote, with some understatement. “Mr. Wilberforce is a candle that should not be hid under a bushel. The influence of his conversation is great and striking.” Thornton, perhaps more than any other member of the group, understood that an individual who engages the culture apart from community is as impotent as a community that does not engage the culture, just as an arrow without a bow is as useless as a bow without an arrow.

The group built on their disciplined commitment to love one another by combining their gifts in a corporate effort to engage society. Their “brains could not be denied, even by those who sneered at their religion. They possessed between them an astonishing range of capacities: encyclopedic knowledge, a capacity for research, sparkling wit and literary style, business sagacity, foreign policy expertise, legal ability, oratory and parliamentary skill. No prime minister had such a cabinet as Wilberforce could summon to his assistance,” Garth Lean writes in God’s Politician.

Rather than creating a religious subculture, the group was a counterculture. They were far from a holy huddle. They understood that a person must understand one’s times in order to impact one’s times, and were masterful at navigating and impacting their culture.

Christians who are active in the political arena ought to reassess their tactics in light of the Clapham Fellowship’s remarkable influence and faithfulness to Christ. For despite the well-publicized successes of the Christian Coalition and others, the church, and religious conservatives in particular, are probably at or near the zenith of their political power. Studies indicate that only 18 percent of Americans consider themselves to be both devoutly religious and politically active. Such a relatively small number can only exercise so much leverage in the political process, and that leverage appears to be at its limit. “We just don’t have the numbers,” says conservative political commentator Cal Thomas.

One of the primary sources of discord among religious conservatives, in fact, is how to get more leverage out of a system that seems to be stuck. This battle pits purists like Dobson versus pragmatists like Ralph Reed. But the real danger for the church is not whether we will lose political leverage, but whether achieving a “place at the table” will reduce us to a political constituency alongside the National Rifle Association, Americans for Tax Reform, the Beer Wholesalers of America, and countless others. There is nothing wrong with the church functioning as a political constituency, but we can and should be more. Indeed, it is naive to think that the creation of a dominant Christian political constituency—were such a thing possible—would renew American society, for two reasons.

First, the great spiritual movements that have shaped societies and their political institutions have almost always been marked not so much by numbers, but by intensity. The First and Second “Great Awakenings” in American history were great not so much because of their size as because of the depth of change that “awakened” individuals sustained. For that matter, evil spiritual movements like Lenin’s and Hitler’s follow the same model. For good or ill, small groups of highly committed individuals are the engines that drive revolutions. Wilberforce chose an intense commitment to a few rather than a loose commitment to many.

Second, the transforming power of God comes through love, not laws. As important as they are, just laws cannot substitute for a body politic that loves justice. Laws do not exercise jurisdiction over the soul, while love penetrates the soul. “It is not revolutions and upheavals that clear the road to new and better days, but someone’s soul, inspired and ablaze,” wrote Boris Pasternak.

Wilberforce was such a soul. His consuming passion was serving and loving Jesus Christ. It is impossible to imagine Wilberforce conducting a poll before introducing his bill to abolish slavery. Obeying Christ was his primary mission; developing a winning political strategy was secondary—although he believed that with the support of the Creator he had already achieved a sufficient majority.

Today it seems that many prominent political figures in the church are flirting with dreams of a political messiah, as if the incumbent Messiah were somehow lacking in power. In many respects, Wilberforce fits the profile of the political messiah so many long for. Yet Wilberforce’s political power did not come from the sources the church is increasingly embracing: parties, money, coalitions, image, lobbyists, a mobilized base, et cetera. His power came from Jesus Christ and a few lifelong friends.

Another Wilberforce will not be raised up by traditional political engineering. Such attempts typically produce hollow clones who mirror one another in an embarrassing spectacle of political pandering. A genuine reformer, however, can be born out of a community of believers passionate about Jesus Christ. The stakes for our nation could not be higher. The promises this generation embraces in the next century will greatly influence whether the coming decades will be a time of renewal or erosion. May we choose to be communities—like the Clapham Fellowship—that transform culture.

—John Hart, RQ’s Contributing Editor for Politics, works as an aide in the U.S. House of Representatives. In 1994, he became the youngest writer ever to win the Amy Writing Award, for an article on Mother Teresa’s speech at the National Prayer Breakfast.

“Every Arrow Needs a Bow,” by John Hart, CHRISTIANITY TODAY, July 1998

LEADER’S GUIDE

REF title \* MERGEFORMAT A Passion for Social Change

Page PAGE 7

PAGE 1

Visit www.ChristianBibleStudies.com

CHRISTIANITYTODAY

INTERNATIONAL

Visit www.ChristianBibleStudies.com

ARTICLE

REF articletitle Every Arrow Needs a Bow: William Wilberforce

Page PAGE 5

REF cibsslogo