Testimony on the Proposed “Social Creed for the 21st Century”

The following testimony concerning the proposed “Social Creed for the 21st Century (Item 09-09) was presented to the Social Justice Issues Committee of the 218th General Assembly (2008), in San Jose, CA, on June 24, 2008.

I’m Alan Wisdom, an elder at Georgetown Presbyterian Church in DC and Vice President of the Institute on Religion and Democracy. I urge you not to adopt the new “Social Creed.”

ACSWP presents the creed as “a concise consensus statement of existing policy.” This claim must be questioned. I will grant that the creed is concise. But is it a consensus? I think not. Consider the following:

• The creed calls churches to work for “public education for all, and universal, affordable and accessible health care.” Private education and healthcare—even when offered by churches—are not satisfactory. The creed puts its faith in “universal” systems run by the government. Others would not share the same faith that government always knows best.
• The creed insists on “[e]mployment for all, at a family-sustaining living wage, with equal pay for comparable work” plus “time and benefits to enable full family life.”  But who will guarantee all these benefits? Again, the creed likely looks to government.
• The creed seeks redistribution of wealth through “[t]ax and budget policies that reduce disparities between rich and poor.” Others would stress giving the poor opportunities to grow their own wealth.
• In endorsing “[e]quitable global trade,” the creed seems to side with the “fair trade” movement that has opposed almost every free trade agreement.
• The creed demands “[n]uclear disarmament and redirection of military spending to more peaceful and productive uses.” Nowhere is there a recognition that force may sometimes be necessary to preserve peace.

Let’s be frank: We don’t have consensus. And how would we know if we did? The document has been out only a few months. Few church members are aware of it, and even fewer have studied it.

Yet ACSWP proposes that we endorse the creed first and then study it. That’s got the whole thing backwards. First you study and then you see if you have a consensus to endorse. I urge you to send the Social Creed out to the churches, but without approving it.