Comments on: Sound Off: Social Justice

By: James Pearson

James Pearson — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 14:02:47 +0000

“That all of us might have the opportunities afforded now only to the most fortunate of us.”

Not long ago I was challenged to give a definition of social justice that fit into a tweet. That’s what I came up with.

By: Joanna

Joanna — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 03:13:06 +0000

Social justice believes that every person has the right to be treated as a human. It often has to do with righting a wrong. It can be fought on individual levels, on a community level and even on a nationwide or worldwide level. And it seems to me that it is a fight. It is not as much about my personal interaction with “the least of these” as much as it is about my pursuit to change people, structures and systems which create, exploit, and abuse one or more of “the least of these.” Social justice seeks change and implies action. It is often first motivated and continually fueled by love and compassion but its goal is to change what is. Social justice plays a prophetic role by shining light on injustice and crying out, “This is not the way it is supposed to be!” Social justice plays a priestly role by connecting those currently held captive with the means to overcome whatever obstacles stand in their way so they may reconnect with their made-in-the-image-of-God humanity. Social justice plays a kingly role by calling those in power to correct the systems that ignore, enslave and dehumanize people. Sometimes social justice requires us to become those in power and change those systems ourselves. Most importantly, social justice is about doing whatever is in our power to see that people are treated as people.

By: Duncan McFadzean

Duncan McFadzean — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 22:03:17 +0000

Rusty – I note you assume that governments bring justice. But what if they bring injustice? How does that change how you look at things? – e.g. Zimbabwe in recent years.

By: Duncan McFadzean

Duncan McFadzean — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 21:57:30 +0000

What about this “to loose the chains of injustice and untie the cords of the yoke, to set the oppressed free and break every yoke? Is it not to share your food with the hungry and to provide the poor wanderer with shelter — when you see the naked, to clothe him, and not to turn away from your own flesh and blood?”

Justice to a Scot looks different to justice to a Kenyan which looks different to justice in Japan. The complexities of each situation demand a generic term that encompasses the principles – to me, “social” is dealing with two aspects 1) referring to society as a whole and 2) referring to the day to day living that makes up that community. Justice is a term that makes right ways of living (e.g. widows and orphans are cared for, or the modern equivalent)and therefore seeks principles of fairness, wholeness, restoration to be in evidence, removing injustice. Perhaps social justice can easier be defined as being against any injustice in society.

Just because a phrase is trendy and has no real definition doesn’t mean it’s not worth fighting for or keeping.

Social justice is not an event, or a programme, or a group of charities. It’s a term that references the removal of injustice, in any form, in any situation.

By: mark

mark — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 02:51:39 +0000

A good selection of responses! I’ll dump my socio-philosophical one in:

Ultimately, what is “social” referencing? Interpersonal interactions (see Luhmann). But what is Justice? We should be careful about this one, to not assume it is the same as our American love for freedom. But if Justice is freedom, then it is freedom to be socially-determining. (Be it in politics or friends.) And now we’re talking about oppression..

From another standpoint, “social” is the latest buzzword (which has good theory as well as present cultural values behind it), and that people, thanks to globalization, feel connected and responsible for those whom our parents never saw the faces of, never heard the cultural practices about.

By: Michael Dunaway

Michael Dunaway — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 02:39:34 +0000

Honestly I’ve NEVER been very comfortable with the term “social justice,” especially as applied in recent American history. The concept of justice necessarily entails an evaluation of what is fair or deserved, as well as an assumption that the one using the word knows best what is fair or deserved. So for some, an able-bodied person refusing to work who starves to death is receiving perfect “social justice.” For others, no one who is suffering has any accountability for his choices. I believe our duty as Christ-followers is almost always much more demanding than what most people mean when they say “social justice.”

By: Jason Fowler

Jason Fowler — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 20:19:50 +0000

Social justice is befriending and recognizing JESUS in the face of those of us trapped on the margins.

By: Rusty

Rusty — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 18:34:54 +0000

I’m not Catholic, but I like the distinction between social justice and love they make (in other words, it seems Biblical). Social justice is about politics–government is God’s instrument for bringing about justice; while charity, or love, is what the church does. The church doesn’t just stay on the sidelines–it awakens society to its responsibility to insure justice, even when that requires sacrifice. But we evangelicals tend to use it as a synonym for our ministries of love and compassion. We can call on society to be more just, but our mission as the church is to love.

By: Micahel

Micahel — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 17:26:50 +0000

Social justice is writing wrongs.

By: kate

kate — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 16:29:54 +0000

its funny that you ask this question, because something about this term makes us uncomfortable and we cant figure out why. We’ve been invited to put on a “social justice area” at an event and are struggling with what to call it. We dont like the sound of “social justice area, event, experience etc.” it seems to detract from the real needs and human side but at the same time some people will identify with what that means.

So the question is how do you summarize it into an understandable name or category and still capture the essence of what it really is?