A couple months ago I wrote and posted a “narrative creed” designed to foster a greater emphasis on ethics within the context of narrative faith. Last week I posted a “creed for community” written by guest author Joey Fuson. Today, I encountered an even more explicitly ethical (even political), and much more narrowly-focused, creed.
It’s called “A Christian Creed for Health-Care Reform”, produced by the Christian social justice magazine Sojourners. The online page containing the creed includes an invitation to sign it; apparently a copy is to be sent to Congress.
As one of God’s children, I believe that protecting the health of each human being is a profoundly important personal and communal responsibility for people of faith.
I believe God created each person in the divine image to be spiritually and physically healthy. I feel the pain of sickness and disease in our broken world (Genesis 1:27, Romans 8:22).
I believe life and healing are core tenets of the Christian life. Christ’s ministry included physical healing, and we are called to participate in God’s new creation as instruments of healing and redemption (Matthew 4:23, Luke 9:1-6; Mark 7:32-35, Acts 10:38). Our nation should strive to ensure all people have access to life-giving treatments and care.
I believe, as taught by the Hebrew prophets and Jesus, that the measure of a society is seen in how it treats the most vulnerable. The current discussion about health-care reform is important for the United States to move toward a more just system of providing care to all people (Isaiah 1:16-17, Jeremiah 7:5-7, Matthew 25:31-45).
I believe that all people have a moral obligation to tell the truth. To serve the common good of our entire nation, all parties debating reform should tell the truth and refrain from distorting facts or using fear-based messaging (Leviticus 19:11; Ephesians 4:14-15, 25; Proverbs 6:16-19).
I believe that Christians should seek to bring health and well-being (shalom) to the society into which God has placed us, for a healthy society benefits all members (Jeremiah 29:7).
I believe in a time when all will live long and healthy lives, from infancy to old age (Isaiah 65:20), and “mourning and crying and pain will be no more” (Revelation 21:4). My heart breaks for my brothers and sisters who watch their loved ones suffer, or who suffer themselves, because they cannot afford a trip to the doctor. I stand with them in their suffering.
I believe health-care reform must rest on a foundation of values that affirm each and every life as a sacred gift from the Creator (Genesis 2:7).
Amen.
My gut reaction is that the creed could be improved were the last paragraph (the one explicitly referencing “health-care reform”) removed, as it seems to overly particularlize the otherwise general tone of the statement. On the other hand, the last part does have the effect of emphasizing the creed’s contextual origin and nature, rather than making it into a “universally orthodox” statement of faith/ethics which it cannot hope to be (and which, I would argue, no creed can hope to be). So I suppose my feelings are mixed.
The statement as a whole, regardless, is an interesting one. It certainly contains a number of valid theological and ethical ideas that are relevant to the current health-care debates. However, the creed departs from the more or less standard conception of the purpose of a creed: rather than being intended as a formative statement for a particular community of faith, this “health-care creed” is explicitly designed to double as a “petition” and to be submitted to Congress as such!
Thus, this creed not only goes beyond the standard sort of content that historical creeds comprise, but also challenges traditional notions of what function creeds are supposed to serve and what sort of communities or organizations in which they are to be put to use. Arguably, it would be more appropriate to regard the present document not as a creed at all, properly speaking, but rather as a call to action that takes the form of a creed as a rhetorical strategy. Again, I have mixed feelings on the matter, though I would tend to regard it as a legitimate creed, albeit an unusual and perhaps boundary-pushing one.
I would be interested to know, first, whether other people regard this document as really being a creed, and second, whether or not other similar petitions-via-creed-rhetoric exist.



3 comments
Comments feed for this article
9 July 2009 at 09:44
Steven Woolley
I am strongly in favor of the political sentiments of this statement, but voted that it is not a creed but a political statement made to look like one. That being the case, I still like it.
CP
9 July 2009 at 10:59
Matt Shafer
I’m beginning to agree, the more I think about it. But on the other hand, I think a fuller discussion of just what “creed” means would be in order; without a better understanding of the meaning and purpose of creeds, it’s really impossible to determine the proper status of the document at hand. I sense another post coming on…
30 July 2009 at 07:14
Frederickus
Whether this is a true creed or not, all I can ask is: WWJD? What WOULD Jesus do? I think the answer is apparent!