Wesleyan heritage, public policy and the option of poverty eradication: challenges to the people called Methodists in South Africa

Keith Anthony Vermeulen*

I have known those who could only afford to eat a little coarse food once every day. I have known one in London picking up from a dunghill stinking sprats, and carrying them home for herself and her children Such is the case at this day of multitudes of people, in a land flowing, as it were, with milk and honey! abounding with all the necessaries, the conveniences, the superfluities of life!⁽¹⁾

The driving idea behind globalization is free-market capitalism-the more you let market force rule and the more you open your economy to free trade and competition, the more efficient and flourishing your economy will be. Globalisation means the spread of free-market capitalism to virtually every country in the world. Therefore, globalization also has its own set of economic rules-rules that revolve around opening, deregulating and privatizing your economy, in order to make it more competitive and attractive to foreign investment.⁽²⁾

The philosophical and ethical bankruptcy of globalisation was based on reducing every aspect of our lives to commodities and reducing our identities to that of mere consumers in the global marketplace. Our capacities as producers, our identity as members of communities, our role as custodians of our natural and cultural heritage were all to disappear or to be destroyed .. Our capacity to give and share was to shrink. But the human spirit refuses to be subjugated by a world-view based on the dispensability of our humanity.⁽³⁾

Introduction

Wesley's ministry emerged within a world of shifting boundaries, opportunities and challenges, not too dissimilar from our age of globalisation and expanding market opportunities. The difference in the above three quotations, however, is that the magnitude and rate of change of market scope through electronic and technological capability today, could hardly be compared with or even comprehended by Wesley and the early Methodists. While scenarios of ideological and economic conflict today are sketched in the last of the opening quotations, Wesley had already highlighted the problem of poverty in a micro-and-macro economic framework in an era so foreign to ours yet so relevant to contemporary economics.

This paper argues that Methodists ought to embrace the Wesleyan heritage that leans toward solidarity with the poor, marginalized and dispossessed. It acknowledges too that a misunderstanding of his civil-state relationships such as his attempts at upliftment of the poor on the one hand and preference for the monarchy over institutionalized democracy on the other, has led to scholars minimizing his judgments on public policy. It is, therefore, Mr. Wesley's interaction with Britain's political economy, as indicated in our opening quotation that provides new insights into public policy, advocacy and economic justice geared toward poverty eradication in South Africa. This connection provides an opportunity to explore the relationship between divine power, love and grace, thereby aiding Methodists and Christians in South Africa to come to terms with our faith and witness in the public realm.

As we make this leap, two caveats are in order. First, the age of Enlightenment could in no way parallel the expansion of world trade located within rampant globalization and neo-liberal capitalism. Neither could it begin to understand the progressive capability of computing power and the information explosion due to the rise of electronic mail and the World Wide Web⁽⁴⁾

. Second, the geo-political changes related to this expansion, the rebuilding of East-West and North-South relations together with the emergence of a non-racial, constitutional democracy in South Africa create a paradigm shift for revisiting Wesley's African heritage. The challenge to the people called Methodists after nearly a decade of democracy in South Africa is not to rehash the debate on capitalism versus communism. Instead, if we accept that Wesley's economic ethic is based on ministry to the poor as a means of grace, we are challenged to answer how, after a decade or more of globalization that followed the collapse of institutionalized communism, we respond to growing international and civil movements that decry the ongoing and ever expanding gap between rich and poor (nations and individuals)? What do the people called Methodists feel and say about the imbalances of trade between developed and developing nations resulting in the accumulated debt of poorer, developing nations to richer nations and multinational banks? How do we respond to the skewing of political power and the undermining of political sovereignty by multi- and trans national corporations?

This paper cannot deal in depth with these issues of the economy and poverty. In our limited approach, however, we believe that the people called Methodists possess a heritage that is able to influence public policy in South Africa - public policy that enhances the value of those who are most affected by rampant globalization and liberal market economy - through a witness to, for and by the poor that is a Wesleyan model of social justice. Further, if we may call such a strategy a heritage of the "warm heart" and the "extended hand", then Methodists are duty bound to consider the current levels of trade expansion, globalization and liberal market economy as the means of spreading "scriptural holiness". Such a holiness of heart and life - a holiness that for Wesley was steeped in social justice - brings a clear judgment against the ongoing, inequitable distribution of wealth and resources between rich and poor in South Africa.

Inasmuch as Wesley allied his public thoughts with Wilberforce against slavery, we believe he would not accept the world's contemporary economic malaise, perhaps best described as neo-colonial slavery, as inevitable and immutable. Therefore with the very basic ethical tenets of evangelical economics in mind, this paper interrogates the argument that insists there is "no alternative" to neo-liberal market principles and suggests, without prejudice, alternatives in line with Wesleyan socio-economic justice. Secondly, without suggesting that our heritage defines an actual economic system, we turn to various possibilities of preferential options for the poor. With Wesley as an example of political advocacy, we claim that targeting government fiscal expenditure is a major means of empowering the poor, growing the economy and eradicating poverty.

Challenging the "There is no Alternative" theory

Randy L. Maddox warns that too often theological interpretations of Wesley as a champion of the poor begin and end with a "caricature" of his context and his ministry.⁽⁵⁾

One such example is the theological criticism that Wesley's sermon "The Use of Money" was an apology for primitive capitalism. Maddox reminds his readers that the injunction to "gain all you can" merely stated the assumption to enjoy social responsibility in the manner one acquires property, capital or the means of production. The injunction to "save" relates to the manner of self denial in the use of resources without straying into waste and the indulgence of luxury. The command to "give" renounces the accumulation of anything beyond one's basic needs and advises the redirection of surplus possession to meet the needs of one's neighbour in want. Wesley's economic ethic, or "evangelical economics" as Jennings coined it, was not some ethic of decision or personal choice as though one could sever the model "holiness of heart and life" into a division between the public and the private. This debate about Mr. Wesley's intentions found new expressions of interest during the late 1980s at a conference on Wesleyan theology in South Africa. I limit my attentions on this issue to the presentations of three Methodist ministers.

Aubin de Gruchy⁽⁶⁾ argues that John Wesley's socio-economic influences on 18^th century England had both intended and unintended consequences. With regard to Wesley's contribution toward effective social action de Gruchy relates, amongst others, three models of socio-economic transformation. First, he mentions Wesley's self-help scheme in 1740, in which a small group (about twelve) of unemployed and destitute people were trained for four months in "carding and spinning cotton" after which they were able tosupport themselves from their own labour.⁽⁷⁾

Second, as a further part of his ministry to the marginalised, Wesley started a widows' home. He had observed for many years that, although not frail or infirm, many widows were unable to provide for themselves, since they had neither infrastructure of family or friends to care for them. Wesley leased two small houses for the care of nine destitute widows, and two poor children. These were funded from collections taken at the Lord's Supper, and also from the weekly contributions of the bands. These widows and children had their meals with Wesley.⁽⁸⁾

Unfortunately this venture proved to be too great a financial burden and had to be discontinued after a relatively short time. Wesley created a simple loan society to assist struggling Methodists. This venture started in 1746 and, in the first eighteen months no less than 255 people were helped. The scheme was based on a public collection made by Wesley for the specific purpose of helping those in financial difficulties to get back on their feet, or to assist those who wished to start a small business. Wesley says: "I made a public collection towards a lending-stock for the poor. Our rule is, to lend only twenty-shillings at one, which is repaid weekly within three months. I began this about a year and a half ago: thirty pounds and sixteen shillings were collected; and of this no less than two hundred and fifty-five persons have been relieved in eighteen months."⁽⁹⁾

We are told that "Among its first beneficiaries was a cobbler named James Lackington, who in 1775 borrowed five pounds with which to start a secondhand book shop. This new business grew more rapidly than his cobbling, and in course of time he gave up the latter. The book business developed into the largest secondhand bookstore in London, if not in the world. It made its proprietor immensely wealthy, and the year Mr Wesley died Lackington's profits from his business amounted to twenty-five thousand dollars".⁽¹⁰⁾

While social action was deliberate, Wesley's work amongst the poor came to be seen as a result of religious endeavour, guaranteeing the poor wealth and prosperity as a result of God's will and displeasure with poverty. The unintended consequences, states de Gruchy, were that Methodists became a movement towards affluence, deviating from its witness to social concern while at the same time in a sinister manner, the class meetings opened an avenue for public participation of members, a feature that Wesley feared and loathed in institutional democracy.

Charles Villa-Vicencio⁽¹¹⁾, in the same series of discussions, questions to what extent Mr. Wesley's "advocacy of good works antecedent to the conversion experience [was] essentially necessary to reassure the "altogether Christian" of his or her salvation." This argument places Wesley as a captive to his context in that the problem of poverty and suffering become the defining factor for Wesley's simultaneous quest for personal salvation and good works. The way out of this theological malaise, suggests Villa-Vicencio, is to pursue Wesley's doctrine of perfect sanctification as a construct that rejects the "narrow Wesleyan perspective" of God's activity of social transformation outside of human participation. Villa-Vicencio urges Methodists, instead, to pursue a "broad theological horizon" that "could assist us to become co-creators and active partners with God in transforming South Africa [which] is ultimately the meaning of sanctification."

It is Itumeleng Mosala⁽¹²⁾, broaching the subject from the viewpoint of social and political exclusion at the time, who captures the imagination. He points out that Wesley's relativism on non-essential matters relating to Methodist doctrine "is nothing but theological opportunism."⁽¹³⁾ Such opportunism, says Mosala, results in captivity to a political ideology that challenged the tendency of industrialism to undermine human dignity "without questioning the basic logic of capitalism."⁽¹⁴⁾ Mosala therefore, calls for a dynamic revision of the doctrine of Christian perfection by challenging Methodism to " take seriously the discourses of struggle of oppressed people."⁽¹⁵⁾ Mosala is therefore challenging us to understand the heart of the doctrine of sanctification - Wesley's standard of excellence, Christian perfection, by which the gift of grace in Christian life is to be measured. When we accept the challenge to understand Christian perfection from the experience of the economically oppressed and marginalised, we begin to understand how Wesley's economic ethic undergirds and elevates his ministry to the poor. Visitation of "those who need me most", for example, shifts from being a task or obligation to an unspoken means of grace. Now, after ten years of democracy, we reflect on our Wesleyan heritage. Thinking in terms of the means of grace, while dialoguing with communities oppressed and marginalized under apartheid and still bearing that legacy of inequity, we proceed to interrogate various assumptions of neo-liberal market economy.

1. If we are saved by grace through faith to do good works as co-creators with God (Ephesians 2:8-10) how do we hand over an economic order to "the invisible hand of market forces"? From Margaret Thatcher's privatization of national services to Ronald Reagan's cuts on social security, a system of privatized economics gained impetus with the rider that there was no alternative to the market economy. Duncan Forrester⁽¹⁶⁾, former principal of New College at Edinburgh University, points out that the philosophy behind this trend stems from F A Hayek, who in The Mirage of Social Justice, argues that true market elements should operate without hindrance or controls, otherwise there would not be economic justice. This philosophy, says Forrester, lies behind the assumption that a market economy has a nature and soul of its own and, "like Topsy, it just growed". Herein lies a clear challenge to the Creator's sovereignty over all creation at least and a subtle leverage for the divine inspiration of market economy, at worst. The question that arises is, to what extent does a market economy encourage the people called Methodists to lapse into a "heart-hand-mercy" witness? The evangelical injunction in the letter to the Ephesians holds together salvation and a divine-human partnership for the good and renewal of the earth. How do we then justify a distinction between salvation and the call on the saved to exercise stewardship over resources intended for the good of all creation if such stewardship is a forbidden practice in a market economy?



2. If the earth is the Lord's and everything in it (Psalm 24:1), how do we accept an economic order based on scarcity and therefore inequitable distribution? Friedman, a journalist who writes positively about globalization, states that neo-liberal economics may be flawed but it is the dominant and only model and that we are duty bound to participate in it.⁽¹⁷⁾ That would not be a problem except that the growing inequity between rich and poor, developed and developing nations abounds, with related problems such as debt, disease and even death. The question that arises is that, if God's economy is an abundant one - enabling some to seek the perfection of "Lexus" type technology, should we not then focus on the allocation and distribution of such gains? The problem that arises, we are told, is that market economies operate on competition based on price. The result is that capital is valued as a resource while labour becomes expendable. What we witness today is the paradox of rampant unemployment and capital growth. For example, British Telecom in the 1990s posted large profits while thousands of workers were retrenched and human resource managers earned huge salaries. Capital formation is also created by subsidies while employment on the other hand is discouraged by taxing it. While all these resources are available, distribution does not follow.



3. Can we find any biblical or theological justification for the idea that an economic order and globalization are value free? Do we need to accept anything that operates outside of moral will? How do we understand an order outside of moral purpose whether that order is between people and people and/or between people and resources? This question is a theological challenge similar to the relationship between salvation and stewardship that we posed above. If sin is the breakdown of relationships between humanity, God and the use of resources, do we accept an order that allows the rich and powerful unfettered control of the poor and weak? Since poverty and wealth are not simply questions about economic resources but also concerning power relations in society, globalization is a profoundly ethical and theological question. How would we weight, for example, the principles of regulation over wealth such as Jubilee which allows for forgiveness and restoration of relationships and the eradication of debt? In the past twenty years economic inequality has grown by leaps and bounds. There is no evidence of wealth that has "trickled down". To the contrary, indications are that wealth has been sucked up and continues to be sucked from the poor. Exports from poorer countries have far exceeded developmental aid. Rich countries subsidise their products, dumping them onto poorer nations. The share of trade from poorer countries has been reduced, resulting in a consistent concentration of assets in the pockets of the rich. Furthermore, globalisation and the rise of the World Wide Web have resulted in the creation of a virtual economy comprised of unusable wealth belonging to a few rich people. We are living in a world that is spiraling hopelessly in debt and, while debt provisions exist for business companies, it is strange that no debt forgiveness principles apply between nations on an international level. Without checks and balances, unregulated market economy allows for neo-colonial slavery and even genocide by rich countries over poorer nations.



4. If the centre of Jesus' ministry was to bring good news to the poor, release to the captives and proclaim God's economic favour and generosity, how can we accept as inevitable an order that transfers resources from the poor to the rich? How do we reconcile this with the condemnation by the prophets of the Old Testament that such widening of income disparity is the fruit of robbery and that resultant poverty is a form of violence? A tendency in Protestant and evangelical thinking needs to be dispelled - that the poor are poor because they are lazy or because of one or other kind of moral indiscretion. On the other hand wealth is lauded and the disparity is encouraged by market economists because it is seen as good for economic growth. Jesus followed a long line of prophets who condemned greed and usury as well as the marginalisation of the poor. Jesus' central vision for mission (Luke 4:12ff.), which is also to be found in a key sermon of John Wesley's, insists that true Good News, authentic evangelical economics is about proclaiming and living out characteristics of judgment on all that militates against the dignity of the poor, marginalised and outcast of society.



5. What kind of community does "creative destruction" result in if economic growth and wealth are to trump traditional values such as national, cultural and religious identity? The Biblical concept of justice, which includes well-being, peace, protection of family, care for the vulnerable, wealth and human flourishing, is to be celebrated as life, to be abundantly enjoyed (John 10:10). The Old Testament refers to such a state as shalom - a peace based integrally on justice that makes right what has gone wrong. How can we narrow our concept of wealth to the accumulation of capital and reward only owners of capital? Friedman's Golden Arches theory of Peace claims that no two countries which have Mac Donalds chains have gone to war against each other. Simply put, he claims that economic prosperity as represented by countries in which certain TNCs operate, do not have the propensity to war against each other. His is a form of Pax Americana - the peace of the market. This assumption of peace needs to be challenged. Who takes responsibility for the fallout caused by liberal economic systems? Who cares about the resultant stresses of job loss, mental illness and extreme alienation, family breakdown from dual income parents, drug addiction and gangsterism as economic enterprise? The destruction of traditional values without support structures, says Dandala, is an indictment against Western religious and economic systems.⁽¹⁸⁾ In a Christian and African sense of ubuntu, charity is intertwined with justice and peace and is the product of respect for cultural, religious and political diversity. If Christians allow liberal market economics to trump the values of respect and peace, we shall all be guilty of ushering in an era of barbarism posing as "creative destruction".

Having called into question the theological, ethical and Wesleyan support for a market economy of a neo-liberal nature, let us turn our attention to more salient alternatives. Our theological thought from here on will be shaped by two new ideas emerging from the People's Budget Campaign,⁽¹⁹⁾ which encourages Christians to understand and respond to principles of South Africa's macro-economic strategy. We shall focus on addressing poverty through public policy that urges the creation of a comprehensive, caring, social protective net as an ethical priority. Second, as we proceed to analyse poverty in South Africa as a legacy of apartheid inequity, we shall advocate increased fiscal expenditure by the State in South Africa as an effective and ethical step towards poverty eradication.

The context of poverty and inequity in South Africa

The problems of poverty, income inequalities and rising unemployment as discussed in the previous section are not broad theological and ideological issues but challenges of reality in South Africa. After nearly a decade of democracy, the current structure of our economy, as we shall indicate, has been unable to impact on our colonial legacy of economic disparity and eliminate the legacies of apartheid. The report of Statistics South Africa, Earnings and Spending in South Africa records disturbing facts about the race, gender and provincial gaps in incomes and expenditure. The poor became poorer from 1995-2000 with the richest 20% of households controlling 65% of the national income while 50% of the poorest household incomes dropped from 11,3% to 9,7%. The racial character of income remains unchanged except that the ratio of income amongst African households slipped from 25% in 1995 to 18% in 2000. The Eastern Cape and Limpopo provinces had the most people living in poverty. Women head the poorest households in African community. White headed households are the most affluent. Between 45 and 55% of South Africans (20-28 million) live in abject poverty and of these, 11% of households with children under seven went hungry because of a lack of money. The UNDP's Human Development Index Report of 2002 puts South Africa amongst the worst performers in the world, especially given our strong macro-economic structure. Such inherent poverty, it warns, gives rise to the phenomenon of the poverty trap: lower productivity, harder acquisition of skills and the undermining of social cohesion. It is in this context, however, that we propose public spending as a major instrument for eradicating poverty as well as supplementing economic development.

Public policy and macro economic strategy: key interventions in poverty eradication

The poor are not poor because they are lazy and immoral. The poor are unable to pay for services, not because they revel in crime or are corrupt, but simply because they do not have access to capital. While personal and individual morality has its social benefits, there are more pressing and structural matters that perpetuate poverty such as ruling class economic policies. Unfortunately, a series of articles on poverty and Methodism edited by Heitzenrater, makes no reference to the role that macro economic conditions play in the lives of the poor and wealthy. Theodore Jennings,⁽²⁰⁾

on the other hand, has appropriately pointed out Wesley's oft neglected position in public policy and economic strategy. In the chapter headed "A preferential option for the poor", Jennings identifies Wesley's "concrete solidarity" with the poor through theological and pastoral engagement. Often Wesley's engagement with the poor led to his welfare appeals as well as organization of relief on behalf of the destitute, sick and poor. While ministry to the poor is central to Wesley's spreading of scriptural holiness and to Christianity, Jennings points out that Wesley's document "Thoughts on the Present Scarcity of Provisions" reveals his grasp of economic principles in analyzing the cost and scarcity of food for the poor as well as other goods which lead to a spiral of unemployment and starvation. Wesley suggests that half of the annual corn crop goes into distilleries which export their product to countries such as Algiers, while British subjects suffered hunger and poverty. This radical analysis of the economy, says Jennings, led Wesley to argue for tenant farmers (cash croppers) over against big farm monopolies (a point that the SACC Churches recently stressed in their submissions on the Communal Land Rights Bill in SA), for luxury taxes on chariots and export horses as well as the abolition of distilling. The latter case was not a matter of private and individual moralizing as much as it was of Wesley being passionate about the effects government policy had on the poor, turning him into the revolutionary witness in public policy of his time. As we reflect on Wesley's recommendations for national policy in dealing with the plight of the poor, we utilize these insights in respect of current macro economic strategy in South Africa.

A brief analysis of public policy in South Africa's macro-economic strategy

Government spending, because of restrictive monetary policy, remains too low to enable the poor in South Africa to break out of the poverty trap, resulting in a spiral of low economic growth, low social investment, low wages and severe poverty. All of this contributes to a low efficiency and effectiveness of government monetary policy. The People's Budget Campaign in 2003 therefore called on government to "Spend more" and "Spend well" in order to address the eradication of poverty.

At the heart of a developmental approach to poverty eradication strategy, is a call to acknowledge that poverty is about power and resources. Government is urged to improve, what the UN Committee for Social Development calls a "social protection" package for the poor. We shall elaborate more on this later when we discuss the Taylor Committee's recommendations on comprehensive social security. We were assured in the President's speech in February 2003 that government is committed to "push back the frontiers of poverty".⁽²¹⁾ Social protection in empowering impoverished communities, however, would also need to include the following:

• government direction of economy to create social entrepreneurship;
• the regulation of the market to overcome the unintended and intended legacies of apartheid;
• empowerment of the poor by ensuring their access to basic services and social grants as an integral part social protection; and
• government's political and moral will to use additional resources appropriately, effectively and without damage to the economy.

The question arises: Is government able to spend more on empowering the poor without damaging its macro-economic framework? The answer from researchers is a resounding "Yes". Since 1996 government has spent R 50 billion annually on tax cuts, money that has disproportionately benefited the rich. Corresponding analysis indicates, however, that these tax dividends have not yielded higher savings or economic growth. The indications from private investment are of such a nature that they tend to mirror State investment and that higher social investment by the State may well result in higher private investment in poverty eradication. By the same token, initial tax rates may rise in an attempt to address poverty but analysts are confident that, as poverty is addressed, tax rates may well decline as the economy grows.

A call to implement a Basic Income Grant (B.I.G.) as an integral part of a balanced and comprehensive approach to social protection

In 2000 government appointed a Committee of Inquiry into Comprehensive System of Social Security for South Africa to explore ways to meet these commitments. The Committee, chaired by Prof. Viviene Taylor and also known as the Taylor Committee, reported to Parliament in 2002. The Committee noted that, as a developing economy coping with the structural legacies of apartheid, South Africa is unlikely to be able to create stable and meaningful employment opportunities for economically active adults in the foreseeable future. It is in this context that a recommendation for "social protection" as a "safety net" for the poor was made.

The Committee reported its findings that Old Age pensions and Child Support Grants were powerful mechanisms for combating poverty and that the presence of an aged person in a household frequently lifted households out of poverty. It also noted that, in spite of effective public transfers, the patchwork of social grants inherited from the apartheid era was unable to meet the challenge of rooting out extreme poverty, due in part, to gaps in coverage. The Committee called for a balanced and comprehensive approach to social protection.

The Taylor Committee further identified three kinds of poverty that need to be addressed. Asset poverty provides access to productive and income generating assets such as land and credit as well as to social assets such as community infrastructure. Capability poverty refers to free and adequate public health care, free primary and secondary education, free water and sanitation, free electricity, accessible and affordable public transport, adequate housing as well as jobs and skills training. Parliament heard too that income poverty often played a huge role in preventing the poor households from accessing anti-poverty measures such as health care, primary education and free basic services. The Committee argued that in addressing a comprehensive social security package, a keystone would be to address income poverty. Chief among the recommendations of addressing income poverty were the Child Support Grant, the Old Age Grant and the Basic Income Grant.

A Basic Income Grant:

• Is non means tested and removes bureaucratic involvement and cost in distribution;
• Is universally applied to every citizen irrespective of age or economic status;
• Deals with chronic poverty and destitution by ending a state of cashlessness;
• Allows for the poor to access rights to basic needs such as education and health.
• Is given to everyone so that those who do not need it will be taxed but also contemplate how to reduce the poverty gap other than through giving to those who appeal to the rich for help.
• Restores the minimum dignity to those who otherwise have no means of living with dignity.

Conclusion

Our South African heritage enables us as Africans to reflect theologically with progressive analysis on what might otherwise petrify theologians elsewhere who appear unable or unwilling to transcend the assumption that there is no alternative to the rampant neo-liberal economy of globalization. Our Wesleyan heritage demands that we decide on our location of the wealth-poverty equation as well as on serious engagement with the poor. In fact we have argued that for Wesley, solidarity with the poor emerges as a means of grace rather than a remote ideological opinion. While the (Methodist) Church has become aligned with capital and middle class values, our African heritage gives us an unrivalled opportunity to impact on macro-economic structures, insisting that Christians participate in a social order that seeks to "push back the frontiers of poverty". In this sense, economics in the Wesleyan mould is always about our relationships with those who bear the brunt of political, social and economic systems. Such relational economics asks, as does Itumeleng Mosala, where and how we locate ourselves in relation to the rural poor, the abused woman and girl-child of civil society. I suspect that such economics has a moral resonance and synergy more in line with "the human spirit (that) refuses to be subjugated by a world-view based on the dispensability of our humanity", as propounded by Vandana Shiva. And I would wager that Wesley stands in the shadows with some pride, as Christians advocate for the dignity of the poor, not as some moral duty but as a "means of grace", an integral part of our claim to excel at Christian citizenship - a measure of our sanctification.

The Revd. Keith Vermeulen is Director of The South African Council of Churches' Parliamentary Office, formerly known as the Public Policy Liaison Unit

NOTES

1. John Wesley, Thoughts on the Present Scarcity of Provisions (1773).

2. Thomas Friedman, The Lexus and the Olive Tree (London: HarperColllins, 2000), 9.

3. Vandana Shiva, "The Living Democracy Movement: Alternatives to the Bankruptcy of Globalisation" in William Fisher and Thomas Ponniah (eds.), Another world is possible: Popular alternatives to globalization at the World Social Forum (Cape Town: David Philip, 2003), 115-124.

4. See Friedman, The Lexus, who refers unreservedly to globalization as a "world that is ten years old", a process that is inevitable and immutable, its excesses best dealt with through understanding how its parts work in order to benefit everyone (xi-xxii).

5. Randy L. Maddox, "'Visit the Poor': John Wesley, the Poor, and the Sanctification of Believers" in Richard P. Heitzenrater (ed.), The Poor and the People called Methodists (Nashville: Abingdon, 2002), 59-81.

6. For a fuller account see "Beyond Intention - John Wesley's Intentional and Unintentional Socio-economic influences on 18^th Century England", Journal of Theology for Southern Africa, 68,(September 1989), 75-85.

7. John Wesley, Works I:292 as in D.D. Thompson, John Wesley as a Social Reformer (New York: Library Press, 1971), pp 12f.

8. John Wesley, Works VIII: 265, Ibid., 19f.

9. John Wesley, Works II: 81, ., 21f.

10. John Wesley, Works VIII: 267, Ibid.

11. "Toward a Liberating Wesleyan Social Ethic for South Africa Today" in Journal of Theology for Southern Africa, 68, (September 1989), 92-102.

12. "Wesley read from the experience of social and political deprivation in South Africa" in Journal of Theology for Southern Africa, 68, (September 1989), 86-91.

13. Ibid., 87.

14. Ibid., 91.

15. Ibid., 91.

16. See especially "Justice and the Market" in Duncan B. Forrester, Christian Justice and Public Policy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997), 140-164.

17. See the opening quotation by Friedman above. I recommend the book as a popular rendition in support of globalization and contemporary market economy. I also recommend as parallel reading with The Lexus and the Olive Tree, Fisher and Ponniah's Another world is possible, which raises many other serious practical and ethical questions about globalization and neo-liberal market economics.

18. This point was duly stressed by Bishop Mvume Dandala during his address to South African Christian Leaders Assembly in June 2003 in Pretoria and was the subject of much discussion in a subsequent interview with the BBC.

19. The full document, People's Budget 2004, together with an educational guide Budgeting for People's Needs: an educational guide to budget, together with previous SACC submissions on fiscal policy may be accessed elsewhere on this site.

20. See Theodore W. Jennings, Jr., Good News to the Poor: John Wesley's Evangelical Economics, (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1990), 47-69.

21. President Thabo Mbeki, in his address to the nation, illustrated government's intention to address poverty through job creation and a revised grant system as a strategic priority for 2003. It appears to have set a tone for the 2004 Budget in which social expenditure such as health and education etc. have significantly increased in comparison with the budget in the mid 1990s. Hopefully this trend will continue over the next years as South Africa seeks to gain ground in the battle against poverty.