Joseph Bottum has written a recent article in First Things (its a journal you can’t find at the Christian bookstore) about the death of protestant America, underscoring the overwhelming decline of the mainline church in the last 50 years. One thing he does is relate the mainline’s exchange of theological conviction for the sake of social/political action as a source for the decline. It is without debate that the mainline church’s welcome embrace of liberal theology contributed to its demise, but Bottum goes a step further and says when they gave more attention to social action than they did theological conviction they not only loss numbers they became less and less relevant.
The quotation from Joseph Bottum that I’d like for us to chew on is this one:
“The churches’ desperate hunger to mean more in politics and economics had the perverse effect of making them less effective opponents of the political and economic pressures on the nation. They mattered more when they wanted to matter less.”
I bring this up for a couple of reasons. One of them was because of my experience with the Leadership Summit. I loved the Leadership Summit, but I am developing an hypothesis about something I observed there. Almost all the speakers at the Summit championed some form of social justice cause, and from my understanding Willow has really tuned in to the social justice and human rights need’s around the world. This is a good thing, maybe the best thing the influential mega-church has contributed up to this point. Justice is important to God, and to seek his heart through prioritizing these causes is crucial. BUT, when theological convictions are lacking it is quite natural to rally around social agendas. Further, this is often done at expense of strong, stated theological convictions. Everyone would get on board with feeding the hungry, basic human rights, AIDS in Africa, etc... You could even get a seeker to do that.
Now, at a place like Willow, which has a wonderful heart for Evangelism, but wouldn’t be known for its deep theological conviction or strong gospel proclamation you have to wonder if they will naturally gravitate toward social justice issues. I am not calling Willow Creek liberal, I just think the slope is slippery. When you begin championing causes in Christ’s name without boldly exalting and proclaiming Christ’s gospel you can look up in 15 years and be running purely social ministries with no great sense of what you actually believe and proclaim about Christ and his finished work on the cross.
It goes back to how I introduced my talk at ignite. “An assumed gospel is a non-transforming gospel.” Without a robust, full, stated, continually proclaimed gospel in your ministry (whether social or not) real change simply will not happen. Because ONLY the gospel can change a man’s heart. It only has the power and sufficiency to set captives free.
Therefore, what the quotation from Joseph Bottum is really saying is...if churches try to incite change through the political process, social agendas, human rights initiatives (all good things to do) without a sense of strong theological conviction—conviction oriented toward the sufficient power of Christ crucified, buried, and resurrected (the ultimate thing), then 1), you are not ultimately solving problems because the gospel is holistic and without a proclaimed gospel you are simply doing charity and 2), in the long run unregenerate people cannot sustain such activity, thus the death of the mainline church. Therefore churches are actually serving the culture better by changing people’s hearts rather than raising the banner for social/political causes.
Now, I agree with a both/and approach. There is no reason to give in to the fallacy of the excluded middle.
Tim Keller summarizes it well: “A church must be more deeply and practically committed to deeds of compassion and social justice than traditional liberal churches and more deeply and practically committed to evangelism and conversion than traditional fundamentalist churches. This kind of church is profoundly counter-intuitive to American observers. It breaks their ability to categorize (and dismiss) it as liberal or conservative. Only this kind of church has any chance in the non-Christian west.” - Tim Keller
I think it’s crucial to maintain such balance. I just hope others do as well.
Jay Risner
The quotation from Joseph Bottum that I’d like for us to chew on is this one:
“The churches’ desperate hunger to mean more in politics and economics had the perverse effect of making them less effective opponents of the political and economic pressures on the nation. They mattered more when they wanted to matter less.”
I bring this up for a couple of reasons. One of them was because of my experience with the Leadership Summit. I loved the Leadership Summit, but I am developing an hypothesis about something I observed there. Almost all the speakers at the Summit championed some form of social justice cause, and from my understanding Willow has really tuned in to the social justice and human rights need’s around the world. This is a good thing, maybe the best thing the influential mega-church has contributed up to this point. Justice is important to God, and to seek his heart through prioritizing these causes is crucial. BUT, when theological convictions are lacking it is quite natural to rally around social agendas. Further, this is often done at expense of strong, stated theological convictions. Everyone would get on board with feeding the hungry, basic human rights, AIDS in Africa, etc... You could even get a seeker to do that.
Now, at a place like Willow, which has a wonderful heart for Evangelism, but wouldn’t be known for its deep theological conviction or strong gospel proclamation you have to wonder if they will naturally gravitate toward social justice issues. I am not calling Willow Creek liberal, I just think the slope is slippery. When you begin championing causes in Christ’s name without boldly exalting and proclaiming Christ’s gospel you can look up in 15 years and be running purely social ministries with no great sense of what you actually believe and proclaim about Christ and his finished work on the cross.
It goes back to how I introduced my talk at ignite. “An assumed gospel is a non-transforming gospel.” Without a robust, full, stated, continually proclaimed gospel in your ministry (whether social or not) real change simply will not happen. Because ONLY the gospel can change a man’s heart. It only has the power and sufficiency to set captives free.
Therefore, what the quotation from Joseph Bottum is really saying is...if churches try to incite change through the political process, social agendas, human rights initiatives (all good things to do) without a sense of strong theological conviction—conviction oriented toward the sufficient power of Christ crucified, buried, and resurrected (the ultimate thing), then 1), you are not ultimately solving problems because the gospel is holistic and without a proclaimed gospel you are simply doing charity and 2), in the long run unregenerate people cannot sustain such activity, thus the death of the mainline church. Therefore churches are actually serving the culture better by changing people’s hearts rather than raising the banner for social/political causes.
Now, I agree with a both/and approach. There is no reason to give in to the fallacy of the excluded middle.
Tim Keller summarizes it well: “A church must be more deeply and practically committed to deeds of compassion and social justice than traditional liberal churches and more deeply and practically committed to evangelism and conversion than traditional fundamentalist churches. This kind of church is profoundly counter-intuitive to American observers. It breaks their ability to categorize (and dismiss) it as liberal or conservative. Only this kind of church has any chance in the non-Christian west.” - Tim Keller
I think it’s crucial to maintain such balance. I just hope others do as well.
Jay Risner
