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
3 comments:
"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."
All I can say is that I agree 100%. Saving trees, recycling, healing AIDS, world peace, solving world hunger, are all great causes. But none of those things will ever get anyone to Heaven.
I spoke at a Youth Alive meeting this morning at the high school where I minister. I asked how they typically share their faith. Here's what I got. Invite people to church, build friendships, live a godly life. All great things no doubt. All very important. However, each of things are also unable to get anyone to Heaven. I spoke out of 1 Corinthians 15:3-4, and told them only the Gospel can change a person's destiny.
I think churches take the easy way out quite honestly. Instead of a "robust, full, stated, continually proclaimed gospel" it's much easier to care for the poor, recyle, etc. To balance this I think we need to ask ourselves, "Did Jesus care for the poor, befriend sinners, and all of that other stuff"? Yes. So should we do all of the stuff? Yes. Did Jesus also proclaim the Gospel. Of course. So should we. He commanded it.
Jay, again I couldn't agree with you more. This is something I keep coming back to. In my ministry I don't have to be fancy, creative, on the cutting edge of culture. Although I try and would like to be all of those things, what matters most is that we proclaim the Gospel, and teach students to live, share, and believe the Gospel as well. Great post.
Yeah.
Loving people and helping everyone and the world makes sense. We have a divine motivation and we need to be strong in that motivation and we need to remind ourselves constantly of it and to proclaim it as we do our deeds. People will see how we love and they will know G-d. End of story.
Stick to G-d, he'll lead you down the path of sacrificial agape love. Nothing really to argue here. We'll do our thing and he'll do his thing (and how great that they go together and lean on one another eh).
People say things like "only the gospel can set captives free" and while it's true, we neglect the fact that we continue the gospel each day and that the gospel is made new each day as there are new sufferings and captives each day. We're a part of the mission of Christ. We carry the gospel, our hands and feet, our sweat and tears and blood WRITE the gospel. We also must set captives free and do all that the gospel compels us to. Because we were set free and had our sight returned by the gospel.
Jay--well done, my friend. I think it was so well done, postings have been minimal. I fully agree with the balance that must be found in churches--a balance between theological conviction and action. And I do think in the midst of a social justice firestorm we need to be grounded back to the "why" of what we're doing.
I do think we need to be careful in assuming that those who are pursuing social justice efforts do not have strong and stated theological conviction. I believe many of those conversations are in meeting rooms and in small leadership gatherings, not posted on websites. And I think we need to be equally careful not to fool ourselves into thinking that if we consistently are proclaiming and stating a theological conviction that action will automatically flow out of that. I think the church of the last 30 years has been really good at stating what they believe, but unwilling to put their action with their mouth is.
Could it be possible for a church to have very deep and strong theological conviction (softly spoken) and be engaged in being the hands and feet of Christ?
Could it be possible that is easier to rest in our intellect and our conviction and call it good than to be engaged in frontline justice and societal redemption?
Post a Comment