Many religiously conservative Christians have felt a sharp and enduring pain from our faith having lost its place in culture and society, and thus our culture and society have lost its way. And part of that loss is an enhanced, which is sometimes by manipulation, anticipation of persecution and the generalization and magnification of a few small, socially hostile acts against individual Christians in America. Well-known, and deservedly so, Reformed theologian Tim Keller (click here for bio ) has recently written an article that gives suggestions on how we can reverse our fortunes. The title of this article actually does well in summarizing Keller's expecatations: How To Reach The West Again (click here for the article).
The article is well worth reading and interesting. But rather than try to give a point-by-point review of the article, I want to get right to the heart of the matter in terms of why Christianity is not where it use to be in culture and society. And then ask you the reader to read Keller's article to see if what I provide here helps make Keller's article a bit more complete.
First we should not compare our post-Christian culture and society with Christianity's position in the 1st century even though there are some similarities. Why? It is because while 1st century Christianity was basically a newborn in that it had yet done anything good or bad, Christianity's status in America is based on the loss of status and position and thus Christianity's current situation is more similar to Israel's exile in Babylon. That is because Christianity's new position is punishment for centuries of past and current sins just as Israel was finally punished for its centuries of sins.
What was Christianity's sins? It was that of dominance. And I can't help but believe that though there are comments made in Keller's article against trying to regain that dominance, that, in the end, that is what Keller is saying we should do only in new ways.
And one of the key problems with Keller's article is that though there are fleeting statements that indicate a recognition of that past dominance, there are no indications of being contrite for it.
What Keller's article seems not to appreciate is how the New Testament describes its expectations of society. This is done in a couple of passages that describe Church discipline. In both of those passages, society is described as being a mix of Christians and unbelievers with no hint of Christian dominance. In one sense, ancient Rome provides a partial model for how society should be according to the New Testament. Rome is a partial model because as a pagan society, in that it recognized the existence of many gods, Rome showed much tolerance to non-Christian religions. But Rome was not a complete model because it became intolerant of Christianity's claims to exclusivity.
Thus, as religiously conservative Christians, we should welcome and work for a society where as many gods are recognized in the name of religious liberty and tolerance while calling all to repentance. And whether we should welcome such a society is not clearly enough stated in Keller's article though he is against political domination. What is missing is whether cultural and social marginalization is a natural result of what Keller is trying to promote.
Christianity is not the only victim of its continued attempts to dominate. Post Modernism is a partial result of that domination and thus those who have been influenced too much by Post Modernism are victims too. We should note that Post Modernism speaks more against Modernism than Pre Modernism to which Christianity belongs. Here we should note that Post Modernism is friendly to inclusive, not exclusive, religions.
So before we religiously conservative Christians (a.k.a., flaming fundamentalists) can regain a more credible voice, we need to openly acknowledge our failures of both the past and present. We need to take our own 'apology tour' before we can realistically expect unbelievers to even be interested in listening to us. What Keller says about our need to be servant-oriented is more than true. But without acknowledging our past failures, it will be more difficult to be servant-oriented and thus many will not be convinced that we have changed our ways.
One more point that is not exactly clear in Keller's article. That is in how we Christians should share this pagan society with unbelievers. Again, Keller does well to speak against wanting political dominance. But what should be the substitute? How can we both be salt and light to culture and society when we want both to call people to change while supporting the notion of a pagan society in the name of religious liberty?
One way is to learn how to share society as equals. And that means being politically, as well as culturally and socially, involved in sharing society with others as equals. And to do that, we must guard the equality of the other groups as if it was our own.
That means that we Christians most politically collaborate with unbelievers to do that. But to do that, we must also resist the siren call of tribalism. And that is especially true regarding political and ideological tribalism. To avoid tribalism, we cannot even imply any kind of relative utopia, especially in the name of Christ. To do that requires that we too strongly associate the Gospel with specific ideologies and that divides the Church because there will be real Christians who hold to other ideologies. And the moment we fall for some ideological or political tribalism, we have lost our prophetic voice that challenges all ideologies to repent from sin.
Hopefully these comments will make Keller's article more complete. But it is the reader who is the final judge for that. And to do that, one must read both Keller's article and this article.
No comments:
Post a Comment