A theme (some might say an obsession, given the
content of my blogs!) of my faith is balance. My first student sermon in
seminary compared John 3:1-18 with Matthew 25:31-46.
The former is the encounter between Jesus and
Nicodemus, and includes the phrase, “You must be born again.” It also includes
the best-known verse in scripture—John 3:16: “For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, that whoever
believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.”
The latter is Jesus’ Parable of the Sheep and the
Goats, with the familiar injunctions to feed the hungry, clothe the naked,
visit the prisons, etc. The conclusion: “As you did it(or didn’t) to the least
of my brothers, you did it (or didn’t) to me.”
One is about spiritual and eternal matters, while
the other is about what has been called “The Social Gospel” or issues of social
justice. The point of my sermon was that the same Bible contains both emphases.
To date, I have not discovered a biblical prioritizing of the two emphases. So far as I can
see, we are enjoined to a balance of ministries to people’s spiritual and
eternal needs as well as to their physical and immediate needs.
When asked which was the most important
commandment, Jesus responded, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and
with all your soul, and with all your mind. 38This is the
great and first commandment. 39And a second
is like it, You shall love your neighbor as yourself. 40On these two
commandments depend all the law and the prophets” (Matthew 22:37-40 NRSV).”
The second is “like it.” “On these two commandments depend all the law and the prophets.” I
don’t find any way in that text to rationalize one to the exclusion—or even to
the moderating—of the other, and I’ve preached that theme several times each year
since then (1969); but I think I have a new way of articulating it.
I think the greatest weakness in the community of
Christian discipleship is the problem of reductionism. Even in Jesus' day there was a tendency for people of faith to reduce discipleship
to a simple formula ("Which is the greatest commandment?")
“All ya’ gotta’ do is…” and then recite the list.
I sometimes have called it “formulaic” Christianity or Christianity by theorem—the
lowest common denominator.
I observe two specific reductions.
The first is what Jim Wallis calls an atonement-only gospel: the only purpose
for Christian discipleship is to lead people to salvation—to avoid hell and
attain heaven. In my estimation it is impossible to deny the New Testament premium
on that kind of life and witness, which is generally called “evangelism”.
The second reduction is an ethical absolutism: the primary measure of faith is our behavior
toward others. Again, there is no denying that Jesus taught an ethical paradigm
few humans have attained. Too few have tried; indeed, many rationalize away the
injunctions to minister to the poor (or to tend in other ways to matters of the
common good) by labeling them “secular humanist” or “socialist” or “communist”.
Few teachings strive for a balance between the
two reductions.
In my last blog I described a debate between Jim Wallis and his close friend, Southern Baptist seminary
president, Albert Mohler. The topic
was, “Is social justice an essential part of the gospel and the mission of the church?”[1]
Wallis argued yes, justice is integral to the gospel. Dr. Mohler said no, arguing that social
justice was important but that “the gospel” was the atonement brought about in
Christ that saves us from our sins and secures our souls for heaven.
I admit up front that I have no hard data to
support my observation and, moreover, that I am biased toward my own
reductionist tendencies. Given those qualifications, however, it seems
relatively clear to me that:
1. Those who, with Dr. Mohler, say that social
justice issues are important but secondary to evangelism tend to rationalize
and thus to neglect and even to oppose efforts to minister to the poor. To be
fair, in my limited observation almost all who oppose ministries of social
justice are really opposing government involvement
in those efforts. On the other hand, the truth of the matter is that if the
government doesn’t do it, who will? There certainly are not enough resources in
the churches, most of which are declining and struggling to survive; and no
other entity has stepped up to the plate!
2. Those who emphasize social justice ministries
tend not only to neglect evangelistic ministries but even appear condescending
or even contemptuous toward those who do. To be fair, in my limited observation
such opposition is not to evangelism itself but to specific strategies of
evangelism (I am in that category: indeed, I find many evangelism strategies outright
counterproductive to the gospel!) On the other hand, I don’t recall seeing an
effective evangelistic strategy emerge from that set. I do hear considerable
rationalization about quality versus quantity.
Which brings us around to the issue of balance.
I watched the “Stupor Bowl” last night (you might
guess I had no pony in that race). I’m not a fan of either team; but, it was
less stressful to watch without caring who won. I don’t think I yelled at the
TV even once!
It occurs to me that evangelism and social
justice ministries might be like offense and defense on a football team. It
takes both. If a team is weak at either, it is less effective.
The hoards leaving the church, and those who never
got involved, speak volumes to the ineffectiveness of an unbalanced church.
That’s how I see it through the flawed glass that
is my world view.
Together in the Walk,
Jim
[1] Wallis, Jim (2013-08-15). Who Jesus Is and Why It Matters (Ebook Shorts) (Kindle Locations
192-213). Baker Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.
No comments:
Post a Comment