On Not Transforming the World

Christianity Today: On Not Transforming the World

Hardly a day goes by that a book or an email doesn't arrive telling me how to "transform the culture" or "change the world."

In one recent email, a conference promised the attendance of many nationally recognized evangelical speakers. I went to the website and read that at this conference, among other things, I will "find out what it means to be inwardly strong and outwardly focused and to have a church body that desires to change the world from the inside-out!"

I have on my desk a book subtitled "The Passion and Practices of Missional Churches," and the subtitle for one chapter says that missional churches "expect to change the world." It leads with a quote from a well-known futurist, who says, "It is still God's policy to work through the embarrassingly insignificant to change his world and create his future." The book points to one Southern California church and says, "The ultimate criteria for determining its effectiveness is the transformation of Los Angeles."

Are they ever in for a big disappointment. On top of that, I'm now worried for Los Angeles.

.......

To be sure, he says we can be "the salt of the earth" and "the light of the world." As such, we can indeed give the world a glimpse of kingdom life so that many will give glory to God (Matt. 5:12-14). But there's nothing there about the world being transformed. What Jesus wants us to do primarily, it seems, is to love those right in front of our noses.

I remain puzzled as to why we're so bored with the very things Jesus asks us to do, like picking that foreigner up out of the ditch, giving away our goods to the poor, going to court with a young man who's being railroaded by the system, taking an orphan into our home, going the extra mile with the oppressive and manipulative, forgiving the offender, baptizing, and witnessing. I find these things really, really hard to do. I fail all the time. If I can't even do these things well, why would I believe that I could transform my culture, let alone change the world?

Just because Jesus doesn't ask us to change the world doesn't mean, of course, that it's not going to eventually be transformed....

I agree with certain aspects of Galli's observations, but I would frame things very differently. I believe we are to be transforming the world but not in the two primary ways Christians usually offer. On the one hand, there is the highly individualistic personal gospel approach ("Jesus and me") offered by far too many Evangelicals. We are only to be about "saving souls." When we save souls, those saved people will become the source of world transformation. But this fails to account for the fact that if I insist that saving souls is the only legitimate activity for Christians and teach this to others, they will, in turn, pass this mentality on to others and perpetuate a mindset where transformation does not occur. Of course, some Evangelicals believe this world is going to hell in a handbasket, and there is no value in transformation anyway.

On the other hand, there are the social justice folks, aggressively seeking to use the state's coercive power to compel people to behave morally. There is a considerable gray area, but I see it as a difference between restraining evil and compelling virtue. It is not their only tool for ushering in the kingdom of God, but government is a central component to which most other options play a supporting role. I'll call this "Jesus and sword."

I think Jesus and Paul were radically subversive and sought transformation. But their strategy was neither "Jesus and me" nor "Jesus and sword" but "Jesus and communities." The transformation was aimed not at individuals or the government but at the mediating institutions of family, business (which were closely linked), and voluntary associations. The nation's governance spoke mostly to the family and clan, not the individual or the entire nation. By transforming households consisting of multi-generational biological families as well as slaves and free workers connected with households, and then linking these households together, Jesus and the early church sought nothing less than the transformation of the Empire.

Unfortunately, Western Christian thought on transformation has been heavily influenced by Enlightenment categories when it comes to transformation. There is a heavy bias toward "Jesus and me" individualism on the Religious Right. On the Religious Left (whether of the grand old Mainline denominations or of the more recently resuscitated Evangelical Left championed by Wallis and heavily evidenced in Emergent circles), there is a heavy bias toward Jesus and the sword; an underlying conviction that an expertocracy can plan society and people's lives better than individuals making decisions in communities can. It is a choice between the arrogance of the autonomous self and the hubris of Enlightened leaders planning society through reason and science. I know many friends of either position will protest that they do champion intermediary institutions, but my experience is that the Christian anthropology of the Christian Right and Left, when it comes to issues of family, business, and voluntary associations, is abysmal.

I think the vision of transforming society through mediating institutions is evidenced by Jesus and Paul.

Comments

[Bob Robinson]

Michael,

Yes. Good post.

I, too, was troubled by Galli's editorial. Maybe (well, not maybe!) because the purpose statement of my ministry (CCO) is "Transforming College Students to Transform the World."

And I agree with you that, generally, we too often simply see the Right's individualism or the Left's governmental solutions as the only two options. Your call to "champion intermediary institutions" is important.

That being said (that the two extremes need to be avoided), I think that what they offer must not be lost either - individuals must be changed and that government is one of the spheres that must have Christian influence in order for all of society to move toward transformation.

[Michael W. Kruse]

Well said, Bob. Thanks!