Sitting at my kitchen table, my 20-something friend said, “Can you help me? I’m trying to find a way to describe myself that doesn’t immediately offend people and drive them away. Don’t get me wrong, I love Jesus with all my heart but labeling myself a Christian too early in a conversation or relationship isn’t helpful. What should I do?”
The conversation at the kitchen table was a natural result of a shared experienced we’d had where we saw a very well meaning friend ‘witness’ imploring the listener to go beyond good works. Unfortunately, the approach made both of us cringe. As we analyzed it together, we articulated a few conclusions: to our knowledge there was no prior relationship with the object (person) of the presentation of the Gospel, in fact, no previous interaction at all; and there was an assumption that the person wasn’t a believer in Christ. It was (albeit superficial) a theologically sound appeal to commit to Christ so why would we be embarrassed at this presentation when we know that a commitment to Christ is the most important decision a person can make?
My friend’s question for me was a capstone for a week of thinking deeply about these issues. Like my friend I, too, am finding myself running away from the labels that have, unfortunately, been applied to people like me who take their faith seriously but are finding the labels less and less helpful in our attempt to be ‘relevant’ Christians. Like my friend, I am on a quest to redefine myself avoiding the labels. In an age where many of my age-mates and fellow believers in Christ feel comfortable living in the polarization of our culture, I am looking for ways to feel comfortable in what some people would call ‘gray areas’ that do not promote the polarization but put me in contact with those who need a genuine experience with Christ.
James Hunter in his controversial book, To Change the World, argues that it’s inherently in our Christian DNA to work to make the world a better place. He believes our well-meaning efforts often fail to bring about the very change we want to accomplish. Hunter, from his perspective, does an “appraisal” of the culture change use by well-meaning Christians and goes on to highlight the ways they are “inherently flawed and therefore incapable of generating the change to which they aspire.” Hunter says that all too often Christians migrate toward bases of power and unwittingly undermine the very problems they are designed to solve.
What is really needed, Hunter argues, is a different paradigm of Christian engagement with the world, one that Hunter calls “faithful presence”–an ideal of Christian practice that is not only individual but institutional; a model that plays out not only in all relationships but in our work and all spheres of social life. He offers real-life examples, large and small, of what can be accomplished through the practice of “faithful presence.”
His approach, while controversial in some circles, makes sense to me. Hunter goes on to say that such practices will be “more fruitful, more exemplary, and more deeply transfiguring than any more overtly ambitious attempts can ever be.” In his own way, I think Huger is calling us to ‘winsome’ Christian. People that attracts people to the faith rather than repulses them.
Faithful presence: we have to show-up if we want to make a difference in the world, and in people’s lives, and the attitudes we arrive with are so important! Do we show up as a judge and jury or do we show-up knowing that we, too, are flawed but we have found answers to life’s deepest questions as a follower of Christ? And we have to show-up in the most unlikely places…moving beyond our safe places just like Jesus did.
Lausanne, Cape Town, was a major event that took place back in October. It was filled with a who’s who of Christianity from around the world focusing participants on world evangelism. The two worlds I am describing ‘bumped’ into each other early in the Congress.
The first night was dedicated to alleviating poverty. I was a compelling presentation! Many in the 5000+ in attendance resonated with it.
John Piper, in his devotional on one of the subsequent days, reminded every one that doing good works and alleviating suffering in this life was a good ambition…but it was not enough. My memory of his quote on this was, “Current suffering is nothing compared to the suffering people will experience in an eternity without God.” He went on to remind the group that it wasn’t either/or but rather both/and: the Gospel message combined with living out our faith validating God’s love and the message of hope.
My conclusion, after experiencing these two presentation, is that the two are not mutually exclusive but those that promote each will take a very differing approach to the spread of the Gospel. Is either wrong? It’s all about contextualization within the target culture whether is be in Africa or the USA.
I am just finishing the book, The Next Christians, by Gabe Lyons. Someone stuck it in my hand in at Lausanne, Cape Town. Lyon’s book describes my friend precisely: twenty-something; a committed believer who wants to engage, not divide; willing to live out Christian commitment and faith in the midst of a culture that seems to run counter to faith; but my friend isn’t willing to wage war with it. My friends sees faith as more than just a message of hope, although it is that, it is also a message of restoring a broken and fallen world to what God originally intended when he was in the creation mode. God is love, and in that love there is no fear. It’s a restorative love that makes a difference in life here and now. Christianity isn’t just about fire insurance!
I really think there is a healthy discussion going on in my community of faith that is making me more and more comfortable living in the margins and looking for a new way of expressing my beliefs. I encouraged my 20-something friend not to be discouraged. The solution is to become part of what God is doing to remake our culture…but we have to engage it. We have to meet people where they are. We cannot hold the culture accountable to our preconceived ideas and high values of the faith when, unfortunately, too many of us have done too much to wage war with the culture and then we aren’t willing to apply the high standards in our own lives. That promotes another label: hypocrite.
Lyons does a nice job of articulating the reconciliation that comes in a relationship with Christ and the extent to which God goes to be reconciled to the world (Luke 15).
Andy Crouch writes, “It is not enough to condemn culture…the only way to change culture is to create culture calling Christians to be culture makers. For too long, Christians have had an insufficient view of culture and have waged misguided ‘culture wars.’ We must reclaim the cultural mandate to be the creative cultivators that God designed us to be. Culture is what we make of the world, both in creating cultural artifacts as well as in making sense of the world around us. By making chairs and omelets, languages and laws, we participate in the good work of culture making.”
Yours for meaningful and genuine engagement…
Filed under: Uncategorized | 3 Comments »
Something we thought was a distant future is actually happening right in front of us: the eradication of Bible poverty in our lifetime. Who would have dreamed that? Ken Taylor did.
My prayer for the 2011 is that we find common ground: politics, religion, etc. Aren’t you tired of all the finger pointing and bickering?
Another guy who’s looking for common ground is 
