In Response to ”A Christianity only the New York Times Could Love”

Relevance

In thinking about this article, I realized that I've been struggling here for a long time. I think most of us struggle with the draw between ministries that are more Christ-focused and ones that are more Church-focused. For me it feels like living in Christ and working in the Church. There's no competition between those two when you put them in ink, but it seems that we often either to fail to embrace Christ or fail to embrace each other. Yet embracing Christ and not embracing each other shows us to not truly be embracing Christ. And concerning embracing others and not Christ.... “do not even the pagans do that”?

We're not going to leave our places of Christ-centeredness and we're not about to leave the societal church either. I pray that they would have patience and not leave us! We need to find out how to live in Christ and work in the social Church, to learn to do social works in Christ, and how to cast the vision of Christ-centeredness to our society.

I'm taking this from an angle of “the societal church” versus “the spiritual church”. You could also call it the “natural church”. There certainly isn't anything “natural” about social movements whose people actually love each other-- I only say “natural” because the natural Church loves through the natural. So many are confined to this kind of ministry. I am not an exception. Actually, I think I'm unusually dull in the natural ministry.

I'm preaching to the choir when I say these things. Maybe I say them out loud so I'll have to listen to myself.

Winning to the Church versus winning to Jesus

Scattering

He who is not with Me is against Me, and he who does not gather with Me scatters abroad. (Read the context of Matthew 12:30 and Luke 11:14-23 or yourself. You may decide that its applications don't extend to this subject. I think they do.)

This is the central problem. Are our societal ministries gathering with Jesus, or for something else? Unless we are gathering for Jesus, we are scattering his wheat. Maybe we're not harvesting tares, but maybe we're not getting wheat into the barn either.

Fully understanding that most “Christian brand” societal programs are not fighting against the interests of Christ directly (quite the opposite), I say we should be first concerned for any which are divided from Christ in the first place! The concern is not that any such ministries are not gathering. The concern is that they're not gathering together, with Jesus. Jesus' first interest is bringing people to his father, not to do societal works. Blessing others with Jesus is absolutely better than blessing them with societal blessings and never showing them Jesus. Jesus us to join with him in both, but I believe his higher priority is getting people to the father.

Considering this verse, I have to concede to David's use of “anti-messiah”. But I find it a bit strong. “A-messianic” would be more graceful. I have no authority to judge the Church, so I'll prefer to use more passive terms. Direct speech can burn bridges. If we want spiritual change, we must acknowledge that it will only come by the Holy Spirit.

The failure of the flesh's Gospel (ministry in the natural)

21"Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of Heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in Heaven. 22Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?' 23Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!' (Matthew 7 NKJV)

Even if we use the tools of the personal messianic gospel, we can completely miss the point. How much more so if we use only secular social tools? When I talk with “a-messianic” Chistians, I often hear “I prefer sermons on such-and-such” and “I'm offended that people admit that Jesus said such-and-such a thing”. People filter Jesus. I want to ask “whose Jesus are you following?”.

We'd better get Him right. We'd better not be looking for ourselves and calling that “God”. In this country, everyone can claim personal untouchable authority on Truth, but it's not so. Not here or on the other side of death. We'd better not sculpt our personal Jesus.

43"You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' 44But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be sons of your Father in Heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your Heavenly Father is perfect. (Matthew 5 NKJV)

It's true what they say. The Quar'an and other books have some of the positive moral messages of the Bible. The world will be just as impressed with the character of the sincere Muslim as the “sincere societal a-messianic Christian”. So what will draw others to Christ, through us? Only Christ, in us.

Winning people to Christ, winning them with Christ.

A love beyond the flesh

27 “But I say to you who hear: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, 28 bless those who curse you, and pray for those who spitefully use you. 29 To him who strikes you on the one cheek, offer the other also. And from him who takes away your cloak, do not withhold your tunic either. 30 Give to everyone who asks of you. And from him who takes away your goods do not ask them back. 31 And just as you want men to do to you, you also do to them likewise.
32 “But if you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners love those who love them. 33 And if you do good to those who do good to you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners do the same. 34 And if you lend to those from whom you hope to receive back, what credit is that to you? For even sinners lend to sinners to receive as much back. 35 But love your enemies, do good, and lend, hoping for nothing in return; and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High. For He is kind to the unthankful and evil. 36 Therefore be merciful, just as your Father also is merciful. (Luke 12:27-36, NKJV)

They will know we are Christians by our love. But don't pagan fathers love well enough to give their sons bread and not snakes? What will make us different? The differentiation is the manner, means, and substance of the love. The pagan loves with what he's got, and that's him. The pagan in concerned with the wordly things (Luke 12:29-30 NKJV), and worldly love. The thing that sets the Christian apart is that the Christian seeks to act in the world's arena, yet in a supernatural way. The pagan's love is natural. At least one sect of Islam tithes out of financial excess— the poor don't have to give their would-be marginal contributions. I've been told it's much more rational than Christian tithing. Yet Jesus memorialized the copper-coin widow for her impractical (“irresponsible”? “dangerous”?) gift. Christians are called to give everything they have, and more. Let's give out of everything God's got, and embrace the foolishness of Christ-- the cross [of love].

We need to love with the gifts of the Spirit. We need to love with the supernatural cross of Christ. We must win men with acts of love, and win them to Christ by loving in the Spirit.

Being practical – call to action

Seeker friendly

There are plenty of things that the unchurched aren't ready for-- Church politics, Church history, Church culture. And there's plenty of Jesus that people aren't ready for! So we do need to introduce people at a pace that won't freak them out, both for their progress and for our safety (Matthew 7:6).

Seeker friendly – seeking what?

If our fellowships are friendly towards seekers-- what are those seekers seeking? People show up to church to find friends, spouses, business opportunities, an escape from boredom. People stumble into Jesus for all sorts of unrelated (and sometimes bad) reasons. We must decide: “What kind of seeking do we want to promote in our ministries? More directly, what kind of seeker are we trying to pull in?”

Just as the Charismatic Church must remember to focus on the face of God and not his hands, the societal Church must remember the same thing. Our ministries must start at God, and from there do his works-- not start at his works and end at ours. And so directing every ministry towards God is the first step to finding “good” seekers. I want us to be wary of events that have no correlation to evangelism, worship, work of the Spirit, and ministry. Yes; our social ministries should spend time “just hanging out”, but those times shouldn't be formally announced through the ministry. Ministry parties are great-- and are a great time to remember what God has done and why we wanted to do it with him. Rejoice together in the Lord always! Those should be announced. But if we're not going to rejoice in him, let's not diffuse (the scattering idea again) our ministry with them.

What we want to stop is seekers from finding us [and thinking they've found what they were looking for]. What could be worse than stopping seekers from finding God when they're so close? --and with a substitute that's so poor? We need to keep God (rather: ourselves!) in a place in our ministries where we are dwarfed by Him.

We need to maintain an upward tension in seekers. Otherwise, the seeker might not keep moving towards God; drifting towards “lesser Gods”-- or, dissatisfied, drift out of the Church. If we are a stream, we need to be flowing. Standing still is not allowed! Seekers need to know they can keep rising towards God, and they need to keep their desire on him! This is well-accomplished by maintaining an upwards gaze and spiritual motion ourselves. If we halt, moving only in the theater of “natural” ministry, we should not be surprised when our followers stagnate like us. If we aren't all looking at God, neither will they. We want to maintain a tension (a desire if possible) in seekers to pursue God. The seeker-friendly nature of our ministries should support seekers seeking, not seekers stagnating.

Practical centering

These issues apply to entire ministries but are played out in individual lives. If we want to cast vision in “the societal Church”, we'd better embrace it up-close. When men see us, they must see Jesus before seeing his Church.

The same master that commands us to love said “Blessed are you when men hate you.” Jesus isn't concerned first with pleasing men, and our ministry's gaze needs to first be on him. [If you allow this usage of this verse--] Seek first the kingdom of God, and the all else will be added-- our earthly ministries will happen. We will win men, and will win them to Christ. But we must seek to build the kingdom of Heaven, not the kingdom of man. We can't serve two kingdoms. We know that to stay in the kingdom of Heaven is to acknowledge our king and increase in him. If we pull others into the kingdom of Heaven, they will do the same. That's the order that it has to happen. We shall have no place in the kingdom of man.

I'm all for social and political reform groups, and even ones made of Christians. ;-) But I think God would be better “advertised” if those groups would separate from “churches” and “ministries”. Task groups (IHOP-KC's housing ministry comes to mind) exist for a natural purpose. They can exist without a high mission statement-- their worth leans on the mission statement of the parent ministry. No one is going to interview that ministry and expect to find a balanced representation of Christianity. A church that exists primarily for social action is not this way. “Church” boasts a lot about the activity of God and the Christian lives there. Any organization with “church” in its title should be prepared to represent a complete idea of the Church of Christ-- which is centered on Jesus. There is no slack room here.

Because the world doesn't understand the Spirit or “those who are born of the Spirit”, when it sees works of the Church, it can only see what's moving in the natural. So the only way for our Christian social reform programs to stand out in the world's eyes is to have “God” as the first reason of what we do. And it has to be convincing. If we're asked, ”why do you fight for social reform?”, would we say “because we believe in equality?” Well, great, so do the Pagans. That doesn't mean anything anymore. What's news to them is that the Christan God believes in it too, and so sincerely that he's taking it to the streets and the ballot box.

Practical partnering

15 Some indeed preach Christ even from envy and strife, and some also from goodwill: 16 The former preach Christ from selfish ambition, not sincerely, supposing to add affliction to my chains; 17 but the latter out of love, knowing that I am appointed for the defense of the gospel. 18 What then? Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is preached; and in this I rejoice, yes, and will rejoice. (Philippians 1)

Certainly if Paul can say this about people who evangelize out of envy and strife, he can say it about much of the Church that I don't gel with. I have at least as many negative motivations and misconstrue Jesus just as much as anyone else. So I don't want to separate myself from, discount, or discredit the work of the societal Church. I have a lot to learn from them.

How far do we support “a-messianic ministries”? I say “as far is is practical to further our objectives”. Do we partner? Yes? Do we partner with secular organizations? Yes. We wouldn't treat the Church any less.

The socially responsible Church

And what of political and economic action? How far should the church go into these arenas and still call itself “The Church”? I'm not going to try to answer that. Maybe Kevin will share some advice?

The metric of success – building the kingdom of Heaven

It's all about advancing the kingdom of Heaven. We need to keep our eyes on that, and God will give us the tools and direction to make it happen. We shouldn't allow our interests to be blindered by the working out of our ministries in the natural.

Oops. Sorry about the length of this post. Responses welcome. I don't want to wander off into heretical monologue ;')

-andrew