Hi Billy, What is the true mission of the Church ? THAT question is vital. > But I'd like to break it into parts, with one part being *: > *In the realm of political action, what is the true mission ? > >
Evangelicals, as a group, have been defined by what they are against, not what they are for (to a large degree their own fault). That's a problem. Secondly, starting with Constantine the Church have tried to be in the place of "power and influence" and we see that in America today still. Essentially the same philosophy. Many would say that the "place of power" is the Christian thing to do (the "Christian Nation" philosophy) although in many ways that is an attitude antithetical to the mission of the church which is to serve the community, not lord over it. That's not, IMHO, a reason to avoid the ballot box but screaming at people is not really going to change their way of thinking or the way they live. Those kind of changes requires teaching within sound and real relationships (we can call that "discipleship"). The problem is that when we scream at people they don't want to have any kind of relationship with us (for good reasons, I might add). Thus, any kind of politics that turns off the very same people that you want to build real relationships with isn't helpful to the mission of the church. Our politics, be it left or right, has defined us too much. Too much talk and too little "real" Christianity out there. We know it and the people we're screaming at knows it so who do we think we're kidding? I've known for a long time that Christians needs to re-think their political engagement which is one of the reasons I am looking at Radical Centrism. Here's a quote from a book reviewer: "...citing Stephen Fowl and Darrell Guder, the underlying suspicion for Fitch is that evangelicals have failed “to lead a life worthy of the calling to which they have been called” (Eph 4:1), and to order their “common life” together toward a pattern of life that yields “the disposition” of Christ in the world (Phil 1:27). In this sense, borrowing from Zizek’s illustration of the diet coke phenomenon – the most consumed drink in the world that neither quenches thirst nor tastes very good – Fitch argues that evangelicalism has become an “empty” politic – “driven by antagonisms and contradictions as opposed to something real to which we aspire.”[iv] Fitch proposes that the three main beliefs have characterized evangelicals over time: 1) “the Inerrant Bible” and how it “shapes us for arrogance,” 2) “the Decision for Christ” (a conversionist understanding of salvation centered around substitutionary atonement) and “how it shapes us for duplicity” 3) and “the Christian Nation” and “how it shapes us for dispassion” (the subtitles really tell the whole story). The words that are capitalized function ideologically – again referencing Zizek – as “master-signifiers.” In other words, these ideas are “objects to which people pledge their allegiance,”[v] and Fitch argues that each one eventually produces an “irruption of the Real” for the people who adhere to them, revealing “the contradictions at the core of our [evangelical] politics.”[vi] end quote More could be said. I am thinking this through myself so I might not be the best one to communicate this. There has to be room for both the left and the right within "the Church" and we need to be unified, not what we are against, and we should pledge our allegiance to Jesus, and his way of life/attitude, rather then rally around 'master signifiers' that doesn't mean anything but makes us feel really good. // Lennart > Billy > > > ================================================= > > > 10/7/2011 [email protected] writes: > > Hi Billy, > > This book would be interesting to read, no doubt. However, it's seems it's > mostly about "left vs. right" and who is the most "biblical". Interesting, > to be sure but hardly as helpful David Fitch's recent book "The End of > Evangelicalism?" > > http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/cr/1606086847/ref=aw_d_cr_books > > Fitch uses 'the work of noted Slovenian philosopher and critic Slavoj > Zizek to critique three essential evangelical ideals: "the inerrant Bible," > "the decision for Christ" and "the Christian nation."' (to quote a > reviewer). > > Fitch critics both the "left vs. Right" approach to "Christian politics" > and the use of "master signifiers" within each camp to illustrate the > inherent "emptiness" of both". Neither left nor right is particularly > helpful if the goal is to understand politics from a truly "Christian" > perspective. > > First, the context should not be "who's the most Biblical" but rather what > is the true mission of the Church and how that understanding is expressed in > and through the Church (I.e. those that join God in his mission to the > world). > > Both the left and the right misses the mark. I think Fitch nails it > perfectly using Zizek's theories analyzing the problem. Of course, Zizek is > less helpful in providing answers but Fitch understanding and explanation of > "missional church" provides a blueprint for true "Christian" political and > cultural engagement. > > I am not sure how you feel about his answers but for me, personally, coming > from more of a "right" perspective his has been very helpful in > understanding how I, and I venture to say, (too) many others have gone > wrong. > > A Google search for book title "The End of Evangelicalism?", Fitch and > review should bring up enough links to more information. > > // Lennart > > Sent from my iPhone using the pinkie on my left hand > > > On Oct 7, 2011, at 13:04, [email protected] wrote: > > *Christian Post* > How Would Jesus Vote? New Book Looks at Evangelical Faith and > Politics<http://www.christianpost.com/news/how-would-jesus-vote-new-book-looks-at-evangelical-faith-and-politics-57573/> > > Fri, Oct. 07, 2011 Posted: 01:00 PM EDT > ------------------------------ > > Two evangelical Christians, one a Republican and the other a Democrat, roll > out their ideas on how the Bible applies to culture and politics in a new > book, titled *Left, Right & Christ*. > > Can a Democrat be a Christian? Should the government care for the sick? Do > legalized abortions increase the number of abortions? These are just some of > the issues Lisa Sharon Harper and D.C. Innes undertake in this new book from > Russell Media. > > Harper, director of Mobilizing at Sojourners, and Innes, associate > professor of Politics at The King's College, offer mostly different > responses, but do agree that these are the type of conversations Christians > should be having if they already are not. > > Their conversation, stemming from different world views, opens a field for > Christians to discuss political issues and their relevance to Scripture > openly. > > *Left, Right & Christ* also gives a good idea of how one Christian > denomination can contain people with vastly differing views on the world and > politics. To compare those views, and to present them to the public in their > full range is important, according to Harper and Innes. > > Often times, a book like *Left, Right & Christ*, which involves two > authors presenting their respective arguments, gives readers the opportunity > to consider the arguments on both sides, Harper told The Christian Post. > > Harper's and Innes' differing views often stem from different ways of > interpreting Scripture. > > "I hope my argument [in the book] is compelling," Innes told CP. "Obviously > more biblically faithful [than Harper's]. Lisa tries to be biblically > faithful. I think her hermeneutic is off. But we have a conversation that > will help people take the Bible more seriously; take its application more > seriously, and not be afraid to talk to one another about the fundamental > political issues. Explore why are they different." > > "[Innes] approached Scripture very theoretically," Harper told CP > separately. > > He looks at the Scripture, interprets it, and then applies it, she added. > But Harper often does the opposite, she said. She takes questions from life > to Scripture. If she then manages to find a story in the Bible that > corresponds to the issue in question, she will draw conclusions from the > text. > > But the authors seem to agree on at least one issue – that it is important, > especially in public life, not only to profess your religion, but to put > their faith into practice. > > "I think how [religion] is being used in politics is really the question," > Harper said. "It's not enough for candidates or legislators to profess > faith. What really matters is the policies that they propose and push." > > Most importantly, she added, it is important that the policies they push > are actually about the values that their religion supports. > > "Professing faith is very easy to do, and that's really using religion; > that's using religion for other means and to gain political points," Harper > said. "We're in very confused times, and very polarized times. So it would > be easy for evangelicals to put down their Bibles, and pick up ideologies; > their party's politics. But I think that's lazy, and I also think that's not > faithful." > > She added that *Left, Right & Christ* was written in order to give > evangelicals an opportunity to wrestle with important contemporary questions > together with the authors. > > "We may not know how Jesus would vote, but Harper and Innes help us > solidify what we actually believe and where we are in terms of our faith and > politics," the book's press release adds. > > Both authors gave a short lecture in New York on Thursday, followed by a > book signing and a panel discussion featuring prominent Christian speakers > Jim Wallis, CEO of Sojourners, and Richard Land, president of the Southern > Baptist Convention's Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission. > > Both Wallis and Land were happy to chime in on the conversation since they > are also both evangelicals, yet have differing political views. Land > supports small government and little regulation. Wallis was a spiritual > adviser to President Barack Obama. His work focuses on social justice. They > join the idea enclosed in the title, with the Left (Wallis) and the Right > (Land) trying to find common ground on the issue of Bible and politics. Or > to at least clearly state their arguments. > > Luiza Oleszczuk > Christian Post Contributor > > > -- > Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community < > [email protected]> > Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism > Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org > -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <[email protected]> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org
