For my chart, I've pitted Cultural Engagement versus Cultural Control. Does the church engage with the outside culture? versus Does the church set the agenda or control the topics of discussion and engagement?
When the church does not engage culture or control the agenda, they are forced to COMPARTMENTALIZE. They still live in a world dominated by an agenda, just not theirs; and they insist on keeping on in it by keeping their Christianity separate, like a privately held personal conviction. So, they live next to, work with, interact on-line with, shop by, exercise near, and drink coffee from the world around them without batting an eye because they keep Christ in a private place in their head and heart where no one else can touch Him and where He does not interfere with anything else around them. He doesn't mess with how you vote, where you go to school, what books your read, what books you don't, etc.. Everything is separate. This is the quadrant of Compartmentalization. This is navigating the tension of being a Christian in an anti-Christian culture by ignoring the tension: simply keep them separate in your head and watch whatever you want on Netflix. Christianity is viewed primarily in terms of internal personal salvation. This method is not particularly interested in worldviews at war. It prefers parallel lives internally and externally. The enmity between the seed of Eve and the seed of the serpent is not acknowledged as a present reality to be dealt with in picking sides, but assumes that private salvation is possible without public declaration and simply decides to live and let live.
When the church does not engage culture but wants to control the agenda, they are forced to retreat to a CLOISTER. This is the Amish approach. Keep to strongly held, well thought out convictions, but keep them away from the outside world. Limit touch points with world around you in order to keep the world from getting inside you. This is like keeping the boat in a barn in order to keep the water from getting into it. For a fear of sinking, stay away from water. This is not becoming of the world by avoiding it as much as possible. This is taking Christianity to the catacombs when it is still permissible in broad daylight. This is retreating before the anticipated onslaught. This is creating your own ghetto. The perception is that the world has chased you to a cave and so you set up camp inside in order to preserve Christianity. An alternate, counter-culture is produced, but kept in a vacuum and sterilized by keeping others out. This Christianity has robust opinions about what one ought to do that are shared liberally inside the cave and rarely outside of it. Christianity is viewed primarily in terms of a kingdom inside the kingdom of the world. The world is going to hell in the hand basket and so the only alternative is to build a fireproof shelter in the cranny of that hell-bound basket, deep down where fingers rarely find anything... you know, next to the detritus of previous snacks and dryer lint particles. This is nook and cranny Christianity. Survive where they aren't looking and hope they never catch wind. This method assumes God's ways are better, but also assumes very few others will ever buy into that and so the only way to preserve God's good way of life is to hide it under a bushel. This assumes the world's culture would win in a fight, so it's better to hide in the locker room than to suit up to have it out.
When the church engages with the culture but lets the culture control the agenda, they are forced to COMPROMISE in order to be allowed to sit at the cool kids table. This is the kind of Christianity that is always chasing cool points and as we all know there is nothing less cool than trying to be cool. The only way to engage with culture in this way is to allow them to define the terms, the dates, the place, the topic, and the outcome. Christianity is allowed to exist in this world as long as it forfeits whatever parts of its circle existed outside its concentric overlap with the existing culture. Christianity is not a distinct culture with something to add to the current culture, but one to tolerate, at best, by compromising everything it holds sacred in order to gain an opportunity to speak. This is the girl getting the boy into the back seat in the hopes of teaching him the value of abstinence. The strategy defeats itself; if you win, you lose, if you happen to make a point, you lose the point. You cannot defend the value of Christianity by selling it out in order to pay for the platform to speak about its value. To be there speaking is to have devalued it. You cannot promote its selling points by selling it out in order to pay for the promotional posters. It is self-contradictory. Christianity, in this approach, is viewed primarily as an endangered species doing whatever it takes to survive, not realizing that it is removing anything distinctly Christian in order to endure. This is the giraffe shortening his neck in order to gain sway with horses or the tiger removing his stripes in order to better relate to other cats. If the triangle surrenders any of his points in order to gain traction for triangles, he will find himself out of shape and obsolete, defending the extinct. This method assumes the world's culture is superior to the Christian's in most regards; so much so, that we have no choice but to learn from them because it's their world after all, we're just living in it.
When the church engages with the culture and sets the agenda, it is COMBAT. It is manufacturing culture in order to engage in the cultural war. You need ships to fight a naval war and bullets to have a shoot out and so in this approach the church creates culture and exports it in order to engage in cultural warfare. It is not importing culture from the world around it because it doesn't delight in trinkets and bric-a-brac. It meets culture head on and benefits from the discussions, but it sets the agenda, the topic, the definition, etc... It doesn't fight on the enemy's battlefield; it chooses the time and place of battle. This is a proactive approach. This requires initiative. This requires a vision for the world and for Christian conquest in light of the Great Commission. This is believing that when Jesus sent us out, He expected us to win. He didn't send us on a cultural suicide mission, but on a quest to make His Kingdom come and His will be done on earth as it is in Heaven. In other words, Jesus didn't teach us to pray in a way that the Father would say, "No," This approach declares, "Let the best culture win" with the confidence that Christian culture is the best. Not just better for you, like broccoli, but better overall, like cheesecake. This approach presupposes that this is God's world and we're all just living in it and our goal is to help the outside world fall in line by seeing how great our God is. This assumes Christian culture will win in a fist fight and promotes the event in optimistic expectation by hardening its fists. It only shadow boxes in order to box the kingdom of shadows.
There is more that could be said, but I wanted to get these initial thoughts in print and in play. May God grants us a mindset of Combat that sees the leaven working its way through the lump more and more everyday and the mustard seed growing and claiming every square inch of every single place and every single person for Christ's glory and our good. Amen!
No comments:
Post a Comment