Lately, I have been reflecting on
some of the challenges presented to the churches today in sharing the good news
and witnessing to what God has done in Christ and continues do in the church
and in the world. I share this reflection as a United Methodist pastor who
enjoys theological and biblical study. The following is a matter of thinking
along with Avery Dulles, in an article he wrote, "Evangelizing Theology"
(First Things, March 1996, pp. 27-32). This Roman Catholic theologian enumerates
the reasons why he thinks evangelization is difficult for contemporary
Catholics. I have found that his reflections affect United Methodism as well.
Dulles says
there are certain theological factors, common theological viewpoints that
achieved ascendancy in the past few decades that have made evangelization
peculiarly problematic for us. He recalls a time when theological triumphalism,
with themes like “A Million More in ’84,” were prominent. However, he thinks
that in this time we are in danger of theological defeatism. He thinks that
Christians have reduced the actions of God in the world to a way of being
helpful, rather than focusing on God. He thinks the church will attract few
people with that message.
The first
theological trend that Dulles cites is the contemporary trend to regard
"faith" as some a universal, innate, human quality found in many
different forms among the world's religions, shared by everyone who cares
deeply about anything. Theologically, he identifies the notion in Paul Tillich
of "ultimate concern" as consistent with this view. Faith in this
view exists without any definite set of beliefs, without gospel. The Christian
faith is merely a human construction that many people throughout the ages have
found helpful. Every religion is only a particular expression of that deeper,
more universal, and more important disposition called "faith."
However, Dulles notes that such a notion of faith is quite different from the
faith proclaimed by Paul:
"We thank God constantly for this,
that when you receive the Word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it
not as the word of man but that which it really is, the Word of God, which is
at work in you believers" (1 Thessalonians 2:13).
Second,
Dulles lists "metaphysical agnosticism" as a theological deviation
that hinders our evangelization. Anything we say about the divine is always
metaphorical, and therefore unreliable. What can we know about God anyway?
All
statements about the world have a degree of inexactitude about them. Everything
we say about the world, even the world of things, is also a statement of faith.
When we say things about the supernatural world, we speak through analogy; but
analogous speaking can still be truthful speaking. The Bible asserts that our
God is a God who hides. Now we see through the mirror dimly; however,
Christians claim that through the gift of Christ and his Holy Spirit, we do
know God. Faith is not a vague experience of the ineffable. Faith is also a
realistic confidence in what God has revealed to us.
Dulles'
third obstacle to evangelization is the "pragmatism and
utilitarianism" that infects our theology. We have been guilty of
presenting the Christian faith as if it were some helpful means to some humanly
desired end. We have reduced the Christian faith to a technique for getting
what it is we wanted before we met Christ. In this view, the Christian faith is
justified based on its effects - the promotion of self-esteem, inner peace,
liberation of the oppressed, economic progress. In this view, it is not so
important whether or not God is real, but whether God is helpful.
Next Dulles
lists the problem of "cultural relativism." We have found, through
the modern social sciences such as anthropology, that various cultures have an integrity
of their own and cultures ought not to be destroyed by Western imperialism
Christianity
has shown a genius for adapting itself to many of the world's cultures. It has
proved supremely adaptable in a wide diversity of cultural expressions; however,
there is no denying that Christianity always brings with it a collision of
cultures. Each day each one of us moves easily between any number of different
"cultures." Christianity is one of them. The mission field is always
full of debate, asking ourselves "Can we baptize this particular cultural
expression as our own or not?"
However, as
Dulles says, to be a Christian means to be someone who affirms that the culture
that is Christianity is that which is true, that which is the light of the
world, that in which each culture finds its best fulfillment.
Dulles then
lists the problem of the relativism enjoined by religious pluralism. Having
discovered the diversity of religious expressions on our globe, some say that humanity
should allow each of these expressions to stand alone, unhindered by dialogue
with, engagement with, and possible conversion by others. This is what Dulles
calls "soteriological relativism." The impression one gets is that
Jesus is the Savior, which is helpful for us, but not for the whole world. Each
religion has its own path to salvation, and no path is truer than any other is.
This is not a new proposal, but it is a wonderfully attractive proposal for
avoiding the conflicts between the competing truth claims of religions. Unfortunately,
it will not work. Most all religions claim to be true. They are not all saying
the same thing. To imply that they are all equally helpful, all equally true,
is not to take them at their own word. There is no way for religions to avoid
bumping up against each other. One cannot smooth over the conflict by denying
that there are true differences. Rather than take the differences among
religions seriously, the underlying argument is that no religions makes any
basic difference anyway, so why take them at their word.
It is of
the nature of our religion to want to share its joy with whomever will listen.
Christianity is not unique in this. As Christians, we ought to be intensely
curious about the faith claims of others; we ought to listen to them, both in
order to understand our neighbors better, and also to understand ourselves
better. At some point, however, we long for the opportunity to witness, in word
and deed, to the truth that we have found, or more properly, the truth that has
found us, in Christ.
The sixth
obstacle that Dulles lists is, "the false concept of freedom that pervades
contemporary culture and frequently infects theologians." Here, Dulles is
pointing to our modern infatuation with choice. The significance of my life
lies solely in the choices I make. I choose, therefore I am.
Of course,
this is an inheritance from the European Enlightenment. The Enlightenment
invented the notion of the individual, the individual whose existence is
constituted through his or her choices. No wonder that, under this construal of
humanity, religion became a purely private and personal matter, something that
I had chosen. When one thinks about it, it is rather odd that during the same
era in which the social sciences showed us how caught our lives are in webs not
of our creation - our parents, our histories, our economics - we brag so much
about our freedom of choice.
The gospel
in not a mere human contrivance, a "lifestyle option" among others.
We believe that the gospel is something given to us by God, an act of God
Finally,
Dulles lists the seventh theological aberration, which he calls
"anti-authoritarianism." Many of those who reject the gospel do so
because they believe that it violates their human autonomy (autonomy:
literally, "self-law"). They are not about to submit to some external
authority; they want to be free.
Submission
to the gospel gives us the means to lay hold of our lives, to say no to our
better selves, to turn our lives into an adventure; as we are fond of singing in
our hymn, "Make me a captive Lord, then I shall be truly free."
