Challenges to Evangelizing

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."