influencing culture

Posted by Paul | Filed under uncategorised

I’ve been thinking more about Stanley Hauerwas’ criticisms of how the church engages the world (see, e.g., Resident Aliens). Simon Chan picks up on this in ‘Spiritual Theology’ with the following summary:

…the real problem is that for much of Christian history, the church operated on a monolithic understanding of engagement with the world that was based on the Constantinian model. The church has to take out citizenship in the world in order to exercise influence in it. Then, as a respectable world citizen, the church has to play by the rules set by the world. Stanley Hauerwas put this model of Christian engagement under deep probing and found it wanting. He offered an alternative model for Christian engagement based on the Anabaptist concept of the church as an alternative polis, the church as a colony of “resident aliens” on earth whose real citizenship is in heaven. Hauerwas believes that such a church, far from being irrelevant to the world, can actually challenge the world by offering a “real option” to the world through its own disciplined life (a “community of character”)

My thoughts on this were provoked by reading a letter to a newspaper implying that the church had lost its moral authority. This got me thinking where we get our moral authority from. In the past it was an accepted part of western culture, but it seems that the accepted-ness is now passing.

So, we have a choice. One possibility is to become another pressure group — one slightly out-of-step with the culture. Hauerwas’ problem with this is that we are forced to play by the rules laid down for us. At that point we lose something significant. If nothing else, the rules do not assume a post-resurrection world. It seems to me that the message of new creation gets distorted — lost in translation. It seems like the distorted message often comes out sounding negative and reactionary, rather than positive and new-creation-like.

Another option is to act as an alternative community. To model new creation; to ‘practice resurrection’ (W. Berry). If we really believe that what we have is the true way to live, is really ‘new life’, then should we expect that a community living that way will attract and will find its own moral authority from its fruit. Then, when people come to us, we have a position from which to speak. If you think this is fanciful, then take it up with Isaiah — it seems to me that this is something like what he is describing when he says

In the last days the mountain of the LORD’s temple will be established as chief among the mountains; it will be raised above the hills, and all nations will stream to it. Many peoples will come and say, “Come, let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob. He will teach us his ways, so that we may walk in his paths.”

It’s not about trying to put our agenda on others, but having fruit sufficiently attractive that others come and ask how it works.

I shouldn’t leave before pointing another sub-option. Discussing Can Church transform the culture?, Graham Tomlin talks about the church being a place where people are formed who can positively influence society. Again, he has Hauerwas and associated observations in mind.

to be continued (probably)…

Tags: , ,

Permalink | November 15th, 2007

2 Responses to “influencing culture”

  1. Zoe Elizabeth Says:
    Zoe Elizabeth November 28th, 2007 at 7:35 am

    On the discussion of morality Donald Miller’s Searching For God Knows What may be of interest to you. I find your blog very informative and intriguing. I like how well read you are. I find that difficult to find among friends. Keep it up.

  2. Paul Says:
    Paul December 3rd, 2007 at 10:32 pm

    Thanks for your kind comments, Zoe. Of course, behind every well-read person is simply a long train commute to work ;-)

Leave a Reply