A Theology of Social Action
By Jerry Redman
In the seventh chapter of the book of Zechariah, certain Jewish leaders inquire of the priests and prophets as to whether they should once again observe the fast to commemorate the destruction of Jerusalem. Zechariah is emphatic in his reply, as he tells them that God’s word to them on this matter is no different than it has been previously. The prophet tells them that the “fast” they are hoping to observe has little to do with God, and everything to do with them (v. 6). In addition, he reminds them that they have already been instructed to show justice, mercy and compassion to each other (v. 9), as well as to bring justice and help to the marginalized of their society (v. 10).
However, verse eleven refers to Israel’s stubbornness concerning God’s command, resulting in God’s anger toward them (v. 12). Their refusal to obey God’s command concerning social justice resulted in Israel turning “…the pleasant land desolate (v. 14).” By refusing to be a blessing to those most in need of it, Israel suffered the judgment of God not only against the people of the nation, but also their land itself.
This scriptural illustration is used in order to show both God’s concern for those who do not fully enjoy the blessings of a prosperous culture, and His expectation that those whom He calls His own (and who call themselves His) are expected to move beyond their own interests, traditions, and physical and spiritual comforts so that the marginalized may have a share in the blessings God bestows on a nation. The time in which we live today seems very similar to the story found in Zechariah 7. While the Christian faith community in America has enjoyed and continues to enjoy financial blessing and institutional strength, the segment of our society that suffers from hunger, homelessness, a lack of proper health care, joblessness, abuse, addiction, exploitation and a lack of resources and the power to change their situation continues to grow. Add to this the dire circumstances of many on the continent of Africa, the countries of North Korea and Iraq, Israel’s West Bank, and much of Latin America, and there is no denying the social crisis facing our world today.
However, in so many areas of the world, the Church is engaged in very limited ways at best in these crises, often times engaging only in argument over what has created the crises in the first place. Having served as a pastor in three local church congregations, as well as working as a consultant with other local fellowships, I have seen firsthand that the typical local church budget does not in any meaningful way address these social action/justice opportunities, either on a local, national or global scale. All the while, these crises only continue to grow worse, and the pictures from places such as Darfur do nothing to give one hope that there is a turnaround coming.
In the face of all of this, be it the lack of clean drinking water or basic healthcare for many Africans, or the growing hunger, homelessness or sexual exploitation problems facing America, there has been an undeniable move in the last decade on the part of many of the leading architects and heroes of popular culture to not only bring awareness to these issues, but to also bring about solutions and substantive change for the poorest in our world. Whether it is the work of the Jubilee Project, DATA, or the ONE organization, many of popular culture’s most recognizable and influential figures are leading the way in the fight to see every human being have access to clean water, nutritious food on a regular basis, and basic, life-sustaining health care.
With celebrities such as Bono of the rock band U2, Brad Pitt, Angelina Jolie, Oprah Winfrey, Don Cheadle, George Clooney and many others acting as leading faces and voices of various social action/justice causes, scores of people, especially those among the college-age and twenty-something demographics, have responded to their call with action, passion and selflessness. While some have dismissed this action and passion as nothing more than an attempt to raise one’s “cool factor,” hundreds of thousands of young people from the above-mentioned demographic groups have decided to make the problems of those without power and resources their problems as well. Many of these young people see this as an opportunity to more fully live out their faith in Jesus Christ, while many others are seeking to simply improve the plight of humanity without any particular faith motivation to do so. However, it is a mistake to dismiss the spiritual motivation on the part of many who have decided to make social action and justice a key part of their lives.
While we have seen this social action/justice movement grow in various segments of our culture, it is within the Church that the attention to, as well as engagement in, these opportunities is not nearly as pervasive. Therefore, my thesis for this paper is to show a true engagement with popular culture on the part of the Church will require many segments of the Church to address and change its previously detached attitude toward both social action/justice initiatives, as well as those individuals and groups these initiatives hope to help. The Church’s lack of substantive engagement with the marginalized of society places us in danger of experiencing the same judgment described in Zechariah 7. This lack of engagement also greatly limits our opportunities to evangelize and disciple both the marginalized within our culture, as well as those seeking to help them who do not consider Christianity a viable choice for their lives, or who feel that they must help because they view the Church as having ignored the marginalized.
With this overwhelming social need, the perception on the part of many that Christians in general, and the institutions of the Church specifically, have for the most part failed to act in any meaningful way to remedy this need, as well as the missional opportunity presented to the Church by the social justice crises faced around the world, it is vitally important that Christians act now on behalf of these marginalized persons. But, this action must be more than a few attempts to lessen guilt over our cumulative lack of action, or even sincere, but rather in-effective, strategies to alleviate the suffering of the marginalized. The only way that the Christian community will not only engage, but also bring true change in the social justice areas previously mentioned, is through a new and deepening theological foundation of thinking about how we minister to the poor and defenseless. This new theological foundation will also require an expansion of who we consider to be our partners in these social action initiatives, which means we must rework our criteria concerning those with whom we are willing to connect for the cause of Christ, even if many of those people are not adherents of our faith. Finally, and most importantly for purposes of this paper, we must open ourselves to voices and figures of influence and leadership possibly not previously considered by the Church. These individuals and groups could very well be new prophetic voices that, just as the prophets of the Old Testament did, are able to, “…shatter settled reality and evoke new possibility in the listening assembly.” The arrogance that many Christians have come to be known for, especially in America, must be replaced by a humility that allows us to listen to the voice of God calling us to minister to those (the marginalized) so prominently featured in scripture, even if those “prophetic voices” are those whom we would not consider part of “us.”
All of this points us to popular culture, and many of its leading faces and voices that have decided to use their celebrity, wealth and influence to engage those who value their creativity so that the plights of orphans, AIDS patients, the victims of the Darfur crisis, the homeless, the hungry, etc., are no longer ignored or forgotten. It has been especially true of the Church in America over the last quarter century that we have not been nearly as engaged in changing the fortunes of the socially marginalized as scripture calls us to be, but many of the key figures of popular culture (musicians, actors, artists, and athletes) have drawn significant attention to these unfortunate groups. Beyond the attention they have been able to create, they have also created significant momentum and action on behalf of various social action initiatives. The Church, especially the evangelical segment of the Church in America, can no longer sit on the periphery of these issues and the initiatives that seek to solve them. To do so any longer not only lessens our missional opportunities, but also shows popular culture we do not believe the totality of all we say our faith is about and built upon, especially the specific words of Christ.
In the last year I have had the opportunity to befriend a Jewish gentleman who works part-time at a Panera Bread restaurant that I frequent. Irving has retired to the South after spending all of his childhood and adult life in Brooklyn, New York. Although he loves the South, he admits he is still getting used to its rather odd culture (as a life-long resident of the South, I have told him I am still trying to get used to it as well). One of the things he has pointed out to me about Southern culture is the prevalence of Christianity, at least in an institutional sense, in the South. He has commented to me about the arrogance and lack of social engagement he sees in so much of the Christianity with which he is presented. However, Irving has spent quite a bit of time reading the Christian Bible, and he is well acquainted with the words of Jesus. During our last conversation, he told me, “I could be a Christ-follower if Christianity was really about the teachings of Jesus. But, as I look at Christianity today, I see it having little to do with Jesus and His teachings.” I found it difficult to disagree with his assessment. However, I believe Irving’s assessment sums up both the disappointment and expectation culture has with and of Christianity. A more clear indication that we value Christ’s teachings enough to act on behalf of those to whom He has sent us will begin to lessen some of the negative views culture has of Christianity, as well as bring us into a deeper relationship with culture, allowing us a greater opportunity to offer the redemptive message of Christ to that same culture.
I. A NEW FOUNDATION
Former U.S. congressman Tony Hall, who is also a Christian, claims that we as a nation have, “…lost our voice for the voiceless, the have-nots, the children, the widows, the orphans, the people who stink and don’t look so good.” I contend that the same can be said and is being said about the Church. While there are multiple reasons being put forward as to why this is, I believe we have lost sight of a clear theological understanding of the need to have the “voice” to which Congressman Hall refers. In an earlier section of the book, Hall says this: “I believe a government is measured-a country is measured-by how much we reach out to the poor, how we help the hurting, how we help the oppressed.” If a government or a nation is measured in such a way, how much more is the Church measured by this? Jesus made it clear in scripture that only our love for God should super-cede our love for our neighbors, both those we know and those we do not (Matthew 22:39), and He of course defined what He meant by “neighbor” (Luke 10:30-37).
If a new foundation of action and engagement and a recovery of our voice for the marginalized are to be realized, we must recover a better vision of what it means to be followers of Christ. While many can speculate on how this recovery of vision happens, it would be interesting to explore how our traditions might help in that recovery. For those of us involved in the faith for some time, it is easy, as well as commonplace, to have become somewhat removed from the culture at large, as well as ignore the obvious social action needs and opportunities around us. Could it be that for those of us who have been a part of the faith for some time we should create re-initiation rites and experiences that catalyze in us a renewed vision of the working out of Christ’s mission and mandate to His followers? Kelton Cobb refers to “ceremonies of incorporation” for various cultures, and it is this opportunity to which I am referring. For those undergoing these ceremonies, they are indoctrinated into, “…the most prized wisdom of the tribe.” Cobb goes on to say; “Knowing what they have undergone, knowing of their fresh exposure to the cherished symbols of the tribe, the society that has sent them into this ritual process prepares itself to receive them back in a transformational status.”
What I am proposing is a decision on our own part to re-initiate ourselves, so that we might receive ourselves back in a way that returns us to missional integrity. While there are several instances in scripture where Christ refers to the fact that our identity with Him will cause many to hate us, I firmly believe that a re-discovery of our mission and purpose that is lived out in a transformational manner, and in such a way that shows culture we care about something more than ourselves, our buildings and our budgets, will cause culture to want to partner with us for the betterment of the world. Cobb continues; “If the visions that were generated while they (the initiates) were held in thrall by communitas have sufficient power and durability, they can actually carry over into permanent changes in the way their society classifies reality and the social relations within it. In this way cultures are reoxygenated by these rituals.” This process of “reoxygenation” is essential to the Church traversing the distance it has put between itself and popular culture.
There are numerous individuals and organizations, some operating from a faith context and many who are not, that have put social action on the radar for many Americans who would have otherwise not considered these crises needing their attention. It has been interesting, especially since the creation of the ONE organization (ONE exists to bring an end to extreme poverty and needless disease around the world) in 2005, to watch many in the Christian community argue about whether the Church had any business doing anything but preaching the gospel. As I have dialogued (or argued) with many people about this issue in the last three years, I have insisted that for all of the problems associated with what many call the Christian sub-culture or ghetto, the AIDS, hunger and drinking water crises that face Africa provide the Church an answer to the whole “WWJD (What Would Jesus Do?)” movement from the early-nineties. I have challenged many Christians who are unsure about the Church’s call to these initiatives that the answer to the “What Would Jesus Do” question was found in the opportunity/crisis presented to the world on the continent of Africa. I firmly believe that the ONE organization was guided by God, whether its leaders recognize that to be true or not, to not only bring the plight of Africa to the attention of the world, but to also call the Church to the social action it has refused to take (for the most part) for the last twenty-five years.
In his book, A Generous Orthodoxy, Brian McLaren writes about his search for and struggle with what it means to be “missional.” He describes some of the ways this word has come to have quite a bit of prominence over the last decade or more in various Christian circles, but his main treatment of the word, at least in the early stages of the book, has to do with what it actually means to be a missional Christian. After describing some attempts on his part to come up with a satisfactory meaning, McLaren tells his readers that his “aha” moment concerning the word’s definition came when he was able to write out this definition of one who is missional: “To be and make disciples of Jesus Christ in authentic community for the good of the world.” It seems that large segments of Christianity, especially those segments heavily influenced by a western, evangelical mind-set, have either missed or chosen to ignore this aspect of missionality that is truly for the good of the world, including those inhabitants of the world who do not and may never share our faith.
God told Abraham that if he obeyed the call that God was extending to him, “…all the peoples on earth will be blessed through you (Genesis 12:3, TNIV).” While I realize this call and instruction was to Abraham first, then his family, then his descendents that would eventually become the nation of Israel, as Christians the roots of our faith lie in the call to Abraham and those who came after him, therefore, the echo of this call and promise reverberates in and through us today. The many teachings of Christ that deal with the care of the poor and oppressed point to a desire to see no one left out of the blessings His Father desires to extend to humanity. But, much of Christianity today seems to be more about, “For the good of me and mine,” then it does the entirety of humanity. However, whether they recognize it or not, or whether they even intend to, many of the leading figures within popular culture who are known for their social activity, do seem to be motivated by the good of the world. So, could it be argued that with our clear call to make disciples of Jesus throughout the world, as well as the fact scripture tells us that the world will know that we are followers of Jesus because of the love we have for each other (thus bringing about the authentic community to which McLaren refers in his definition), and the clear mission of many within popular culture to bring about the good of the world, should we not be in partnership given all that we already have to offer, and the transformational power that could result from such a partnership? I will address this a bit more deeply in the next section of the paper.
There is one more point I want to make concerning this call to make disciples who live in authentic community for the good of the world. Actually, it is more accurate to say that McLaren makes the point after providing the definition for being missional. He writes; “It (the definition of missional) says that Christians are not the end users of the gospel.” Again, it is easy to note and should be obvious to many that so much of Christianity acts in such a way that tells the outside observer that we are in fact the end users of the gospel of Jesus. But, with Christianity in the west in obvious decline, and so many in the west believing that our faith offers little to nothing in the way of real-life solutions and hope, is it not time to do a thorough re-examination of just what it is we have done with the gospel, and whether we have both understood it and declared it as Christ truly meant it to be?
One final point for this section again comes from McLaren. After giving his missional definition, he asks his readers to reconsider what this means concerning our relationship to the gospel, the Church and the world and vice versa. He believes that we have put ourselves at the core of all things related to the gospel, followed by the Church and then the world. He calls for a reversal of this, with the world occupying the most important place in our thinking and action. He writes; “This missional approach…eliminates old dichotomies like ‘evangelism’ and ‘social action.’ Both are integrated in expressing a saving love for the world. Those who want to become Christians (whether through our proclamation or demonstration), we welcome. Those who don’t, we love and serve, joining God in seeking their good, their blessing, their shalom.”
A lived theology that shows we desire what McLaren has described for all of humanity will undoubtedly give us a seat at the social justice table already full of many of the important faces and voices of popular culture. While I realize that many of them might be suspect at first of both our presence and our intentions, a theology of discipleship, community and action for the good of all of humanity will begin to diminish their suspicions, allowing us to be welcomed into their work and fellowship as valued, important and necessary partners in the vital work of bringing hope to those who live and die every day without it. This is probably the easiest part of the “sale.” Getting many long-time Christians to see the importance and necessity of such a lived theology will be a much tougher task.
II. A NEW PARTNERSHIP
In 2005 I discovered a book by Thomas Friedman, who is a foreign affairs columnist for The New York Times. The book, The World is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-First Century, was a captivating read, and I quickly began to recommend it to anyone who would listen to me. Obviously, many other people had the same response to the book that I did, as it quickly became a best-seller and it made Friedman, who had already written three best-selling books and was quite respected, a literary, social commentary and political, celebrity. He began to appear on numerous political and business talk shows, and seeing him interviewed on nightly news reports became commonplace. However, Friedman was not content to rest on what he’d written concerning this “flattening” movement he was seeing. So, the following year he published a second edition of the book, with up-dated information, and then in 2007 published the third edition of the book, with even more up-dated and new information. Friedman has even commented that he hopes one day to finally be finished writing the book, although I wonder if that is possible. In the book, he deals with not only what it means for the world to have become “flattened” politically, socially, economically, culturally, etc., but he also explores how this flattening movement impacts not only what it means to be human in this century, but how humanity will change due to a never-before experienced or imagined connection to each other. He writes: “Globalization 3.0 is going to be more and more driven not only by individuals, but also by a much more diverse- non-Western, non-white- group of individuals. Individuals from every corner of the flat world are being empowered. Globalization 3.0 makes it possible for so many more people to plug in and play, and you are going to see every color of the human rainbow take part.”
Friedman writes about his introduction to open-sourcing and how important it already is and will continue to become in this ever-flattening world. Friedman interviewed one computer executive who said that open-sourcing is, “…incredibly empowering of individuals,” thereby actually creating more and stronger collaborations and communities. He went on to say, “The old model is winner taken all…I own it. The only way to compete against that…is to all become winners.” I truly believe this executive is describing not only a new reality and opportunity for business, technology, or even governments, but for the Church as well. For all of my life I have heard most of the Church either rail against popular culture, or tell its followers that popular culture must be avoided at all costs, or a combination of both. In this decade it seems this situation has gotten even worse rather than better, as so much of the evangelical Church in America seems to have sold its soul to the Republican political party. In the midst of this very real dilemma, however, many followers of Christ are finding that a different approach to both how we minister the gospel, as well as how we view and interact with culture, is both needed and is yielding positive results.
Far too often, Christians have chosen to ignore the opportunities to partner with already existing organizations who were focused on bringing solutions to social problems, but who were not part of our faith. Instead, we would build our own system/organization to address the same issue, but one that provided a decidedly “Christian” perspective and solution. Most of the time all that we accomplished was to reduce our already limited resources even more, as well as further marginalizing ourselves within the culture we are supposed to engage. We also weakened those organizations who did not share our same faith system, but who would have benefited from our help and partnership, had they just been shown we were not there to preach at them and hammer them with our doctrine. Nobody wins when nobody collaborates.
A new theology of connection, collaboration and partnership is the next step after we have laid a new theological foundation for social action and popular culture engagement. I want to point out an example of success when these new collaborations, connections and partnerships take place. I have already mentioned the ONE organization, which exists to end extreme poverty and needless disease around the world. As a member of ONE, I am not asked to contribute money (unless of course I want to), but instead I am asked to contribute my voice. This means whenever I receive an appeal from ONE to contact my senator and congressman or other influential leaders concerning key legislation that is being considered that will directly affect the world’s poor, I do so through email or by phone. It is as simple as that. I have many friends, all of whom are Christians, who are also part of this organization, and we talk frequently about the organization’s latest initiatives, and what sort of success we are seeing in those initiatives.
ONE was rolled out in the spring of 2005, not long before the “LIVE 8” concerts that happened around the world in order to bring awareness to the issue of global poverty and disease. ONE began to flood the Internet and television with a brief video that stated its mission and what we as ordinary people could do to become part of it. The video featured several key figures from popular culture such as Bono, George Clooney, Don Cheadle, Brad Pitt, and many others. However, the person I was both most impressed and surprised to see on the video was televangelist Pat Robertson, the founder of CBN. Robertson is known for his highly conservative, evangelical, and often controversial political views. He stirred quite a bit of controversy in the days following 9/11 with comments that were anything but helpful and healing. I could not help but wonder how the people at ONE came to even consider asking him to be part of the campaign, as well as why Robertson would align himself with so many “liberal” celebrities, many of whom show no spiritual leanings whatsoever, and if they do, they typically do not lean towards Christianity. But, there he was, wearing the plain white shirt all the others wore, pleading for action on behalf of humanity’s poorest. While I have noticed that the response of the American Church to the call of ONE has been mixed at best, Robertson’s involvement is an inescapable example of the fact that partnership between ourselves and popular culture for the good of the world is not only possible, but even far easier than those on either side might have thought it to be.
We must be willing to just sit down with each other and respectfully talk and listen to each other, acknowledging our differences, but not letting those differences be what define us or those with whom we might be able to partner. I recognize that there is a large segment of the Church that sees no value in partnering with those who do not share our faith, but many other committed Christians (including myself) are finding that through respect, listening and humility, many who find their spiritual center within the music, film and art of popular culture are not only allowing us into the room, they are in fact welcoming us. I myself have been accused of hanging out with some pretty shady, suspect characters as I go about living out Christ’s call and the ministry He has entrusted to me, with some Christians going so far as to call me a heretic, and in one case, “an instrument of the devil (I am not making this up).” But, I remember from scripture the accusations leveled at Jesus, many having to do with the company He kept. A lived theology of engagement and action will mean that we share the journey toward justice for all of humanity with many people we may not have previously considered partnership material. It is equally important to remember they will have not previously considered us for that role either.
III. A NEW VOICE
There is no doubt at this point in human history that many people, both in America and throughout the world, are hungry for the kind of leadership that lifts not only the spirit, but that also provides hope that becomes reality. Again, while I believe the Church has been called to provide this hope, we have spent far too much time using our prophetic voice to articulate something less than the message of Jesus, and this has cost us our opportunity to be heard in many settings. But, I believe strongly that we can recover that voice, and that we are beginning to see a Spirit-led movement to return the Church to its role of speaking in a fully prophetic way. By this I mean a way that not only describes the gravity of the current human situation, but also the opportunities for turnaround if we will begin to act on behalf of those to which scripture, the Old Testament especially, gives pages and pages of attention.
There are multiple voices within popular culture currently that continue to draw the attention of the world to the plight of those who lack both the resources and the influence to change their fortunes. A friend of mine refers to Oprah Winfrey as “America’s senior pastor.” Bruce Springsteen’s latest record, “Magic,” draws our attention to an America that seems to have lost its way, and possibly, its soul. Brad Pitt is spending a great deal of time and money to help rebuild several of the forgotten neighborhoods of New Orleans that have been overlooked or even abandoned by its local, state and federal leaders in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Angelina Jolie is deeply involved in bringing attention to the plight of poor children around the world, as she serves in an official capacity for the United Nations. I believe one can even make the argument that Illinois Senator Barack Obama, although he is primarily a political figure, has become just as much a part of the popular culture fabric, and many people, especially younger voters, believe he can bring about the kinds of changes that will lift the fortunes of many who seem to be on the outside looking in when it comes to the so-called “American Dream.”
While all of these popular culture figures have gained significant attention for their social justice work, I find no voice from within popular culture more significant or important than that of Bono, the lead singer of the world’s biggest rock band, U2. Born in Dublin, Ireland as Paul Hewson, as a teenager he was tagged with the name “Bono,” a name he decided to adopt. U2, four men who have been friends and band-mates since they were teenagers, have been a band for over thirty years, and they have been recognizable music stars for almost the last twenty-five years. In addition to this, three of the members expressed a commitment to Christ in the early days of the band, a commitment that has been constantly examined and speculated about by both Christians and non-Christians for years. However, the spiritual imagery and overtones of much of their music is undeniable, and Bono has especially talked openly over the years about his faith in Jesus.
However, he has expressed and lived out that faith
DISCLAIMER: Church of God and Faith News does not necessarily endorse or sanction all or any part of this news item.
