Sunday, July 6, 2008

Improving the Words of St. Francis


“Preach the gospel always. If necessary use words”. Urban legend has it that the source of this profound little saying was St. Francis of Assisi. Yet it finds a powerful affinity among younger evangelical twenty and thirty somethings in today’s culture. Quoted by younger adult Christians on facebook and Blogs everywhere, this quip is firmly entrenched in the worldview of an entire generation of American Christians. And understandably so. With such looming hostility towards Christians in general, many evangelicals under forty believe that the integrity of Jesus is at stake and therefore self-consciously have become “deed-based,” emphasizing social action duties such as feeding the homeless and building houses for the poor to counter this hostility.

This antagonism towards Christians has a political underpinning. Since media types and political commentators have wrongly generalized Christian evangelicals and fundamentalists as a religious right voting block intent on imposing a Christian Theocracy on the rest of the country, the same people have also confused aggressive evangelism as a recruiting tool for the evangelical’s political agenda.1 Yet I can understand their misjudgment. We Christians often make Jesus look like a politician who is running for office, dispersing pamphlets and literature, knocking on doors, and holding large rallies, all in the name of Jesus!

As a college student rebelling against my fundamentalist-Baptist upbringing, I had my fill of this type of evangelism, designed to mass-produce as many Christians as possible in the shortest amount of time. Something seemed terribly wrong with the methods that our spiritual forefathers taught us, including handing out tracts at restaurants to waiters and waitresses who didn’t want them and going door-to-door calling/witnessing to people who really had no desire to talk with strangers about their spiritual destiny. In addition, we were encouraged to bring as many people possible to Christian concerts and youth rallies where we heard passionate stories, designed to scare people into heaven-such as the heart-breaking account of a teenage girl who did not give her life to Christ in time, but instead died in a car wreck, which sent her to hell. “Today is the day of Salvation,” the evangelist would cry out. Next, scores of teenagers, manipulatively fraught with fear, rushed down the aisles to make sure they were going to heaven when they died. They had promoted a packaged, fire insurance for the future life as the essence of the Christian faith. Just as bothersome were the gospel presentations that I was taught. Romans Road, Four Spiritual Laws, the EE questions, and many others did not do justice for the gospel that I was slowly rediscovering. Rather these presentations reduced the gospel to a set of dry propositions that only seemed to pay lip service to the greatest story ever told.2

Fast forward twenty years later and I wonder if we’ve swung the pendulum to the other side. In lieu of past damaging misconduct by the Jerry Falwell’s, the Pat Robertson’s, and the James Dobson’s in the public square, it appears as if younger generations of Christians have self-consciously gagged themselves from speaking the name of Jesus in public. For instance, lets examine Rob Bell’s public interaction in a panel discussion at the “Seeds of Compassion” interfaith conference this past April. While Rob Bell displayed authenticity combined with his immaculate story-telling ability, he purposely avoided using the J word in a faith environment where Jesus is not a dirty word to the vast majority of people. Even as the Muslim scholar referred to teachings of the Koran and the Sikh holy man cited ancient Hindu wisdom, Rob Bell’s moving story about why we should forgive climaxed with, “Because it is the right thing to do!” Although a very true statement, the forgiveness that Jesus offers (which allows us to forgive each other and even forgive our enemies) is so much more than the shallow moralism that Rob alludes to in the discussion, which even most atheists could claim. As a result, the generic genuineness of Rob Bell’s interfaith dialogue did little to enhance the reputation and uniqueness of Jesus Christ. When I brought up these arguments on the blogosphere, almost every one who defended Rob did so based on not wanting to offend those who had written off Christianity because of the negative reputation of its followers.

Considering this situation as well as many other conversations with my fellow Christians, I am beginning to believe that my generation and younger have developed a shame complex of their fellow Christian brothers and sisters and have lost confidence in the word of God, the living (Jesus) but especially the written (the Bible). Maybe this is why we so readily embrace the supposed words of St. Francis “Preach the gospel always, if necessary use words” as our modus operandi of mission? Whatever the reason, its time we get back to using our words to proclaim the gospel along side of our actions. Just as there is something terribly wrong with a gospel that only proclaims words, there is also something inherently wrong with the “Preach the gospel, if necessary use words” way of thinking. It presupposes that proclamation is just an option of the gospel, whereas Romans 10:14 pictures the apostle Paul passionately posing the question “how can they hear without someone preaching to them?” Even as the gospel travels through relationships (as opposed to impersonal methods such as door-to-door witnessing, handing out tracts, and manipulating people at concerts and rallies), the gospel must be communicated through our words so that people can respond with repentance and faith in Jesus Christ.

So I have a proposal that will make this statement from St. Francis more in line with the Biblical narrative. Lets replace the “if” with “when.” Then it will state, “Preach the gospel always. When necessary, use words.” By substituting “when” with “if,” suddenly our words are no longer just an option, but a significant aspect of our gospel witness. Moreover, lets not forget that our radical sacrificial love of the poor and needy as well as our holy living (Read James 1:27) will distinguish us from so called Christians whose actions give credence to the stereotype of a loud-mouthed bigoted fundamentalist-evangelical. Therefore, with the power of the Holy Spirit, we can ungag ourselves and then tell the gospel story with confidence and clarity as an obedient response to God’s grace.

____________________________________
1To get a feel for the roots of fundamentalists and evangelicals, read George M. Marsdent's Understanding Fundamentalism and Evangelicalism (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Co, 1991). By explaining their socio-religious history in the 19th and 20th centuries, one can understand why there is a tendency by fundamentalists and evangelicals to attempt to turn back the American social clock to the previous generation. This is their primary reason for engaging in the social aspects of politics, not to build a Christian Theocracy as many contemporary, paranoid political writers would have everyone believe.
2This statement does not mean that I am against propositional statements. Throughout all of scripture, its narrative makes propositional declarations. One example is found in the first statement of Genesis. "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." Since about 78% of the entire cannon is narrative, shouldn't we Christians attempt to master the art of story telling, especially the gospel?

13 comments:

Poop is Emergent Too said...

Good stuff Joel. We recently talked about this at church, both are necessary and neither is an if! It's like JP says: The Whole Gospel for whole People...

Poop is Emergent Too said...

Good stuff Joel. We recently talked about this at church, both are necessary and neither is an if! It's like JP says: The Whole Gospel for whole People...

Anonymous said...

Joel-this is a really well written blog that I have been thinking about since yesterday when I first read it. I am still marinading some thoughts, but wanted to give you my intial thoughts that I enjoyed reading it. There is something that isn't sitting right with me with all of it, and I am still figuring out what that is....will definately ponder away some more and write then...

Grace and Peace.

Joel A. Shaffer said...

Jess, I am looking forward to your interaction. As you know I am always open to critique. Also, remember I am a equal opportunity offender of everyone whether they be fundamentalists, evangelicals, emergents, Mainline Protestant, Catholic, etc....Hopefully I have taken the high-road in my critique....

Anonymous said...

Joel-that is something I have noticed in the critiques that I have read of yours-they are the high road! I value that integrity of yours. They are well thought through thoughts-it is enjoyable reading your site!

Be back with more...still marinading....

Anonymous said...

I spent awhile "marinading" on this one too before I replied, because it has a lot of food for thought. In the end what I came up with this. I am often guilty of doing what you are getting at what you say many younger Christians do.

But I think I have a good reason (or perhaps rationalization? who knows?)

What I think younger, more liberal/social conscious Christians are attempting to do is separate their faith from a lot of the misgivings we have with traditional evangelicalism.

You contend that Christian evangelicals are wrongly stereotyped. I think it may be better to say that they are wrongly generalized. There are a large number that are the socially conservative base of right wing politics. Guy like Dobson or Robertson have huge voices in our media because they have millions of supporters.

So I believe what I am often trying to do in my life when I don't use Christian language or what have you is that in my mind and in the mind of non Christians, a lot of that language brings up an image of Christianity that I do not associate myself with.

It has been a difficult balance for me. And this was a timely blogpost. I have spent a lot of the last year struggling to find how I reconcile my belief in Jesus and faith in the biblical narrative and my total lack of faith in the traditional church and moralism I came up in.


Somewhere there has to be an answer for the new generation of believers to redefine the face of Christianity, but still remain true to its teaching and spirit.

I don't know if I made any headway here, (or even said anything that wasn't nonsensical) but you definitely gave me more things to chew on, and talk to God about, and for that I am continually grateful for this blog.

Keep it up man.

D.

Joel A. Shaffer said...

Derek,

As I think about it, generalize is a better word than stereotype for the reason you gave. I will update it soon.

I think you make a good point and I totally understand the reasons why we are hesitant to share the gospel story. I think there probably should be a Part II to this conversation. I made a point that we should share the gospel with both our words and actions, but I think we need a conversation in how to do it in a way that is rooted in loving our neighbors as ourselves, as opposed to evangelistic manipulation?

What baggage do we need to remove so that we can communicate and demonstrate the gospel (of the kingdom) so that we are not living and telling a watered-down, reductionist gospel, but rather living out and sharing a robust gospel that is faithful to the Biblical narrative?

I am still praying for you and Katherine that can find a church that is both faithful to the scriptures and that is not weighed down with all of the baggage of cultural Christianity. Its so much easier and better to express the gospel in word and deed in a faith community than in isolation.

Anonymous said...

Joel-I am ready now. I have been thinking about this for awhile...a couple thoughts.

1-This is such a stellar blog post that I have been marinating on it since my first comment...that says something to the content of it.

2-I keep hearing my professor of preaching's voice in my head. We had talked about Peter's sermon in Acts and how 43.6% of his sermon was just scripture recitation...I think of this because of the importance to have the life of the scripture growing in us. These living words should be oozing out of the way we live (preaching by living) and the way we talk (preaching my speaking).

3-The reason why this post does something in me is because I have been wrestling with the importance of the traditional style of preaching (pulpit, congregants) all year. This post ignites some of those thoughts. I battle between the importance of preaching and re:imagining preaching. I hear Henri Nouwen in my head who talks about how words have lost their meaning today. If that is true, then we must learn to preach in a different format.

4-I am not ready to say, "Preach the Gospel always, when necessary use words" but this post has recaptured a belief that the narrative of Scripture MUST be the narrative that we as preachers are teaching daily. People are hearing the narrative of sex, power, and money daily that the message of the gospel must be preached daily. The message of the gospel is a greater narrative - it is the narrative we are meant to be a part of! Now, does that mean words must be used to preach it - yes. Does that mean we must be living it - yes. Preaching the gospel is a way of life, and part of our life is words.

5-Obviously these are not polished thoughts…even this weekend I was talking about this with Walter Bruggeman. I say that because your post is good. Thank you Joel.


Thoughts? Push backs? Seriously, wanna hear them.

Joel A. Shaffer said...

Jess, Thank you again propping my post. If I am able to help people from all walks of life within Christianity think, than I am on track to being faithful to my calling as a teacher. I may send a form of it to Relevant Magazine or some other journal. Any thoughts?

How do you end up always rubbing shoulders with these famous theologians, Christian statesmen and women? One of my closest friends and I were trying to figure out how to get out of some church responsibilities so that we could hear Walter Bruggeman. Didn't happen. Oh well....

I am with you in reimagining preaching. I was convicted by a John Piper message a few years ago when he said this: "The other reason I say that imagination is a Christian duty is that when a person speaks or writes or sings or paints about breathtaking truth in a boring way, it is probably a sin. The supremacy of God in the life of the mind is not honored when God and his amazing world are observed truly, analyzed duly, and communicated boringly. Imagination is the key to killing boredom. We must imagine ways to say truth for what it really is. And it is not boring. God's world - all of it - rings with wonders. The imagination calls up new words, new images, new analogies, new metaphors, new illustrations, new connections to say old, glorious truth. Imagination is the faculty of the mind that God has given us to make the communication of his beauty beautiful." From following yours and Jim's blogs, both of you are doing well demonstrating by your lives and communicating with your words God's narrative with creative imagination. Now you have me thinking and marinading about different forms that preaching could take. I'll have to maybe get back to you on that one....

By the way, what was Dr. Bruggeman's response to your questions on this issue?

King Ott said...

Great post, good thoughts. Personally, I think it makes more sense to re-emphasize Jesus and de-emphasize Christianity, because that's where the problems seem to lie. It can be wonderful talking to people about Jesus, who otherwise would not want to, when they understand that you will not be trying to place any religious baggage on their shoulders.

Anonymous said...

Joel- I have been thinking about your questions for awhile here are some thoughts.

1-I am honestly still thinking about this blog. I was interviewed by some students who wanted to know more about the gospel and your blog came to my mind as I engaged with them.

2-I think you should send it to Relevant. Play around with it some more and let it marinade. Then send it!

3-To answer your question about rubbing shoulders with some notable people, it is because of Mars Hill. I know we don't always get it right by any means, but it is such a gift to be able to bring in people who are recognized in the Christian scene.

4-Dr. WB answer. Backstory. He kept talking about how preaching is the mode in which we need to tell the story today. I kept thinking of your blog and my conflicting thoughts on "words" and imagining preaching in a new form. So I asked him, "In today's post-modern culture how can we emphasize preaching so much when words are quickly losing their value. What might it look like to re:imagine preaching in a new way so that the narrative is heard?" His answer: "That is your job. I am 75 and you get to do that hard work." While people laughed in the crowd, I thought it was a cop out answer. Partially true, but mainly a cop out answer.


If you do get it published, let me know. I want to buy a copy!

Anonymous said...

And to Christian Beyer....your comment has been rubbing me in a difficult way. You said "I think it makes more sense to re-emphasize Jesus and de-emphasize Christianity, because that's where the problems seem to lie." I understand what you are saying, or least I think I do. I might have said something like this 7 years ago too. But the more I am understanding Jesus and what happened when he walked onto the scene of history, the more I cringe at comments like this. Reason for this is that Jesus constantly was working within the framework of the Jewish religious system. As Richard Rohr says he was on the outer edge of the circle. One foot in the door of the traditions of the religion and one foot out helping it progress forward. You have inspired me to write some of these thoughts down into a blog...more to come.

Joel A. Shaffer said...

Christian-I definitely understand where you are coming from. I wish it were that easy (to separate Jesus and Christianity) in speaking the good news of Christ. Unfortunately as this post and comments attest, there is so much cultural baggage attached to even who Jesus was and is. Many people refuse to make that distinction.

I think that is why in the apostle Peter's first letter that he emphasizes good works and deeds as a response to all of the slander that the churches were experiencing. I don't know if we have emphasized doing good works (such as sacrificially loving the poor) enough as part of apologetics.

Ideally, word and deed in expressing the gospel should be inextricibly linked together. Even in a 21st century post-modern world evangelicals (whether emergent or conservative) have a difficult time truly living out holistic mission. Hopefully conversations like this will help us in this pursuit.