Love, Truth, and Justice – Enough?
Posted on 13 July 2009
My reflections on Novak’s response to Benedict’s encyclical have upset me, and I can’t quite put my thoughts to rest. Why is it, I wonder, that we don’t really believe that the way of the cross is practical enough? Why is it that we don’t believe speaking and living the truth in love is enough? Why do we always need something more or other?
5 responses to Love, Truth, and Justice – Enough?
Francis Schaeffer in his work: The Church at the End of the 20th Century made this observation over 30 years ago:
To be a real revolutionary you must become involved in a real revolution–a revolution in which you are pitted against everybody who has turned away from God and His propositional revelation to men, against even the users of the God-words, a revolution in which we may again hope to see good results, not only in individuals going to heaven but in Christ who is Lord becoming Lord in fact in this culture of ours to give us even in this fallen world something of both truth and beauty.
We and our Churches must take the truth seriously. The great tragedy is that in all our countries evangelicalism under the name of evangelicalism is destroying evangelicalism. Orthodoxy under the name orthodoxy is destroying orthodoxy…But if we must first speak Christianity with a clear content and an emphasis on truth in contrast to what is not true, equally we must practice truth…We must practice truth even if it is costly.
This is a time to show to a generation who thinks that the concept of truth is unthinkable that we do take the truth seriously by considering the principle of the purity of the visible church and what discipline in regard to both life and doctrine means…If you think that the tough young people who have rejected the plastic culture and are sick of hypocrisy are going to be impressed when you talk about truth as you unwittingly practice untruth, you are wrong. They will never listen…We live in a generation that does not believe such a thing as truth is possible, and if you practice untruth while talking about truth, the real thinkers among the young will just say, “Garbage” (excerpts from: pages 36-39; (Downers Grove, Ill. Intervarsity Press) 1978
Michael,
Thanks for this provocative quote. As you can probably imagine, I’m both drawn to and repelled by Schaeffer. I like his fervor, his seriousness, but I dislike many of his theological presuppositions. As an example, he says ‘To be a real revolutionary you must become involved in a real revolution–a revolution in which you are pitted against everybody who has turned away from God and His propositional revelation to men…’
Now I agree that Christians ought to be ‘real’ revolutionaries, but I don’t think to accomplish that we have to be ‘pitted against everybody who has turned away from God’; Christ came among us not only to divide, but to unite; Christ is for us , and he is against only in that he is for us.
Further, I think Schaeffer goes wrong because he believes revelation is ultimately propositional. Revelation is ultimately personal, and to make the mistake Schaeffer makes – if I read him rightly – is to miss the point badly.
Another example: I appreciate Schaeffer’s insistence on living, and not merely speaking, the truth, even when such living is ‘costly’. However, I don’t think we should trust now the ‘sincerity’ of young people anymore than he should’ve trusted it then. The so-called genuineness and anti-hypocrisy of the the young which leaders always are calling on for various reasons is not what it seems. It is a myth that pervades our culture – you can see an excellent species of this in the advertising industry – and it carries with it a load of problems.
Anyway, good discussion, as always and I appreciate your response.
Good points Chris…I suppose for me, when I read your post I was drawn back to an observation he made thirty years ago. I believe Schaeffer to have spoken in a way here that does what I believe is necessary with regard to how we treat or respond to Novak…in essence I believe Schaeffer was saying the Cross is enough and it is practical enough that Theology in essence is to come out of our fingertips…(sorry for all the ellipses, bad habit.
I believe the comments Scaheffer made with regard to being “pitted against” the world so to speak are intended not so much as to divide in a hostile way but to distinguish between those who wish to live out what they profess and the nominal among us because those who profess to believe in the cross of Christ and His rights and claims as Lord are in essence practicing atheists who ultimately bring or bear little effect upon the world around them.
Oh, and with regard to being pitted against, I don’t believe he meant an “isolationist” view either but one that is truly revolutionary in the way we live as radical followers of Christ and the way of the cross.
I suspect that the issue does not lie in the practicality of the cross. Instead, the issue may lie in the nature of the cross itself. The cross demands submission. The cross demands that we submit to what appears to be defeat, even unto death itself.
In addition, I suspect that the framing itself is suspect. When we call something practical we are generally speaking about its usefulness for us. The cross is not useful, in fact, it most often works against us, albeit for us. I know very few revolutionaries who allow themselves to be transformed by the very thing that actually subverts their revolution.
Just my musings… I might be way off base on this one.