New Kids At The Grown Ups Table

In last Sunday’s sermon I mentioned a startling statistic from a national study by the University of Chicago:  from 1985 to 2004 the number of people who report having no close relationships rose to 24.6%.  I mentioned it as part of our commission to love others and to be “burden bearers” (Galatians 6:2). 

 I think that while our primary focus is always to those around us (family, neighbors, coworkers), that I forgot to encourage us to also consider each other.  I had a conversation this week with a brother who is struggling with loneliness in the midst of a busy work life, family life, and ministry life.  What hit me was that I experience many of the same feelings of isolation.  We talked about the source of it, are our expectations realistic, etc.  But I think the bottom line is that in the press of serving others we need to be sure that we are including each other in the things we are doing.  We need to be making contact with one another in the casual, “how are you doing”, “what’s up” way.  If we don’t wait for a crisis we can often prevent a crisis. 

I guess what I’m urging us toward is not being a church where 25% of the people are isolated and alone.  That would be tragically wrong.  The only thing worse would be a church where all we care about is hanging out with each other apart from loving others and being light and salt in the community. 

So pray.  Pick up the phone.  Ask how their doing.  Be a friend, make a friend.  Love one another. 

I had a conversation with someone this week about their experience with the summer reading program at Pearl Lane.  He shared that he was very excited to be a part of it, and the romance of working with kids on things that will bless their lives in important ways.  When he got into it he realized that it really wasn’t all that fun.  While he always went he wasn’t usually excited and would have prefered to be somewhere else doing something else with his time.  But he stayed faithful. 

The last day of the program one of the young men he was working with seemed particularly down.  It turns out that his family was moving and he was sad.  They talked a bit, but my friend felt out of his depth and called over the woman who runs the program and who heads Cross Cultural Ministries.  She was busy with lots of things but dropped them all to come and talk.  My friend shared that it was one of the most amazing conversations he had heard, and that he will remember it for the rest of his life.  He said it was one of the most profound moments of his life.   

I hesitated to ask about details that he didn’t volunteer.  And, honestly, the details don’t matter.  What matters is understanding that blessings come through obedience and perseverence.  So much of life in the Kingdom isn’t a Disneyland ride.  Though many churches are structured to offer an entertainment venue in order to influence people, the truth is that many of the things we are called to do as the people of God are good, right, holy, and meaningful; but they’re not fun.  This can be a hard lesson for a “customer is always right”, “ease and comfort” culture.  I think it is in John B Hays’ book Submerge that he talks about people wanting to graduate from places that confuse worship and entertainment, joy and enjoy.  I think that’s what my friend discovered (thought I suspect he already knew it because he stuck it out so long).  He discovered that joy and the sacred are found at the end of dry, dusty roads.  

One of my favorite writers is Leslie Newbigin (1909-1998), an Englishman who has had a profound impact on Christian mission around the world and in my life.   Newbigin was a deep thinker anchored in the foundations of the faith who both challenged and engaged the culture of his (our) time.  For more information on this insightful thinker, check out http://www.newbigin.net/ .   

I was browsing the web while on holiday last week, and ran across an excerpt of Newbigin’s work on the Evangelicals for Social Action web site entitled “Evangelism in the City” ( http://www.esa-online.org/Article.asp?RecordKey=89D529CE-5261-4F7D-9085-8AF7AB8B55B5 ).  Naturally I read it, and as predicted by his authorship found many profound insights and clarifications.  I wanted to share one in particular on the distinction between evanglism and proselytism.  It is important because the culture we live in doesn’t acknowledge the difference, but it is a difference we have to realize and hold on to.  At the same time, we have to be sure that we are not engaging in proselytism as defined here.  The difference between the two is clarified below.  FYI, this is an excerpt from an essay written while Newbigin was pastoring in a poor urban neighborhood in Birmingham, England after his years of service in India.   

        Is there a valid distinction between ‘evangelism’ and ‘proselytism’?  It must be admitted that in many discussions of this subject I have sensed that the distinction was very simple: evangelism is what we do and proselytism is what others do.  But I think it is possible to get beyond this obvious illusion.  Everything depends upon the point which I made at the beginning, namely that the conversion of a human mind and will to acknowledge Jesus as Lord and Savior is strictly a work of the sovereign Holy Spirit of God, a mystery always beyond our full comprehension, for which our words and deeds may be by the grace of God – the occasions but never the sufficient causes.  Anything in the nature of manipulation, any exploiting of any weakness, any use of coercion, anything other than the ‘manifestation of the truth …in the sight of God’ (2 Cor. 4.2) has no place in true evangelism.  Of course all who know Jesus as Lord and Savior will rejoice when the company of those who love him grows.  But they will also know that Jesus is much greater than any single understanding of him and that it therefore behoves us to make no final judgments until the Judge himself comes.  It is Jesus alone who decides who will be summoned to be with us in the company of his witnesses.

        If we are clear about the distinction between evangelism and proselytism, we shall be in a position to say something about the matter of evangelism among people of other faiths.  I have mentioned the fact that in the area of my present pastoral charge there is a large proportion of families of Muslim, Hindu, or Sikh faith.  I have said that I find it much easier to talk with them on matters of religious faith than with most of the natives.  But I am also frequently told, sometimes by Christian clergymen, that evangelism among my neighbors of other faiths is an improper activity and that I ought to confine myself to ‘dialogue.’  I find this exceedingly odd.  We live in one neighborhood.  For weal or woe we share the same life.  We wrestle with the same problems.  It is, surely, a very peculiar form of racism which would affirm that the good news entrusted to us is strictly for white Anglo-Saxons!  After the last annual assembly of the United Reformed Church which had given much attention to evangelism, one of the participants wrote to the church’s monthly paper to ask why it was that this word was reserved for our relations with unchurched Anglo-Saxons while in respect of our relations with people of other faiths we spoke only of ‘dialogue.’  The question was not answered.

        How has it come that ‘evangelism’ and ‘dialogue’ are presented as opposed alternatives?  Surely because both have been misunderstood.  Evangelism has been misunderstood as proselytism.  There is reason for this and all of us who seek to be true bearers of the gospel need to take note.  If evangelism is the attempt of a religious group to enlarge itself by cajoling or manipulating those unable to resist, then it is rightly suspect.  But a believing, celebrating, loving Christian fellowship, fully involved in the life of the wider community and sharing its burdens and sorrows, cannot withhold from others the secret of its hope and certainly cannot commit the monstrous absurdity of supposing that the hope by which it lives applies only to those of a particular ethnic origin.

        And the word ‘dialogue’ too needs to be examined.  No sharing of the good news takes place except in the context of a shared human life, and that means in part, the context of shared conversation.  In such conversation we talk about real things and we try both to communicate what we know and to learn what we do not know.  The sharing of the good news about the kingdom is part of that conversation and cannot happen without it.  But why do we have to substitute the high-sounding word ‘dialogue’ at this point?  Is it because we fail in the simple business of ordinary human conversation?  I confess that in the Winson Green neighborhood we have not established any ‘dialogue’ between representatives of the different faiths, but we do have quite a lot of conversation.  It is a kind of of conversation which is not an alternative to but the occasion for sharing our hope, and it leads some people to ask the sort of questions that lead further.

(Taken from Paul Weston, ed. Lesslie Newbigin, A Missionary Theologian: A Reader (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans and London: SPCK, 2006). Available in the USA from Wm. B. Eerdmans at http://www.eerdmans.com/shop/product.asp?p_key=9780802829825

There are several important points here.  The first is that Newbigin’s starting point is a Reformed understanding of the gospel in which God alone saves.  It isn’t about walking aisles, saying rote prayers after someone, or joining the membership of a particular congregation.  Those can all be legitimate expressions of new life, but the point is (contrary to Finney and many revivalist forms of Christianity) that human beings cannot be talked into or manipulated by emotions, threats, or rewards into true faith.  If we focus on techniques and methods instead of the power of the Holy Spirit to regenerate and call through the glorious story of Christ, then we can be accused of manipulation.  However, if we are living and sharing our lives knowing that God will bring to life those of his chosing in his time, then we don’t have to pretend or put on show for other people.  The story changes lives or it doesn’t.  It’s God perrogative and power not ours.  With this understanding we relieve ourselves of the necessity of feeling we have to convince/arguing people into belief.  We are free to simply be friends, neighbors, and co-workers.  This isn’t to say that we don’t have to have reasons for the hope that is within us and to be able to deal with the difficult questions of life that people have (called apologetics), but it does mean that we are more likely to be free from ”proselytising” because we know that true life doesn’t come through manipulation, coercion, exploitation, or other means. 

The second important point is the necessity of being part of the community of people in which we are living out and talking about the gospel.  A congregation that merely swoops in with gifts and presents for a temporary fix of conscience or to lure folks into decisions as a condition for food, shelter, friendship, or assistance is honestly suspect.  But being part of, walking alongside, living with friends and people and talking about what is important in our shared experiences is, well, natural.  NOT sharing in that context is what is abnormal.  Whether people are convinced or not, is not our job.  We just have to live and share our joy with those around us. 

Having made the important distinction between what it means to share the Good News vs. proselytism, I must say that I am more comfortable using more descriptive language about the process like sharing, conversation, etc in place of the “evangelism” precisely because of my own connotations and expriences in revivalist forms of Christianity.  Whatever your experiences may or may not include, please keep a healthy, Biblical understanding of the process, means, and responsibilities of sharing Christ’s love.