Christianity Out, Jesus In?

Can one equate Christianity with a bloc of values which constitutes one side in America’s ‘culture wars’? Whether or not this is a proper understanding of Christianity, it is a common one.

One can wrestle sincerely and with great effort about the definition of ‘Christianity,’ but net result of the culture wars seems to have been to associate a fair amount of toxicity with that word.

In June 2015, David Brooks wrote in the New York Times that

Christianity is in decline in the United States. The share of Americans who describe themselves as Christians and attend church is dropping. Evangelical voters make up a smaller share of the electorate. Members of the millennial generation are detaching themselves from religious institutions in droves.

His assertions are not without some controversy. But if most of them are true, as is probably the case, they are still not cause for despair.

The ‘culture wars’ have consumed too much attention - especially the attention of those who would be followers of Jesus. Discovering, articulating, and promulgating morality is not the central task in the life of a Jesus follower.

Disciples of Jesus are certainly called to ethical living, and are called to avoid amorality. But other tasks are more urgent.

We know that all humans have sinned; all are fallen; all are guilty; all stand condemned and are unable to help themselves in regard to their guilt.

Debating moral question is merely working out the details about who’s guilty of which sin. It doesn’t change the foundational reality that the entire human race needs forgiveness and redemption.

The words ‘church’ and ‘Christianity’ have accumulated a certain virulence because these institutions, originally founded to be the embodiment of the practice of following Jesus, have strayed from their original mission and gotten ensnared in the social conflicts of the era.

Perhaps Jesus followers might step back from the culture wars for a bit. They might be surprised to learn that others will engage. Among those who seek to protect the life from the time of its conception there are many who quite explicitly identify themselves as not Christian.

Stopping the poison of pornography, and protecting the institutions of marriage and family, are tasks which occupy many Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims, Jews, Sikhs, and others.

While Jesus followers are not the only ones to advocate for a moral or ethical worldview, they are the only ones who are called to certain other tasks. Those other tasks, which are exclusively and uniquely theirs, are therefore of a greater urgency than those tasks which are shared with others.

The culture wars will continue, with or without Jesus followers. But the task of proclaiming the unconditional love of God toward each and every human, the task of proclaiming that unearned and unmerited forgiveness is freely given by Jesus to all people, is a task which only the the followers of Jesus do or can do.

If Christianity as a human tradition withers, but a true understanding of Jesus flourishes, it is really a loss? If churches as human institutions languish, but communities of Jesus followers go about their business of showing unconditional positive regard toward all people, is that a tragedy?

If ‘Christianity’ and ‘church’ are mere human cultural products, then they are expendable. If these words point to the authentic practice of following Jesus, and to communities which concretely express in deeds His care for people, then these words mean something different than, and apart from, a belligerent in the culture wars.

It may well be time for Jesus followers to take a break from the culture wars, indeed, to deliberately distance themselves from the culture wars, not to in any way compromise their morality, but rather to focus on tasks which are more important than morality.

Being a Christian should be something more than, and different from, simply being moral. Being a follower of Jesus certainly is something different than merely being moral.

Morality is important. But for the follower of Jesus, there are other things which are more important.

How Shall We Organize Ourselves?

In nations which have the right “peaceably to assemble,” people constantly organize themselves. Even in nations which don’t explicitly have this right, people create patterns of interaction and social institutions.

As Aristotle said, after all, human beings are social animals.

Followers of Jesus are no exception. In fact, they necessarily live out their beliefs in community. By definition, being a follower of Jesus is an activity done partly with others.

A spiritual life includes both solitude and camaraderie. One meditates alone. Prayer and study can be done alone or in groups. Fellowship, confession, and corporate worship are always done with others.

When working together, groups choose patterns by which they will organize themselves. Over various times and places, we see a broad spectrum of organizational styles: authoritarian, democratic, flexible, rigid, codified, spontaneous, bureaucratic, chaotic.

Naturally, the question will arise: which is the “right” way to structure a community of Jesus followers?

Although there is an urge to believe that God prescribes some organizational pattern, scholar Hermann Sasse notes that Jesus followers have an “understanding of the divine Word, of the distinction between Law and Gospel, that it finds no laws in the New Testament about” how a community should structure itself.

The followers of Jesus should consider questions of “polity as adiaphora, as ritus aut ceremonias ab hominibus institutas” (“rites or ceremonies instituted by” human beings). Jesus followers “may and must claim freedom, since” Jesus “is not the legislator for a human” spiritual “society, and the Gospel contains no law defining a correct” spiritual “polity.”

The work of Jesus followers requires that they organize themselves: to feed the hungry, care for the poor, educate children, make peace.

There is no doubt that they must organize; the question of how they will organize remains open.

God gives great freedom in this matter. He calls His people to deeds of mercy: Jesus followers give aid to everyone and anyone, and pointedly to those who believe quite differently. God requires Jesus followers to tend to the physical needs of the Hindus, the Buddhists, the atheists, and others.

The followers of Jesus are free to consider whichever organizational pattern they find most effective to carry out this work. God does not write bylaws or define who may be on a board of directors.

The spiritual mandate is quite clear: it is the distinctive mark of Jesus followers that they render aid to all types of people. But there is no mandate concerning governance models, as Hermann Sasse notes. The impact of the “basic theological principle of strict separation of Law and Gospel becomes clear when one observes how” Jesus “has given His” followers “no law” concerning governance.

Sasse goes on to say that “every form of” organizational “government is feasible which leaves room for a proper administration of the means of grace, which imposes no restrictions upon their administration.” As long as the work of Jesus is being done, many structures are possible and permissible.

This great freedom has been in place for 2,000 years. The earliest examples of the Jesus movement manifest this liberty: “It is worth noting how modern historical research into the beginnings of” the Jesus movement “has confirmed the profound exegetical insight,” which is “that the New Testament knows of no specific polity of the” Jesus followers “and therefore could not give canonical sanction to any such polity.” The history of the Jesus movement shows that in “polity the origins do not indicate singleness, but rather a manifold variety of form.”

This requires a humility on the part of those who advocate for one governance model or another. We may not present any such pattern as the only permissible one or as the one required by God.

Serious study of the text reveals an absence of specific direction for organization, despite occasional concrete examples of such. “No one who considers the statements of the Bible will in these days be so bold as to claim to have discovered in the New Testament a complete system of” organization for Jesus followers. “There existed in the” earliest phases of the Jesus movement “of the New Testament a number of possibilities as to the manner of organizing the spiritual ministry.”

If rendering service to others is the distinctive mark of Jesus followers, then the clear proclamation of the Good News about Jesus and the administration of sacraments are the distinctive marks of a community of Jesus followers.

A follower of Jesus helps others, and helps them with no regard to their spiritual beliefs. A community of Jesus followers declares His freely-given love, directed toward all human beings; this community administers the unearned unmerited forgiveness to people.

In sum, there are things which a community must do and must be in order truly to be a community of Jesus followers; but none of those requirements are organizational or constitutional in nature. This is God’s gift of free to His followers.

(The quotations from Hermann Sasse are taken from a three-volume edition of his letters, published by Concordia Publishing House, 2013/2014)