Earlier today, I stumbled across an article by a Christian on the possible influence of the Emergent Church upon the politics of the U.S. (it was also written before last year's election). In this article, she bemoaned Emergents' rejection of "anything the 'Christian Right' may have focused on." In particular, she raged against the fact that Emergents are pursuing many forms of social justice instead of taking a harsh stance against key religious right issues like abortion and marriage. As she puts it:
"The more socially minded leaders they follow have convinced them that it is all right to set aside issues such as abortion or same-sex marriage and replace those with ridding Africa of AIDS. This cannot be ignored."
While I would agree with her that we cannot ignore the issues of abortion or homosexuality, why is the basic assumption here that it is an either-or pursuit? Why can't we take on a more holistic approach to being "pro-life" and protect life both here and abroad. Let us protect life due to natural causes and human ones. Furthermore, even if we had to sacrifice some cause, it could quite possibly be argued that AIDS or hunger or child soldiers kills many more people than the gay community. If we are truly concerned about people's souls and "spiritual poverty" as the article's author puts it, then shouldn't seeking to save the lives of those who are dying without ever knowing Christ rather than addressing our pet sins take precedence?
In summary, it seems that this author simply cannot understand why many of us are some concerned with these issues of social justice. Instead of recognizing how the whole Bible, from front cover to back, addresses these same issues of justice, she can only seem to relegate such attitudes to a "social gospel" or even worse to "socialism." While I admit, there is a danger of neglecting good theology for a more works based gospel or for a "social gospel," this author again makes the assumption that you can't have both. Why can't we both affirm the creeds of orthodoxy and also be prompted to seek justice and the Kingdom of God here in our world?
The last point that I found extraordinary was this author's fatalism toward social issues (with the exception of course of her own two that she thought were important.) The following is an extended quote from the article:
"It remains to be seen if these young people who are Emergent Church enthusiasts or followers of the pied pipers of the "Religious Left" will actually solve the problems for which they have a burden....But thanks to the Fall in the Garden, every square foot of grass on either side is full of weeds, and there is really no panacea for the world's desperate problems except for the Lord's return. That does not mean that until that time some of the issues being raised should not be attended to. But expectations should be kept relatively low."
So apparently, the Holy Spirit did not come at Pentecost. Apparently, the Kingdom of God cannot be seen at all until Christ's return. Apparently, Christ's first coming did nothing except ensure that we could go to heaven and be cleansed of sin. I'm sorry, but as I read the words of Christ, I have to believe that He also inaugurated the Kingdom of God. That gives us hope for today, not just for the future. Jesus also didn't wait for His return to help others; He began the healing work of the Kingdom while He was here. Granted, this world will never be perfect until Christ returns. We can't fix every problem. But neither can I simply wait around and watch a dying world continue in its pain when I have knowledge of Christ. While I will keep expectations realistic, I also know that God is breaking into our world already and that His Spirit empowers us. Thus, I won't hang my head in low expectations and brace myself until Christ's return. As our lord taught us to pray: "May Your Kingdom come, on earth as it is in heaven."
To read the article go to: http://www.worldviewtimes.com/article.php/articleid-3786
