Things that I have read and heard recently:
- There is a War on FITB (Fill in the Blank)
- Things are getting out of hand
- People are reacting emotionally
- Emotions are being stirred up in an attempt at manipulation
- Social justice is not the gospel
- The Church should just focus on Christ
Here are some thoughts in response to the above list:
The “War on FITB” is a rhetorical device used to summarize a cultural position in defense of a perceived attack on that position. The War on Christmas is a particularly ridiculous example of this. We live in a secular, pluralistic society in America. America is not a theocracy, thank God! Some people choose to say “Happy Holidays” instead of “Merry Christmas” to demonstrate respect to those who may not celebrate Christmas. There are atheists and agnostics who celebrate Christmas, exchange presents, decorate a conifer, etc. Do we give people who say “Merry Christmas” a purity test to determine their brand/denomination/presence or absence of faith? No.
“Things are getting out of hand” assumes some threshold of tolerance has been crossed. This is the cry of a bystander – someone who is not engaged in whatever social or political discourse is occurring. The bystander wants it to be known that the disturbance is unwelcome. The bystander, in this case, is upset because people are upset. They are reacting to some perceived overreaction. Rest assured that there won’t be much time spent thoroughly researching, not just Googling the favored position, the topic. The bystander will likely click “Share” on some favored mouthpiece’s social media post without adding a personal position. If someone disagrees with the bystander, it’s so easy for that bystander to deflect to the mouthpiece. I’m much more interested in your thoughts. Have some skin in the game. Don’t be a bystander.
“People are reacting emotionally.” Yes. They are. If you make a claim that you react in the absence of emotion, you are a liar or a robot. If you make the claim, I’m not going to choose “robot” as my assessment. God created man with emotions. The Bible ascribes emotions to God throughout the Old Testament. Jesus wept. Aristotle taught that three things must be present in any persuasive argument: ethos, pathos, and logos. Pathos is emotion. Your claim of an emotional reaction is an attempt to dismiss. Your claim has no power here.
“Emotions are being stirred up in an attempt at manipulation.” Read above about the three requirements of a persuasive argument. An appeal to emotion is completely appropriate, especially in conjunction with ethos and logos, ethics and reason. Labeling a persuasive argument, especially one which incorporates all three aforementioned elements, as manipulation is cheap rhetoric. Your claim has no power here.
“Social justice is not the gospel.” Let’s roll up our sleeves and get into some semantics. If B includes A, then stating A is B is true; it does not mean that all of B is A. Confused by variables? If the gospel includes social justice, then stating social justice is the gospel is true; it does not mean that all of the gospel is social justice. Still confused? The gospel includes social justice. The message of the gospel is one of spiritual (re)birth and it is lived out in service to and worship of God, which includes social justice. Yes, it starts with conversion, but it is lived out in beatific and holistic life. To exclude how the gospel is to be lived out is to throw out the second half of the Great Commission to make disciples. Stop compartmentalizing the gospel. It’s not just for Sunday mornings and weekly community groups. It guides us in how we ought to treat our fellow humans, imago Dei.
“The Church should just focus on Christ.” Let me fix that sentence for you. “The Church should focus on Christ and how He leads us to live out our lives in Him.” The difference between these statements cannot be understated. In context, the original seeks to dismiss societal ills as distractions, as ancillary. Those who hold this perspective should reexamine their faith. Are they attracted to Christianity because, in it, they find solace and like-minded individuals who hold conservative social values? Or are they attracted to Christianity because of Christ? – the Christ who sat with the poor, tax collectors, and prostitutes – the Christ who literally flipped the tables of the money changers over in the Temple – the Christ who touched the “unclean”, healing lepers and all manner of illness. The gospel includes love for and toward the needy, poor, ill, imprisoned, widowed, abused, downtrodden. The gospel does not exclude. Christ is for all. He is not the mascot of your club.
Lastly for consideration in this writing, the derision ascribed by many Christians to “social justice” must stop. Social indicates our relationship between our fellow humans. God relates to us both spiritually and socially. Justice is an inextricable quality of God. Derision of social justice is a derision of God.
David A. Larson 