Ed Vitagliano

AFA Journal news editor

March 2007 – How does one go about changing a culture? How does a society alter its course or, if it is stagnant, shake itself out of its lethargy and begin a new journey?

In the 1960s, a determined and idealistic cadre unleashed a revolution trumpeting a hyper-individualism that, over the last four decades, has transformed American culture. These people began as a “counter-culture,” challenging the presuppositions and principles that formed the bedrock underlying the status quo of an entire civilization.

Their success has been so complete that Europe and Canada are unrecognizable as societies that were once Judeo-Christian, and the U.S. seems to be riding a rocket sled to the same destination.

A failed counter-culture
Of course, the revolution begun in the ’60s did not triumphantly rush through the city gates without a shot being fired. Many rejected the core assumptions of the radicals and resisted their ideology and activity at every turn.

In essence, this latter group consisted of “cultural conservatives.” They were trying to “conserve” the traditional ideas that were being threatened – like a Biblical view of human sexuality, for example, and the institutions that were built upon them, such as marriage and family.

But such conservatives are in the latter stages of losing the culture war, and losing it so completely that, for the most part, they have now themselves become the “counter-culture.” It is they who are now standing outside the city; it is they who are bringing up the siege equipment; it is they who are trying to force their way in and root out those who dwell in the towers of authority and power.

Is this an exaggeration of the state of the culture war? On BeliefNet.com, David Kuo, a former aide in the Bush administration and author of the book, Tempting Faith: An Inside Story of Political Seduction, suggested that, especially for evangelical Christians, the culture war as currently being waged seems futile.

“Christians like me have worked in politics for the last several decades with the hope that just the right president, the right Congress, and the right judge or justice would stop abortions, strengthen marriages, create a safer country for children, and ensure that our religious faith was respected … ,” he said. “But the reality is that though we have had amazing political success – Republican presidents for 20 of the last 28 years, Republican control of Congress, etc. – social statistics are pretty much unchanged in the last three decades. From divorces to abortion to children in poverty, things haven’t improved a whole lot.”

In the areas of conflict that seem to absorb so much time on the religious right – especially matters relating to marriage, family and the sanctity of human life – Kuo seems right on target. There has been so little progress.

Moreover, so few people seem to care about these issues. Amy Sullivan, a contributing editor for The Washington Monthly magazine, noted in a USA Today op-ed piece that “only 12% [of Americans] say abortion and gay marriage are more important issues than poverty and universal health care, … [and] a paltry 5% of Americans identified abortion and gay marriage as their top issues.”

In fact, the only bright spot for many Christians in the 2006 elections was once again the tremendous success of state ballot initiatives protecting traditional marriage. In seven out of the eight states where such measures were put to the test – Colorado, Idaho, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Virginia and Wisconsin – pro-family forces won.

However, even those silver clouds had a dark lining, according to WorldNetDaily founder Joseph Farah, who said “the closeness of all those tallies is what disturbs me.”

“You would think that amendments simply declaring marriage to be an institution between one man and one woman would garner at least 90% support among Americans,” Farah said. “Yet, even in four states in which the amendment passed, opposition exceeded an astounding 40% of the vote. Conservatives look at those numbers and see victory. I’ve got news for you: So do the same-sex marriage activists. I look at those numbers and see inevitable defeat. It might be in 2008 or 2010 or 2012. But the die is cast. There is no question that the American view of marriage is changing.”

In the long term, Farah said, the sexual radicals pushing the ideology behind same-sex marriage are winning “the battle for the hearts and minds of the American people using the cultural institutions of the press, the entertainment industry, the foundations, the corporations, even the churches.”

So what should Christians do about a culture that seems intent on rejecting its own Judeo-Christian foundations?

A simple debate?
One of the approaches for which some evangelicals have opted is to emphasize the philosophical aspects of Christianity. In other words, as the Christian faith competes with other ideologies in the marketplace of ideas, these believers seek to demonstrate what Christianity has to offer our society. The Christian faith becomes merely the philosophical foundation for confronting, say, poverty or racism.

Generally it is the evangelical left that advocates taking this tack. Christian leaders falling into this camp would include Jim Wallis, executive director of Sojourners/Call to Renewal and author of the best-seller, God’s Politics: Why the Right Gets It Wrong and the Left Doesn’t Get It; Tony Campolo, a well-known writer and speaker and professor emeritus of sociology at Eastern University; and Ronald Sider, author and president of Evangelicals for Social Action.

Wallis, an earnest opponent of the religious right, said in a column on www.washingtonpost.com that “religious people must win the debate, just like everybody else, about what is best … for the common good.”

This misses the point completely. Christians currently cannot “win the debate” on any number of critical issues because the culture has rejected the underpinnings of the Judeo-Christian worldview. As a result, our society will continue to reject the propositions that flow out of that worldview. It is difficult, for example, to win an argument about abortion when a culture does not recognize the sanctity of innocent human life in the womb.

The only hope of changing that sad reality is for the church to confront the dominant ideological basis for American culture – secularism – with the same passion that the early church confronted the philosophies of pre-Christian paganism.

‘Disciplined by democracy’
Of course, the great power given to the church by the Lord Jesus Christ is the Gospel. It is through the preaching of the cross that the church must engage our secular culture and its problems.

Unfortunately, the Sojourners’ crowd sometimes seems jittery about the hard truths of that Gospel message. Wallis said that “religion must be disciplined by democracy,” and that Christianity cannot claim for itself a “monopoly on morality.”

That is hogwash. The claims of Jesus Christ are absolute and universal. They apply to every man, woman and child in every place and in every time. Christians not only have the option of proclaiming the Lordship of Christ, they have the obligation to do so, for one day every knee will bow and every tongue will confess that truth (Philippians 2:10-11).

Christ’s claims even apply to the matters about which the evangelical left is so passionate, such as poverty, racism and wider issues of social justice. Every society – and every individual in them – will be held accountable for their attitudes and actions in these areas.

But some liberals seem to loathe the exclusivity of Christ’s claims. In a USA Today op-ed piece after the mid-term elections, Tom Krattenmaker recommended a more middle-of-the-road approach. “As progressives wield language that once belonged solely to conservatives, may we do so fairly, in a way that acknowledges that the other side of the debate also has values. In doing so, we’ll model other core values of ours: inclusiveness and respect for differing viewpoints,” he said.

Certainly believers have a responsibility to be respectful of others and their opinions. Christians should avoid being arrogant and loutish. They should season their speech with grace and humility. And there is nothing wrong with Christians attempting to persuade unbelievers that the truth of God would make for a better life individually and, corporately, a better country.

That is why, for example, there is nothing unchristian about trying to cure AIDS or trying to alleviate the suffering of those who have that dreadful disease.

But if believers fail to address the sinful behaviors that very often lead to contracting HIV, have they not placed their light under a bushel and denied the soul-changing power of the Gospel itself?

Yes, people who aren’t Christians have values, and many people who are Christians have the wrong values. Neither of those propositions really gets to the heart of the matter. The point is that Jesus Christ is Lord of heaven and earth, and all values must be brought into line with His.

Dangers on the right
Thus the approach of Wallis and Krattenmaker runs the risk of taming the Gospel and gutting it of its power, for there is a prophetic as well as a pastoral calling for the church.

However, the approach of those on the evangelical left is not the only one with hidden dangers. There are also inherent risks with the approach generally taken by those in the religious right.

If those like Jim Wallis seem to only emphasize the encouragement of a philosophical faith, those on the right often appear to emphasize only confrontation – in essence choosing the prophetic calling over the pastoral.

And while conservative Christians often emphasize issues related to human sexuality or the deleterious effects of the entertainment culture, these matters don’t exhaust the concerns raised by Scripture. Perhaps the evangelical right ought to give more than mere lip service to issues concerning poverty, race and social justice.

Moreover, if the religious left appears to dilute the Gospel, the religious right gets awfully close at times to replacing the Gospel altogether. It does so by appearing to say that sinners – for example, in Hollywood – should simply stop sinning, and thereby earn God’s favor. The truth is that sinners sin, and their only hope for change is the Gospel.

If evangelicals are going to have an impact on our culture, and if they have any hope of reversing our culture’s backslide into a pre-Christian paganism, the Gospel is our only hope. Christians on both the left and the right would be wise to remember that truth.