Pages

Thursday, February 22, 2018

Book Review: To Change the World: The Irony, Tragedy, and Possibility of Christianity in the Late Modern World, Oxford University Press, 2010



Review:
James Hunter, in his book To Change the World, tackles the political theologies adopted by American Christians in their diverse efforts to be faithful in the world. He approaches this contentious issue as a sociologist and as a Christian. With detailed, historical accuracy he describes the political/religious relationships with the world that the Christian Right (conservatives/fundamentalists), the Christian Left (liberals and moderates) and the neo-Anabaptists (Quakers, etc.) have taken. He calls the political theologies of each of the three groups “competing myths” and notes “they become the basis of some measure of exclusion and division in the church, especially to the degree that they are embraced uncritically” (James Davidson Hunter, To Change the World: The Irony, Tragedy, and Possibility of Christianity in the Late Modern World, Oxford University Press, 2010, p. 176). He says, “the tragedy [is that]…many Christians – and Christian conservatives most significantly – unwittingly embrace some of the most corrosive aspects of the cultural disintegration they decry. By nurturing its resentments, sustaining them through a discourse of negation towards outsiders and in cases pursuing their world of power, they become functional Nietzscheans participating in the cultural breakdowns they try to resist.” His bottom line is that “Christians have not only embraced strategies that are incapable of bringing about the ends to which they aspire, they have also embraced strategies that are deeply problematic, short-sighted, and at times profoundly corrupted” (pp. 175, 193). Instead, Hunter offers as an alternative ‘a theology of faithful presence’. “For the Christian, if there is a possibility of human flourishing in a world such as ours, it begins when God’s word of love becomes flesh in us, is embodied in us, is enacted through us” (p. 241). He advocates this incarnational approach to the divisive political theologies existing up to now. An important book for those with interest in how political science, history and Christian social activism have played out in recent centuries in the United States.
4 stars                          M.L. Codman-Wilson, Ph.D. 

Excerpts:
“The three political theologies [Christian right, Christian left, and neo-Anabaptist] are the leading public edge of more complex paradigms of political engagements: ‘defensive against’, ‘relevance to’, and ‘purity from’ the world… Political and theological conservatism…seeks to create a defensive enclave that is set against the world. This ‘defensive against’ paradigm has long been embraced by Protestant Fundamentalists and mainstream Evangelicals, though it has also become a strategy in recent decades for many conservative Catholics… [Since] pluralism has been massively threatening…, they have sought to resist the erosion of the truth claims of Christianity by attacking the world’s efforts to undermine the integrity of the Word of God” (pp. 213-214, 219, 222).  They say: “Political action will return a sense of cultural ownership to Christian citizens nationwide, ‘preserve, protect and defend the Judeo-Christian values that made this the greatest country in history, ‘begin renewing American culture,’ save traditional marriage = and the traditional family, ‘ensure broadcast decency” [etc]… It’s either God’s way or the way of social disintegration” (pp. 126, 119).

“More recently, the ‘relevance to’ paradigm is a paradigm of engagement embraced by Evangelicals in the ‘seeker-church’ movement, and by more progressive Evangelicals in the ‘emerging church’ movement… Their emphasis is less on the defense of the faith than on being relevant and connected to contemporary culture. By the late 1960s, progressives were left in creed and practice with less and less that resembled anything like historic Christianity... In the ‘seeker church’ movement, the emphasis away from the use and explication of Creedal confession is obvious, since the whole point is to  focus on the ‘felt needs’ of the person in the pew –especially the felt-needs of non-believers”(pp. 215, 220, 216).

“Those who operate within the ‘purity from’ paradigm ...take the view that there is very little that can be done for the world because, in its fallen state, the world is irredeemable aside from Christ’s return. [These]Christians…[say] the only justifiable strategy is to separate from darkness as the community of light” (pp. 218, 220).