The sixth section of the Lausanne Statement in Seoul, Korea addresses a concern for peace in a world of violent conflict. Just how are Christians to advocate peace in the world? The statement does not call for peaceful ‘coexistence’. Instead, the Church’s universalism is stated in terms of ‘God’s saving rule over all peoples’ (6.77). Thus, peace comes not by opposing evangelism but by nations permitting Christians to proclaim the Gospel. Peace and reconciliation come through Christ and the transformation and love that flows from Christian faith. This thoroughly Biblical and Christian understanding is hardly that touted by others (including universalists in the broader ‘Church’) that all faiths are equal ways to God, and therefore peace is by affirming everyone and even celebrating whatever they contribute to the smorgasbord of multi-faith multi-culturalism. (This appears to be Pope Francis’s view and one that has been articulated in contemporary Roman Catholicism.)[1]
Noting that some
areas of the world have found greater peace and harmony (6.78), the Statement
also notes that this is not the case in other regions (6.79). It condemns those who stoke war (6.80) while
calling on Christians to care for the vulnerable and serve as peacemakers
(6.81). Quoting from the previous
Lausanne Congress in Cape Town of past Christian complicity in violence, the
Statement laments such moral failures of Christians (6.82) and calls for
repentance (6.83). This last paragraph
expands on the notion of a ‘nation state’ as a state with multiple, culturally
distinct groups. I suppose the reason for
repeating the concern already stated a decade ago must be the divisions between
people resulting in the wars in Ukraine and the Middle East. Indeed, 6.84 states explicitly that God
fulfills His promises to the Biblical people of the Middle East through Jesus
Christ. Thus, Christians should oppose theological
errors that stoke current violence. This
all too general comment seems to be a warning not to read the identities and
politics of Biblical times onto the current political situation in the Middle
East. If so, a more direct challenge to
such theological anachronisms and exegetical errors would be worthwhile,
without, however, turning Lausanne into a political entity when this is not its
purpose. Indeed, the Statement rightly
distinguishes politics from God’s mission: ‘We lament that some
Christians have looked to the state rather than the gospel as the key means for
bringing about God’s intentions for the world’ (6.85).
However, this
Statement makes a crucial error in weighing into a socio-political perspective
that befits current, cultural trends beyond Lausanne’s missional purposes. Thus, it says that it opposes the ‘great
evil’ of nationalism in the sense of a state aiming to have a single, national
culture (only one possible meaning of ‘nationalism’, note). This political perspective appears to swallow
the pill of identity politics in the West, which holds that multiculturalism is
an intrinsic good rather than a highly problematic commitment that has led to
and is leading to increasing violence.
It seems, despite statements to the contrary, to affirm religious plurality
as not only acceptable but beneficial—a large part of ‘culture’ is
religion. Fundamentally, this view
maintains that all cultures are equal, static, and valuable such that a
multicultural state is—without further specification—to be valuable. It removes the prophetic role of the Church
to speak to the nations and all cultures the truth that they are not the
Kingdom of God. Far better would have
been a statement that Christian faith transforms cultures and is called upon to
develop a superior culture in the Church. Otherwise, ‘the Kingdom of God’ language is
rendered nonsense. As Paul says, ‘But our citizenship is in heaven, and
from it we await a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ’ (Philippians 3.20).
Paragraph 6.86 notes
the Korean situation in particular, since the document was written in
Seoul. Christians are called on to pray
for unity between the north and south and the open proclamation of the Gospel
in the north. I see no reason to pray
for unity, which is, after all, a political agenda, but praying for the open
proclamation of the Gospel everywhere is, indeed, a Christian prayer. The concluding paragraph to this section
(6.87) further calls on Christians everywhere to intercede for the persecuted
and labour for peace, build Christian communities, promote a culture of peace,
and proclaim the Gospel.
Much of this Section
lays out hope for peace in the world, primarily through the Church and
Christians working toward that end. At
such an altitude, the particulars on the ground that need to drive any serious efforts
are almost imperceptible. One wonders
what such a Statement has to offer Christians facing regular persecution and
death from Islamists, such as in northern Nigeria. Given the nature of this Statement, avoidance
of particular issues is only to be expected, but this raises the question
whether Lausanne conferences would do better to produce a different type of
document in future meetings, one that focusses on a few issues facing the
Church at the time rather than a sort of systematic theological restatement
covering many theological topics.
One specific issue that really needs to be addressed throughout the world and that is a major threat to peace is Islam. The multiculturalism of Western nations has provided an open door to radicals. This Lausanne Statement affirms multiculturalism but makes no mention of such a threat. It appears to understand culture in terms of cuisine, dress, and some traditional customs rather than as something deeply shaped by religion and something the Church as its own culture (the Kingdom of God) challenges. The Church often stands against culture and always seeks to transform culture.
[1] Cf. Rollin G. Grams, ‘Is the Pope Catholic? A Response to the Universalism of Pope
Francis,’ Bible and Mission Blog (15
September, 2024); online: Bible
and Mission: 'Is the Pope Catholic?' A Response to the Universalism of Pope
Francis.
No comments:
Post a Comment