![\"\"](\"https:\/\/31.media.tumblr.com\/73ea2ecfe55ba1e3eba4047e3ff2b36e\/tumblr_inline_n3hpachCF31s88eo4.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
\n
I have been on a long spiritual journey; I am sure that many of us have been.\u00a0 This week\u2019s reading and our last reading gripped my soul in substantial ways.\u00a0 Something must be happening in me.\u00a0 But answers to spiritual longings do not usually come in fancy packaging.\u00a0 In fact, the content that touched my soul this week was John Davison Hunter\u2019s simple, common sense thoughts.\u00a0 The author says, \u201cThe church will not flourish in itself nor serve well the common good if it isolates itself from the larger culture, fails to understand its nature and inner logic, and is incapable of working within it\u2014critically affirming and strengthening its healthy qualities and humbly criticizing and subverting its most destructive tendencies.\u201d[1]<\/a>\u00a0 I loved these concepts.\u00a0 I do not want to be isolated from the larger culture.\u00a0 I don\u2019t believe that Christians are to be isolators but embracers of the world in which they live.<\/p>\n Every culture has its own myths to describe itself.\u00a0 Even Christian theological systems have their myth structures, and James Davison Hunter reminds his readers of several interesting myths in this week\u2019s reading. \u00a0His reading, for me, had many connections to other readings in the LGP from this semester: social theory, public theology, capitalism, evangelicalism, and other familiar themes.\u00a0 Frankly, this book at first was a tough read, but after several early mornings of pushing through, I finally came to a great appreciation of Hunter\u2019s thesis.\u00a0 Hunter writes:<\/p>\n God, then, does not speak through empty abstractions or endless circumlocutions.\u00a0 Rather, in every instance, God\u2019s word was enacted and enacted in a particular place and time in history.\u00a0 In all, presence and place mattered decisively.\u00a0 Nowhere is this more evident than in the incarnation <\/em>[italics mine].<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Word and world, then, came together not so much because words describe the world accurately or because words correspond to reality.\u00a0 Rather, word and world come together through the word\u2019s enactments\u2014both the fact<\/em> that God\u2019s word is always enacted but also the way<\/em> his word is enacted.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n This, in short, is a theology of faithful presence<\/em> [italics mine].\u00a0 It can be summarized in two essential lessons for our time.\u00a0 The first is that incarnation is the only adequate reply to the challenges of dissolution; the erosion of trust between word and world and the problems that attend it.<\/em>\u00a0 From this follows the second: it is the way the Word became incarnate in Jesus Christ and the purposes to which the incarnation was directed that are the only adequate reply to challenge of difference.<\/em>\u00a0 For the Christian, if there is a possibility for humans flourishing in a world such as ours, it begins when God\u2019s word of love becomes flesh in us, is embodied in us, is enacted through us and in doing so, a trust is forged between the word spoken and the reality to which it speaks; to the words we speak and the realities to which we, the church, point.\u00a0 In all, presence and place matter decisively.[2]<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n Earlier in his book, Hunter compares and contrasts three Christian political, theological systems, as he confronts power and politics in American culture.\u00a0 He first describes the Christian Right<\/em> and this movement\u2019s myths.\u00a0 Secondly, he deals with myth structures of the Christian Left<\/em>.\u00a0 Finally, he includes and thought-provoking chapter on the Neo-Anabaptists<\/em>.\u00a0 He then describes these three political theologies as \u201cdefensive against\u201d (the Christian Right), \u201crelevance to\u201d (the Christian Left), and \u201cpurity from\u201d (the Neo-Anabaptists).[3]<\/a>\u00a0 On reading these chapters, I found myself constantly thinking that each of the systems was deficient in some way.\u00a0 I used to be an activist, both on the right and then on the left extremes.\u00a0 I had thought, at times, that these systems were the answer to changing the world.\u00a0 But then after some serious disillusionment, I found myself asking a lot of questions:\u00a0 Is it really through political activism that Christians will change culture?\u00a0 Society?\u00a0 The world?\u00a0 Who is actually correct \u2013 the far Left<\/em>?\u00a0 The far Right<\/em>?\u00a0 The militarists?\u00a0 The pacifists?\u00a0 Not finding answers, I threw in the towel altogether for a season.\u00a0 I was tired of being in the middle of \u201ctheological culture wars.\u201d\u00a0 We are a polarized nation politically and spiritually.\u00a0 Candidly, it is a confusing mess\u2013a wild ride, to say the least.<\/p>\n Hunter takes a shot at answering these concerns by offering an \u201calternative way.\u201d[4]<\/a>\u00a0 I found assurance in Hunter\u2019s model, particularly in his correct notion that, \u201cGod is at work; the Holy Spirit is still very much active.\u201d[5]<\/a>\u00a0 In spite of a lot of tension<\/em> in the church, which is not always a bad thing, the Holy Spirit is working in the world today.\u00a0 Hunter then focuses on the notion of discipleship<\/em> becoming a primary work of the Church.\u00a0 This kind of one-on-one ministry presupposes that one is being actively guided by the Holy Spirit.\u00a0 Hunter then advocates for a completely new paradigm shift that he calls \u201cFaithful Presence Within<\/em>.\u201d \u00a0He also points out how this faithful presence<\/em> is played out in the world.<\/p>\n According to the text, the first action is that Christians be fully present to each other<\/em>.\u00a0 This refers both to those within and those outside the Christian community.\u00a0 It is not merely about the Christian sub-culture; it is also about the other<\/em>.\u00a0 \u201cTo welcome the stranger\u2014those outside the community of faith,\u201d says Hunter, \u201cis to welcome Christ.\u201d[6]<\/a>\u00a0 Secondly, Christians are to be fully committed to \u201ctasks<\/em>,\u201d in all they do, including their work, eating, drinking\u2014everything.\u00a0 From a Biblical perspective, this is a clear expectation for followers of Christ.\u00a0 Finally, Christians are to be faithfully present in their spheres of social influence<\/em>; these include families, communities, and institutions.<\/p>\n So, can Christians really make a difference in the world?\u00a0 Yes, but how we go about this task will determine the kind of influence we will have.\u00a0 We will either be influencers for good or influencers for evil.\u00a0 Hunter is arguing for a relational approach<\/em> rather than a political one.\u00a0 Personally, I agree with this approach.\u00a0 This attitude gives me hope.\u00a0 This approach gives me a way that I can be the Christian I am in ways that rely on God and that I can do without shame and embarrassment in a world wanting to see authenticity, transparency, vulnerability, and love.<\/p>\n Political presence or faithful presence<\/em>?\u00a0 Perhaps we need both.\u00a0 But I think I know what works best for me.\u00a0 How about for you?<\/p>\n\n
\n\n