I\u2019ve observed that when the church engaged in political debate, it ended up creating an even greater barrier for people to receive the gospel. As a Canadian church leader, I follow politics. I have my theologically formed convictions.\u00a0 I preach Jesus and call people to surrender to the Lordship of Christ.\u00a0 I have also been active in serving the common good in our society. However, I tend to remain on the fringe of political debate. I haven’t viewed it as fruitful.<\/p>\n
Yet in Evangelization and Ideology: How to Understand and Respond to the Political Culture<\/em>, Matthew Petrusek posits that rational engagement in political ideology opens the way for evangelism. Petrusek is a Catholic academic who focuses on Christian ethics and moral theology. He states, \u201c\u2026the hyper-politicization of society constitutes an opportunity for evangelism rather than an obstacle\u2026the church has a unique opening to re-enter the sociopolitical fray, re-engage the secular mind, and call the culture back to Christ \u2013 provided we can effectively understand and respond to the contemporary ideological battlefield.\u201d[1]<\/a><\/p>\n Another book we read this semester, The Identity Trap<\/em> by Yascha Mounk, alerted us to \u201cidentity synthesis\u201d. He believes that this phenomenon has occurred as the result of a confluence of thought streams that include postmodernism, post-colonialism, and critical race theory. By \u201cidentity synthesis\u201d he means the \u201crole that identity categories like race, gender and sexual orientation play in the world.\u201d Mounk\u2019s solution to this issue is to attempt to build a more just world. He appeals, \u201cTo build a just world, societies should strive to live up to their universalist aspirations instead of abandoning them.\u201d[2]<\/a> Petrusek on the other hand believes that people should be engaged in healthy debate using moral arguments based on Catholic social thought traditions without an outright appeal to faith.[3]<\/a><\/p>\n Thinking In Circles<\/strong><\/p>\n Petrusek provides a map of concentric circles that help the reader locate the source of political disagreements. He believes, \u201cMost political conflicts have little to do with politics. They are rooted in more fundamental disputes about moral knowledge, the definition of the human being, and even metaphysics.\u201d[4]<\/a> At the centre of the map, he places applied morality, which is how a moral concept is applied in a particular domain of life. Moving outward we have morality, epistemology, anthropology, ontology, and theology. The circles are interrelated and interdependent. Remove one circle and everything above it collapses. I found this conceptual map to be the most compelling part of the book. Most of us find ourselves in these confusing conversations regularly and having a map to locate and navigate an argument using the Socratic method is incredibly helpful.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Is Argument The Best Way Forward?<\/strong><\/p>\n However, I do have some hesitancy with this book. At the end of the book, he tells us that his sole goal is to help people encounter Jesus and his Church. He writes, \u201cThe dominant political ideologies of today are blocking wide swaths of the culture from receiving this invitation and all its blessings. Evangelizing the political culture is thus ultimately not about ideology and even less about politics. It\u2019s about opening the widest and straightest path possible for making the pilgrimage to the Lord.\u201d[5]<\/a> I completely align with his desired end, but I want to challenge his primary means to get there. He believes that we must have rational arguments about these issues. I am not opposed to a good debate, but I\u2019m not convinced that it is the primary means to accomplish the desired end of helping most people in our culture encounter Jesus.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n First, I wonder if we are past this point as a society. If you\u2019ve been tracking with the Canadian academic, Jordan Peterson, you would have noted how he has been treated for his rational engagement in this arena.[6]<\/a> The evidence suggests that our society has thrown rationality out of the window and prefers to cancel and crucify those they disagree with rather than engage in rational debate. At the same time, I am also keenly aware of the fact that Peterson has helped crack the door open to faith for many atheists.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Secondly, Jesus\u2019 and the disciple\u2019s primary means to help people encounter the Good News is not through political debate but through a rather counterintuitive means. The Gospel writer, Luke, tells us, \u201cWhen Jesus had called the Twelve together, he gave them power and authority to drive out all demons\u00a0and to cure diseases,\u00a0and he sent them out to proclaim the kingdom of God\u00a0and to heal the sick.\u201d[7]<\/a> In short, he told them to proclaim and demonstrate the availability of the Kingdom and then give people the opportunity to respond. If people didn\u2019t respond they were to move on and do this somewhere else.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Thirdly, the other primary issue that Petrusek doesn\u2019t address very well is the work of the Holy Spirit in evangelism. Just to be sure, I checked the subject of indexes and the Holy Spirit is not listed. The book of Acts tells us that the disciples are to be filled with the Holy Spirit and become witnesses to the resurrected Christ.[8]<\/a> John tells us that the Holy Spirit will, prove the world to be in the wrong about sin and righteousness and judgment.\u201d[9]<\/a> A Spirit-empowered follower of Jesus joins in the work that the Holy Spirit is doing in the lives of people and embraces the opportunity to be a co-participant in Jesus\u2019 work of redemption.[10]<\/a><\/p>\n <\/p>\n Finally, the sacrificial love of God, demonstrated by the church, is instrumental in helping people encounter Jesus.[11]<\/a> Jesus\u2019 high priestly prayer for his disciples is that they would dwell in the loving one-ness that is experienced between Jesus and the Father. In turn, they would love one another in the same way and this, in turn, would be a sign to the world of God\u2019s unfailing love. Jesus tells his disciples that their very presence in the world would have the effect of salt and light. Noting the importance of being light Jesus says, \u201c<\/sup><\/strong>In the same way, let your light shine before others,\u00a0that they may see your good deeds\u00a0and glorify\u00a0your Father in heaven.\u201d[12]<\/a> Rodney Stark, a sociologist, wrote about the growth of the early church in a pagan culture in \u201cThe Rise of Christianity\u201d<\/em>. He writes, \u201cI believe that it was the religion\u2019s particular doctrines that permitted Christianity to be among the most sweeping and successful revitalization movements in history. And it was the way these doctrines took on actual flesh, the way they directed organizational actions and individual behavior, that led to the rise of Christianity.\u201d[13]<\/a> Eugene Peterson puts it this way, in his book \u201cPractice Resurrection\u201d<\/em>, \u201cSo, why church? The short answer is because the Holy Spirit formed it to be a colony of heaven in the country of death. \u2026 Church is the core element in the strategy of the Holy Spirit for providing human witness and physical presence to the Jesus-inaugurated kingdom of God in this world. It is not that kingdom complete, but it is a witness to that kingdom.\u2026\u201d[14]<\/a><\/p>\n <\/p>\n While I wrestle with the premise that rational, sociological debate will open a wide swath for people to encounter Jesus\u2019, I do think this is a really good resource. It is a helpful tool to have in the toolbelt when one engages in sociopolitical debate. It would help someone engage with the major ideologies of the day, provide a means to locate their claims using the map of concentric circles, and the means to offer a different vision of human flourishing.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n \u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n <\/p>\n [1]<\/a> Matthew R. Petrusek, Evangelization and Ideology: How to Understand and Respond to the Political Culture<\/em> (Park Ridge, IL: published by the Word on Fire Institute, an imprint of Word on Fire, 2023), 3.<\/p>\n [2]<\/a> Yascha Mounk, The Identity Trap: A Story of Ideas and Power in Our Time<\/em> (London: Allen Lane an imprint of Penguin Books, 2023). Kindle. Chapter 14.<\/p>\n [3]<\/a> Petrusek, Evangelization and Ideology<\/em>, 11.<\/p>\n [4]<\/a> Petrusek, 49.<\/p>\n [5]<\/a> Petrusek, 463.<\/p>\n [6]<\/a> Elizabeth Whitworth, \u201cJordan Peterson: Free Speech Is Under Attack,\u201d Shortform Books<\/em> (blog), February 22, 2024, https:\/\/www.shortform.com\/blog\/jordan-peterson-free-speech\/.<\/p>\n [7]<\/a> Luke 9.1,2<\/p>\n [8]<\/a> Acts 1.8<\/p>\n [9]<\/a> John 16.8<\/p>\n [10]<\/a> John 15.26,27<\/p>\n [11]<\/a> John 17.21-23<\/p>\n [12]<\/a> Matthew 5.16<\/p>\n