At one time or another, all of us have been driving along the highway or streets believing we had the supreme knowledge of where we were going. In an instant our confidence changes because of a wrong turn or misinformation. When we are lost, we turn to the ole trusty GPS in an effort to get us back on track. As we look at the screen, we see that famous word, recalculating.<\/p>\n
Recalculating is the attempt made by Matthew E. Petrusek as he writes Evangelization and Ideology. He attempts to redirect Catholics in responding to wokeness, secular, and political beliefs. As he spent most of his career as a professor his didactic directive is aimed at guiding societies hyperpolitical ideological framework. His book weighs the balance between Catholic beliefs and the socio-political challenges within culture.<\/p>\n
His ideology is framed from a Catholic perspective, and as his book is very academic in nature as he works out the progression of evangelization through a political lens. Petrusek\u2019s influence emanates from Bishop Robert Barron, an apologist for Catholic social teachings. To Petrusek\u2019s credit, he correctly acknowledges the end goal of evangelism while opening the door to various pathways, \u201cno way is superior as long as they lead to Christ and his church.\u201d [1]<\/p>\n
Petrusek unpacks the Catholic Church’s social thought tradition and how it has changed over time. However, I believe the road to evangelization remains the same, and if political debate is the way to open minds, then we better close the door.
\nWhat is Evangelism? Evangelism is proclaiming the Gospel \u2013 the good news about Jesus Christ, which is God\u2019s power to save all who believe it and turn from sin to follow him. The road to Jesus is not through political debate but through the Gospel, a surrendered life and transformation through the work of the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n
Political debates have already fragmented the church. We truly, indeed, are in the midst of a hyper-partisan environment with culture wars raging between traditional and contemporary viewpoints. American Christianity, Christian leaders, and Christian churches have used Sunday morning as the platform for modern politics, with Jesus on the back burner. It has become glaringly evident much of Christian leaders and churches seem to be finding their voice in this arena, putting stakes in the sand and aligning left or right and middle in the political spectrum.<\/p>\n
How the church handles the political arena is ultimately divided, but Petrusek\u2019s take on evangelizing the political culture leaves much to be desired from my perspective. He believes that if political debate is done right, it can help win minds. As I think about his goal of winning minds and handling the political arena, I am reminded of another book, The Politics of Jesus, written by Obery Hendricks Jr. Hendricks looks at Jesus through a different lens by opening minds to see Jesus\u2019 identity as a political revolutionary and who works to overturn social injustice. Hendricks, too, affirms that the church and its ministers should enter the political arena but offers a justice perspective.<\/p>\n
“The uncompromising example of Jesus Christ places upon every Christian minister the responsibility to withstand the temptation to align oneself with the secular ruling powers. It is true that it is part of every minister\u2019s calling to be a pastor to his or her parishioners, to be a spiritual leader and teacher, and a comforter of the sick at heart and those afflicted in mind, soul, spirit, or body. Ministers of the Gospel must comfort the afflicted, but they also have the prophet\u2019s duty to afflict the comfortable.\u201d [2]<\/p>\n
I once heard at a seminar that we \u201cseek the welfare of the city\u201d by fighting against injustice and evil. Hendricks argues there is a need for church leaders to use the political arena for such. He later goes on to say there are distinguishing characteristics which determine whether they represent the true cause of Christ and his mission or self-interest; “There are two telltale criteria: (1) they are silent about issues of social justice, and (2) they function as uncritical supporters of rulers and politicians, rather than as their moral conscience and dedicated arbiters of biblical justice.\u201d [3]<\/p>\n
While I applaud Petrusek\u2019s discussion and attempt to take on this most polarizing topic. Trying to make the political world a moral one is a noble attempt. Politics and morals are not in the same family. For the Christian with a moral foundation, weaving the two together is no easy feat. Petrusek realizes it, \u201c\u2026materialist empiricism (examining morality as it relates to politics) has an even bigger problem: it cannot produce a prescriptive morality, meaning it cannot tell us what we should and should not do.\u201d [4]<\/p>\n
When it comes to evangelization, politics can be introduced as a new form of identity, and it is viewed as a trap from my perspective. In the Identity Trap Yascha Mounk was not optimistic about the Trap\u2019s future. \u201cthe forces favoring the identity trap and favoring its retrenchment will clash for years to come.\u201d[5] The emergence of new identity factions is on the rise daily, resulting in a more isolated and divided society than ever before. Sadly, Petrusek’s premise of evangelism and politics is yet another one.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
[1]Petrusek, Matthew R., and Thomas Collins. Evangelization and Ideology: How to Understand and Respond to the Political Culture<\/i>. (Park Ridge, IL: published by the Word on Fire Institute, an imprint of Word on Fire, 2023). 18.<\/p>\n