The idea that money solves the problems of the poor comes from an Atheistic-Materialistic worldview that reduces everything in the world to the material level. Humans are animals. The world has too many mouths to feed; we must reduce that number. Countries are poor because they lack natural resources. To solve the problems of poverty, we need to transfer wealth and technology from one group (the wealthy) to another group (the poor). Resources are physical things in the ground.

But as I began to travel, I began to see materially wealthy nations with virtually no resources. Holland and Singapore are examples. And I saw relatively poor nations that had massive natural resources, such as Mexico and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. I saw wealthy nations like Japan with lots of people and no resources, and an impoverished nation like Somalia with few people and no resources. I have watched Haiti receive thousands of organizations, billions of dollars in international aid, and hundreds of thousands of volunteers coming and going over the years. Haiti is still a material wasteland.

What I saw did not fit my socialist model, i.e. that redistribution of resources leads to social justice. Thus, I began to question my assumptions about the causes of poverty and the solutions to the problem.

The first book I picked up was British economist Barbara Ward’s, The Rich Nations and the Poor Nations. I learned that other factors were at work in the wealth and poverty of nations. The second book was Dutch Prime Minister and theologian Abraham Kuyper’s, Stone Lectures. Dr. Kuyper showed me the radical nature of worldview in shaping the material and political culture of nations.

As I continued to read, I turned my reflections into lectures. In the mid 1980’s I was training young men and women to work overseas among the poor through the International Hunger Corps. One day a student said to me, “You must be reading Michael Novak.” I said, “Who is Michael Novak?” He said, “You must have read him, because what you are articulating is the heart of his book The Spirit of Democratic Capitalism.” Having been socialist in my perspective (and practice) of alleviating hunger and poverty, the very word capitalism was a red flag to me. But I set aside my apprehension and bought the book.

Michael Novak is an American Catholic writer, economic philosopher, and theologian. Two sites to provide more background are his own web page and Wikipedia. His book, The Spirit of Democratic Capitalism, published in 1982, became a modern classic for people wanting to understand what makes some nations rich and others poor. He confirmed my reflections about poverty and development. I was on the right track. Usually I can tell a friend the best book I had read in the previous year; Novak’s was the best for the entire decade of the 80’s.

Here is a chapter from The Spirit of Democratic Capitalism. If you take time to read it, you’ll understand why Novak has had such a powerful impact on my life and thinking.

- Darrow Miller

From its root in scripture, the concept of social justice travels through Thomas Aquinas. Aquinas wrote about the concept of general justice, i.e. that a citizen has an interest not only in his own welfare, but also in the welfare of others: “Now the virtue of a good citizen is general justice, whereby a man is directed to the common good.” (Summa Theologica)

In 1840, the Italian Jesuit scholar Luigi Taparelli D’Azeglio, co-founder of the theological journal, Civitia Cattolica, appropriated Aquinas’s concept of general justice to coin the term social justice. Taparelli was writing in response to the massive changes in society brought on by the industrial revolution. Dr Ryan Messmore, the William E. Simon Fellow in Religion and a Free Society at the Heritage Foundation, writes of Taparelli:

His vision of social justice, then, emphasized freedom and respect for human beings and the small institutions through which they pursue basic needs. He held that true justice can’t be achieved without doing justice to our social nature and natural forms of association. Social justice entailed a social order in which government doesn’t overrun or crowd out institutions of civil society such as family, church and local organizations. Rather, they are respected, protected, and allowed to flourish. [emphasis Messmore's]

In 1892, Pope Leo XIII’s social encyclical, Rerum Novarum, built on Taparelli’s argument. Roman Catholic scholar Michael Novak describes this unfolding in his essay, “Social Justice: Not What You Think It Is.”

Social justice had a very different meaning for Aquinas, Taparelli and Pope Leo XIII, than it does today. As a culture’s worldview changes,  so its language changes.

For example, in the language of Judeo-Christian culture, a woman carried a baby in her womb. In today’s atheistic paradigm, the unborn baby is called a “product of conception.” In the West’s historic paradigm, marriage was a covenantal relationship between a man and woman, before God, for life. Today the word is being redefined in post-modern terms to be a temporary relationship between two consenting adults. So it is with the term “social justice.” When the worldview of Europe and North America shifted from the Judeo-Christian worldview to an atheist-materialist worldview, the term was deformed from its original, nobler meaning to the one in use today.

In our next post we will see how this narrative unfolded. For now, suffice it to say that the modern usage is a code word for statist solutions to poverty. It is associated with Marxist and socialist zero sum economic policies derived from an atheistic-materialistic paradigm. Instead of individuals forming associations to care for the needs of those in the community, social justice now means the redistribution of wealth so that all people may have either a level playing field – the same starting point in society, or equal outcomes – the same ending point.

-          Darrow Miller

What is happening? Societies which once were civil, which had long been shaped by a relationship with the living God and the Judeo Christian worldview, have abandoned their roots. They have preferred Atheism and Materialism. As a natural consequence of this worldview, morals become relative, the concepts of sin and virtue are dropped from our vocabulary. As a result, we market evil through music, movies, and the internet. Lawlessness grows and societies begin to descend into anarchy.

Almost no one in the United States government–and that includes President Barack Obama—seems to recognize that America’s growing disorder is rooted in the moral breakdown of our society. And where does the moral breakdown come from but the grievous exchange of a Biblical worldview for an Atheistic worldview?

However, British Prime Minister David Cameron continues to make the connection in England. He acknowledges that the Bible, not the Enlightenment, was the foundation of Western Civilization. A few months ago he called on the British government to re-moralize England; now he has called upon the Church of England to lead a revival of traditional Christian values. He has properly recognized that the re-moralizing  of a society is primarily the realm of the church and only secondarily the role of the government.

Kudos to David Cameron. But two wrong assumptions seem to be driving his thinking. First, he seems to believe the Archbishop of Canterbury can drive such change from the top down. Second, his action suggests it isn’t important whether Christianity is true, only that it is useful. It is as if Cameron were saying: “We have a problem so let’s introduce religion to fix it.”

God cannot be used pragmatically, as if He were a technique. God is God! He is not to be approached because he is useful. We must come to him in a spirit of repentance recognizing that he is the wellspring of all that is true, good and beautiful. At the time of John Wesley in England and the founding of America, people understood that God was infinite, holy, and real. Today, God is reduced to the size of our imaginations and bound by our language of discourse. We diminish the God of creation to the level of the pragmatic by calling on Him only when we believe he is useful, to the psychological when we expect him to simply fix us, and to the material when we primarily appeal to him for things.

C.S. Lewis opened his essay “Man or Rabbit?” [now published in God in the Dock (Eerdmans, 1970), pages 108–113] with these words:

“Can’t you lead a good life without believing in Christianity?” This is the question on which I have been asked to write, and straight away, before I begin trying to answer it, I have a comment to make. The question sounds as if it were asked by a person who said to himself, ‘I don’t care whether Christianity is in fact true or not. I’m not interested in finding out whether the real universe is more like what the Christians say than what the Materialists say. All I’m interested in is leading a good life. I’m going to choose beliefs not because I think them true but because I find them helpful.’

Now frankly, I find it hard to sympathise with this state of mind. One of the things that distinguishes man from the other animals is that he wants to know things, wants to find out what reality is like, simply for the sake of knowing. When that desire is completely quenched in anyone, I think he has become something less than human. As a matter of fact, I don’t believe any of you have really lost that desire. More probably, foolish preachers, by always telling you how much Christianity will help you and how good it is for society, have actually led you to forget that Christianity is not a patent medicine. Christianity claims to give an account of facts—to tell you what the real universe is like. Its account of the universe may be true, or it may not, and once the question is really before you, then your natural inquisitiveness must make you want to know the answer. If Christianity is untrue, then no honest man will want to believe it, however helpful it might be: if it is true, every honest man will want to believe it, even if it gives him no help at all.

How do you re-moralize a society?  By pursuing Truth.  Disorder in society springs from disorder in the soul. To arrest the growing lawlessness in society, one must begin with the souls of the nation’s citizens.

National reform begins with the preaching of the Word of God, and a prophet’s call to personal and national repentance, coupled with a movement of the Spirit of God. We see the living God challenging the nation of Israel to this repentance: “If my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land” (2 Chronicles 7:14). Note several things here. First, if the land is to be healed, the first step is repentance. We need to be reminded about who God is – Real and Holy, and who we are – separated from God by our sin and rebellion, trying to live outside of the order that God has established.  Second, note that it is God’s people, not national government, who must repent. And third, it is God, not man, who will heal the land. The nation will be healed by God through the obedience of his people.

At the time of Wesley, the Church of England was largely part of the problem. Wesley reluctantly went outside the Church of England to spark the revival and begin the reform. Without limiting what a sovereign God may choose to do, today’s Church of England seems no more likely to be the agent of true revival that it was in Wesley’s day.

The church must be revived and then through her obedience, society must be reformed from the inside out through an acknowledgement and application of Kingdom Culture, i.e. Truth, Beauty and Goodness. The internal world of the heart must be renovated before the external world of behavior can be reformed. Revival without reformation is sentimentalism. Reformation without revival is a humanistic effort. England witnessed such revival-reformation over 200 years ago. The Wesley revivals of 1736-1768 were followed by the profound societal transformation led by the sons and daughters of Wesley through the Clapham Sect 1790-1830. This same pattern—revival leading to reformation—must occur in the West today whether in Britain, continental Europe, or the United States.

The concept of a moral universe is the product of three monotheistic religions that trace their roots to Abraham. This may be described as “moral monotheism.” Each of these Abrahamic faiths acknowledges a transcendent God who created the universe and who has revealed himself to man. Because the God of Abraham is moral, the universe he created has a moral frame.

On the other hand, consider the natural consequences of other religious systems. The atheistic materialism of the West is a religion that begins without God, thus has no basis for morality. The same is true of polytheistic beliefs such as African tribal religions, or those religions that declare that nature is God  (e.g. neo-paganism). None of these provides a foundation for moral absolutes. Without an objective standard for right and wrong, there is no possibility for human freedom, moral responsibility or the rule of law. We see this in so-called “primitive” societies that seldom demonstrated a concern for moral absolutes, and thus rarely embraced the concept of human freedom and personal responsibility.

Judaism, Christianity, and Islam all affirm but one God who is moral, and believe in a moral order in the universe. But the way each of these faiths see obedience to the law is very different. Bill Whittle, a writer, director, photographer, video editor, blogger and the host of the video commentary Afterburner shows the distinction between Islamic, Jewish, and Christian obedience to the law .

Many western nations (America, England, and other European countries) nations were formed from cultures that flowed from the worship of the God of the Bible. The language of discourse was theological, not the pragmatic, psychology language of today. Theology was known as the queen of sciences and considered the foundation for the arts, humanities, science, and all of life. Education was an integrative process; students studied broadly and each subject was related to a comprehensive Biblical framework. Today, education is fragmented, subjects are isolated, and students learn more and more about less and less. At one time educated citizens were not only knowledgeable, they were also moral. Wisdom and virtue were the primary values. Today we seem to bow at the altar of ignorance and vice.

Western culture has cut herself off from her roots. The result is a growing lawlessness in individuals and societies. May God raise up a prophet to call our nations to repentance!

-          Darrow Miller with Gary Brumbelow

Many young Christians care about social justice. They believe Christ followers should be concerned with the poor, with the care of creation, and other political, economic, and social issues. They see in the Bible God calling his people to feed the poor, clothe the naked, shelter the homeless, and seek justice in the public square and the marketplace.

Admonitions in both testaments provide the motivation and the context for our engagement in social justice. Here are some examples in the Old Testament:

- Zechariah 7:9-10: This is what the LORD Almighty said: “Administer true justice; show mercy and compassion to one another. Do not oppress the widow or the fatherless, the foreigner or the poor. Do not plot evil against each other.”

- Isaiah 1:17: Learn to do right; seek justice. Defend the oppressed. Take up the cause of the fatherless; plead the case of the widow.

- Psalm 82:3: Defend the weak and the fatherless; uphold the cause of the poor and the oppressed.

- Micah 6:8: He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the LORD require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God.

Similarly the New Testament makes social justice a major thrust of the expansion of the kingdom of God. Jesus calls us to love our neighbor as we love ourselves.

- Matt 22:37-39: Jesus replied: “’Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.” This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’”

He also reminds us that when he returns he will sit on his throne and separate the sheep from the goats based on how we had treated those in need.

- Matthew 25: 34-40: Then the King will say to those on his right, “Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.” Then the righteous will answer him, “Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?” The King will reply, “Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.”

Likewise the Apostle Paul implores us to have the mind of Christ.

- Phil. 2: 3-4: Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit. Rather, in humility value others above yourselves, not looking to your own interests but each of you to the interests of the others.

Many young Christian read these passages and wonder how their fathers could miss something so obvious. How could their predecessors be so consumed with “spiritual salvation” and so unconcerned for the cultural mandate and “thy kingdom come”? Writing in Of Other Worlds: Essays and Stories, C.S. Lewis speaks of the church’s culpability:

But it did not happen, however, without sins on our parts: for that justice and that care for the poor which (most mendaciously) the Communists advertise, we in reality ought to have brought about ages ago. But far from it: we Westerners preached Christ with our lips. With our actions we brought slavery of Mammon. We are more guilty than the infidels: for to those that know the will of God and do it not, the greater the punishment. (Pg 38)

The question is not Should Christians engage in social justice? The question is How can we best ensure that justice flourishes in all areas of life – economic, political, social, et al?

Before we proceed, let’s define the term “social justice.” Then we will reflect on the historical background of the term.

Social justice refers to justice in the social arena. The two words to be examined (from Webster’s 1828 dictionary) are:

Justice n. [L. justitia, from justus, just.] The virtue which consists in giving to every one what is his due; practical conformity to the laws and to principles of rectitude in the dealings of men with each other; honesty; integrity in commerce or mutual intercourse. Justice is distributive or commutative. Distributive justice belongs to magistrates or rulers, and consists in distributing to every man that right or equity which the laws and the principles of equity require; or in deciding controversies according to the laws and to principles of equity. Commutative justice consists in fair dealing in trade and mutual intercourse between man and man.

Social: a. [L. socialis, from socius, companion.] Pertaining to society; relating to men living in society. or to the public as an aggregate body; as social interests or concerns; social pleasures; social benefits; social happiness; social duties. True self-love and social are the same.

Note that in the social realm there are two elements of distributive justice – that granted by the government which renders equity to each citizen and equality before the law, and commutative justice - that granted in the market place through free and fair exchange between peoples. This is “social” justice in that it deals with justice in the community, between citizens and their neighbors.

Author and economic and social philosopher, Michael Novak, writes, “Social Justice is capacity to organize with others to accomplish certain ends for the good of the whole community.”^[1] He continues,

Social justice is a virtue, a habit that people internalize and learn, a capacity. Its capacity has two sides: first, a capacity to organize with others to accomplish particular ends and second, ends that are extra-familial. They’re for the good of the neighborhood, or the village, or the town, or the state, or the country, or the world…. [It] is the new order of the ages.^[2]

Justice is a product of kingdom culture, it is doing what is good and right towards people as well as righting the wrongs that have been done to people.

Next we will answer the question What is the historic root of the term social justice?

Dallas Willard captures this concept in The Divine Conspiracy: “The obviously well kept secret of the ‘ordinary’ is that it was made to be a receptacle of the divine, a place where the life of God flows.” Likewise, my dear friend, George Grant, in his book, The Micah Mandate, notes:

After all, the future of our culture does not depend upon political messiahs or institutional solutions. Neither does it depend on the emergence of some new brilliant spokesman or inspiring leader. Instead, the future of our culture depends upon ordinary men and women in the church who are willing to live lives of justice, mercy and humility before God.

Recently, I received a letter from my good friend in India, Raaj Mondol. Raaj and his wife, Geeta, have been friends for many years. Their lives reflect the power of the God working through ordinary people.

Raaj has been affiliated with the Disciple Nations Alliance as a teacher – trainer in India and on the sub-continent. Geeta Mondol is an inspiration to my life in that through necessity and calling she has founded the Ashish Foundation for the Differently Abled which “seeks to work towards a society that views each person as being of value and importance and to make a difference in the lives of children with disabilities as well as their families.”

How different will the lives of the children of Ashish Center be because of the vision, hard work, and persistence of Geeta? What kind of impact for good will Ashish Center have in India? God alone knows the answers but we’re watching with great anticipation.

In his letter, Raaj reflects on a series of e-mails that relate to the DNA’s concern for the plight of women.

Thanks a lot for sharing your heart in this mail. … We were first connected to Andrew Brumme and Evan from Shadowline films when they were coming to India by one of our friends who had asked us to help them in getting contacts with people associated with the issue of Female foeticide in India. By God’s grace we were able to help them connect with some people when they came to do the shooting for the film. When we met them and talked at the Reflection Art Gallery we recognized how much we shared the same vision. We were so thankful that someone was making a documentary on this issue as prior to that we ourselves had been thinking of producing a short movie on the issue but for some reason we had not been able to do it. We recognized that when God puts his concern on a particular issue then He gives the same vision to many others in his household and it is very clear that this issue of the silent genocide of girl children is one among them.

 I do not know if I shared with you that the Lord has guided us to take up this issue as the main focus of our ministry through Salt Initiatives. We have been engaged in sharing the concern in the churches, college students and people in the urban communities. We are in the process of setting up a website letherlive.in where we hope to have an interactive medium and platform where women facing the issue can get help. Now it is under construction and we hope that by January 2012 it should be fully operational. We had told Andrew and Evan during their second visit to India that we will be happy to share this movie at different forums. It would be a good tool for us.

We are so encouraged to know that you are passionately sharing the concerns in your own teachings. We are thankful to you for igniting this concern in us for the state of women in our country through your worldview teaching. It has been an important part of our journey and Lord had time and again confirmed with us that he has been leading us in this path. We would appreciate your prayers for much wisdom and guidance from the Lord for our team.

Let Her Live and the Ashish Foundation recognize the significance of each human life. Here are two friends who understand that Ideas Have Consequences! and that the Biblical concept that all human beings are made in the image of God drives them to push back against the Hindu culture that so depreciates women and special-needs children.

God does inhabit the ordinary. He moves communities and nations through the quiet work of people like Geeta and Raaj. What has God put on your heart? Don’t let thoughts like, No one knows me! … I have no resources …  I have no ‘power’ be barriers to what God might be calling you to do.

Remember, “the future of our culture depends upon ordinary men and women in the church who are willing to live lives of justice, mercy and humility before God.”

-          Darrow Miller

The second protest movement began in the fall of 2011 in New York City. Known as Occupy Wall Street, this movement, like the Tea Party, has spread all over the country. Like the Tea Party, OWS is protesting growing corruption in the United States, but their concern is corruption in the economic centers of power. They focus largely on big corporations and their executives who often make exorbitant salaries, and sometimes are richly rewarded even as they destroy the profitability of their companies and/or drive them into bankruptcy.

Corruption in the United States is indeed growing. Transparency International’s (PCI) 2011 Corruption Perception Index can be helpful in viewing the global trends in corruption perception. As you look at the global map of corruption, ask yourself these questions:

• What countries have the least corruption? What common faith root do most of those countries share?
• What countries are most corrupt? What are the faith roots of those countries?
• Where is your country on the scale? What is the faith root of your country?
• What correlation might one make between the faith root of a nation and its corruption level?

Since I have been tracking the PCI, the United States has been growing more and more corrupt.

The PCI has nine categories ranging from very clean (9-10) to highly corrupt (0-.9). These nine are grouped into three: least corrupt (7-10), corrupt (4-6.9), and most corrupt (0-3.9). Most Western nations are among the least corrupt. The lowest of the top three least corrupt categories ranges from 7-7.9. The United States has been rapidly falling to the bottom of the least corrupt category.

The first CPI, in 1995, rated the US 15^th from the top with a score of 7.79 on a 0-10 point scale. But today the United States is 24^th from the top with a score of 7.1 near the bottom of the least corrupt countries categories. The table below shows steady growth in corruption in the United States over the last decade.

If the trend continues, the United States will soon have the dubious distinction of moving from the “clean” category to the “corrupt.”

Americans in the Tea Party Movement and the Occupy Wall Street Movement are drawing the nation’s attention to the swelling political and corporate corruption respectively. This increase in corruption in the US can be traced to the loss of Biblical moorings. As the church has abandoned truth for “faith”… as she has moved from an outward cultural and public-square focus to an inward personal-faith focus … as she has moved from living in an objective external universe to a subjective internal universe … she has failed to disciple the nations.

Instead of promoting and living the virtues of hard work, excellence, thrift, integrity in the market place and public square, the importance of physical purity, and honoring covenantal relationships, the church has turned inward and allowed the market place and public square and even the church to be shaped by atheistic and materialistic culture. During the “good times” we witnessed people buy houses and cars they could not afford, spending on credit cards with abandon. When the economy crashed, people, including Christians, walked away from mortgage and car loan obligations made when the economy was doing well. Now that the economy has tanked, they follow the path of least resistance and walk away from a pledge made rather than help define a different way of living for our broken nation.

We saw this most dramatically when “evangelical Christian” Ken Lay brought down his own company, Enron, in a context of greed and manifest corruption. Lay’s final principle was to make as much money as he could as fast as he could without thought to ethics, the long term health of the company, its employees, stockholders, or the general public.

Gerard J. Arpey

In his recent op-ed piece for the New York Times, Michael Lindsay, President of Gordon College, writes of the moral courage of Gerard J. Arpey, the chief executive officer and chairman of the board of American Airlines. Arpey exhibits a powerful contrast to many chief executives who run their companies into the ground and leave with a “golden parachute,” a generous severance package with no correlation to the executive’s job performance. Lindsay writes that Arpey “resigned and stepped away with no severance package and nearly worthless stock holdings. He split with his employer of 30 years out of a belief that bankruptcy was morally wrong, and that he could not, in good conscience, lead an organization that followed this familiar path.”

Lindsay continues by quoting Arpey: “It is not good thinking — either at the corporate level or at the personal level — to believe you can simply walk away from your circumstances.”

If we want to see our countries move from corruption to very clean, we need to recognize that the root of a just society is the worship of “… the LORD your God [who] is God of gods and Lord of lords, the great God, mighty and awesome, who shows no partiality and accepts no bribes (Deut. 10:17).” Corruption has no place among Christians. We are to be known as the people who seek justice and truth and are willing to pay a price in the market place and public square for our choices.

We can thank God for men and women like Gerard Arpey who are willing to stand on principle and resign a job rather than break the contractual obligations of their companies.

Yes, the OWS and the Tea Party movements are right: there is a growing problem of corruption in the United States. The solution is not more government regulation, but an increase in internal self government based on moral law and Biblical principle of Americas citizens. The solution is not more government bailouts of companies “too big to fail” but a call to the leaders of those companies to fulfill their moral responsibilities to the long term health of the company, employees, and stock holders rather than increasing profits at any cost.

It was Dutch Lawyer and Theologian Hugo Grotius who captured the importance of personal responsibility in society:

Hugo Grotius

He knows not how to rule a kingdom, that cannot manage a province; nor can he wield a province, that cannot order a city; nor he order a city, that knows not how to regulate a village. Not he a village, that cannot guide a family; not can that man govern well a family that knows not how to govern himself; not can he govern himself unless his reason be lord, will and apatite be vassals; nor can reason rule unless herself be ruled by God, and be obedient to Him.

We need a national repentance and reformation that will restore the moral principles of our founding.

- Darrow Miller

An interesting part of the blog post is that Keller places the conversation among young leaders with “Reformed and evangelical convictions.” I am a young leader with “Reformed and evangelical convictions” and I run in circles where these conversations are loud. Therefore, I would like to offer my thoughts on Keller’s post and maybe add another vantage point to the conversation.

The Bible speaks to the need of the older generation passing down the faith to the younger generation. I once heard it said that if the older generation preaches a message that they fail to robustly live out, the young generation will not attack their parent’s behaviors as much as they will their beliefs. I really sense this is what happened in much of North American evangelicalism. Children of the late 70’s, 80’s, and 90’s watched their parents participate in a dualistic, pragmatic Christianity that emphasized the individual over the communal and cultural. As many of these kids came of age they asked why their parents never talked about vocation, the poor, world development, consumerism, and the growing realities of pluralism. A large group of this generation wanted a different type of Christianity. Simply speaking, the reaction of this generation fueled the emergent church movement and the young, restless, Reformed movement.

The emergent church brand wanted a faith that had feet, in contrast to a Christianity that seemed simplistic and content with personal salvation. They epitomize the generation who concluded the beliefs of their parents led to their lack of behavior. Rather than being critical of the depth of their parent’s beliefs they went after the content of their beliefs. The result of this approach has led to what many are saying is just a new form of old liberalism.

The other group, the “Young, Restless, Reformed” movement grew out of pragmatic Christianity that made church growth and “your best life now” the target. This group was ripe for the message of a big God in the heavens who does whatever He pleases (Psalm 115:3). The message of men like John Piper fell like water on parched ground to a generation who had been reared in pragmatic Christianity.

The context in which all of this has been taking place is a very different context than that of 20-35 years ago. Today the World Wide Web is the primary portal of communication; we are in contact with the whole world’s problems like never before. Globalization is bringing the nations into our cities, neighborhoods, and living rooms. The questions being asked today are not the questions asked in 1985. Globalization was not nearly as big an issue in the 80’s as it is today. Technology and transportation are creating a context never before seen in world history. Therefore young Christians are forced to ask the question, “What does the gospel’s influence on this culture look like?” This question raises other questions about the nature of the gospel and the mission of the church, just as it has in every generation before it.

Our context is new but the issues are not. John Stott wrote Christian Mission in the Modern World in 1975 and it is being rediscovered by those who were not born until the 1980’s as if it were written for such a time as this. Church history going back long before Stott shows that many within this generation are near-sighted. We young ones could learn a bunch from our predecessors. Yet our living predecessors need to remember moments like this can be the greatest opportunities for the church to be purified and pruned. Stott was arguing for a wholistic gospel that addressed physical as well as spiritual problems. He along with many others moved the Western Church forward in substantial ways.

I think today’s conversations are somewhat a rehashing of old conversations. It is exciting because those conversations need to be engaged to ensure faithfulness to the gospel and clarity of calling for the church. But I also think the context and questions being brought up today are calling the church into a more comprehensive gospel than many before promoted. It is not just a gospel that heals the spiritual and physical but one that heals nations. The true gospel addresses how faith relates to our work, how Christians should respond to undocumented immigrants and Muslim migrants, it addresses America’s culture of mass consumption; it speaks to the way cultures should and should not develop. The Bible reveals how cosmic distortions lead to cultural idolatry and how individuals appropriate that in their personal lives.

The gospel the church proclaims is the power that brings salvation to the whole world. Therefore the mission of the church is the discipling of nations. We need to disciple individuals, families, and we have to disciple at the level of culture as well. Cultures are the conglomeration of all aspects of society so we need to care about all aspects. If we are to love our neighbor as ourselves then we have to realize that culture shapes them for good or evil. Let’s shape them for good and remember only God is good (Mark 10:18).

- Tyler Johnson

For the past ten years, Tyler has worked on college campuses, arranged church partnerships, led community initiatives, and established a city-wide church network that seeks to raise up transformational leaders in the city of Phoenix.  He currently is a part of the Leadership Team at Redemption Church in Phoenix, Arizona, as well as the Director of the Surge Network.  He is married to Hayley and they have three children:  Braden, Yale, and Lucianna. Tyler serves on the board of directors of Disciple Nations Alliance.

I do know that Apple computer owners from the very beginning have loved their machines and were loyal to the brand. Most, perhaps all, of my artist friends choose Apples over PCs. And for sheer aesthetics, Apple computers have more beauty than the functional looking PCs. Finally, I must admit that my PCs are always breaking down. Whenever this happens, perhaps monthly, my friends say, “If you owned an Apple, this would not happen to you!”

Marilyn, my wife, knows even less about computers than I do. So when her last PC died, she bought a used Apple. And she loves it. She loves the ability to make an appointment at the Apple Store and receive great service. She can go in and get instruction on how to use a certain feature of her computer. In the rare event that something goes wrong, she can get it fixed quickly. There is a culture at Apple of service, excellence, and of kindness toward “technically challenged” customers. This much is obvious to someone who has little technical knowledge or interest.

Which brings me back to Bono’s tribute. He said something provides the clue to the success of the Apple brand. Steve Jobs had a passion for beauty and for excellence. Bono writes:

I really respect people who are involved in business who have an artist’s eye and ear. There are very few. Steve was a very, very tough and tenacious guardian of the Apple brand, but the thing that endeared him to artists was his insistence that things had to be beautiful. He wasn’t going to make ugly things that made profits.

The big lesson for capitalism is that Steve, deep down, did not believe the consumer was right. Deep down, he believed that he was right. And that the consumer would respect a strong aesthetic point of view, even if it wasn’t what they were asking for. He believed that deep down, if he served what was right and what was great, then he would serve the Apple shareholder, and if he chased what they wanted, he would let them down.

The culture of the kingdom of God is manifest in Truth, Goodness, and Beauty. These virtues are to be integrated into all of our lives. Bono records that he knows very few people in business that have an artist’s eye. And sadly, too many Christians are governed by the culture of mediocrity and utility. We seem to have little concern for beauty. But Steve Jobs knew something that few of us grasp. He understood the importance of beauty, not only in the arts, but in business. He understood the Biblical virtue of excellence, even as this virtue is often forgotten by the church and thus by Western culture.

Christendom is healthy when she recognizes and lives the culture of the kingdom, the culture of excellence and beauty. Healthy Christian business people are concerned with making things that are excellent. They ask not only “is this product profitable?” but “is it moral?” And, “is it beautiful?” Healthy Christian writers relate ideas that impact the nation and not simply entertain bored readers. Healthy Christian musicians create music that is life affirming and beautiful, not death pursuing and repellant.

Steve Jobs “wasn’t going to make ugly things that made profits.” For Jobs, beauty took precedence over profits. He understood that human beings are wired for beauty. And when we are confronted with the beautiful–in a sunset, a field of spring flowers, the lovely form of a pregnant mother, or, yes, in a computer–we recognize the beauty. And, if we can escape the tyranny of pride for a moment, it touches something in our soul.

In spite of the absence of any profession of faith in Christ, Jobs’ commitment to excellence, the value he placed on people, and his eye for beauty (even in the manufacture of computers) … all these are kingdom virtues. Some non-Christians exemplify these truths more clearly than some Christians.

We can be grateful that a man of Steve Jobs’ creativity and vision also had a heart for beauty and excellence. In this he has reminded us something of the eternal.

-          Darrow Miller

Compassion literally means “to suffer together with another” and is perfectly demonstrated by Christ who came to suffer together with us in His incarnation, and ultimately to go to the cross on our behalf. Compassion is also demonstrated in the parable of the Good Samaritan who didn’t just transfer money to help a dying man, but got his hands dirty and suffered together with him. By its very nature compassion cannot be done by people (for example, government bureaucrats in Washington) who are physically removed from needy people themselves.

Christians would do well to think carefully before using the phrase “social justice” as I was reminded recently by a speech by Catholic theologian and economist Michael Novak titled “Don’t Confuse the Common Good with Statism.”

[Some] seem to think that the way to achieve “social justice,” that is, to help the poor, is to give more money to the state to distribute (or whatever it does with the money, once it flows into Washington’s coffers). [They] equate social justice with turning over to the state the project of “fighting” poverty.

Where…is [the] evidence that this dependence on the state actually helps the poor?

The 2011 Census Report on Poverty and Income…displays contrary evidence. After pouring three trillion dollars (going on four trillion) during the last three years, in the name of helping the poor and creating jobs, the federal state’s failure is breathtaking. The ranks of American poor have swollen to the highest number (46.6 million) since poverty figures first began to be recorded, 52 years ago. The percentage of Americans who are poor (14.1 percent, or nearly one in seven) is the highest in seventeen years. Is giving so much of taxpayers’ money to the state helping the poor?

… Those who insist that the only (or the best) way to achieve the common good is to give more resources (and more control) to the federal state, had better go looking for some evidence somewhere that undergirds their self-righteousness. They insist that others of us, who do not support the expenditure of more state money, are immoral.

Yet the first moral obligation, Blaise Pascal wrote, is to think clearly. And with evidence.

What is true for the common good is also true for social justice. Those who insist that the test of social justice is giving more tax revenues to the state need to display their evidence.

For myself, a mountain of evidence convinces me that Thomas Sowell is right: Giving money to the state in order to help the poor is a little like trying to feed the swallows by feeding the horses. The swallows get very little of it.

- Scott Allen

But what is happening before our eyes in 2011-2012 is nothing new. As the  author of Ecclesiastes reminds us:

What has been will be again, 
                what has been done will be done again; 
                there is nothing new under the sun. (Eccl. 1:9)

Nearly five hundred years ago, on October 31^st, 1517, an obscure Roman Catholic monk nailed his 95 Theses on the Power and Efficacy of Indulgences to the church door in Wittenberg.  Centuries before text messaging, the internet, or even electricity, Martin Luther’s words went viral, carried by the information highway of the day–Gutenberg’s printing press. But not by that channel only. Luther’s ideas were also spread by a generation of balladeers, artists, musicians, songwriters, and cartoonists. These passionate communicators shook Europe to the core and triggered a re-formation of culture that shaped the West and continues to influence the larger world to this day.

What do Martin Luther and the Arab Spring have in common? Read the thought provoking article in the Economist How Luther went Viral .

- Darrow Miller