Friday, June 8, 2012

Review: Christians and the Common Good

Our founding fathers established a constitutional provision regarding the practices of religion and government in our country, effectively, in the first amendment, providing for a separation between church and state. But as Christians, don't we have an obligation to live out our faith, not just in our individual lives and corporately as church, but also in the way we govern? If we are truly government of, by and for the people, then shouldn't government reflect the common faith that we purportedly share (about 75% according to some polls claim either belief in Christ or in God)? But this can be a slippery slope - we are a nation that celebrates freedom of religion and recognizes itself to have a pluralism in the larger faith community, celebrating a diversity of religious beliefs as part of our culture and heritage. Our founding fathers also recognized the danger in a particular faith or specifically, faith tradition, exercising too much influence on the government, or even becoming the government. The Puritans, the Pilgrims, Quakers, and Catholics, to name a few, all left England for the New World to escape the dominance of the Church of England, culturally, religiously, and politically. So how can we, as Christians, then exercise both our faith and our good citizenship? This is the topic that Chuck Gutenson explores in his book, Christians and the Common Good: How Faith Intersects with Public Life.

A brief disclaimer is in order before I proceed, however. Dr. Gutenson was one of my seminary professors, and I confess that he was, and remains, one of my favorite professors. His classes featured not only wonderful biblical exegesis, but he also brought that exegesis to bear on our modern culture, economics, and politics, pushing us to think about what God had to say to us in the ancient text about our modern world. He challenged us to think and explore, and in this book he continues that tradition that I first encountered from him in seminary so many years ago. Gutenson suggests that we avoid proof-texting the biblical passages (deciding what we believe about a topic and then searching the Bible until we find a text that supports that belief, or reading a short piece of scripture and ignoring the context of the writing to use it to support or affirm a specific policy or theology). Rather, he suggests, we should consider the outcomes that God desires for His creation. Then we should consider how a particular passage and its context contribute the outcome that God is seeking to achieve.
Many of us approach Scripture primarily to find out how God wants us to live, and Scripture becomes primarily about what we are to do. But it is only by grasping God’s character and nature that we begin to discern what God expects of us. In many places in Scripture, we are instructed to be imitators of God. However, if we are to imitate God, we must first know what God is like. Only then can we give serious attention to imitating God. We must approach Scripture realizing that it is the story of God’s interaction with humanity, and this story constitutes the disclosure of God’s nature.
Once we begin to grasp the overall story and to start to discern the nature of God, then we can begin to see what God desires, and yes expects, us to achieve as part of the Kingdom that has come into being in Jesus Christ:
God's expectations mostly relate to outcomes. In other words, we will come to see that God does not so much care whether we have this or that form of public institution. Instead, he is most concerned that certain things are accomplished, for example, that the poor and the marginalized are properly cared for and that the powerful are not left free to exploit the weak.
Gutenson begins his conversation about the Christian's responsibility for the public good by exploring various biblical passages, their context, and what outcomes God is seeking to form. The exegesis is sharp and well defined and Dr. Gutenson challenges his reader to think more deeply into the contexts and history of the texts and then prompts us to see the outcome that God wanted then and still wants from us as His people. He also challenges our common habit of focusing on just a few issues, not only to the exclusion of others, but in effect even ignoring the overall outcome that God desires.
Unfortunately, given the complexities of public life and the wide-ranging expectations God has for us, there is a remarkable degree of temptation to simply ignore issues. If one believes that God is only really concerned with a couple of issues, it becomes easier to ignore others. But human life, particularly our common public life, is just too complicated for this kind of reductionist approach.
Of course this approach leads us to reduce not just our focus, but also our faith,
Quite simply, a major reason for the increasing irrelevance of the church for today’s culture is its inability both to envision and to demand an alternative way of being in the world.

But Gutenson also maintains that we cannot simply rely on the public institutions to accomplish the task of the Kingdom. While government, he says, is ordained by God and can be used to accomplish Kingdom outcomes, we mustn't rely solely on government to accomplish the tasks that have been given to the body of Christ. For governments rely on power to function and hierarchy to manage, but the Kingdom is founded on sacrificial love. What Dr. Gutenson refers to as "a firm commitment to the common good" requires a balanced approach between government and and Kingdom. It also requires an acknowledgment that we have privatized religion in our culture and that we need to recognize that the public discourse must fundamentally involve our faith. As an adjunct history instructor I commonly suggest to students of early U.S. History that it is not possible to separate the faith traditions from a discussion about the beginnings of our nation. It the same way we must move away from the idea that faith is not part of the discussion around issues such as health care and gay marriage. However, I agree with Gutenson's assertion that rather than promote individual public policies in some of these arenas, we need to consider, as a people of faith, what outcomes God desires for us and seek a balanced approach to achieving the common good.
Let me begin by saying that I am sympathetic to those who say that help for those on the margins ought to come from the church first. However, I have to part company when some take the next step and suggest that such help can only come through the church. While we should be happy to see churches taking on ever increasing roles in the alleviation of the suffering of those in crisis, we simply cannot preclude government from being involved in this work. This is particularly true when churches are simply unable or unwilling to take on the enormous task. Human lives are just too precious and important. Poverty rates are too high for government not to be involved.
The general tendency to either try and mold the government into a biblical role, or to argue against any government involvement in social policy are both to be avoided. Some of our issues are too far ranging and too extensive to be alleviated by the church alone. And again, we must ask ourselves what the role of the Kingdom is in a government of, by, and for the people.
As we have argued throughout, trying to identify the biblical role of government is the wrong place to start. Rather, we must begin our inquiry by trying to discern the general contours of how God intends for us to live together. Of course, the answer to that question is not one that can be answered by appealing to a handful of popular biblical texts. There are numerous reasons why this approach is inadequate and will likely lead us to faulty conclusions. Instead, we must seek to develop an understanding of what would constitute a biblical view of community...
Gutenson avoids offering specific policy suggestions, but offers questions and reflections to begin a larger conversation around the ways to shape public policy to achieve the outcomes that God desires for His people. The book is well written, with very good biblical exegesis that will not weigh down the lay reader, but is in depth enough to hold the attention of the trained theologian. The dots are all connected as he explores the biblical mandates to build a just society and draws the reader into our modern public arena to bring those outcomes into the present. His writing style flows smoothly and continues to draw us forward from biblical foundations to modern politics and policy making and finally to considerations about specific challenges that currently lay before us as a nation and as the people of Jesus Christ.

Now its us up to us. Like Elisha before us, we are challenged to take up the mantle of the prophet and seek to find ways to dialogue around faith and public policy to create the outcomes that God is calling us to create. We are created in the image of God - creators - to make a difference in the world. Gutenson challenges us to take the dialogue to the next level. How will we respond?