In this short series on evangelism, I have thought about the conviction that motivates my desire to tell people about Jesus, and the perceptions that help or hinder that. After all that thought, it's clear that a little action is needed.
 |
| Image by Voluntouring from Pixabay |
Action gets a whole section in the Progressive Evangelism booklet which inspired this series. It says that actions to support those in need and challenge injustice are "probably the most common expression of evangelism in progressive churches".
Action
What counts as evangelism?
In its broadest sense, I think that anything that Christians do, or the church does, which engages with everyone else in the world, counts as evangelism. That's how people are going to form an idea of the Christian faith - through all those little interactions.
Having said that, the motivation for any particular action may be on a sliding scale between, at one end, "We are doing this to tell people about Jesus," and at the other end, "We are doing this because we believe it's the right thing to do."
If people are hungry, and you can organise a way to feed them; or lonely, and you have a place where they can meet people, then it may be important to do that because Jesus told you to do such things. Not because it is an excuse to give people a sermon, too.
On the other hand, a church may decide to have a craft stall at the local fair, or give out hot chocolate to teenagers, not because people necessarily need more sweet drinks and craft activities, but because that provides an opportunity to develop relationships and conversations.
In both cases, Christians are taking action to engage with people outside of the church. But does it have to have a "God slot" to count as evangelism? That leads on to the next question.
Do we have to articulate our motivations?
The full question from the Progressive Evangelism booklet was: Is faith-motivated action a form of evangelism, even if we don't articulate our motivations? Or to put it bluntly, do we have to tell people we're helping them because of Jesus, or is it enough just to help them?
I think the idea of "bait and switch" evangelism has been a factor in putting people off. I have been in churches where there is a suggestion that the only reason Christians should have non-Christian friends is to convert them. Or a feeling that you invite people to something that sounds like a social event, only for it to include a substantial call to repentance. Such efforts seem hypocritical, lacking in integrity.
Plus, feeling like you have to work the gospel in at every opportunity creates a pressure that is harmful to both you and your relationships. After beating yourself up for a few failures ("that could have been someone's only chance to hear about Jesus!") it's easy to swing to the opposite extreme and decide never to mention your faith.
But Jon Kuhrt, who has written thoughtfully about this on his Grace + Truth blog, argues that there are good reasons to keep social action distinctively Christian. He writes: "There is one factor that is more important than any other: believing in the relevance of the Christian faith to the people we are seeking to help." That is, the good news of Jesus is something that people need just as much as food, or community, or education. I admit, sometimes I believe that, and sometimes I'm not so sure. I certainly agree with Jon Kuhrt that "maintaining a Christian ethos... is a complex issue... that needs to be faced with courage and sensitivity".
In another blog post, he gives the example of a simple liturgy that his church uses at their weekly meals. People are welcome to join in with the prayers or not, but the act of saying them changes the feel of the gathering. Guests often ask to take the prayer sheets home. Renew Wellbeing spaces have a similar ethos of inviting people to join in with a daily rhythm of prayer.
So, there are certainly ways to communicate that the Christian faith is relevant and important. And "if churches do not help people address these [spiritual] needs then few other agencies will". (1)
(1)Ann Morisy, Beyond the Good Samaritan, quoted on Grace + Truth
Are all actions good?
OK, so the answer is obviously No. But the question is worth considering. Partly because the historical overtones still resonate - fighting the Crusades, banning books which said that the Earth goes round the Sun, and burning witches were all actions that were undertaken in an attempt to safeguard and spread the Christian faith. Our descendants may look back with equal horror at some of our works.
And partly because there is sometimes an idea that any evangelism is better than no evangelism. Well, no. If our words and actions leave people with a worse impression of God than they started off with, that's not spreading the good news.
So, actions may speak as loudly as words, and both, sadly, have spoken of hate as well as love, and of fear as well as grace. Confining ourselves to action does not always provide an escape from the problems of evangelism.
Comments