Franky Schaeffer has a chapter entitled “Truth Versus Pietism” in his book, Sham Pearls for Real Swine. “Truth Versus Pietism” describes two ways to think about reality, basically seeing it either as a unified whole or as split into secular and sacred realms. How we understand the gospel, pursue Christian maturity and engage the world is determined by which of these two views we embrace. In previous posts I’ve discussed what the gospel and Christian maturity is like from the perspective of these two paradigms, and now I’d like to consider how the idea of engaging the world is affected.

“Truth” and “Pietism” think about the world differently. A Truth paradigm sees the world as good and sacred. Schaeffer explains it this way, “[Truth] holds that God is the Lord of all reality and that He created all that is visible and invisible. Because of this, we live in an orderly universe that can be rationally investigated and understood through science and the arts.” Consequently, those who embrace the Truth tradition are at home in this world because it is God’s, even though it is fallen. Fallenness doesn’t mean the visible world is illegitimate or evil, rather it describes the moral state of man and its impact on creation.

The Pietism tradition divides the spiritual from the visible world around us. The “truth” of the spiritual and the “truth” of the physical are not one. Something can be “true” spiritually and not “true” physically. The Church can be right spiritually but wrong scientifically. Schaeffer elaborates, “Pietism gives people a fractured reality, one in which the physical world, the body, the arts, economics, the sciences, the humanities, and sexuality are believed to be at war with the soul.” A pietist is ambivalent towards the world. Three examples where this ambivalence affects the way a pietistic Christian engages the world are how commitments are made and kept, activities are conducted and the arts are understood.

Pietists have no problem breaking commitments if they “feel led of the Lord” to do so. Since the spiritual is supreme, it doesn’t matter what damage is done to another person if the “Lord wills” the pietist to change his direction and break a commitment. Or he may be loose with the facts when making a commitment because he feels it’s God’s will to pursue this particular course. The pietist often will not do the “due diligence” necessary simply because he “senses” it’s God’s will and that is good enough for him. This makes the pietist somewhat unreliable and manipulative, but it also makes him vulnerable to emotional appeal and being taken advantage of. In my experience, some of the worst contractors and business people one can deal with are Christians. I think this is because of Pietism.

For the Pietist, ordinary life and activities need to be “Christianized” in order to be legitimate. Watching a football game with church members must include a half-time devotional and prayer. The refrigerator needs to get decorated with little scripture versus. A missions trip is the only justifiable way to travel and see the world. “The pietistic need to Christianize reality indicates a worldview that does not fundamentally understand or believe that reality is already God’s and the Christianity is truly Truth,” says Schaeffer. More often than not, a full fledged pietist is motivated by a guilty conscience to sanitize all they do in a misdirected attempt to feel spiritual.

Art is misunderstood by Pietism. It is seen from a utilitarian point of view. It must be useful. In other words, art must spread the Christian message. Beauty isn’t seen as its own justification. Truth can’t be explored without some “spiritual” goal. Again quoting Schaeffer, “…good art, like good science, describes the truth of a small or large part of reality without regard to maintaining the respectability of the artist. The fit subject for Christian art, therefore, is reality.” With Pietism, however, art is betrayed. Christian fiction tends to be one long, boring evangelistic tract. Christian music is often uninspired and banal. All stories must have a happy ending or at least a moral. This may be why many Christians’ tastes never rise above kitsch.

There are many more areas where Pietism stunts or distorts our participation in the world. I’ve only touched on a few. Schaeffer covers more in his book. Next post, I will make a chart that contrasts many aspects of Truth and Pietism.

I’ve been writing about Truth Versus Pietism which are two paradigms for understanding reality. A Pietism paradigm splits reality into secular and sacred areas, whereas a Truth paradigm sees all reality as sacred, since it was created by the Lord of reality, God. The consequences that flow from these two views of reality are felt in a Christian’s life. The Christian with a Pietism take on reality has difficulty engaging life fully. There is a subtle ambivalence towards the physical world that often makes him narrow minded, irrational, and frankly, less human. When reality is seen, however, as all of God’s, and therefore sacred, the effect is a Christian who is curious, reasonable and compassionate.

These contrasting views of reality make themselves apparent in all kinds of ways. Not the least is how the gospel is understood. Pietism sees the gospel through an individualistic lens. The focus is on securing one’s personal salvation and happiness. Truth, on the other hand, sees the gospel as the comprehensive plan of God to restore mankind to a community of love, justice and kindness. The gospel is understood as primarily relational.

This theme is carried through as we consider what Christian maturity is for these two views of reality. Pietism, being individually focused and feelings oriented, makes Christian maturity a “moralistic quest for spiritual experience.” Introspection is the name of the game, and the Christian caught in this mentality puts a great deal of value on correct motivation and spiritual feelings. He aims to maintain an interior experience of peace, free from disturbance. The complex, the difficult, the uncomfortable are all resisted in the name of seeking spiritual maturity. This aversion to the hard and raw aspects of life leads him to dishonesty and hiddenness about his own problems, dullness toward others and a lack of integrity towards life. The mature pietistic Christian is an odd, self-righteous and earthly irrelevant person posing as a witness of God (who is supremely relational and unafraid of the reality He made).

Maturity, for a Christian embracing a “Truth” paradigm, is a journey toward greater faithfulness to reality. He constantly seeks to discover truth and align his life with it. Consequently, this kind of Christian is eager to learn and is a “lover of the truth” (2 Thess. 2:10b). His goal is to be a “doer of the word” (James 1:23). He recognizes that life is full of difficult and perplexing questions as well as real people with real problems, all which will require him to lay down his life for others (Phil. 2:3-8; Mark 10:45). Not concerned about looking spiritual, he is able to confess his own lacks since he realizes that admission of ignorance is the first step toward education. While not seeking conflict, he understands that it is often a necessary step to clarify things between people. The mature, truth-oriented Christian is a fully human person in love with God and committed to others.

Next, we’ll consider how these two ways of thinking influence how Christians engage the world around them.

My last post dealt with a concept Franky Schaeffer in Sham Pearls for Real Swine talks about under the title, “Truth Versus Pietism”. The basic idea is that there are two traditions in the church that deal with how to view reality. The “Truth” tradition sees reality as an integrated whole, everything being under the Lordship of Christ. The “Pietism” tradition splits reality in two: spiritual and physical, sacred and secular. These two traditions affect how we think about God, ourselves and our purpose in life.

Pietism values the spiritual over the physical. It sees the spiritual as being more important and more worthy of our attention. The physical world is looked at with skepticism and as irrelevant to the things of God. Pietism sees the world passing away, like a sinking ship. Nothing of real importance happens here on earth, except the saving of souls. The real show begins in heaven.

This schizophrenic take on reality leads pietistic Christians to have an individualistic view of the gospel. Since heaven is where the party is, the main concern now is to get invited (“getting saved”) and to get as many poor souls invited as well. Once a person has received a valid invitation, it really doesn’t matter all that much what they do in the meantime. Of course, it is only right for them to try to get others invited to the party (“evangelism”) since they shouldn’t be selfish, and they must remain in good standing (“holiness”) in order to keep their invitation valid. The Host doesn’t want His guests to be of the unsavory type. It’s probably a good idea to find other guests to fellowship with (“go to church”) in order to help each other stay on the invitation list.

Christianity from a Truth perspective encourages a relational view of the gospel. Sin is seen as a violation of relationship and holiness as a commitment to Kingdom values. God’s work isn’t getting as many people into heaven as possible, but rather the establishment of a new kingdom of justice, kindness and love. Salvation is an on-going conversion to the Kingdom culture (i.e. The Sermon on the Mount), which can only be worked out in the context of relationships. The church is the purpose of God.

Later, I’d like to focus on how a Pietism paradigm affects our understanding of Christian maturity and how we engage the world around us.

One of my top ten books of all time is Franky Schaeffer’s, Sham Pearls for Real Swine. The title of the book is a phrase Winston Churchill coined in reference to the British public school he attended, but Schaeffer applies it to much of the teaching in the church concerning the arts. Once in a while you stumble upon a book that completely changes your paradigm, and this is one of them. My favorite chapter is entitled, “Truth Versus Pietism”. We have been studying its message for the last few Sundays.

The basic idea of the chapter is pretty simple. It compares two traditions of thought in the church, that is, two ways to think about and understand reality. A truth paradigm sees reality as an integrated whole, while a pietism paradigm divides reality into two realms, physical and spiritual (secular and sacred). We’re influenced in various degrees by these two traditions and they shape our Christian theology, practice and approach in the world. (His use of the word “pietism” is not referring to the historical Pietist movements of Jacob Spencer, August Hermann Francke or Count Zinzendorf, but refers to a way of thinking and feeling.)

These two paradigms dramatically affect how we live as Christians. Since a truth paradigm sees reality as an integrated whole, the aim of a Christian who embraces this tradition is to constantly seek to discover truth and align his life with reality. This kind of Christian is honest and teachable. He is hungry for the truth and therefore studies and learns whenever he can. He isn’t concerned about whether he looks spiritual or feels spiritual, he actually wants to be spiritual by being faithful to reality. He is willing to change his opinions and behavior when he discovers something to be true.

Christians caught up in a pietism paradigm, however, constantly look inward searching for correct motivation and right-thinking, spiritual feelings. They “regard life as a moralistic quest for spiritual experience.” Fundamentally, they see life divided into compartments, some spiritual and others not. This leads them to favor experiences and activities that provide “spiritual” feelings and appearances of spirituality over the arts, sciences, humanities and the “hard edges of reality”, including real people and problems. The pietistic Christian looks forward to heaven but creates a “sentimental plastic hell” on earth. The truth oriented Christian lives boldly, honestly and engages life fruitfully, knowing that “God is the Lord of all reality”.

Sham Pearls for Real Swine is not a new book, but it still has something to say to us today. I hope to explore some of the implications of it in my next few posts.

Note: The “Dummies” book is fake 🙂

Last week we were very excited when we read a paper by Richard B. Hays, Professor of New Testament at Duke Divinity School. In Ecclesiology and Ethics In 1 Corinthians, Professor Hays shows that Paul’s exhortations and teachings in 1 Corinthians, and indeed in all of his letters, “should be read primarily as instruments of community formation.” In other words, Paul is not teaching a systematic course on Christian ethics directed to individual Christians. Rather, “his exhortations are aimed at defining and maintaining a corporate identity for his young churches, which are emphatically countercultural communities.”

Professor Hays goes on to say that Paul’s emphasis on community is not, “merely a matter of practical expediency, nor is it to be understood solely in terms of sociological models. Rather, Paul develops his account of the new community in Christ as a fundamental theological theme in his proclamation of the gospel. Indeed, the focus on community is a part of the gospel itself.”

Often, people will ask us, “What do you do?” or, “What kind of ministries do you have?” as if being God’s people is a kind of lesser vision. Professor Hays addresses this issue, “If we ask, ‘What is God doing in the world in the interval between resurrection and parousia?’ the answer must be given, for Paul, primarily in ecclesial terms: God is at work through the Spirit to create communities that prefigure and embody the reconciliation and healing of the world.”

Our mission is to be one of those communities. Living out the Gospel of the Kingdom means unreservedly committing to one another in mutual liability so that we are a “palpable [sign] of God’s reconciliation of the world.”

It is inaccurate to view Paul’s letters as ethical truths aimed at individuals. Quoting again from the paper, “Thus, to do ‘ethics’ apart from ecclesiology is utterly unthinkable for Paul. Ethics is ecclesiology. Ethics is simply the church’s imaginative outworking of its identity as the Israel of God.”

I feel blessed beyond measure when I think about the many communities that have helped us along the way. Each community has its own gift and flavor. Some are rural, others are urban or suburban. They all come from different denominational traditions. They all have unique viewpoints. But a common thread I’ve seen among them all is that they have men and women who passionately love Jesus.

We’ve had the privilege to visit and know many of these communities. Others we’ve only read about or read their literature. We have wonderful friendships with several of them. May God bless these saints who are seeking to live out the Gospel of the Kingdom of God.

Shepherdsfield (Fulton, MO) – Wonderful friends who have contributed to our lives immeasurably.

Countryside (Odessa, MO) – Dear brothers and sisters who are examples of generosity and humility.

Jesus Army (UK) – Zealous and devoted believers we’ve visited who inspire us with their energy and commitment to Christ.

Jesus People USA – (Chicago, IL) – Examples of true servanthood. We’ve had blessed conversation and fellowship with several members and have loved their message for many years.

National Christian Conference Center (Valley Forge, PA) – Friends who first taught us about being an intentional community. Their friendship and wisdom over the years has been a real gift to us.

Bethany Fellowship (Bloomington, MN) – An incredible community that has had worldwide impact through their college, missions, and publishing. Alec Brooks, a close friend of ours who comes out and teaches often in our community, is from Bethany and was its president for many years.

Reba Place Fellowship (Evanston, IL) – The granddaddy of Christian intentional communities. We have been helped theologically by Mennonite authors and Reba Place has been an example to us of putting this theology into practice.

Brazos de Dios (Elm Mott, Texas) – Our friends from Shepherdsfield have told us about Brazos and we appreciate their writings and what their community represents.

Little Portion Hermitage (Berryville AR) – We’ve always been inspired by the life and music of John Michael Talbot. We’ve heard a lot about Little Portion from our friends at Shephersfield.

There are many, many other intentional Christian communities. People are often surprised at how many there actually are. These intentional Christian communities are full of average, everyday Christians trying their best to live out the Gospel, and they have inspired us to do the same.

I mentioned in my last post that when Alec visits us we enjoy watching episodes of Monk. Monk has been the all the rage for a while in the community. It is a clever show. If you haven’t seen the series, the story centers around a disabled San Francisco detective who works as a subcontractor for the police department, solving interesting murder cases. He has obsessive-compulsive disorder which was exacerbated by the trauma of his wife’s murder. Obsessive-compulsive disorder is an anxiety disorder “most commonly characterized by a subject’s obsessive, distressing, intrusive thoughts and related compulsions.” It is often used in an “offhand manner to describe someone who is meticulous or absorbed in a cause.”

Perhaps, we enjoy Monk because we can identify, if not with the actual disorder, the tendencies and excesses of it. When I see Rick Warren’s book, The Purpose Driven Life, I think that I should write a book entitled, simply, The Driven Life. Looking back at my life, I see that at times I’ve gone overboard, obsessing about often minor issues. Perhaps, it was from a desire for excellence or, more probably, a manifestation of some brokenness or sinfulness. Whatever the case, I am thankful that age and constant interaction with God’s people has mellowed me out.

This Thanksgiving I am thankful that my friends have been there for me, helping me to become the man God wants me to be. It is through their love and long-suffering that maturity has seen the light of day in my life. Now its time for me to head out back and clean the dining room in preparation for our special meal. I wonder why I get assigned these cleaning tasks?

This weekend we have visiting with us, Alec Brooks, our friend and mentor. Alec was president of Bethany Fellowship for a number of years and currently leads Charis International, a relief and development support ministry. We really enjoy when Alec comes, not just for his teachings, but the fellowship and evenings of ice cream and Monk.

At our Friday celebration Alec talked about necessity of community in a Christian’s life. We looked at material from Richard Hayes’ book, The Moral Vision of the New Testament. Hayes says there are three images that act as themes in the New Testament: Community, Cross, and New Creation.

Community – A concrete social manifestation of the people of God.

The ethical mandate of the New Testament can only be understood in the context of community. The New Testament is written to a community not to individuals.

Cross – Christian community has to be marked by cruciformity.

Cruciformity is self-giving, self-sacrificing, status renouncing love (Phil. 2).

New Creation – We are to live in light of hope of a new creation.

The whole redemption project is to restore what God intended in creation. 2 Corinthians 5:17 is better translated, “If any man be in Christ, there is a new creation.” We’ve tended to see things in individualistic terms. Our primary identity as Christians is to the family of God.

The message of the New Testament is that God is creating a new people who live under the Lordship of Jesus, loving one another in relationships that are vital and significant.

“Let your light shine before men, that they may see your good works and glorify your Father who is in heaven.” (Matt. 5:17) As Christians we are concerned about our witness. We want our deeds to demonstrate to those around us the reality of God and His kingdom values. Recent news about the moral failing of a major evangelical leader has made me think that perhaps we sometimes confuse witness with reputation. Love of reputation is a snare. The desire to be a witness of God, however, is good. Even though our own mission statement talks about being a witness, I realize now that being a witness isn’t as important as actually living out the Gospel.

Being a witness doesn’t legitimize the Gospel, or ourselves for that matter. This is where a fine line between wanting to be a good witness and craving reputation exists. Early Christians were accused of many things, including being cannibals because they celebrated the Lord’s Supper. In the eyes of some, they weren’t being good witnesses (“Honey, don’t let the kids play with those Christians, they eat people.”). There are, of course, many positive accounts of Christian witness in history. The point is that how we look to others is often tainted by their own views and prejudices. Additionally, the mandates of the Gospel are often at odds with the values of the culture around us, and consequently, can be unattractive to unbelievers; giving up wealth to serve others, for example.

Saint Francis and his little band of followers, in choosing poverty, were seen by the upper class, from where many of them came, as ungrateful and dishonoring their families. To some of the poor, they were seen as drawing attention away from the plight of the real poor. Supposedly, John Wesley, while riding his horse one day, became alarmed as he realized that he hadn’t been persecuted for the Gospel for a while, which indicated to him that he was perhaps losing his zeal for God. He pulled over the side of the road and knelt down in a ditch to pray and repent for his spiritual condition. Apparently, his prayers were so fervent that a bystander on the other side of the ditch heard it, and becoming irritated by this holy roller, threw a stone at him. Wesley raised his voice in thanksgiving that all was well with his soul, as evidenced by this persecution.

Loving reputation, even in the name of wanting to be a good witness, will keep us from honestly confessing our sins and weaknesses. We’ll be worried that it will hurt our witness. I think it’s better to just commit ourselves to living out the Gospel, regardless of the consequences, and let the Holy Spirit take care of the witness.

“Life together” is both the title of Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s book and a phrase that describes the essence of community. Christian community is all about sharing a common life together under the lordship of Jesus. This common life together means sharing our victories, challenges, needs, and aspirations. But it also includes celebrating together. And that’s just what we do each Friday night.

On these nights we celebrate our new life together in a variety of ways. We play games, put on skits, watch videos, learn new skills, eat, laugh, and generally enjoy one another and the shared life we have. We begin with a common meal and go from there. It’s something different each time and the members are continually coming up with new ideas. Occasionally, we blog about our latest time together. Enjoy!