On exploring Aggressive Christianity...
It seems to me that the 'Aggressive Christianity franchise' is growing in TSA - unless they are the ones with the propensity to blog!
While collecting on Saturday for the annual appeal I thought I'd try it out in a conversation with a friend of mine who claims to be an atheist.
"What would you say if I told you I was an aggressive Christian...?"
"I'd tell you to p..s off!"
You should try it - it really is encouraging!
I probably need to get hold of the original Catherine Booth classic and also the contemporary version from Canada - if I am to get my head around this mindset.
----
Steve Court has something to say ... here
While collecting on Saturday for the annual appeal I thought I'd try it out in a conversation with a friend of mine who claims to be an atheist.
"What would you say if I told you I was an aggressive Christian...?"
"I'd tell you to p..s off!"
You should try it - it really is encouraging!
I probably need to get hold of the original Catherine Booth classic and also the contemporary version from Canada - if I am to get my head around this mindset.
----
Steve Court has something to say ... here
Comments
hang on, I'm in the salvation Army.....
At least 'P**s off' is a reaction as opposed to the apathy facing the contemporary church's attempts at evangelism.
'Aggressive Christianity' is in line with the idea of seizing the Kingdom by force.
There is so much complacency and sin within the contemporary church that to cut through it in the available time will require aggression.
What does aggressive actually mean?
"Assertive, bold, and energetic: as in an aggressive sales campaign. Of or relating to an investment or approach to investing that seeks above-average returns by taking above-average risks. Fast growing; tending to spread quickly and invade."
Sounds good to me :-)
PS remember it is an 'internal phrase' used by proponents and not an advertising slogan for the unsaved.
Love and prayers Andrew
I want people to embrace the Jesus I know not repel them - I fear the blanket bombing approach that seems to come hand in hand with the aggressive Christianity rhetoric bounded about could create more damage than the 'well intentions' of a piece of aggressiveness!
(Note: I don't remember reading Aggressive Christianity. So the following comment may be a complete 'garden path' if put into the context of the book)
An 'aggressive' cancer spreads quickly through the body... abnormal cells multiply exponentially, body tissue is changed. While this is a very negative concept, surely Agressive Christianity should be primarily a similar thing - but positive. Aggressive Christianity should begin inside the believer and effect a radical change in their heart.
Whatcha think?
I think the problem is that in 2006 we are tempted to define 'Aggressive Christianity' in the Victorian context in which the term was first couched.
There was a very visible and physical aggression about the early SA pioneers. One can almost see them snatching the gin bottle out of the hands of the wavering seeker and smashing it on the floor before they’d had time to make their decision!
We need to come up with our own interpretation of what it means to be an 'aggressive' Christian in today’s world.
The best contemporary illustration I can think of is the now famous (almost mythical) story of Tony Campolo’s birthday party for Agnes (see: http://coe.ksu.edu/EDETC864/Students/Alan/birthdaycake.html )
To break into a community (hitherto closed to Christians)
To challenge a social evil in the name of Jesus(hitherto ignored by the establishment)
To befriend the friendless (bearing in mind that people are usually friendless for a reason!)
To plant a church in a churchless community
To trust someone who has never been trusted before
To embrace poverty (in true Railtonian style)
To live like an untouchable among untouchables in order to reach the untouchables
To me these would all be examples of contemporary 'aggressive Christianity' in that they all deliver a bloody nose to the devil. Basically to be an aggressive Christian is to boldly go (not where no man has gone before!!!) but where the devil thinks you have no right to be.
Aggressive Christianity by today’s standards must be (as it always was) a lifestyle not just a methodology or approach.
L&P Andrew
BTW Steve Courts BE A HERO starts to open the debate with this regard to a certain extent.
"To populate God’s eternal kingdom with citizens from this temporal world within the restraints and confines of the ‘time’ we have available."
Whatever we do or whatever we don’t do there will always, ultimately, be a cut off point. There is a also a risk to our own eternal salvation if fail to ‘warn’ (see Ezekiel 3) - However, self preservation is the poorest motive for evangelism that there could ever be!
I like Gordon’s use of the word holistic, I like anything that is complete and entire (like full gospel or full salvation). A holistic mission will be aggressive by default. When we think of 'aggressive' we think of Jesus berating the Pharisees or cleansing the temple but his handling of the woman caught in adultery was equally 'aggressive'.
To use GC’s analogy of carpet bombing, the bombs don't fall on the lost but on the enemies who hold them captive. The 'Blind Guides' are a justifiable target but the one's they lead are not.
It is not the lost who needs to fear (or will be offended by) an 'aggressive Christian” but it is the hypocrite, the apathetic establishment, those who abuse the poor etc. The ‘aggressive Christian’ will always be a thorn in the side of such people. Like the OT prophet (or John the Baptist) they have a knack for spotting compromise and when they spot it they expose it.
I think the proof of the pudding is in the eating, in spite of all the postmodernist waffle we hear about cultural relevance – no one has ever been able to identify a new convert who was physically prevented from finding Christ in TSA because our name put them off. On the other hand no SA Community Church has had more evangelical success simply because they changed their name.
It is the intellectuals, the planners and strategists within the church that worry about such semantics – the activists have no time they just get on with delivering a holistic gospel.
A rose by any other name….
L&P Andrew
However, and I post with a good deal of trepidation, one of my biggest concerns about the whole 'Aggressive Christianity' issue is that some of its proponents seem to be aggressive at the slightest hint of criticism or a differing opinion. There seems to be an attitude amongst some that if you question their position, you are questioning God himself, and that theirs is the only way TSA should be going.
I think this criticism could be levelled at all 'labels' where proponents are passionate.
Please be assured we are teachable but passion determines that we will think ourselves to hold a monopoly on the truth - until someone convinces us otherwise.
It is a good point, Railton was (in my opinion) the son of aggressive Christianity (Mrs B being the adoptive Mother) – yet Railton is described by his contemporaries as being one of the most gentle and humble men you could meet.
Aggressive should not be an excuse for rude, proud or arrogant but it should be an oxymoronic euphemism for humble (wow – did I just say ‘oxymoronic euphemism’!)
L&P Andrew
From what I can tell you are a good example of the 'oxymoronic euphemism' in action, in that you show a humble spirit whilst clearly being passionate about your views!
I too like Gordon's holistic mission, which to me is so much a part of the previous discussion about "the false dichtomy of mission". TSA is called to both 'serve and to save' (not necessarily in that order) but sometimes the rhetoric coming out of the 'Aggressive Christianity' camp appears to advocate that Evangelism is the sum total of our Mission.
I don't want to fall out with you when you've said such nice things about me - nobody's ever called me anything as sweet as 'an oxymoronic euphemism' before!
At the risk of being misunderstood - if you're happy with my definition of evangelism...
""To populate God’s eternal kingdom with citizens from this temporal world within the restraints and confines of the ‘time’ we have available."
The I would have to say that this is the sum purpose of our mission. Just as all roads lead to Rome so all aspects of Christianity lead to the goal defined above.
It's not about 'bums on seats' but it is about bums in heaven :-)
L&P Andrew
I've enjoyed reading your blog, and your opinion and insight into more than one blog in this community has been challenging. However, this idea of 'Bums in heaven' has got me a little bit concerned.
Are you telling me that everything we do revolves around just the atonement? We make christians because jesus died for our sins and so we can go to heaven when we die?
With that mindset, surely churches are just warehouses for people until they die, because thats when it all happens and everything gets exciting?
I think we are in danger of limiting A multifaceted gospel story of life and life in all its fullness to a one track gospel for death.
I have been converted so the son of God cn manifest in my very body his life.
just a thought. love the blog.
Ben
You are absolutely right and I agree with you completely.
Christianity is primarily about 'Christ in me' it is about the word of God living in me, it is about God being glorified and extending his life, his compassion, his creativity in and through mine.
The statement about 'bums in heaven' was in the context of our overall aim and onjective (indeed God's overall objective) which is to populate his kingdom (both now on earth and in the future)
Don't know where you come from but 'bums' in the UK refers to one's posteria and not down and outs :-)
Love and prayers Andrew
I think we're both coming from a similar point of view...I have much to identify with in the AC movement, but also elements that concern. But that's the same with any movement...
I like what's been said here lately about our purpose being not just about getting to heaven, but the way in which we journey while we are here...the whole justice agenda etc. And as a DYO I have no problems with people doing Youth Work because it's good to do youth work, not just as a gimmick to get people into church.
I guess a big part of this is that lovely quote we all had to write an assignment about whilst at college - "evangelism is mission, but mission is more than just evangelism".
I can't tally with a form of Christianity which is about pressuring people into the kingdom, about terrifying them...
Maybe I'm just a post-modern wuss!
M
Your last sentence...
"I can't tally with a form of Christianity which is about pressuring people into the kingdom, about terrifying them..."
This is a tricky one for me. Evangelism may well involve pressure and it may also involve fear.
Jesus spoke of hell in very fearful terms, a place of deep regret, a place of 'gnashing of teeth'. He also told us to go into the highways and byways and 'compel' them to come in, i.e use 'pressure'. Indeed what is an Army prayer meeting with 'fishing' and mercy seat appeals if not pressure?
I think the key here is the absolute essential need for spiritual (spirit led) direction.
Jesus did not pressure the woman at the well but he did pressure the rich young ruler. Jesus didn't terrify the woman caught in adultery but he did say scary things to the Pharisees.
We must never say 'never!' but we must always be led by the spirit. Ley me finish with a quote from Andrew Murray (don't you just love Murray?)
"Our great Commander organizes every campaign, and His generals and officers do not always know the great plans. They often receive sealed orders, and they have to wait on Him for what He gives them as orders. God in Heaven has wishes, and a will, in regard to any work that ought to be done, and to the way in which it has to be done. Blessed is the man who gets into God’s secrets and works under God."
As long as our evangelism and our mission (and everything else we do)is inspired and led by the Spirit then everything is fine - if we are depending on our own wisdom then we and the lost are at risk.
What we need is to allow Christ to work in and through us so completely that our actions become naturally his.
Love and prayers Andrew