Theology Today - Vol 34, No. 2 - July 1977 - BOOK REVIEW - Politics and the Biblical Drama & Agenda for Biblical People

199 - Politics and the Biblical Drama & Agenda for Biblical People

Politics and the Biblical Drama
By Richard J. Mouw
Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 1976. 143 pp. $3.95.

Agenda for Biblical People
By Jim Wallis
New York, Harper & Row, 1976. 145 pp. $3.95.

These two recent books by evangelical Christians demonstrate a growing commitment within the conservative evangelical community to bring the resources of Christian faith to bear on the world of politics. They are significant books, both because they help destroy the image of conservative evangelical Christianity as necessarily allied with conservative or even reactionary politics, and because their major differences reflect a healthy debate within that community on the proper relationship of Christian faith to the current political order. An examination of a central theme which runs through both books-the nature of the state and the proper relationship of the Christian to the state-will illustrate both of these points.

Richard J. Mouw, author of Politics and the Biblical Drama, is Professor of Philosophy at Calvin College. He helped draft both the 1973 Chicago Declaration of Evangelical Social Concern and the 1975 Hartford Statement of Theological Affirmation. Writing from within the Calvinist tradition and grounding his analysis in Scripture, Mouw finds a basis for human government in the Genesis account of the Garden of Eden before the fall. He argues that the so-called political dimensions of human society were present in rudimentary form in the Garden in the relationships among God, Adam, Eve, and the animal world. This being the case, the concept of government is rooted in the order of creation, though the fall has perverted that original intention. Mouw contends that some governmental form would have been necessary even without the entrance of sin into human affairs, although "not a form characterized by the coercive patterns associated with sin." He quotes H. Richard Niebuhr to the effect that "culture (including the political order) is all corrupted order rather than order for corruption … It is perverted good, not evil, or it is evil as perversion, and not as badness of being." Government, then, because it is created good, can be a source of human good.

Even after the fall, Mouw argues, Scripture indicates that God looks to Israel and other non-theocratic governments as potential sources of justice and decency. The biblical record suggests that though these governments rebel against God, they retain the possibility for renewal. Even Israel's shift from theocratic rule to administration by human

200 - Politics and the Biblical Drama & Agenda for Biblical People

kings does not completely obliterate the promise of divine guidance. "If you will fear the Lord and serve him and hearken to his voice and not rebel against the commandment of the Lord, and if both you and the king who reigns over you will follow the Lord your God, it will be well" (I Sam. 12:14). Jeremiah counsels the Israelites in captivity to "seek the welfare of the city where I have sent you into exile, and pray to the Lord on its behalf, for in its welfare you will find your welfare" (Jer. 29:7). Daniel admonishes Nebuchadnezzar to "break off your sins by practicing righteousness, and your iniquities by showing mercy to the oppressed, that there may perhaps be a lengthening of your tranquillity" (Dan. 4:27). Mouw's point is that human government can be a source of God's grace if it is faithful to God's demands. Human political institutions can serve as preparatory signs of the Kingdom which is to come.

The proper relationship of the Christian to the state is a function of this understanding. The Christian is called to seek to bring the state more fully into accord with God's intention in order that the state may perform its proper role. Scripture tells us that human beings are to "have dominion" in the created order. Mouw argues that since human beings are created with the capacity to assess situations, project into the future, plan strategies, it would seem "a judicious exercise of created abilities to put these gifts to use, even in the area of social and political planning." Responding to John Howard Yoder's statement that Christians should "see our obedience more of praising God, and less as running his world for him," Mouw contends that some attempts to "run his world for him" might be an important means of praising him. If one's interventions are based on a careful assessment of the issues involved and a rejection of actions which flow simply from a desire to coerce others, new departures for Christians within the political arena are possible. "Such a departure would be realized if Christians pursued political activity with a desire to promote justice coupled with a genuine love of neighbor and humility before God."

Three areas of activity are central. First, Christians are called as a redeemed people to proclaim God's word in the world. God's word has direct implications for politics, and those who have heard that word cannot keep silent. Secondly, Christians are called to relate to the world as servants identifying with the political needs and sufferings of the world. In this regard, Mouw says it is "not unthinkable that some Christians might go beyond praying for justice. Should the opportunity arise, as it did in the Old Testament for Joseph and Daniel, they might even seize the chance to promote justice by serving in pagan courts." Finally, Christians must also seek to alter the structures of the larger human community to bring them more in line with their original intention. In sum, Richard J. Mouw assumes that the state can be an instrument of God's will, and actions by Christians in the political arena can assist in realizing that potentiality.

201 - Politics and the Biblical Drama & Agenda for Biblical People

Mouw's argument is familiar to anyone who has read in the "Christ transforming culture" tradition espoused by theologians such as H. Richard Niebuhr and Daniel Day Williams, among others. However, the book is significant for at least three additional reasons:

(1)The argument is constructed in such a way that it may well be persuasive to conservative evangelicals who have tended to see the political order either as beyond the scope of Christian concern or as beyond the possibility of renewal. Conservative evangelical Christianity is on the ascendency in the United States today, and one way or another it will influence the shape of American political affairs. Books like Mouw's can help to shape that influence in creative rather than destructive ways.

(2)Mouw's interpretation of Scripture can help those of us who tend to agree with his argument to find a more substantial biblical basis for our own understanding. Whereas conservative evangelicals often believe that "Christianity has nothing to do with politics," so-called liberals often too easily collapse religion into politics. Mouw helps clarify the distinctions between the two disciplines and yet affirms their ultimate interrelationship.

(3)Throughout the book, Mouw shapes his position in dialogue with other evangelical theologians, particularly Hendrikus Berkhof and John Howard Yoder. For example, he entities his discussion with Yoder, "The Anabaptist-Reformed Dialogue." This approach is particularly helpful both because it sharpens Mouw's own position and because it further indicates to those who stand outside the conservative evangelical community the vitality of ethical discussion in that community.

III

Jim Wallis, author of Agenda for Biblical People, is editor of the journal Sojourners (formerly the Post-American) and serves in the leadership of the Sojourners Community in Washington, D.C. He is representative of a growing number of activist, young evangelicals who espouse a theology of "Christian radicalism" and who seek to relate the mandates of biblical faith to the resolution of contemporary social and political issues. Agenda for Biblical People reflects Wallis' deep commitment to expose the idolatrous nature of current institutions, particularly the state, and his attempt to help shape a radically renewed Christianity. It challenges all of us to renew our faith in and commitment to the God who has redeemed us in Jesus of Nazareth.

Wallis roots his theological interpretation of the nature of the state in his understanding of the New Testament doctrine of "the powers," drawing freely from Hendrikus Berkhof, William Stringfellow, John Howard Yoder, and Jacques Ellul. He states that though "the powers"

202 - Politics and the Biblical Drama & Agenda for Biblical People

were created by God and were, therefore, originally part of the good creation, we do not know them in their intended and created role. Instead, because of the fall, we know them only as masters and oppressors. No longer instruments of God's love, they are in diametric opposition and rebellion to God's will, and they demand absolute allegiance. "No longer agents that bind God and humanity together, they now separate and divide, standing as barriers between God and his creation and between God's children." Though they are still used in God's sovereignty to preserve the world from disintegration, life lived under them is slavery.

Christ's life, death, and resurrection have brought victory over "the powers." He shattered the myth of their absolute authority by demonstrating his freedom in relation to them. He challenged their rule and would not submit to them. Indeed, the fallen powers were so exposed and threatened by Christ's actions that they acted in collusion to kill him. The cross symbolizes that freedom in which death is swallowed up in victory. Christ's resurrection vindicates his manner of life and death, seats his victory, and allows others to live freely and humanly in the midst of "the powers" by their "being in Christ." This must be the proclamation and witness of the church of Jesus Christ. The church is a new force in history which is a sign to "the powers" that their dominion has been broken. The very presence of a body of people who exercise their moral independence is an essential element for Wallis because "without a visible and concrete demonstration of independence, all the church's outward attacks upon the institutions of the world will be doomed to failure."

The state, according to Wallis, is perhaps the most dangerous of "the powers" in today's world. In Wallis' descriptions of the state, the theological notion of "the powers" often merges with his empirical observations of the current status of the United States and other nations. This point is best illustrated by the following quotations:

"America is a fallen nation. In fact, the fall is the principal political and spiritual fact of America and other nation-states."

"Vietnam was the mirror that revealed to us the truth about our nation."

"For us, the modern state is the great power, the great seducer, the great captor and destroyer of human life, the great master of humanity and history in its totalitarian claims and designs."

Though it is not always clear, Wallis seems to be saying that though the United States may be the most villainous of all contemporary

203 - Politics and the Biblical Drama & Agenda for Biblical People

states, all states are in unrestrained rebellion against God. He calls for absolute war with the systems of the world.

Wallis argues that the response of the Christian church should be to shape "a radical nonconformist community in the present world system, refusing to live by the norms and assumptions that control the behavior of others." The church, renewed, is the sign and bearer of the new order. It fulfills its mission, not by conforming to the world's definitions of "responsibility" and "realism," but by relating the gospel with power to current social and political realities. The following sentence is perhaps the best single statement of Wallis' understanding of social change: "The primary engine of social change is disciplined and sacrificing minorities whose alternative vision, style of life, and radical action demand a response that moves history." The renewed church, rooted in biblical revelation, must fit that definition. It is called to be a new society, totally other than the existing world order. Renewal will come in no other way. In sum, the church's relationship to the state is independence and defiance.

The differences between Politics and the Biblical Drama and Agenda For Biblical People are striking, both in substance and in mood. Mouw tends to think of the state as "corrupted good" and Wallis as simply "corrupted"; Mouw encourages Christians to work within the system to change it, whereas Wallis encourages them to defy the system and create an alternative; Mouw writes analytically and cautiously, whereas Wallis writes with abandon and paints with a wide brush. Finally, Mouw reflects the mood and style of the prophet. Wallis writes with great feeling, and one is grateful for his many insights into contemporary political and social reality. Conceptually, however, his argument has a number of problems which need to be addressed.

First, Wallis' theological understanding of the state needs the correctives to be found in Politics and the Biblical Drama. If the state indeed participates in "corrupted order rather than order for corruption," as Mouw argues, the continuing possibilities for transformation are more real, theoretically at least, than Wallis' analysis allows. Though Wallis seeks to root his own position in Scripture, it is not always clear that that is the case. Instead, one receives the impression that he sometimes uses a particular biblical interpretation to bolster political predilections already arrived at through other means. This is a rather serious matter for one who seeks to base a political program so forthrightly on biblical revelation.

Secondly, Wallis tends not to differentiate adequately between theological and empirical categories during the course of his argument. Therefore, one is often not clear whether particular statements are expressing theological convictions or empirical judgments. For

204 - Politics and the Biblical Drama & Agenda for Biblical People

example, the statement, "America is a fallen nation," needs both theological and empirical justification, without which it becomes less than persuasive. In general, Wallis' theological defense is much more developed than his empirical defense which tends often to remain at the level of sloganeering rather than hard analysis. In this regard, he reminds the reader of William Stringfellow, who obviously has bad a major influence on Wallis' thought. Interestingly, Mouw makes a similar criticism of Stringfellow's thought in Politics and the Biblical Drama.

A related concern is the way Wallis dismisses movements for social change based on premises other than his own, particularly political liberalism. He speaks at one point of "the bankruptcy of liberal assumptions" but never really gives us his definition of "liberal assumptions" or why they are bankrupt. Historically, one liberal assumption has been the need to protect the individual from the overweening power of the state, a central concern of Agenda for Biblical People. It could well be argued that the most significant force in the United States today resisting state idolatry is contemporary liberalism. Despite Wallis' dismissal, liberalism is not bankrupt, though it is in a weakened condition from repeated attacks, including those by individuals whose support it needs.

Finally, an ecclesiastical utopianism pervades Wallis' thought. After exhibiting a profound despair over contemporary political institutions, he looks to the creation of a Christian community which would demonstrate "a whole new order in human affairs called the kingdom of God." One needs to respond that while compelling vision is one thing, concrete manifestation in history is another. The church, even though it has within it the ever-renewing spirit of its Lord, will continue to exhibit in all its manifestations the strengths and weaknesses of other institutions. It will retain the power to instigate social renewal because of the radical imperatives inherent in its gospel, but it will continue to need the critique and support of other people and other institutions whom God has visited in other ways. To expect too much of the church is to leave oneself vulnerable to disillusionment.

Despite these criticisms, Agenda for Biblical People should be read, particularly since all of us are inclined to become comfortable with the injustice of the present order and neglect the need for fundamental and far-reaching change. Wallis does perform the prophetic role in shaking one out of complacency and awakening conscience. Further, his prescriptions for action, though not universally applicable, can provide a blueprint for particular Christians to follow which can enrich the total Christian community and its witness in this country and around the world.

Paul H. Sherry
United Church Board for
Homeland Ministries
New York, N.Y.