Christianity of “The World”
Today’s world is home to a plethora of religions presented in many different ways, extremities, denominations, and individual characterizations. In Christianity especially, there are many forms that people perceive the world, exhibit their behavior in humanity, and practice or demonstrate their love for God. In some cases, people withdraw from society to practice their Christianity. By withdrawal, people are able to form separate communities from contemporary society and impose narrower rules within their community that would not be possibly imposed by the average person. Thus withdrawing allows only the most religious and dedicated of people to exclude themselves from the world so they may continue their love for church in peace from modern society (and especially atheists or those who choose not to follow the teaching of the Bible). Another way by which a Christian can interact with the world is through conforming. To conform is to succumb to so the dramatic colors of society and to coexist in it despite if one’s religious beliefs matches with those around them. Often, when people conform it is difficult for an outsider to realize their aptitude for Christian religion affiliation until they would be witnessed walking into church on Sunday. Finally, Christians can seek to change in this world. By seeking to change they can promote the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ by actually spreading Christianity to all those around them by action, voicing, or doing missions. While Justin Martyr valued the idea of love for and of God he thought the purpose of Christianity was to spread the love of Christ through seeking to change, St. Clement takes a more conformational stance by compromising with the Bible. However, I too (like Justin Martyr) believe that Christians should interact in this world through engagement rather than conforming or withdrawing due to the active and unconditional means of the Bible.
When one seeks to change, they emphasize the spreading of God’s love which is essentially what Justin Martyr was notorious for. Justin Martyr was a second-century Christian apologist whose writings initiated the first positive influences of Christian revelation on the Roman Empire. He became a missionary of sorts as he endeavored to convert other Romans to Christianity. He convinced them to adopt Christianity as truth by elaborating on his beliefs and reasoning behind how there must be a divine being in the form of God the Creator. His reasoning included how the laws established by Christianity are moral and rational—which makes Christianity initially hard to distaste as ethical laws could only be beneficial to society. Additionally, Martyr felt it important for people to understand that God fills in the holes that science cannot explain via the composite of faith and reason. Essentially, why one can use reason at all and that because miracles are possible, God must exist. Hence, the rationality of Christianity is exemplified by the Trinity where Godhead is one God in three persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Justin Martyr taught of the significance of the Trinity and elaborated that Christ takes form as logos—the name or title of Jesus Christ, seen as the pre-existent second person of the Trinity. He asserted that Jesus Christ is the incarnation of the entire divine logos and therefor the Word of God, principle of divine reason and creative order. The purpose of Christ’s coming into the world was to teach humanity the truth and grant them the opportunity of revelations to save them from their sins. Justin Martyr spread this concept to those around him and thus sought to change the mindset of those who had not yet converted to Christianity. By teaching the morals and rules of the Bible, he spread the love of Christ. His actions justify that he would say a Christian should interact with the world by seeking to change by reformations within the church as well as conversion.
Furthermore, St. Clement was another, earlier, Christian theologist. Though, unlike Justin Martyr, St. Clement warranted the natural sins of people instead of teaching the love of Christ. St. Clement deciphered between the two kinds of possession. The two types are distinguished between the enjoyment, frui, of God, and the means of use, uti, in order to arrive at the goal of living life as intended by the Bible. Frui ultimately attributes to pure selfish enjoyment of appetitive physical, emotional, and material desires which is prohibited because it is associated with greed. Hence, collecting, whether it be money, cars, or power, for the sole purpose of collecting is the root of all evil and the excessive acquisition of things one does not need. Alternatively, uti is the form of possession in which celebrates beauty as God’s beauty. Uti entails possessions intrinsically good due to its reverence of God thus, the use expended for the glory of God orients it [the possession] back to His love. In Matthew 19:16, Jesus declares for those to “Keep to the commandments” and therefore be thoroughly selfless and give to those who requisite charity. Regardless, to attain salvation depends on whether aims for the love of God are attributed. The significance of St. Clement is that he took this passage and interpreted in a way that justified the “natural” behavior of human beings—which is to put oneself before others. He justified the acquisition of things not necessary to life by claiming that if possessions are not one’s highest good, the possessions are therefore not bad in and of itself. St. Clement ultimately offered a cop out. His writings, in St. Alexandra in particular, provided the allowance for people to still feel like a good person by making things that should be associated with greed attainable, such as the accumulation of money. By emphasizing this loop hole, St. Clement would believe a Christian could reach salvation by conforming. This is exemplified because instead of teaching the direct laws and morals of God, he is conforming to society. He creates an easy way out that allows Christians to feel as if they can still attain salvation if they do the bare minimum in following Christian laws. By doing this there essentially makes no difference between a Christian and a non-Christian and therefore they coexist as they are not abiding by the laws of the Bible as they are stated, they are side stepping and neglecting them. St. Clement’s argument does not really provide value in being a Christian— just the title. To him, the purpose of Christianity is yet another material possession and something to call “theirs” instead of “being” and spreading.
Although there are many ways to go about Christianity, no way goes without a flaw. By means of withdrawal, people tend to exclude themselves completely from society without spreading or sharing their beliefs or love of God with anyone around them. For example, the Amish are a community of Christians insistent on a fundamental separation of church and state. The Amish are a self-isolated group of people who have clearly defined beliefs and strong values, which they practice with extreme consistency. They believe if the mass of people does not follow their beliefs, they should exclude themselves from society so they can follow what they themselves believe. Certainly, the courage and determination of a people who refuse so persistently to conform to the avidity of modern society and culture should be noted.
“Their rejection of modernity entails enduring considerable ridicule, and also enduring the hard work of performing all their labor by hand, without modern conveniences. It is true that there is a dark side to modern technology, and the Amish have avoided this dark side by refusing to accept technology” (Amish).
However, while their goal may be to keep their faith very strong and valued amongst themselves and to not succumb to the temptations of popular culture, their withdrawal from society fails to allow people to see their true idea of the purpose of being a Christian. Ultimately, the problem with withdrawing from society is that isolation keeps the church from being depicted as commissioned by Jesus. By breaking off into isolated communities of believers whose primary claim of commonality is a distrust of modern society rather than the reconciling power of the gospel, the ability to spread the love of Jesus to all (the way the Bible insists) is relatively extinct.
Similarly, conforming allows for a complacency which is not intended by the Bible. While there are many interpretations of the Bible and it is humanly impossible for one to be as perfect as Jesus Christ, to conform is to reduce to the likeness or correspondence in manners, opinions or moral qualities of society. In today’s world, many Christian abide by life in this way as they go to church but still cheat, drink, steal, and ultimately sin in a manner which is undesirable by Christian ethics. Finally, while seeking to change sounds ideal it is indubitably the hardest to attain. It takes much mental and persuasion power and immense faith to be able to share the love of Christ in every aspect of one’s life. While seeking to change is idealistic, conforming makes life seem so much easier, and withdrawal allows for particular people to practice Christianity as their own separate entity or even denomination.
While I believe our society is very St. Clementian, seeking to change should be the way that a Christian should interact with the world. Today is very conforming as the desire to accomplish things quickly and with as little effort as possible takes from the cognitive, careful, and important human efforts to spread the love of the Lord. I believe that if a Christian is intent on being an ideal child of God and to follow the Bible then the cultural fads of conforming to popular opinions and actions cannot be their standard for morality. Rather than a retreat into isolation exhibited by withdrawal or the adoption of anti-biblical positions endorsed by the post-Christian culture present today, what the church needs to be about is voicing the love, hope, laws, and the gospel of Jesus Christ. In John 17, Jesus prayed “we are not of the world and shouldn’t pretend to be”. By saying this, He is ultimately distinguishing the Christian people from those of modern society and uniform humanity and latently urging for the Christian to not become like them as there is the covert duty of seeking to change those around them and provide them faith in the power to influence. Despite the infringement of many to conform to society, I believe that a Christian should stand on the eternal, unchanging, and infallible truth of the Word of God, rather than on the whims of popular opinion.
Ultimately, the ways a Christian may interact with the world vary in substantial ways. Those who aim to withdraw seek solitude in their religion and separation from a corrupt society to uphold their ideas of Christian tradition. Those who believe conforming is the best way to interrelate with the world believe that today’s society is too fast-paced and skeptic to preach their religion. Finally, those who believe in seeking to change as the best way for a Christian to interact with the world believe that a Christian should praise the words of God regardless of what society may say about them. If Christians who seek to change lived this way and were characterized by a devout mentality, society may find the Church regaining popularity and followers. If Christians all interacted with the world by seeking to change, the love of the Lord would be hard to deny.