Thursday, August 31, 2006

Christianity at Risk

On the basis which has been laid down one can speak briefly of the purpose with which the Christian enters into dialogue with people of other faiths. This purpose can only be obedient witness to Jesus Christ. Any other purpose, any goal which subordinates the honour of Jesus Christ to some purpose derived from another source, is impossible for the Christian. To accept such another purpose would involve a denial of the total lordship of Jesus Christ. A Christian cannot try to evade the accusation that, for him, dialogue is part of his obedient witness to Jesus Christ.

But this does not mean that the purpose of dialogue is to persuade the non-Christian partner to accept the Christianity of the Christian partner. Its purpose is not that Christianity should acquire one more recruit. One the contrary: obedient witness to Christ means that whenever we come with another person (Christian or not) into the presence of the Cross, we are prepared to receive judgment and correction, to find that our Christianity hides within its appearance of obedience the reality of disobedience. Each meeting with a non-Christian partner in dialogue therefore puts my own Christianity at risk. . . . The Christian who enters into dialogue with people of other faiths and ideologies is accepting the risk. But to put my Christianity at risk is precisely the way by which I can confess Jesus Christ as Lord - Lord over all worlds and Lord over my faith. (Weston, Paul. "Lesslie Newbigin: Missionary Theologian." Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans. 2006 p168, 171)

As I read this, and it rings true in my heart, I can't help but draw the inevitable conclusions. Could it be that we have sought to share the good news in a way that doesn't put our own Christianity at risk? Could it be that we expect only our partner in conversation to be changed through the cross? Or could it be that we so little proclaim the good news of Christ that our Christianity is never placed at risk in dialogue, and is therefore never refined, and we are laden with chaff?

No comments: