The Ends of Faith

Throughout the history of the Church, there have been countless movements that either rise and quickly wither, or completely reform the Church. Names like Augustine, Luther, Calvin, and Edwards stand out as giants of the faith, while there are countless others whose ideas perhaps conform better to the modern zeitgeist, but whose names are obscured by the passage of time. No one reads Pelagius or Servetus anymore, even though their idiosyncrasies continually pop back up. What makes the reformers stand out against time, while other movements repeatedly die even after being repeatedly introduced? Let us look at three categories of theology, and look at where the various reformers fell:

1: Autocentric Theology is a theology in which faith is a means towards personal gain. Though all faith is autocentric to some degree (otherwise why have it), this refers to faith as a means for increasing earthly well-being – what C.S. Lewis calls a mercenary faith. This includes the entire Prosperity movement with its Osteens and Dollars. But less obviously it includes the seeker-friendly movement: by treating Christianity as self-help or a method of personal moral improvement, the individual’s present well-being becomes the end, excluding God except as a means to these personal ends. Become a better person, fill the God-shaped hole in your life, live your Best Life Now – these are the slogans of an autocentric theology.

2: Sociocentric Theology probably gets the most credit from the world of the three, and is even well regarded within the Church. Its ends are society – the poor, the opressed, and the downtrodden. Now while these are certainly noble goals and even commanded by scripture, they are not to be our final ends (Matthew 26:11). The category includes Liberation Theology, a blend of Marxism and Catholicism in which the Kingdom of Heaven is brought to earth through political activism, as well as Protestant liberalism, whose theology discounted the spiritual in favor of a gospel of the universal brotherhood of man. But it also includes the more modern emergent church. Popular authors such as Rob Bell preach a “relational” gospel, in which the purpose of God is to restore humans to harmonious relationship with one another (see Sex God). This is of course true, but it is not fundamental. Though he acknowledges that our interpersonal relationships stem from our relationship with God, the interpersonal connections are still made out to be, intentionally or not, ends in themselves. Like the autocentric theology of the seeker-friendly church, the sociocentric theology of the emergent church can only lead to mass exodus once the novelty wears thin and people find no reason to invoke the name of God to clamor for social justice.

3: Theocentric Theology is the historically orthodox position of the Church: a focus on God Himself as the ultimate good and the end of faith. But backlash caused by isolationist fundamentalism, where social change was regarded as rearranging deck chairs on the titanic, has led people both within and without the Church to completely disregard theocentrism as a relevant option in modern society. Though the rise of Evangelicalism has removed some of the impetus for this backlash, and though Protestant liberalism has become a marginal force, theocentrism is still regarded with suspicion.

Theocentrism is, however, the only sustainable theology in the long run. Both the exodus from the seeker-friendly movement and the coming exodus from the emergent church are, and will be, results of a failure of distinction. The example of liberal theology is instructive here. Its goal was to uncover universal common nuggets of truth behind all world religions, and by the early 20th century it seemed all but inevitable that further social and scientific advance would continue to thin the ranks of the reactionary fundamentalists. History did not, of course, work out that way. Certainly the belief that all religions are essentially the same is as popular as ever, but these believers do not regard themselves as Christians anymore. Why would they? As long as they keep basic moral tenets regarding self and others, they’re covered by this amorphous ecumenical religion.

The common thread among all the reformers that stand out in the history of the Church has in each instance been a strong theocentrism: it is the only proper way to commend the Christian faith. Augustine pioneered the idea of God as Himself the ultimate good. Luther rebuked the Roman Catholic Church for autocentrism in the sale of indulgences, among other things. Calvin and Edwards proclaimed the glory of God as the end of all history. Social gospels and self-help gospels have been creeping in since the beginning of the church, but they cannot – and do not – last. Where a sociocentric Christianity can blend well enough with a sociocentric Islam or a sociocentric atheism, theologically they could not be more different. Where a sociocentric Christianity might as well be agnostic Humanism, a theocentric focus sets it apart and commends it. Our focus needs to be first on God, and only then on society and ourselves as means to the glory of God. This is true Christianity.