Antiracist activists routinely chastise people for merely being personally opposed to racism when what is needed -in their view- is sustained political action that transforms laws, policies, and institutions that produce inequitable outcomes. Some Christians have similarly criticized churches that merely preach against racism and teach that it is a sin, but are politically disengaged and are not actively demanding policy changes. In particular, the view that churches should primarily aim at transforming systems indirectly, by transforming individuals through the gospel, comes under particularly withering criticism.

A few days ago, I Tweeted the following:

Jesus devoted little if any of his ministry to dismantling unjust systems and structures. He spent nearly all of his time preaching the gospel, teaching, and doing good to individuals. We don’t live in 1st-century Israel, but his model is still relevant to us.

I was surprised not only at just how controversial this Tweet was, but at how mixed the responses were. Some Christians viewed it as obviously true while others called it “slaveholder theology.” What accounts for the differences?

One reason seems to have been a misunderstanding about what I meant by “dismantling unjust systems and structures.” Numerous people responded that Jesus clearly preached against injustice, challenged the religious authorities, befriended the marginalized, and even cleansed the temple. His teaching rightly inspired later Christians to overturn systems like slavery. I agree with all of that. However, that’s not what I meant by “dismantling unjust systems and structures” and that’s not how that phrase is normally used (try Googling it).

When modern activists talk about “dismantling systems,” they absolutely do not mean criticizing certain attitudes, preaching against sin, or even engaging in protest. For example, antiracist activists routinely chastise people for merely being personally opposed to racism when what is needed -in their view- is sustained political action that transforms laws, policies, and institutions that produce inequitable outcomes. Some Christians have similarly criticized churches that merely preach against racism and teach that it is a sin, but are politically disengaged and are not actively demanding policy changes. In particular, the view that churches should primarily aim at transforming systems indirectly, by transforming individuals through the gospel, comes under particularly withering criticism. “Just preach the gospel” is seen as a cop-out in the face of systemic injustice.

But, from this perspective, it’s much harder to argue that Jesus was focused on “dismantling unjust systems and structures.” He did not engage in sustained political activism, affirmed paying taxes to oppressive Roman authorities (Mat. 22:15-22), refused political power (Jn. 6:15), and insisted that his kingdom was not of this world (Jn. 18:36). While Jesus’ teaching did correctly inspire his followers to seek justice and did eventually transform the world, that kind of indirect action over the course of centuries is simply not what activists have in mind when they use this phrase.

The second objection I received was that I must not think Christians today should seek justice. Here, I grant that my Tweet was unclear. I alluded to the fact that Jesus’ context was different than ours, but didn’t explain how. When asked, I immediately clarified:

I didn’t say “Christians shouldn’t care about injustice” or “Christians living in a democracy shouldn’t exercise their political power.” In fact, I deliberately alluded to the difference in our context today

and

[Jesus’] model is relevant to us not because we copy him exactly. He lived in 1st century Israel and we live in the 21st century U.S. Our contexts are different. But it still shows us what is primary (the gospel) and what is secondary (good work[s], including works of justice).

When it comes to opposing systemic injustice, I’ve often used abortion as an example because it resonates with conservative Christians. While we try to change individual hearts, we also work to overturn unjust laws. There is no opposition between the two. I’ve written about this issue in numerous places but, obviously, I don’t expect Twitter users to familiarize themselves with my corpus before quote-Tweeting me. That said, it is worth clarifying that I’ve never argued that Christians should not care about justice and did not say that in this Tweet.

Read More