Fighting Injustice Versus Preaching The Gospel

Most of us, I think, are aware of the great emphasis on justice (or fighting injustice) that is growing today in our societies... there is an abundance of movements out there promoting justice and the fight against injustice on many levels, and a lot of good things are coming out of it. The Church has been addressing many of these injustices for centuries, if not since it's inception two thousand years ago: truly, the very core of how Jesus taught us to live makes it undeniably necessary that we, as Christians, find the lost, help the needy, support the broken, to show love to the world's enemies... even and especially those who hate us.

Many would be quick to point out that the Church has often failed, and, in actuality, worked against the cause of justice, but it nevertheless stands that it has been, is currently, and will be always a leader in the fight for justice on the earth, even if it is not always on the forefront or comes under persecution in some form or another.

One thing that concerns me, though, is that a large part of the Church somehow finds the idea of bringing justice (and by this we mean establishing righteousness, I believe, not punishing the abusers) more appealing than preaching the gospel. The idea of openly teaching people the Gospel of Jesus (our depravity and God's predestination of the saints to holiness through the life, death, and resurrection of the God-Man Jesus Christ, via faith) gives way to a much more palatable and (deceptively) more "relevant" gospel... that we can effect permanent improvement in the world by eliminating human trafficking and prostitution, feeding those starving to death, correcting gender-based discrimination, et cetera.

I believe that very few people in the world actually wish for the continutation of these things, and they are obvious to any who look. As a result, it is easy for us as Christians to promote it, as it does not personally confront those around us (as oppposed to the gospel, which reveals our depravity). I believe many people feel more security sowing their life into something that is more tangible to the secular world, because instead of being told to get off our soapbox we are given a pat on the back and a "good for you." It feels a lot nicer, people aren't likely to be opposed.

Here is an example of what I am talking about: back in September 2009, the YWAM Australia & PNG Ship Tour Promo Video was posted on youtube. One user made this comment:

Cant fault the sentiment nor the commitment... the only thing i dont like is where you slip the word 'churches' in at 4:15.
Forgive me, but honestly how much has this to do with your religious beliefs?" - Needinaname

In the midst of a video several minutes long highlighting a few different things (mainly how one can actually help), that one word was enough for someone to throw up even a little bit of opposition. If religion hadn't been mentioned in any way, would the user have any opposition? I can't really say, fairly, but from the nature of the comment, it seems not.

Recognising this, it seems that various ministries can often be tentative about what they actually do: instead of preaching the gospel (what they should be focusing on with the other things in addition).

It's necessary for me to point out at this point that I am not in any way opposed to ministries (Christian or secular) intending to help people in ways other than the gospel, such as medical missions. It is my belief, though, that these things should come out of the yearning and teaching of the Gospel. Essentially: it's fine to help people for the sake of helping people, but if you are a Christian, you have a higher responsibility, and that propagating the Testimony of Jesus Christ. Fighting injustice will not convince people to turn towards God... the rest of the world is fighting injustice, too: they don't care a bit for Jesus, and you're just doing what they are doing. It's like expecting someone to go "Man, I want what he has" when you order a Coke instead of a beer at the pub. I think it's much more effective to order the beer and speak the gospel directly to that person over top of it, and this has been my experience.

Back to topic: It seems that the direction of a ministry can eventually be influenced by what it promotes itself as. A missions agency whose primary focus is the propagation of the Gospel but advertises itself as a relief agengy externally must be very careful about what is also happening internally. The effort required to keep up the face of a relief agency could be really taxing. More likely, though, the internal structure of the organisation will be repaired so that it's primary arm is actually as a relief agency, and it becomes a relief agency that also preaches the gospel... essentially changing it's priorities.

I realise that many don't see this as a big issue, and that there are probably many counterpoints about the benefits of being wise about whom you reveal yourself to. I have heard many over the last few months, but none seem to hold nearly so much weight as the gravity which is the burden of the Gospel. As I have said before... you might be able to rid the world of certain injustices (human trafficking, for example) but that does not cure the human condition that we know as our sin nature: our total depravity.

Only when the miraculous healing of the Gospel mends the very heart of a man can true justice begin to reign. The Gospel is the only true and lasting weapon we may wield against the evils that surround us. A justice movement that does not find it's root and ground at the blood-soaked cross of Jesus will ultimately die away.

Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3