Fighting Worldliness with Worldliness

Richard Lovelace, in Dynamics of Spiritual Life, makes this observation, “Many of our people are severely enculturated because their relationship to Christ is so insecure that they are not free to cut loose from cultural support.” According to Lovelace, one of the most important things in working towards corporate and personal renewal is “disenculturation,” or removing the influence of worldliness. The effort to fight against worldliness is critical, but the witness of church history (especially modern church history) shows we do not often know how or with what resources to fight worldliness. 

Lovelace (actually in a different book, Renewal as a Way of Life) observes two errors. First is what he calls protective enculturation. This response comes when there is a sense of danger or fear of the world’s influence on and interference with the church’s mission. Often times, of course, these concerns are valid and demand response. There are times, however, when responses are stoked more from fear than genuine concern and wisdom.  These kinds of responses come with what may seem like a more relevant code of ethics and standards, along with terminology and lingo to indicate who’s acceptable and who’s dangerous in these uncertain times. But what is meant to bridle the worldliness often times functions as a spur. Lovelace argues that this is actually just a form of worldliness itself. “To defend itself against this conformity, the church often resorts to another form of worldliness, the invention of behavioral taboos.” Instead of purifying the church’s heart, it stimulates or “indulges the flesh” (Col. 2:23), what Lovelace calls the “religious flesh.”

The second error he calls, destructive enculturation. What often comes with protective enculturation is the presence of abusive authority structures and grasping of power in ways that are incompatible with the New Testament and often times blinds us to matters of justice because the code of ethics we have humanly created alerts us to terminology or kinds of people that we have marked out of bounds. This, in turn, casts a shadow on the church not just for those outside the church but also for those inside. If there isn’t a complete abandonment of their faith, often times there are corrective efforts that end up conforming the church to the world (Rom. 12:2). In other words, destructive enculturation, is when Christians respond to perceived sins and errors of the church in a way that doesn’t just (rightly) reject the errors of protective enculturation, but rejects fundamental elements of the Christian faith. 

This, of course, leads to more protective enculturation and on and on we go, responding to worldliness with more worldliness. It’s not surprising that this kind of merry-go-round never leads to the actual spiritual renewal and revitalization of churches, networks, and denominations but, instead, the formation of an anxious or reactionary spirit. I wonder if you sense this dynamic in our world today? 

But Lovelace hints at the remedy, or at least a path towards it: “Many of our people are severely enculturated because their relationship with Christ is so insecure that they are not free to cut loose from cultural support.” The reason we move back and forth between different versions of worldliness is because, as Lovelace shows, our “relationship with Christ is so insecure.” We do not feel free enough cut loose from worldly options. In other words, what we are really doing when reaching for either protective or destructive options is looking for a sense of safety, belonging, or power. What we are reaching in these worldly options we should be reaching for in Christ. Lovelace wrote these two books in the 70’s and 80’s but it feels relevant today.

The critical question, which can’t be answered quickly or broadly, is how to form an non-anxious heart that resists reactionary options, where our sense of safety and belonging does not depend on embracing worldly options for cultural support. There seems to be a need for long-term formation towards a deep security and belonging to Christ, that allows for a deeper sense of security and stability in a society that is tossed to and fro, with every wind of opinion.

This sense of deep belonging in Christ is needed because for a follower of Jesus, resisting both options (protective and destructive culturation) will sometimes mean feeling a sense of homelessness and rejection even in our own denominations and traditions. But that will also allow for a greater vulnerability to spiritual renewal. If I could define spiritual renewal as the lived experienced of God’s power and benefits, it is clear to me that fighting worldliness with worldliness only numbs and distances us from God’s power and benefits, since we are reaching for the power and benefits of something else.

---

These photos are from a stretch on the Hudson River, from about 66th St to 79th St. They are taken from an Beautyflex camera (I think 1951). The format it produces is square, 6X6, which is fairly difficult for me to compose pictures I like. Here are a few that while still feel a bit lackluster, they turned out well enough to share a couple from the roll.