Brian McLaren, Hell, Systemic Sin, and Rural America

I just finished reading Brian McLaren’s book The Last Word and the Word After That. (No – not his newest book. I’m cheap, so I bought this one at 50% off and am waiting to read The Secret Message of Jesus until it’s on sale too.) On the surface the book is mostly about the doctrine of hell, its development and its perversions. Though McLaren admits that some of his scholarship about the historical development of the idea of hell is speculative, his real point is the book is rock solid: an obsession with hell as Western Christendom has portrayed it for centuries distracts us from Jesus’ message of the coming Kingdom of God.

Here’s how that works: When we view salvation as simply fire insurance, a way to escape hell and make it into heaven, we miss the ethical thrust of the Old Testament prophets and all of the New Testament. When we add to that our Protestant understanding of the means of salvation, we exclude our actions from the equation, allowing us to believe they are of no consequence. That leads, McLaren says, to a tacit approval of systemic injustice in our world. Assuming that we have the correct belief, we focus on the don’ts of the Bible’s commands and label all the do’s pejoratively as “works righteousness.” Hence we endorse agendas that overlook issues of social justice in today’s world, and even exacerbate it by promoting the commercialized Christianity that is so prevalent in America.

When I was back in Colorado in May, I had a conversation with my old high school Young Life leader about issues of poverty and the social gospel. Because of his own theological beliefs and his work’s emphasis on evangelism, he understandably sought to remind me that “poverty exists because of sin.” I agree with one reading of that phrase, but probably not the reading he intended.

Since I’ve been living in Pittsburgh, I’ve seen more of how the sin of oppression unfairly forces poverty and other ills upon the already poor, regardless of their own personal morality. I think my friend in Colorado meant that individuals sin and end up in poor circumstances as a result of their own sin. Theologically he’s more conservative than I am, and as McLaren suggests, I bet his doctrines of hell and salvation influence that interpretation of poverty. But I think geography has a factor as well.

In rural America, where I grew up, systemic discrimination and injustice occurs on a smaller scale than in big cities. Racism is present, but poverty is more often the lot of pregnant teenagers and single parents, making it too easy to blame their circumstance on individual sin, especially sexual sin. In that environment, people see individual sins more than systemic and corporate sin. The same is probably true in many suburbs.

But does that mean it that systemic sin and oppression do not exist in rural areas? To what extent do rural communities actually endorse sins of oppression by passively ignoring them because they do not perceive the effects? What about suburban areas? Does education play a role in these differences? What would Jesus have to say to the rural church about poverty, oppression, and sin?

  1. Backwoods Presbyterian said:

    While I agree with your premise that we as Christians should focus a lot more on “social gospel” than we presently do we need to have a frank discussion on how to best accomplish this. Firstly we must get one thing strait we cannot and should not go forth into “social gospel” with a white guilt mentality. Secondly we cannot and should not rely on govermental agencies or goverment in general to deal with the poor. It is the job of the Church to help the poor not the government. Thirdly we must not just feed and clothe them but must ensure that after they receive care from us that they will no longer be in that condition. This must be accomplished by first presenting the Gospel and then giving training and other non-monetary related services to help ensure that they will not be in “poverty” any longer. Fourthly we need to really understand what we mean by “poverty”. Poverty is not living without a televison. Poverty is not living without non-essential services. The idea of poverty in America and the idea of poverty in other countries is much different. The poor in America and the poor in Africa bear no real resemblence. We must first understand this as an essential building block that all poverty is not created equal. This is just a short list but I believe that an essential tenet to getting rid of poverty is to re-imagining the fight and we can only do this by dialoguing and critiquing in a positive manner.

  2. Backwoods Presbyterian said:


    Here are a couple verses for your perousal on this subject.

    1 Thess. 4:9-12
    2 Thess. 3:6-13

  3. John said:

    Chris, great words, great questions. While I agree with backwoods on some points, I disagree that the governement should not take a role. The church in America is not in a possition of majority and does not have the power to end poverty. Though, I would agree that the church should play a much larger role than we do and that we can make a big difference. Our governement has a responibility. I would rather see my tax money go to those in need, in a wise fashion, than go to many of the other things we pay for.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: