Category Archives: anthropology

Healing Our Deep Divisions

Our deep divisions come from an impoverished anthropology.

We must reaffirm that all persons we encounter are made in God’s image with vocations of worship and work, play and rest, mutual self-donation and personal flourishing.

Our new anthropology must embrace created dignity, sin-infected depravity, gracious new creation in Christ and the restoration of all creation, as we enjoy God’s eternal reign.

Class and culture, gender and race are transformed with this new vision.

Transforming our society begins with love and truth.

Love: I desire and act for the good of others.

Truth: I assume responsibility for my decisions while recognizing larger influences I may not always control.

As we pray and work for justice, Pastor Chris Brooks’ words resound:
”We must confront individual iniquity and institutional injustice.”
”Poverty is not permanent.”

Poverty, racism, sexism, classism: all can be overcome with unselfish actions rooted in love and truth.

A free society is a virtuous society.

A virtuous society is built on timeless truth.

And it all begins and ends with self-donating love.

And that love is Triune.

 

 

Becoming Human: Competing Global Anthropologies

Dr. Charlie Self
Professor of Church History
The Assemblies of God Theological Seminary
Sr. Advisor, The Acton Institute
Board Member, Missio Alliance

Dorothy Sayers, playwright, novelist and Christian scholar, wrote an important feminist work in the 1930s entitled, Are Women Human? In her essay, she presents the biblical case for gender equality in a humorous and insightful way, grounding mutuality in theological anthropology.  From the Genesis narratives to the new earth of Revelation, she affirms this thesis:

We are all human beings, made in the image of God with a job to do. And we do our jobs as a man or a woman.

This theological vision – of men and women in mutual love and respect carrying out their vocations for the glory of God and the good of others – undergirds the best of ecclesial, economic, political and social liberty. Notice the order of reflection:

Creator > human identity > the call to worship/work > gender identity.

Alas, the effacing (not erasing) of the imago dei has led humankind down all manner of oppressive pathways, from dehumanizing and disintegrating practices of pagan and secular ideologies to the degrading subjugation of women and minorities in the name of religious tradition.

Amnesia of the Creator’s design has also yielded serious psychosocial confusion. Many view gender as a personal preference, a social construct or malleable identity.  In the USA alone, there are ten major family systems, with nine of them alternatives to biological parents and children in the same home. This is not the essay to offer easy answers to these challenges; however, they affirm our need for anthropological clarity and the redemptive grace of Christ.

For followers of Jesus, a full vision of God’s reign includes living the future now in the power of the Holy Spirit, with the church as the herald and witness of the fullness to come. This includes redeeming the wholeness of being human, integrating all facets of individual and social being, including relational shalom with all women and men. Women and men who love Jesus are icons of the coming kingdom. Singleness is not incompleteness, but a signpost of a future where all God’s people are married to Christ and sisters and brothers of one another. Marriage is a special illumination of Christ’s delight in his church, not a superior status.

When we survey other anthropologies, we discover vast “differences that make a difference” (Os Guinness). Our global conflicts are theological and anthropological before they are economic and political. How we understand God and each other is the foundation for liberty and love that empowers the flourishing of all.

A Global Competition

There are three “missionary” anthropologies competing for global influence (and for some, domination). As I outline these, it is important to note that large numbers of people situated within these broad categories are neither self-reflective nor caricatures of the extremes implied by the ideologies. Many women and men, especially those that have relocated to other lands or experienced education and travel, represent synergistic or syncretistic worldviews. It is helpful, however, to uncover the implications of these anthropologies and their concomitant epistemologies and moralities.

(There is a fourth anthropology not articulated in this essay. Eastern pantheistic monism, embracing Buddhist and Hindu traditions, deserves attention for mission and neighborly love, but it is not a proselytizing force in the world. Over a billion persons share this complex and paradoxical perspective that affirms the illusory nature of the cosmos and a call for humility and self-denial that can break the karmic cycle.)

Anthropology #1: Naturalism: pagan and secular visions. This is a catchall category that includes the most ancient fertility cults and polytheisms to contemporary atheistic materialism. In this matrix, humankind is the product of biological evolution or other natural forces (with or without deities that need appeasing). Human nature, however evolved, is completely material, including our ongoing explorations of conscience and morality, religion and spirituality. There is no mind-brain or body-spirit distinction. Westernized proponents see religion as dangerous. Human progress depends on ridding human consciousness of belief in any god. This “vision of the anointed” (T. Sowell) creates inequity by dividing humankind into their version of “enlightened” and “ignorant.” Bureaucratic, intellectual and social elites are given honor while religious groups are objects of hatred or pity.

Anthropology #2: Islam. Yes, Islam. Not some “aberration” or “hijacking” of a great religion, but the heart of the Qur’an and Hadith (authorized interpretations and teachings) itself. Islam’s highest value is submission – to Allah and Allah’s appointed authorities. A qualitative, structural hierarchy pervades all aspects of all Islamic traditions. At the top are male Muslims, followed by female adherents. Next are the misguided followers of Jewish and Christian tradition. At the bottom are found the atheists and pagans. What is of particular note is the inferior status of women throughout the Qur’an and Hadith and in the sociopolitical structures of all Islamic societies. Expressions of this vary from very “liberal” traditions that open most fields of education and work to women to the most strict ideologies that want to reify the 7th to 15th centuries and keep women cloistered and dependent, banned from education and professional vocations and subject to premature marriages, mutilation, honor killings and other oppressions. Enslavement of non-Muslim victims of conflict is part of this ethos.

Anthropology #3: Biblical Anthropology informed by Christian history and theological reflection. Christianity has influenced any land with freedom of conscience, economic opportunity and political liberty. This said, the Church has a long history of is own unbiblical structures, including racism, sexism and moments of syncretistic colonialism. Hubris is not allowed here. What is sanguine is the gradual progress toward full equality rooted in sound theological anthropology. This gradual advance brings the end of slavery, abusive child labor, structural sexism and the foundations for growing racial reconciliation. Christian anthropology declares that in Christ, all are equal: married or single, male of female, rich or poor, Jew or Gentile (the latter couplet covers all ethnic and religious backgrounds).

The Missio Alliance (and this author) assert a robust evangelical egalitarian vision, grounded in the biblical text and realized by the work of the Holy Spirit, who continually liberates our souls from sub-biblical thinking and praxis. All of God’s vocations are open to all women and men, according to God’s sovereign initiative and each person’s willing response. Even more than roles or vocations, Christian discipleship liberates single and married, clerical and lay from the unbiblical classifications that keep some people from enriching the Body and the world.

Choosing Door #3

The only anthropology that liberates people of all faiths (or none) is Anthropology #3. In its best expression it is non-coercive and honors all people of conscience that are willing to live civilly with their deepest differences while working for the common good. As believers partner with the Triune God in his mission for the world, we long for every person to repent and believe the Good News in Christ. Those still considering Christ can be our partner, creating flourishing communities and nations and combatting all forms of hatred, intolerance and sexism.

The pagan or secular materialist ultimately dehumanizes us as we are reduced to biological functions or the victims of natural forces. Islam (even while its many adherents make good neighbors) will never produce a pluralistic land of equality and opportunity. The apriori commitment to a three-tiered anthropology and the inferiority of women, along with the concomitant doctrine of Dhimmitude and long-term commitment to a restored caliphate, make it a poor choice for human liberation.

As we reimagine mission and kingdom influence for the 21st century, communicating biblical anthropology reveals the stark contrast of Christianity to materialist and oppressive ideologies. Jesus’ words and works included deliverance, forgiveness, healing and reconciliation. A robust biblical anthropology, when believed and practiced in community, delivers from arrogance and self-hatred, forgives and reconciles with former opponents, and heals personal and communal wounds when dignity, love and respect flow unimpeded.

We are human beings made in God’s image with a job to do. We do it as men and women being transformed into the image of Christ and walking in the God-ordained works prepared for us from the foundation of the world. What a vision! What a mission! Christ is the contrast to every alternative competing ideology.

Awakening Dignity

Solving our intractable domestic and foreign policy crises will require much more that political compromise and diplomatic maneuvering. Our overextended federal systems and diminished influence abroad are signals of deeper issues. Conservatives press for reduced government and increased personal  responsibility. Liberal/Progressive voices argue for better distribution of wealth that creates a just society. Conservatives are troubled by social elites proffering new moral standards even as they advocate for more government involvement in family and personal life in all non-sexual arenas. Liberal/Progressive leaders focus on structural changes that will even the economic playing field and open doors for historical underclasses to improve their situations.

Both groups have valid concerns. Both are concerned about government intrusion – but intrusion for one is justice for the other. When conservatives protest public school curricula, they are deemed intolerant, impervious to the needs of kids and out of touch with 21st century realities. When liberals are criticized for wasteful public spending and a lack of accountability, their response is to demand more money and label opponents “extremists” or (gasp!) part of the Tea Party. When conservatives are critiqued for a lack of social concern, they often resort to “family values speak” without mentioning the brokenness of families and communities. In foreign affairs, conservatives argue for national self-interest and realpolitik while liberals argue for human rights (while strangely ignoring the persecution of millions of Christians by Islamic regimes).

The foundational answer that begins to solve these issues is a recovery of the dignity of the human person. “Dignity” has been usurped by some to agitate for non-traditional marriage and sexual practices as well as promote euthanasia. In this essay, dignity is not a political term, but as essential part of being human, a quality that affects how we see each person we encounter and view the billions that share our planet.

Our Founders and Framers understood that all government authority is derived from the consent of the governed. The Preamble to the Constitution and the Bill of Rights ensure that the dignity, liberty and integrity of the human person is the starting point for a just society and equitable government. Yes, they neglected female and non-white persons and we paid for such tragic oversight with a Civil War, Suffrage Movements and, at last, Civil Rights in the 1960s. It took us too long to live up to our ideals.

The dignity of each human being is not an invitation to narcissism or solipsism. We are social creatures, made for both personal and relational flourishing. Human dignity is axiomatic. It is the starting point for further reflection of political and social structures. The rule of law, vital for liberty and prosperity, rests upon people of conscience following such laws and seeing the greater good in their discipline.

Dignity rests upon our anthropology. If human beings are the products if impersonal and mechanistic forces, with chance and time accounting for all facets of our being, then morality, purpose, and social cohesion are mere by-products of our survival instincts. If, however, human beings are created in the image of God, distinct yet integrated with the rest of creation and designed for meaningful relationships and work, the possibilities for moral and social well-being increase. If our humanness includes transcendent notions of right and wrong, longings for reciprocal love and the need to fulfill a purpose in life, then the nature of governmental and other subsidiary agencies will reflect these values.

Human dignity begins with conception and ends with natural coronation at the end of life. The immortals we encounter each day may stifle conscience and pursue selfish ends, but they remain of infinite value. Human dignity implies responsibility for our decisions and accountability toward others as we make our way in the world. Such a robust anthropology commends honest discussion of maleness and femaleness, marriage and family, religious and social issues. As persons created by God, we have a design and a destiny, proclivities and personal gifts. We possess freewill and our decisions affect others. We are moral creatures, even if we debate the fine points of particular ethical choices.

Human dignity includes respect for how we are made. Male and female share equal humanness, but they are designed differently. When we reject this design, we are lessening our humanity. We live in a fallen, flawed world deeply affected by our rebellion against God and the Good. This said, we retain our awe of Creation and an amazing gift of conscience. We wrestle with internal and external pressures toward self-destruction and self-realization. We inherently long for love even while we sabotage relationships. We are angry when innocents are hurt and killed and we hope our peccadilloes escape notice. What a paradoxical lot we are!

Back to our domestic and foreign issues.

With human dignity grounded in Creation as our starting point, new avenues of wisdom are possible. We will be skeptical of any agency with too much authority. We will hold ourselves and our public officials accountable for their stewardship of resources that are the fruit of our productive labor. We will care about national interests and aggressively pursue improvements in human rights around the world. We will hold the Islamic world accountable for its dhimmitude of non-Muslims and oppression of women. We will call on the Palestinian Authority to renounce terrorism and acknowledge Israel as a legitimate nation. We will call on Israel to negotiate with integrity the creation of a new neighboring state. We can amend or transform health care legislation into a comprehensive strategy to care for all without destroying choice and private sector enterprise.

Human dignity means we end abortion on demand while helping foster adoptions, care for moms and kids and hold the fathers accountable for their sexual activity. There is no such thing a sex without consequences and erotic fulfillment is not a civil right. We must end all forms of active euthanasia while wisely learning how to let nature take her course at the end of life.

When we begin with dignity, we end in liberty, opportunity, responsibility and the potential for personal and social flourishing. If we reduce ourselves to the products of impersonal nature, then might will make right and we enslave ourselves to the basest impulses found in our flawed natures.

Conservative and liberal friends, let’s start talking about what it means to be fully human and we may find new common ground.