Rachel Amandson

Our mission at SPU is to "Engage the culture and change the world." At first reading you might sense the religious overtones involved with this statement, but would you immediately recognize them as being distinctly Christian? I often wonder how many students understand the meaning of being Christian in such a way as to be able to change the world. I am further struck by the decreasing level of student rhetoric expressing what it means to be distinctly Christian. Recently, there have been conversations in and around campus focusing on what it means to belong to a Christian university such as SPU. I was particularly amused by a dispute over whether or not all radios on campus should be tuned to Christian stations, thus providing an exclusive saturation of conservative, non-denominational ideologies and pithy moralistic moments. Whether directly vocalized or not, what is underlying this growing conversation is a concern over what experiences and politics make a person Christian. More simply put, what in fact makes a Christian a Christian?

This is a question that each of us should attempt to answer while at SPU. Its implications are far reaching and very diverse. The question is very simple, yet ultimately we cannot escape the attached nuances. Is a Christian one who believes a basic set of theological premises? Is a Christian someone who acts in a specific manner? If one violates these beliefs and practices, do they lose their "Christian-ness"? To complicate the already stated questions, can a Christian be a Democrat? Is there a "litmus test" that we can use to weed out those unworthy of being Christian? If there is such a test, what questions or issues would we include? Perhaps some might use music choice, political party, abortion, homosexuality, belief about the Pope, homosexuality, the role/status of women and others for their test.

I know that, among some groups, the above examples are considered to be perfect and acceptable for such a litmus test. Yet I balk at these topics as being inaccurate and focusing on a different set of concerns. Historically, music choice has always been a concern; years ago instruments not specifically mentioned in the Bible were banned from Christian use (ergo no pianos, no organs). Alternatively, some chords were considered to be demonic and therefore unusable. Later, organs and pianos were allowed, but only hymns were considered to be "Christian" regardless of the prose used in the songs. Today, we use any and all instruments, and all musical genres and styles are coming into use by Christians for "Christian" purposes.

Politically, we find Christians theologically on the side of the other issues as well. Christians are for and against the ordination of women, women's role in the family and we still have problems deciding exactly how equal women should be relative to men. Furthermore, there are Christian Democrats, Christian Republicans, Christian Libertarians, Christian Feminists, Christians in the Military and Christian Conscientious Objectors. Christians are Pro Choice and Pro Life. There are even Christians who believe that the Pope has the authority to do what popes say that they have the authority to do! What are we to do with this vast experience of Christianity? Shall we draw a line in the sand to see what side people will fall on? Experientially, we know that Christians are plotted everywhere on the socio-political map. We are in almost every country, demographic, philosophy and economy.

Perhaps we should turn away from experience and look solely at theology. Down through the ages, the Nicene Creed -- or at least the Apostle's Creed -- is used as such a litmus test. We must believe in the Trinity and that Christ died for our sins, giving us righteousness that otherwise we are not able to attain. Yet still we have Christians who would agree with such theology that are on every side of every fence of every issue. Perhaps, then, we cannot look to the issues as a definition of Christianity. But isn't Christianity seen through our responses to the culture, to these issues? Is it not true that in engaging the culture, we also engage these issues? The answer most definitely is yes. We are called to engage the culture in such a way that we bring glory to God. Yet we are left without an answer to the above question: What makes a Christian?

I would like to suggest that adherence to specific social beliefs does not change whether or not a person can be called a Christian. We have already seen that Christians can and do adhere to diverse beliefs about how life should be conducted, politically and socially. I will not, and I believe that God does not, winnow the harvest based on whether or not people listened to the "right" kind of music or belonged to the "right" political party. I also believe that LaHaye and Jenkins were incorrect in their assessment about Catholics by suggesting that they would be "left behind." That is to say that I reject the above "litmus test" that I have commonly heard circulated around this campus through various Falcon articles, and in many discussions with fellow students.

We know that our purpose as Christians is to "know God and make God known." That is, we are drawn into relationship with God in order that we might know the Lord (John 17:3). Furthermore, we know that, as followers of Christ, we are to spread the Gospel (Matthew 28:19-20). If I were to suggest an appropriate "litmus test" then this is perhaps what I would include: how earnestly do we seek to know God, and how passionate are we about our fellow creation? We see this mandate in Jesus' summary of the law and the prophets: Love God and love your neighbor. Therefore I suggest neither a vertical nor a horizontal theology, but both.

The world should not identify us as Christians because we are pro-life per se. The world should not identify us as Christians because we listen exclusively to "Christian" music. The world should not identify us as Christians because we are Republican. I am not belittling those in the least. The world should identify us as Christians because we love. If we truly love God, then we seek Him. If we truly love God, then our seeking the Holy Spirit will make us increasingly perfect even as He is perfect. And if we would be perfect, we will sell our possessions and follow Christ (Matthew 19:21). This means that we would so desire the salvation of the lost that we would let nothing stand in our way of bringing that about through our hands and relying solely on the grace of God.

If our lives are lived in such a way that we both bring glory to God and shine in the darkness of the world, then we can call ourselves Christians. We will always disagree as Christians about many things, be it the color of a church's carpet, or the type of music we are "allowed" to listen to, or even if drinking alcohol is okay. It is even okay to disagree with the way God works and rail against it (read Psalms sometime). The important thing is who the Author of our lives is. The important thing is who lives in our hearts. The important thing is that Christ is seen effectively. We do not have the right to de-Christianize and even dehumanize our brethren for anything less. Discuss the issue at hand, yes, but do not forget that at the end of the day, the person you are debating with remains your sibling in Christ -- whether male or female.