(a continuation of Part IV)
A review at Boundless quotes Hugh Hewitt in In, But Not Of, A Christian Guide to Ambition:
“The most powerful jobs in America may be far less significant than any ministry that provides the context for a conversion from disbelief to belief. You don’t believe that? Then you don’t believe the gospel, and you don’t believe Christ.” He uses Winston Churchill as an example: “Box all of Churchill’s tangible achievements . . . and that box might be nothing compared to the life of a humble missionary who took the gospel to an obscure Amazon tribe.”
If this statement is true, though, how can it co-exist with the seeking of power and influence, even if for Christ? Isn’t it oxymoronic to say that one is seeking power and influence for Christ? Christ has his own power and influence, and in fact is the only real source for any power or influence we may have for the gospel.
”Influence is not an automatic gift bestowed on good people. It is earned.” – Hewitt
I realize that this quote is out of context, but I think that influence is bestowed upon someone who has earned it in an earthly sense, if not automatically. Perhaps we may earn this influence from God as well. But if we are living for God and not man, our focus is not upon whatever influence we may earn from men, because this is not always trustworthy! The esteem of men can be vain and can be earned for traits that are not necessarily godly. If every good thing is from God, then, even if it comes through men, it is still not of man – this is the difference between being of the world, and not.
....In other words, seek after power knowing that it is far from being the most important thing in the world, that you are seeking it solely to serve God and your fellow Christian workers.
No... Seek solely to serve God and your fellow Christian workers. This naturally precludes seeking power. It’s a matter of using whatever power you’re given. Before questions of use can be answered, we must answer questions of the power’s origin. It’s not a matter of “Power and influence must always be means to the right end” (the review), but “By whose means was this power and influence gotten to begin with?”
We all are given power and influence of various sorts. There is power inherent in our talents which may garner influence, or it may be our looks, or our family, or community standing, or whatever. Yet it’s what we do with these talents and circumstances that matters. Opportunities arise; we don’t have to go looking for them unless we are living as hermits. Some of them may be honorable, others not. Many will arise out of life circumstances.
The truth is that we may be exploited even through the power and influence we have – a funny twist on the idea of having power and influence, isn’t it? Same for fame – obviously. But there are obvious examples of this (someone like Anna Nicole Smith, may she rest in peace, and Benny Hinn), and not-so-obvious ones...the person who seems influential, though she may be very competent and ostensibly doing "work for God," may still be serving others’ agendas (or her own) and not necessarily God’s. The value, in God’s eyes, of her work lies not in the influence she’s earned, even rightfully, but in her usefulness, as powered by Him, to witness to the gospel. Those who exploit, in any form, are themselves the ones who are truly being exploited...something to think about.
Psalm 127: Unless the Lord builds the house, They labor in vain who build it;
unless the Lord guards the city, The watchman keeps awake in vain. It is vain for
you to rise up early, To retire late, To eat the bread of painful labors; For He gives
to His beloved even in his sleep. NASB
Psalm 128: How blessed is everyone who fears the Lord, Who walks in His ways.
When you shall eat of the fruit of your hands, You will be happy and it will be well
with you. NASB (cf Psalm 119, 112.)
Power and influence aren’t just found in high-profile positions: as a mother, I naturally have power and influence over my children. I didn’t go looking for children; I allowed them, and they came to me as a natural result of my married life. Power and influence came with them. But how might I use it? Might I wield it with an iron hand, or exercise it judiciously, discerningly, and lovingly?
I didn’t go looking for my husband either. I met him in college; we were in the same trumpet studio. Yes, I had to interact with him and develop a relationship and all that, but that simply required being a somewhat sociable and responsible person, and being myself, and the rest happened. I am aware that I have acute power and influence over my husband. Not because I’m an Amazon woman* or a brute (at least I hope not), but because he loves me. What will I do with this power – exploit it? Bludgeon him with it? Crush him with it? Or use it to build him and our marriage (and therefore our family) up?
*(I’m 5'2" and about 110. But I have been described as a fireball...)
The Boundless review speaks of “holding up powerful Christian role models, and lauding them for their impact on the world.” But I wonder, who are the Christian role models with true spiritual, as opposed to earthly, power, and should we be lauding them for their impact on the world, or for their allegiance to the gospel? What actually defines a “powerful Christian” role model, and by whose measure? Take, for example, the obscure, small-town working man who lives a quiet and humble life, does his work well, and loves his family and community. Is he not a powerful Christian role model? (As is the missionary mentioned above, which Hewitt acknowledges.)
The review does say,
Of course this book isn’t for everyone. Some Christians aren’t called to seek power, but to use their God-given abilities in other ways (as Hewitt states up front), and for them the book will have little relevance. Not all of Hewitt’s advice is for everyone.
Aha. Maybe I’m speaking against something that’s not mine to speak against...maybe I’m one of those who isn’t called to seek power. But I have to ask (again): is there really anyone who is? Even William Wilberforce did not seek power. When he became a Christian, he apparently contemplated getting out of politics, but was convinced to stay and use the power and influence that he already had to effect positive change. And he did. (For a dose of his philosophy see A Dose of Wilberforce from The Point -- I strongly encourage following this link!) Here’s a drop:
For true Christians, bodily and mental faculties, their naturally acquired abilities, their substance, their authority, their time, and their influence are not instruments of their own gratification; these belong and are consecrated to the honor of God and are employed in His service. This the master principle to which every other must be subordinate. – William Wilberforce (emphases added)
Consider this: a person may actually lose power and influence when he speaks and acts in the truth, or speaks of and acts in the gospel’s ramifications. Perhaps those who gave this person his power may withdraw it because they don’t like the truth and don’t want to support it. The courageous will accept this loss. The weak will compromise, doing what it takes to hold on to their power and influence, or retaliate. The story of many pastors, no doubt. Doing the right thing isn’t always rewarded, in this life on this earth. (I wonder what the ratio really is: is it rewarded more than punished, or vice-versa?)
Hewitt acknowledges this in his book, according to the review. He also acknowledges that “You may have a pretty good run at the top or near top of your calling. But it will be a run, and it will have an end.” Yet I still don’t see such an acknowledgment as justification for seeking a run for the power and influence one may have in it while it lasts. If situations and circumstances appear to support the pursuit of a run, then certainly the run should be pursued. But again, not for power and influence, but as an opportunity to serve.
Besides, nowhere are we promised popularity, fame, power, or worldly influence if we follow the gospel. Yet each one of us has power and influence in every single exchange we have with another human being, and in every little thing we do. We may do good, we may do harm. We may be appreciated, we may be ignored. We may be reviled. But our job is to be faithful. The rest is God’s.
********
From the L. A. Times article on Calvary Chapel (mentioned earlier in this series):
Bolstered by $13 million from Smith's Costa Mesa church, Calvary Satellite Network grew into a spectacular recruiting tool for the evangelical movement.
Oh my... “Spectacular recruiting tool”...I daresay that this is not what either we nor God need. Nor does God need the evangelical movement! (*gasp!*) If this “movement” is what’s being served, it’s a false God. And God is not in the recruiting business.
Jesus, Paul, and other biblical figures made their efforts to convert people, with the help of assistants (and in the power of God), but they didn’t build radio towers of Babel. No empires with steeples on top. Paul founded churches solely on the good news! (Note that I didn’t say “built.”) Jesus died for the good news. And that is the bottom line.
addendum: I realize that I'm quoting the author of a newspaper article, not anyone from Calvary Chapel or CSN. I use these words as example, though. I have witnessed Christian leaders expressing concern for reaching numbers of people, and indicating that bigger is better, etc., and that's why I comment on it. I know that this sort of thinking is out there in "Christendom."
final note: since writing this post I read this at Joe Carter’s Evangelical Outpost (esteemed sponsor of this blog):
...."In, But Not Of: A Guide to Christian Ambition", the excellent little book by my "blogfather" Hugh Hewitt. Hugh is one of the most magnanimous and generous men I've ever met and his book has become for me a vade mecum. I keep a stack of the them around so that I can put them in the hands of every serious-minded young Christian I meet.
OK, I will get the book. Then I will comment on it, and perhaps review it. :-)
