Relying on the half-story explanation of the gospel is like handing someone a John Grisham novel with the first and last fifty pages removed. They’d be left with the middle portion of the book, a half story depicting some of the most dramatic developments of the story but giving little understanding of the characters, their aims and beliefs, and how they got into their dilemma in the first place. The story might still be intriguing but the reader would be left feeling empty. The impact of the story would be lost. They could call themselves a John Grisham reader, but they would miss most of the complexity and nuance that make him a compelling author. And the story doesn’t make sense to them because it is an incomplete truth.

When Christians dismiss the cultural mandate as an insignificant part of the Christian life, separatism and piety increases and cultural influence fades, But, if Christians learn and embrace the full story gospel and partner with God in restoring and redeeming his creation, their cultural influence will follow and the Good News will spread.

HOW NOW SHALL WE INFLUENCE?

The idea of culture shaping is widely debated. Most people, and until recently myself included, implicitly believe that cultures are changed from the bottom-up and that to “change our culture, we need more and more individuals possessing the right values and therefore making better choices.”¹⁷ The problem is that it is only part of the solution. In a widely distributed briefing that was presented to The Trinity Forum called To Change the World, James Davison Hunter asserts, “It is this view of culture that also leads some faith communities to evangelism as their primary means of changing the world. If people’s hearts and minds are converted, they will have the right values, they will make the right choices, and the culture will change in turn.”¹⁷

Hunter goes on to say, “…the renewal of our hearts and minds is not only important, it is essential, indeed a precondition for a truly just and humane society. But by itself, it will not accomplish the objectives and ideals we hope for.”¹⁸ This could explain why Christianity as it is practiced by many well meaning, admirable Christians in the past decades has failed to have significant traction.

Cultures are shaped when networks of leaders, representing the different social institutions of a culture, work together towards a common goal: “Again and again we see that the impetus, energy and direction for changing the world were found where cultural, economic and often political resources overlapped; where networks of elites, who generated these various resources, come together in common purpose.”¹⁸

The Seven Channels of Cultural Influence

What are the different social institutions of our culture that Hunter is referring to? They are the social institutions that govern any society, including business, government, media, church, arts & entertainment, education and the social sector. Their combined output of ideas, films, books, theology, websites, restaurants, investments, social work, laws, medical breakthroughs and technology drive an entire nation.

The ideas and values they perpetuate sustain the moral fiber and social conscience of the culture. The people who lead these influential institutions have the opportunity to shape the ideas, thoughts and preferences of millions of others. If Hunter is right, it doesn’t take all that many people or time to witness dramatic shifts in the convictions and aspirations of a culture.

And one of the most unique channels of cultural influence is the church. Few other institutions convene participants from so many areas of society. When Christians embrace the common goals of both redeeming cultures and individual souls, the possibilities for positive cultural influence dramatically increase.

A Story of Cultural Influence

A group of friends saw a similar opportunity in the late 1980’s when they decided to convene and strategically launch initiatives throughout the channels of cultural influence to support their views about justice, society and life. They first convened in 1988 in Warrenton, Virginia. The friends summoned 175 leaders from the various institutions of culture to come together around an important set of issues and to define a simple four-point agenda that could carry their message long and far.¹⁹ As an underwhelming minority, the odds were stacked against them to truly effect change. However, they believed their ideas could have consequences and had faith that their belief in the good hearts of a nation and the just rule of law would prevail. They set aside their personal agendas and differences to come together around the central tenets of their movement and to strategically and tactically advance the message one step at a time, one channel at a time. It is an admirable thing, to see a few committed work together against impossible odds to see their ideas advance. And advance they did.

These friends formed the beginnings of the homsexual movement and were responsible for helping it find its stride in the mid-nineties as every channel of culture was systematically inundated with the message of equal rights, tolerance and civility for homosexuals. As Paul Rondeau points out in Selling Homosexuality to America, “…their strategy was employed in five important markets of social influence… which touch every citizen in America; government, education, organized religion, the media, and the workplace.”²⁰ In the business channel, vigorous attempts were finally successful for same-sex couples to be recognized with benefits equal to married couples.²¹ In the education channel, books like, Heather Has Two Mommies and Daddy’s Roommate about same-sex parenting found their way into schools and public libraries. In television, Ellen and Will and Grace became the wedge that broke open wide acceptance of gays as fun, engaging, and talented human beings. Later, the Fab Five from Queer Eye for the Straight Guy made television ratings soar by showing that gay men are intelligent, have a sense of humor and should be the authorities on fashion sense, design and trend-setting. Within the cultural channel of the church, major denominations like the Episcopal Church and the United Church of Christ opened leadership roles for gays and lesbians.²²

In thirty years, the idea of being gay had moved from being commonly viewed as abnormal and abhorrent in society, to being an acceptable and normal alternative life-style. This illustrates perfectly the potential for cultural influence to happen when leaders throughout the seven channels of culture work together towards a common goal.

Lessons from the Homosexual Movement

Regardless of one’s personal feelings about the influence of the homosexual movement, one must acknowledge the immense success their approach has had on everyday life and perspective in America. When I experienced in my own life the indelible influence these messages were having on me, I had to take notice. Viewing cultural influence through the lens of this movement proves that overlapping channels of influence, working together over a long period of time, can shift American society. In a bizarre way, their success energized my thinking about the opportunity for the church to reshape the movement of Christianity within our culture. It provided the charge and motivation I needed to hope again for what could be and to dream again of what will be when a few committed Christians unify in message and purpose and remain committed to the big ideas of the Christian faith.

Comments

Comments are now closed