Reflections on "Resident Aliens"

From antiquity, God has been reconciling and redeeming humanity though the covenant community. The Hebrew Scriptures record God’s dealings with Abraham and his progeny, forming a nation with God as its ruler. Being a covenanted community, God desired the nation of Israel to be sanctified and set apart from the world as a “holy nation” (Exo. 19:6). With the advent of Jesus, God created an inclusive community whose criterion for membership no longer consisted of circumcision and tribal lineage; rather, people would now be engrafted through baptism into God’s new covenant community -- the church. This would occur without regard for one’s race, ethnicity, gender, or social status (Gal. 3:28). Much of the language used in the Hebrew Scriptures to describe Israel’s divine commission would now be appropriated by the new covenant church as it sought to clarify God’s will concerning its relationship to the world as the God's covenant community (1 Pet. 2:10). Whether referring to the Hebrew community or the Church, Scripture admonishes both communities that they are divinely called to be a light to the gentile nations.

Within contemporary Christianity there are various perspectives concerning the dynamics of the church’s relationship with outsiders. Some “activists” believe the priority for the contemporary church is the “building of a better of a society…Through the humanization of social structures” (Hauerwas and Willimon 45). Other Christians shun political action, believing that failure will be the result of any “tinkering with the structures of society” (45). These “conversionists” suppose the church is to work “only for inward change” because “it has no alternative social ethic or social structure of its own to offer the world” (45). Rejecting the pragmatism of the activists and the “individualism” of the conversionist, Hauerwas and Willimon believe the church offers a “radical alternative” whose primary purpose is to “worship Christ in all things” (45). This writer agrees with Hauerwas and Willimon, asserting that the church is a commonwealth of saints, resident aliens “who have aligned themselves with the seismic shift that has occurred in the world since Christ” (24). The church’s mission is to neither seek the transformation of society through the “constantinianization” of its precepts, nor occupy itself with solely the conversion of individuals. Rather, the Church, being a “holy priesthood”, is to be a “confessing church”, fulfilling its divine mission “proclaim[ing] the mighty acts” of God while residing upon this earth as “aliens and exiles” (44; 1 Pet. 2:9-11). Rather than being concerned with its effectiveness, the primary goal of the church should be “faithfulness” to the gospel by “worshiping Christ in all things” (44-45).

Hauerwas and Willimon write at length concerning the disastrous effects of enlightenment thought upon theology. They briefly mention the renowned German theologian Paul Tillich, an existentialist schooled in enlightenment ideals (44). As a theologian, He believed that it was his duty to translate the archaic beliefs of patriarchal, pre-scientific nomads into values that would be palatable to modern man (20). By shaping contemporary political structures with diluted “Christian” principles, this activity of “translating” was deemed necessary by enlightenment theologians in order for Christians to participate in the politics of the world. Problems with this train of thought are obvious. First, as Hauerwas and Willimon observe, it “assumes that there is some kernel of real Christianity” composed of “basic ideas about God, world, and humanity” (21). In addition, by attempting to translate the Christian teaching into “rational” concepts digestable for the modern mind, the Christian message is skewed by failing to recognize that true ethical development only occurs by participating in the commonwealth of the church -- not rationalizing a set of principles. By wasting time apologizing for the ridiculousness of the Christian faith, instead of forming their ethics according to God’s story, many enlightenment theologians within the church in Germany during WWII would lack spiritual zeal, failing to be the prophetic voice against the Nazi regime. However, there were theologians such as Barth and others, who believed the Christian faith to be beyond rationalization, girding themselves with the prophetic mantle during those perilous times. Barth and other theologians realized that Christian ethics are formed by adhering to a tradition rather than through generalized ethical principles to be rationalized by humanity.

Instead of focusing its efforts on inculcating diluted Christian principles into a depraved world, the Church should view its primary task to be the transforming of the unregenerate humanity through the polis of Christ. By being the community of the cross, the church rightfully fulfills its mission to be faithful to the call of the gospel. Hauerwas and Willimon correctly assert, “The church doesn’t have a social strategy, the church is the social strategy” (43). Because of humanity’s depravity, it has “no other means of accurately understanding the world and rightly interpreting the world except by way of the church” (38). This means that notions such as “peace” and “justice” are incomprehensible “apart from the life and death of Jesus of Nazareth (38). Therefore, the only hope for unredeemed humanity is for it to be regenerated through believing the gospel and becoming engrafted into the Christian communion; for the world cannot understand that it is depraved apart from the life of the church.

Christian ethics is not the product of individualized effort, rather , it is the result of being transformed through participation in the community of faith. Both the conversionists and activists camps expect unregenerate society to adhere to a Christianized form of ethics. However, Hauerwas and Willimon correctly observe that this constantinian strategy fails to “recognize that Christian ethics are church-dependent” (71). Concerning Christian ethics, Hauerwas and Willimon believe that “if the church’s ethics were something that makes sense to every thinking, sensitive, caring American despite his or her faith or lack thereof, the church is underestimating the peculiarity of Christian ethics” (71). Christian ethics are tradition-dependent, not rational precepts accessible to every person. Contrary to the activists and the conversionists’ political strategy, because humanity cannot rationalize morality, this writer believes that Christian ethics can only be genuinely practiced by participating in the Christian community. By providing ample opportunity for believers of various spiritual maturities to interact, the “primary way of learning to be disciples” for believers is through the church. (102). It is within the communion of the saints, by imitating the lives of faithful saints and participating in God’s story that one begins to practice genuine Christian ethics.

Since we are “strangers and foreigners on the earth” (Heb.11:13), the church should consider itself a community of “resident aliens," with its primary occupation not being the preservation of the “rights of the individual” (33), but rather the creation of a community that is transformed by the cross (47). By doing so, the Church is being faithful to is scriptural mandate, specifically Jesus’ admonition for his church to be salt and light (Matt.5:13-15). Hauerwas and Willimon correctly emphasize that the world cannot learn to “love their enemies, tell the truth, honor the poor, suffer for righteousness” apart from possessing the “gift of faith and vision, which is ours in Christ” (46). Because genuine political and communal change cannot occur apart from experiencing the “water of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit (Tit.3:5), the primary political task for the church is to influence the world by being a visible “community of the cross” (47). Hauerwas and Willimon believe the primary activity of “Christian social action” should be to create “a community that makes it possible for people like us to live by the truth rather than to get by on what is false" (123). This writer deems they are correct in their assertion. To do otherwise would distort the gospel's purpose.



Work Cited
Hauerwas, Stanley, and William H. Willimon. Resident Aliens. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press 1989.