OPINION:
It is certainly appropriate for Christians to engage in social, cultural, and political conversations. It is even appropriate for Christians to assert our rights (Acts 16:35-40) as we seek to be “shrewd as serpents and innocent as doves” (Matthew 10:16).
Yet, we should not lose sight of our primary mission of being and making disciples (Matthew 28:16-20). We are the only ones who can accomplish that mission. At times, pushing back against the culture is part of that mission. At others, it may be a distraction that tempts us to renovate our nation rather than build the Kingdom of God.
Subscribe to have the Higher Ground newsletter delivered to your inbox every Sunday.
As Christians, we are an alternative community of “sojourners and exiles” (1 Peter 2:10-12). As such, we must remain focused not on fixing the broken world but on living faithfully within it as we “proclaim the excellencies of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light” (1 Peter 1:9).
As Christians confront the various social and cultural issues we face in the United States, we need to recognize that our primary task is not to develop an American consensus but to coordinate with one another to develop consensus amongst Christians through discipleship and make new disciples by baptizing new converts and teaching them to observe all Christ commanded.
In the United States our desire to preserve individual rights is not currently matched by a shared sense of responsibility of what it looks like to exercise those rights. Because other nations, like China, are not committed to preserving rights, nor to representing or respecting the concerns, desires, or interests of citizens, any lack of consensus regarding responsibility is of little to no consequence. In the United States, our rights protect us, to some large degree, from governmental overreach. They do not, however, help us build a consensus about values and virtues beyond a general agreement that protecting individual rights is paramount.
This dynamic may be illustrated by comparing China’s approach to technology policy with discussions of technology policy in the United States.
For instance, the Cyberspace Administration of China is seeking to institute “Guidelines for the Establishment of Minors’ Mode for the Mobile Internet.” The guidelines would regulate screen time more broadly to better ensure “the protection of minors online.” The proposed regulations call for app developers, distributors, and mobile device manufacturers to create a “minors’ mode” that would be designed to “provide information and service appropriate to the physical and mental development of the different age stages through assessments of product elements such as their type, content, and functions.” The regulations are highly detailed including recommendations for the types of content appropriate for a given age group, user experience, technical functions, and privacy.
Given China’s prior success in limiting online gaming, it seems likely that China will be effective to the extent that they demand accountability by defining “responsibility” for the technology industry through a centralized authority. Such effectiveness comes at a cost in innumerable ways and would certainly be used to reinforce China’s state control. Pointing to China’s successes is in no way an endorsement of their systems or approach, which embodies many of the concerns voiced by critics of policies proposed in the U.S. including, but not limited to, unacceptable increases in the power of the government.
It does, however, serve as a helpful point of contrast with approaches in the United States, like the Kids Online Security Act (KOSA), which has been met with a variety of objections (often reasonable objections) related to privacy issues and concerns about the ways policies may infringe on free speech through more ambiguous “duty of care” provisions.
These objections come despite a stated, though largely unaddressed desire, to limit minors’ access to certain content. For example, adult film star Cherie DeVille notes, “Any association with minors harms the porn industry, but the biggest reason we want kids far away from our videos is because it’s revolting. The idea of teenage boys watching my porn makes me want to vomit, and I know my colleagues share my sentiment.”
Despite the pornography industry’s tech-savvy reputation, the industry has had an oddly difficult time making its content inaccessible to underage viewers. However “revolting” the idea of having kids watch pornography may be, the disgust has not prompted the porn industry to be proactive in limiting child access to porn.
KOSA, and other similar acts in the United States, will likely give parents interested in managing their child’s access to certain online content additional means to do so. Still, it seems unlikely that policy frameworks in a democratic society will be sufficient to address technological challenges because policy frameworks must and should respect the rights of citizens. However, while policy frameworks can preserve and further clarify the relatively clear consensus regarding rights, they cannot generally inspire consensus regarding the responsible exercise of those rights.
As such, there is a danger of becoming a people unwilling to set aside our rights for the good of others and without any shared notion of “the good” beyond the preservations of our rights. Christians seem to be increasingly aware of the drift away from a culture more aligned with Christian moral sensibilities. Still, we need to recognize that even if Christians were to “win back the culture,” any consensus achieved regarding the responsible exercise of our rights would be fleeting. Morals and ethics are, as Richard Averbeck argues regarding the Old Testament Law, “good and weak.” They often provide helpful guidance but are incapable of changing the human heart.
And that’s where we, as Christians, are called to bridge the gap.
–
James Spencer earned his Ph.D. in Theological Studies from Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. He believes discipleship will open up opportunities beyond anything God’s people could accomplish through their own wit and wisdom. As such, his writing aims at helping believers look with eyes that see and listen with ears that hear as they consider, question, and revise the social, cultural, and political assumptions hindering Christians from conforming more closely to the image of Christ. James has published multiple works, including “Christian Resistance: Learning to Defy the World and Follow Christ,” “Useful to God: Eight Lessons from the Life of D. L. Moody,” “Thinking Christian: Essays on Testimony, Accountability, and the Christian Mind,” and “Trajectories: A Gospel-Centered Introduction to Old Testament Theology.” In addition to serving as the president of the D. L. Moody Center, James is the host of “Useful to God” a weekly radio broadcast and podcast, a member of the faculty at Right On Mission, and an adjunct instructor with the Wheaton College Graduate School.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.