Schaeffer: profeet tussen kerk en cultuur

Francis A. Schaeffer, een absolute apologetische grootheid. Iemand die de cultuur probeerde te verstaan, en daarmee in gesprek te gaan. Maar er ook over nadacht hoe de kerk in die cultuur moest staande blijven. Wanneer de kerk stil bleef op de ontwikkelingen van haar tijd, zou zij volgens Schaeffer verdwijnen.
Hij maakt een onderscheid tussen form en freedom. Uit het NT kunnen we opmaken hoe de kerk er globaal uit moet zien. Er moet leiderschap zijn, de gemeente is een gemeenschap van gelovigen, etc. Maar binnen deze piketpaaltjes is er vrijheid om de kerk zo in te richten als er behoefte is, onder de leiding van de Heilige Geest. Wanneer we onze tradities (die Bijbels noch onbijbels zijn) gaan verwarren met absolute regels, zitten we verkeerd.
Schaeffer is eigenlijk een profeet, die a) zijn tijd duidt, en ziet waar het heen gaat, ook voorspellingen en prognoses doet over de kant waar de cultuur op gaat, b) het onvolmaakte, onbijbelse en starre in de kerk opmerkt, en niet schuwt daar in liefde de vinger bij te leggen, maar ook c) oproept om dingen te veranderen, gedrongen door het naderende lot van een kerk, die geen enkele aantrekkingskracht meer uitoefent op haar omgeving.
Diagnose en transformatie, beide belangrijk.
In onderstaande teksten komt dit tot uitdrukking.

'Suppose we awoke tomorrow morning and we opened our Bibles and found two things had been taken out, not as the liberals would take them out, but really out. Suppose God had taken them out. The first item missing was the real empowering of the Holy Spirit and the second item, the reality of prayer. Consequently, following the dictates of Scripture, we would begin to live on the basis of this new Bible in which there was nothing about the power of the Holy Spirit and nothing about the power of prayer. Let me ask you something: What difference would there be from the way we acted yesterday? Do we really believe God is there? If we do, we live differently.' (67)

'People are looking at us to see if, when we say we have truth, it is then possible for this truth not only to take men's soul to heaven, but to give all of life meaning in the present time, moment by moment. They are looking to us to produce something that will bring the world to a stand-still - humang beings treating human beings like human beings. The church should be able to do this because we know who we are and we know who they are - first, men made in the image of God, then brothers within the church and Christian community on the basis of the shed blood of the Lord Jesus Christ. The church will not stand in our generation, the church will not be a striking force in our generation unless it keeps a proper balance between form and freedom in regard to the polity of the church, unless it keeps the strength of the Christian dogmas and at the same time produces communities with beauty as well as truth.' (72)

'Does the church have a future in our generation? Only if it shows not only the form of Scripture at the point of proper polity, but also the form of the Scripture at the point of proper community. If it does not show both together, we have missed the whole lot. One stands along with the other.' (74)
'We must speak where the Scripture has spoken. But let us notice that we must also respect the silences. Within every form, there is freedom. Whether one is painting a picture, or dealing with a sociological problem, or raising a child, it is the same. The formation of a school and the order in a school rests on the balance of form and freedom. I would suggest that where the Bible is silent, it indicates and reflects a freedom within the scriptural form.' (74)

'If the church will allow freedom for changing situations, churches will be here until Jesus comes back. But let us not mistake historical accidents and what is sociologically comfortable out of our past for God's absolutes either in rules of personal dress or in the form that individual churches take in individual situations.' (75)

'But do not confuse the building with an absolute. Do not confuse the church with a church building. It may burn to the ground. But destroying the building does not destroy the church.' (75)

Francis A. Schaeffer, The Church At The End Of The 20th Century, IVP 1970