Charles Colson
Flaming Truth: Recalling Francis Schaeffer's Challenge
Historic Christianity, biblical Christianity, believes that Christianity is not just doctrinal truth, but flaming truth—true to what is there, true to the great final environment, the infinite-personal God." Thus said the great prophet of the 20th century, Francis Schaeffer, whose 100th birthday we celebrate this year.
Central casting in Hollywood could not have produced a better character for the prophet's role: his trademark knickers, often straggling hair, goatee, and intense scowl. His voice may have been shrill at times, but his words were piercing. Those words spoke of what he called "true truth," and warned the church against succumbing to relativism, which—even back in the 1970s—had conquered academia and infiltrated broader society.
Schaeffer, with laser-like precision, hit upon the most fundamental issue of our day: The denial of "true truth" was not some passing academic fad. In both its post-Kantian and postmodernist garb, this denial detaches language from reality and leads to the kind of moral and spiritual relativism that is the current coin of contemporary discourse, especially in Europe and North America.
Schaeffer's message impacted both of us at formative stages of our Christian growth. We were stirred by his challenge for the church to be more than a safe haven for the saved, just a comforter of souls. We were moved by his call to bring Christian truth to bear in every aspect of human life, including literature, politics, and the arts.
Young people by the thousands, many of them refugees from the 1960s counterculture, responded to Schaeffer's call. They made the pilgrimage to his unique community at L'Abri, a word that means "shelter" in French. There they hiked the Alps, listened to Bach concerts, and talked late into the night. They discovered Christianity to be worth considering and capable of being defended. Schaeffer introduced apologetics to a younger evangelical generation and warned against divorcing personal faith from public witness. But L'Abri was far more than a study center. Francis and Edith Schaeffer demonstrated the power of persuasive hospitality lived out in community.
At the heart of Schaeffer's concern was an uncompromising commitment to the sanctity of human life. More than any other evangelical leader of his time, Schaeffer placed the prolife concern on the agenda of the evangelical movement. As our friend Richard John Neuhaus often noted, Schaeffer's witness on the issues of life helped form the context for evangelical and Catholic collaboration.
There is another crucial dimension of Schaeffer's legacy pertinent to this anniversary year. Late in life Schaeffer published a small book, The Mark of the Christian, in which he called for a "final apologetic." Drawing on Jesus' words in John 13:34-35, Schaeffer reminded us that Jesus gave the world the right to decide the genuineness of our faith by our observable love for one another. "This means showing love to our brother in the midst of our differences—great or small—loving our brothers when it costs us something, loving them even under times of tremendous emotional tension, loving them in a way the world can see …. Only with this mark may the world know that Christians are indeed Christians and Jesus was sent by the Father."
Schaeffer's challenge remains pertinent today. The mark of Jesus in us is crucial, and it is compelling. None of our activities—evangelism, social ministry, mission, and worldview work—will receive God's full blessing if they are not guided by the "final apologetic" of demonstrating observable love for one another.
Charles Colson
Charles Colson
Charles Colson was the founder of Prison Fellowship Ministries, an outreach to convicts, victims of crime, and justice officers. Colson, who converted to Christianity before he was indicted on Watergate-related charges, became one of evangelicalism's most influential voices. His books included Born Again and How Now Shall We Live? A Christianity Today columnist since 1985, Colson died in 2012.
- Chuck Colson: Evangelicals Should Be Uniters, Not Dividers
- We Need Health-Care Reform
- Protecting Our Little Platoons
- Doctrine Bears Repeating
- Keeping Pets in Their Place
Star Trek Into Darkness
(on articles open to the public, you must at least register for a free account).
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
Newsletters
Google
Comments
Displaying 1–3 of 13 comments
See all comments
james knaggs
FS brought light to my soul as a young seeker. I have always cherished the hours I spent in his writings and celebrate his influence upon my life.
PETE DAYTON
I remember well going to our church's Francis Schaeffer conference with Edith, Oz Guiness, et al, back in the early 1980's. He hosted a "town meeting", open to any and all, one evening on the right to life vs. abortion debate. In a packed house, he was superb in his rhetoric and defense of the faith. One point that really resonated with me was his refutation of the need for "all or none" when coming to an abortion ban. He felt that getting a ban on 3rd term or 2nd and 3rd term abortions would be a great start. Getting "'half a loaf''would be better than no bread at all". He was also amazing with his charisma and articulation of "true truth".
Carlos Ramirez Trevino
I recall reading Francis Schaeffer’s first book, “Escape from Reason” and being hooked for life. My understanding of FS was that he was attempting to put the plight of Christians and God’s infinite purpose in theological and historical perspective, utilizing a sound philosophical approach. Perhaps I misunderstood if the intent of FS was to make us sensitive to the need for Christian political involvement, with the objective of infusing world culture with Christian values. As I understood them, his writings were a warning to the corrupting influence of social relativism and theological apostasy. But in fairness to the authors of the article, his call was to “bring Christian truth to bear in every aspect of human life, including literature, politics, and the arts.” In essence, FS provided a defense of the Christian’s trust in Christ. Where I begin to differ with the authors is on the emphasis of demonstrating Christian love to change society, as if that were the sole mandate and responsibility of the Church. I suspect that our focus should be to proclaim Christ to a fallen world; a world that cannot be rescued by posting the 10 Commandments on the steps of the Court House or praying under the school flag. The cause of the Christian is not culture, it is Christ. We misunderstand if we turn back to the precepts of the cultural mandate. We are not engaged to save the world, Christ already did that. Isn’t God’s purpose in entering His creation as the man Christ to save us from death and corruption to life? Wasn’t His intent to rid His creation of the potential for corruption? Where then do we stand in our feeble attempts to influence a minute segment of society with religious symbols, rituals, and cultural appurtenances?