Observations Regarding Shane Claiborne's
The Irresistible Revolution
Recently, several folks have asked me about my response to Shane Claiborne’s book, The Irresistible Revolution. Apparently the book has become mildly controversial in portions of the local Christian community. I did a quick read. Therefore, my observations are not worthy of being called a book review but more a summary of impressions.

From a Christian perspective, the book is a timely reaction to the materialistic value system and world view held by many American Christians. Without a doubt, many Christians are materialists who adhere to the Christian “brand” of life rather than an authentic lifestyle of following Jesus the Christ. We have often portrayed worshipping and serving Jesus more as a means of accumulating more possessions than as an end in itself. Instead of following the path of encountering the poor and the needy, we go to church and practice selected virtues so we won’t have to interact with the less fortunate. We make enough money so we can live in the exclusive neighborhoods, send our children to the upper-class public schools or private schools, and then go to safe Christian colleges so they can marry someone who grew up with our values and produce beautiful grandchildren, thus confirming that our sacrifices and efforts were not in vain.

Claiborne does an excellent job of describing the pervasive way that materialism destroys the soul of the Christian. He also very correctly identifies meeting the needs of and interacting with the poor and needy as Christian virtues. While a reaction to the condition of American materialistic Christianity is better than accepting the materialistic values or ignoring them, I wish Claiborne had provided more of a response than a reaction.

The call to radical discipleship has been ignored by the present generation of Christian leaders. While Christian baby boomers have desired to take control of the kingdom of this world (i.e. Moral Majority, Christian Coalition, and Focus on the Family) and lead it in a new direction, Claiborne seeks to provide an alternate or parallel kingdom that ministers to the kingdom of this world and hopefully models a new way to live. It is a new or “cool” form of monasticism.

However, Claiborne’s call to a new kind of monasticism appears to me to be modeled more after the ministry of John the Baptist than the ministry of Jesus. Jesus did not so much preach a message of simplicity as one of encouraging people to be satisfied with what they had. Claiborne’s monasticism is more about giving to the needy in society, while I think the teaching of Jesus was more about contributing to society. By engaging in the economic fabric, we help people become contributors. Only feeding the needy and providing shelter for the homeless can never help people move toward being contributors to society. While we must feed, clothe, and assist folks in poverty, our goal is to help them become people who can feed, clothe, and assist others. Redemption is not survival; it is a life of service.

Perhaps because of the nature of the book, Claiborne appears to minimize the role of spiritual transformation leading to new values and resulting in a changed culture. While I know I am making a generalization after a quick read, I felt the emphasis was on using the commands and the example of Jesus as a means of changing culture rather than beginning with the personal spiritual transformation that leads to cultural transformation. Instruction and example without empowerment leads to disillusionment.

Claiborne’s weakest section of the book is his anti-military rant. He brushes away the just war theory, which may or may not be fully applicable today, but it cannot be ignored in any discussion of pacifism. He frequently uses Old Testament models to reinforce his position, yet chooses to ignore the Old Testament regarding use of the military. I realize that he was not attempting to address the issue of pacifism, but some of his college readers seem to resonate strongly with his views. Of course, I have to admit I am too old to serve in the military, and his collegiate readers are not. As much we dislike admitting it, our life situation does influence our view.

In a very subtle way, this book reminds me of books written just prior to ascendancy of the mainline churches in America. Mainline churches during the 1950s called people to service and neglected the call to the Savior. Service without the Savior soon leads to self-centered duty, which is another form of “works” theology.

I offer these thoughts as a pastor who is leading our church to become more service-oriented. Reading this book made me aware of the crucial balance or sequence that I need and our church needs. Service begins with allegiance to the Savior not with pity for the poor. However, an allegiance to the Savior will lead to a life of compassionate ministry to the poor.

It is not either/or but both/and; and the order is essential. The irresistible revolution must begin with Jesus, or it will become just a bunch wealthy folks doing penance for their guilty pleasures. And nothing is irresistible or revolutionary about that!