Evangelism Without Justice Ignores the Words of Jesus

“A church that is not faithful to the Gospel in all its dimensions inevitably becomes an instrument of the status quo.” 

Fifty years ago, Latin American theologian Rev. C. René Padilla shared these words at the first Lausanne Congress, a global gathering that brought together Christian leaders from nearly 150 countries to address challenges and opportunities in evangelism. In his speech, Padilla made a compelling biblical case for why we can’t separate evangelism from a commitment to justice, explaining that the “church is called to be here and now what God intends the whole of society to be; in its prophetic ministry it lays open the evils that frustrate the purpose of God in society; in its evangelization it seeks to integrate men into that purpose of God whose full realization is to take place in the Kingdom to come. Consequently, wherever the church fails as a prophet it also fails as an evangelist.”  

It was a radical speech, but through dialogue with Padilla, Latin American theologian Samuel Escobar, Anglican priest (and former Sojourners contributing editor) John R.W. Stott, and other key leaders, the Congress listened and ultimately released the Lausanne Covenant. The document was a groundbreaking statement of modern evangelicalism affirming God’s “concern for justice and reconciliation throughout human society and for the liberation of men and women from every kind of oppression.” The 1974 statement admitted humbly how far the church had neglected this concern and committed themselves to upholding the dignity of every person, “regardless of race, religion, colour, culture, class, sex or age.” 

Last week, as I attended the fourth Lausanne Congress in Incheon, South Korea, I was struck with how much the global evangelical movement has evolved in the past half century, including the advent of new technologies and the explosive growth of Christianity in the Global South, which has reversed the mission field and shifted the epicenter of Christianity increasingly to Africa, Asia, and Latin America. These and other trends are highlighted in South Korea itself, which, in less than a century, has transformed itself from a major recipient of aid and the missionary movement to now being among the nations that send the most missionaries to the rest of the world. 

Yet, I was also reminded how much global evangelicalism remains stymied by old debates, including overly narrow conceptions of evangelism. The reputation and witness of the church itself plays a major role in evangelism. Doing justice is integral to the cause of evangelization — a conviction and commitment I wish Christians and churches in the U.S. and around the world more strongly embraced. 

Why evangelism still matters  

For many of us, “evangelism” carries a negative connotation — understandably so: At shopping centers or sporting events, how many of us have cringed at overzealous Christians whose method of spreading the gospel seems to mainly entail yelling at people on street corners? More gravely, we’re all too aware of how many Western missionaries aligned themselves with colonization projects that so often misused and abused the gospel to justify oppression and slavery, the long shadows of which still shape many nations today.  

Especially in this political climate, talking about “evangelization” can also evoke fears of religious coercion and proselytization. For instance, the resurgence of Christian nationalism in the U.S. is often fueling anti-democratic efforts that would limit religious freedom and move America toward a theocracy. I don’t believe that a relationship with Jesus can or should be coerced, imposed, or somehow mandated by government or society — and anyone attempting to do so isn’t listening to Jesus’ own words. 

In a passage known as the Great Commission, Jesus says: “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit and teaching them to obey everything that I have commanded you” (Matthew 28:19-20). To me, these words speak to my desire to ensure people know about the good news of Jesus Christ — not in an ethnocentric, coercive, or self-righteous way, but in ways that lead with the message of God’s grace and unconditional love.    

In practice, this can take on many forms, including subtle or direct ways. In the workplace this can mean being a model of the fruit of the spirit such as love, joy, and kindness with our coworkers. In our deeply polarized politics, this can mean going out of our way to demonstrate love toward our enemies. In our communities, this can mean Christian organizations being first responders to disaster and at the forefront of alleviating suffering. This can also take on more direct forms such as inviting friends and acquaintances to church when appropriate, sharing our own testimony, and planting seeds about God’s love and grace. 

First and foremost, healthy evangelism should be tied to ethic of John 13:35: “By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” Lausanne was a powerful reminder of the ways in which evangelism must be adapted to cultural context and often comes at a real risk and cost in many countries.  

For me, one of the main ways I try to put the Great Commission into practice is through justice and advocacy work. When Christians and the church ignore or perpetuate harm and injustice, it undermines our witness to the world and serves as an enemy to the cause of evangelism. For example, in my work as president of Sojourners, I co-lead Faiths United to Save Democracy, a nonpartisan effort to equip and mobilize Christian leaders, working alongside Jewish and Muslim faith leaders to protect our democracy and the freedom to vote during this contentious election. I do this work because I earnestly care about democracy and want all eligible voters to safely cast a ballot; evangelism isn’t my primary aim. But I also recognize that a benefit of this work is how it can help rehabilitate the negative perceptions of the church and of Christians in the U.S., with profound evangelistic implications.  

Fifty years later 

At the Fourth Lausanne Congress, I joined 5,000 delegates from nearly every nation as we explored what it means to share the good news of Jesus with the entire world — and how to accelerate that work. I was moved to tears by the painful testimony of persecuted Christians from India, North Korea, China, and beyond. I was impressed by the breadth of the program and the diversity of Christians I met who were passionate about sharing the gospel and making disciples. The Congress theme, “Let the church declare and display Christ together,” was a rallying cry to not only proclaim the gospel of Jesus Christ but to also demonstrate it, which is a critical commitment in a time in which hypocrisy and scandals have undermined the church’s witness.  

But despite the affirmation the Congress made in 1974, 50 years later I’m concerned that a commitment to justice still feels optional or marginalized within the evangelism movement. When Latin American theologian and professor Ruth Padilla DeBorst — who is also the daughter of René Padilla — gave a plenary address in Incheon articulating the centrality of justice work in evangelization, she had the courage to name specific issues of injustice that Christians needed to address, including the disproportionate devastation of Israel’s military response in Gaza. Two days later, the director of the Congress emailed out an over-handed apology for failing to review Padilla’s remarks more closely. 

I was also dismayed by the Seoul Statement, released by the Congress in advance of the gathering, a top-down move that precluded any input from the delegates or from the events of the Congress itself to shape the final result. The statement names the need to address violence, conflict, and nationalism, which are harmful to evangelism, writing: “We repent of our failures to condemn and restrain violence by remaining silent, by promoting nationalism, or by unjustly supporting conflicts through deficient theological justification.” In particular, the resurgence of Christian nationalism has damaged the reputation of the church and is fueling anti-democratic politics in the U.S. and many countries around the world. 

I appreciated the statement’s emphasis on discipleship and reading scripture faithfully, but the tone felt overly doctrinal and didactic rather than invitational and strategic. Its section “The image of God and human sexuality” imposes rigid lines around gender and rejects same-sex marriage. While I recognize that these important issues play out very differently across the world, elevating and circling the wagons around a particular position will hurt the cause of evangelism. For example, here in the U.S., the homophobia and LGBTQ+ exclusion that many have experienced from the church is one of the main reasons younger generations are abandoning Christianity.   

Many speakers throughout the week at Lausanne emphasized the degree to which evangelism has de-accelerated in many parts of the world. While there is no magic wand to reverse this trend, I hope and pray that a greater commitment to justice and peace that includes expanding religious freedom around the world, will be increasingly embraced as a critical and integral way to redeem the witness of the church and spark revival where it is needed most, all of which will accelerate the cause of the Great Commission.  

I’m hopeful that the controversy around Padilla DeBorst’s remarks and efforts by many delegates to strengthen the Seoul Statement will encourage dialogue around the integral relationship between evangelism and seeking justice. Ultimately, the success and longer-term impact of the Seoul Lausanne Congress will not hinge on the Seoul Statement but instead on the ripple effect of thousands of relationships that were built, connections made, inspiration and knowledge that was shared, and commitments to collaboration that were made throughout the week and beyond.