Towards a Christ-centred sociology : An envisioned ideal

Towards a Christ-centred sociology: An envisioned ideal This article is a brief explorative exposition o f what the nature and content o f a Christ-centred sociology could entail. In this regard brief attention has been paid to what a Christ-centred sociology is not after which an exposition of what a Christ-centred sociology could entail, is given. Cursory reference to the possible ontological, epistemological, teleological and methodological implications o f a Christ-centred sociology has been made. Brief reference has also been made to research, teaching and causality.


Visions elsewhere a n d in Sociology
To explain the nature and dynamics o f visions in action, this section will start o ff with a story o f two washing machines.This will o f course be done with the full realization and acknowledgement that humans are not washing machines!Two washing machines had a discussion about their respective visions: The one dreamt o f becoming the best washing machine possible while the other rather condescendingly replied: "I prefer to become a concrete mixer.It's a much more worthy task I'll be performing.I'll therefore have a much more fulfilling and satisfying life and my full potential will be realized."The first responded and said: "But you're not a concrete mixer, you 're a washing machine and furthermore -what about the manufacturer's manual?"With defiant pride, the second washing machine replied: "What does he know anyway?I'll become the best concrete mixer ever!"Both started working towards the realization o f their respective visions -and succeeded.The first washing machine had a fulfilling life, operating within the purpose with which the manufacturer had produced it in the first place, lasting twenty years.The second machine lasted two hourstwo hours marked by numerous breakdowns and frustration due to lack o f fulfilment and a sudden premature death -never realizing that there were true concrete mixers out there.

O f course, peo p le are not machines -especially not washing machines or concrete mixers -y e t the principles involved in this story to a frighteningly large extent also apply to humans.
The Titanic -not only because it was the largest human-built moving object on earth at the time, but also because o f the spirit o f defiant pride in which it was built (as it was said that not even God could cause it to sink) -became symbol o f an unfulfilled vision and purpose and a premature death.
Tragically this could have been prevented had the radio operator on the Titanic not responded in the same spirit o f defiant pride to the m essage from another ship, the Californian, that could have saved the ship and hundreds o f lives had it been heeded.When the potentially life saving information was conveyed via radio message to the Titanic, warning it to stop as icebergs lay ahead, the operator on the Titanic retorted: "Keep out!Shut up! Y ou're jamming my signal!I am working on Cape Race!"He was busy sending birthday messages to a radio station -Cape Race -on land.C om te becam e so enam ored by his vision o f the p o sitiv ist society o f he future, th at he even e n visioned the tim e w hen perhaps m en and w om en w ould develop to the po in t w here the sexual act w ould no longer be n ecessary and 'birth w ould em anate from w om an a lo n e ' (Johnson, 1981:75).

Perhaps
"This was Comte's conception o f his mission when in 1857, he was stricken with cancer and died" (Johnson, 1981:75).
Other sociologists followed basically the same route: Karl Marx saw the coming communist society as one in which people would all be atheists without any need for God or religious ideas" (Fraser & Campolo, 1992:16).According to Fraser and Campolo, many sociologists display what they call a "secular bias" and refer to Max Weber and Durkheim in this regard: M ax W eb er ... portray ed the m odem technical w orld as b ein g disenchantedthat is, as losing its m ystery or sacred qualities.A s h um ans e n te r the m odem era, a ccording to W eber, they explain m ore and m ore through science and re aso n leaving less and less to religion and revelation.E m ile D urkheim , the m o st im p o rtan t so cio lo g ist F rance produced, w as aggressively secularist.The public values need ed by m odem dem ocracy m ust h ave strong and convincing foundations.D urkheim w as sure th at religion could no longer provide these foundations, w hile a scientific sociology w ould (F ra se r & C am polo, 1992:18).
In spite o f -or perhaps at least partly because o f -more than 150 years o f sociologizing, societies worldwide are in a terrible mess -perhaps even more so than before the advent o f sociology.Although humankind has advanced technologically beyond imagination, one gets the impression that exactly the opposite is true as far as spiritual and evaluative or moral advancement is concerned.
In fact, contemporary sociology and the society it claims to serve, remind us a bit o f the washing machine trying to be concrete mixer and the Titanic heading for a watery grave four kilometers beneath the grey and icy waters o f the North Atlantic.Our societies and its scientists -especially its social scientists perhaps -seem to be not only part and parcel o f but perhaps even contributing (albeit often unknowingly) to a degenerative dynamic operative in our societies.Why would this be so?Maybe the answer -or at least a major part o f the answercan be found in the domain o f visions with its invitational dynamics luring humans -and therefore also sociologists -toward the realization o f some goal hidden at a certain point in time in future.In this case, w e can assume that such a vision couldn't have originated in the heart o f God but rather within the heart o f the Godless self-god.
Looking at the three visions briefly referred to thus far -namely those involved in our illustrations o f the washing machines, the Titanic and sociology, a number o f critically important elements o f visions became apparent.
• Visions have a source.

• Those inspired by a vision follow a specific course o f action towards
realizing that particular vision.
• That which is eventually realized -the destiny -either corresponds with, or can differ tragically from the original vision, depending on the degree o f obedience to the evaluative directives coming from the chosen source.
• A definite directionality or directional dynamic therefore -i.e. a definite evaluative movement towards what is believed to be the envisioned ideal -is involved in the dynamics o f visionary action.

Teleological assumptions
The quality o f humans referred to above i.e. being evaluatively on the move towards an envisioned ideal, could be termed directionality in human behaviour and involves people being evaluatively on the move away from that which is considered wrong/bad towards that which is considered right/good, however, these evaluative opposites are defined.This movement occurs in terms o f the evaluative directives (values) derived from a chosen directional source by which a directional vision o f the right and good to be realized is created.According to the directives, a definite directional course or mission is outlined (i.e. the how to get there) and a definite directional destiny is implied (Senekal, 1989:13).
Accepting the phenomenon o f directionality, however, still does not answer the question: Which then is the right direction and which the wrong; which the good and which the bad?The answer is to be found in purpose.

Ontological assumptions
This w ill be taken to refer to questions about the true nature o f both categorical realities and normative or evaluative categories.

Categorical real ities
As far as the true nature o f categorical -be they human or supernaturalrealities, is concerned, Christ-centred sociologists would probably accept the following as valid:

Supernatural categories
The supernatural realm as defined and described in the Bible will be accepted as true, e.g.God as Creator, Christ as Saviour, Holy Spirit as comforter; Satan as adversary; Sin as destructive dynamic not only in individual and social lives but in the totality o f creation; eternal death and eternal life as existent; deliverance from the power o f Satan, the gravity o f sin and guilt and the reality o f eternal life through Jesus Christ, for everyone who will accept Him as Saviour and Lord.

Natural categories
The natural realm would include the totality o f physical and organic creation, and is clearly distinguishable from God and clearly not to be equated with God.The physical realm is primarily governed by natural laws instituted by God and operates primarily within the parameters o f a deterministic causality which could o f course at any time be altered if and when God decided to do so.
The organic realm, especially animal and plant life, operates in terms o f biological laws based on genetic information imparted from God into his organic creation also primarily within the parameters o f a deterministic causality though perhaps to a lesser extent than is the case in the physical reality.

Normative or evaluative categories
As far as normative or evaluative categories are concerned, a Christ-centred sociologist would probably also accept the follow ing as valid.Finally Christ-centred sociologists would have to be bold in calling right, "right" and wrong, "wrong" -simply put, calling sin, sin -and to resist the temptation to call bad things by good names and vice versa.The emphasis here is on "calling" i.e. not hating, rejecting, despising, coercing, persecuting ourselves and others who might be involved in these things, but continuously inviting to come out o f bondage, to hold out hope, to encourage through agape love, to hold out joy if w e choose to obey God instead o f the dictates o f sin.

Anthropological assumptions
Every human being is created in the image o f God, and therefore worthy o f agape love and respect and also distinguishable as creatures from God as Creator.Therefore a distinctly a-deterministic approach would most probably be followed by Christ-centred sociologists regarding the understanding o f causality in individual and social behaviour.Accepting that God is the ultimate causa sui and in control, does not exclude the response-ability and with it, the freedom to choose how to respond to whatever com es our way as well as the freedom to initiate behaviour.Clearly, w e have to acknowledge the presence and impact o f the social structures within which we live but also that these structures and processes never determine our behavior -but at most, influence our behaviour.In this process the individual -or a group o f individuals from the alternative race, class o f gender, favoured by the particular theory, is declared "not guilty".In this sense, sociology and some o f its theories as well as some theories in the other social sciences, operate as scientific blameshifter and thus easily become a substitutional gospel for those who choose not to accept the true gospel o f Jesus Christ through whom they could really be declared "not guilty" as He paid the price for their guilt on the cross.

Deterministic explanations -be
Having accepted the liberation from Satan, death and guilt through Christ Jesus, Christ-centred sociologist would therefore also be liberated from the compulsion to find explanations for human behaviour outside o f the realm o f personal responsibility but would be so doing guided by God's agape love for sinners.

Methodological assumption
Methodological assumptions are considered here to involve two dimensions: Firstly, a research dimension and secondly a teaching dimension.

Research
The

A
Christ-centred sociology as presented in this article is considered to be the resultant sociology flowing from the sociological thoughts and actions o f those sociologists who have accepted Jesus Christ as Saviour and Lord; as the Way to God the Father; as the Truth and the Life; sociologists who have accepted the Bible as God's Word and authoritative revelation o f H im self to humankind; who have therefore moved from a position o f defiant pride towards God and knowingly or unknowingly being an ally o f Satan, his demonic angels and his kingdom o f darkness, to a position o f voluntary and conscious submission to God as Almighty Father, to God the Son as Redeemer and to God the Holy Spirit as Comforter; sociologists who have thus moved from a point o f putting their scientific words in the place o f His Word to a point o f placing their scientific words under the guidance o f His Word.This article furthermore briefly states what a Christ-centred sociology would entail in terms o f the following: the teleological, ontological, anthropological, epistemological, and methodological dimensions.
some sociologists are a bit like this too -dreaming o f their own visions regardless o f what God's vision for them is, thus defying God and putting themselves in His stead and also putting their scientific words in the place o f His Word instead o f under the guidance o f His Word.In fact Auguste Comte who had " ... overbearing sense o f his own importance" (Johnson, 1981:73)believed that theological knowledge had to and would be replaced by more scientific forms o f positive knowledge -yet presented him self as the "Founder o f Universal Religion" and "Great Priest o f Humanity" (Johnson, 1981:75).His goal was to develop a new religion -the Religion o f Humanity.Once the new social order with its new Religion o f Humanity which he envisioned, was established, Comte expected that other sociologists would follow his lead by serving as moral guardians and priests providing guidance to industrial and political leaders and promoting sentiments o f altruism and emotional identification with humanity (Johnson, 1981:74, 75).Comte's Religion o f Humanity was a utopian proposal for the complete reorganization o f society.Sociology would be the queen o f the sciences.It would promote an all-embracing system o f morals that would unite all people in the worship o f humanity and ensure the social order necessary for continued progress.Comte's proposals for a positivist society under the moral guidance o f the Religion o f Humanity gradually became more and more elaborate.There would be various rituals and prayers designed to bring about the sublimation o f individual desires and absorption into the "great being o f humanity".There would be a cult o f womanhood, with feminine altruistic sentiments celebrated (Johnson, 1981:88, 9).
Christ-centred sociology?How would the following dimensions (som e taken from Mouton & Marais, 1985:9-17) o f the sociological enterprise be influenced by a Christ-centred sociology?In an attempt to answer this question, attention will be paid to what a Christ-centred sociology, in terms o f these dimensions, i.e. the teleological, ontological, anthropological, epistemological, and methodological, could mean.The possible influence on these different dimensions w ill be discussed as questions in need o f answers.
the directional orientation o f an individual's or group's life is out o f line with God's purposenamely being His representatives on earth according to the example o f Christ and by the pow er o f the H oly Spirit -the diagnoses has to be: wrong direction.The inevitable result will be a tragic discrepancy between directional vision and destiny.Where the directional vision corresponds with that o f the manufacturer, with that o f the Maker as directional source, where the directional mission is carried out in obedience to the guidance o f the Maker, the directional destiny will converge toward and eventually correspond perfectly to the original directional vision.The result?A joyous, fulfilled, victorious, though not necessarily pleasing, painless life without suffering, sacrifice and rejection -but perfectly within its intended purpose.Such was the life, death and resurrection o f Christ.But visions born out o f blindness, result in tragedy and premature death.The question inevitable occurs: are sociologist moving in the right direction, i.e. according to their purpose?Being o f such fundamental importance in the phenomenon o f directionality, the concept, chosen directional source, needs further clarification.A chosen directional source simply refers to that person/idea/object/substance, an individual or group acknowledges as god in its life.This god is acknowledged as having ultimate definitional authority in the life o f that particular individual or group -i.e. the ultimate authority to define categorical realities and evaluative truths (i.e.distinctions between good and evil) -and is therefore ultimately obeyed when choices between these alternatives are made.If for example Marx, socialism, the human body, money, science or alcohol is one's god, one will obey the definitional dictates concerning reality, truth and required actions coming from the god one has chosen.If the living God, as He has revealed him self through His Word, the Bible, His Son Jesus Christ and His Holy Spirit is not acknowledged as God, it follows logically -seeing that each and every living human being needs and acknowledges some or other god -that a substitute has to be found, with the closest and easiest alternative at hand o f course being the self.More generally speaking, this substitute could either be o f an alternative supernatural naturee.g.Satan or his demonic angels, recognized by Satanists as their god -or o f a more mundane nature e.g. the self, as August Comte thought him self to be, or some other human being like Hitler or Marx etc. or a combination o f these.Sociologists are clearly directional beings and sociology therefore is and will always be a directional enterprise.Accepting that w e as human beings and as sociologist are inevitably directionally oriented in anything w e say and do, the question cannot be whether w e are directionally oriented but rather what the direction is in which w e are moving and furthermore whether the direction we are moving in, is the right direction?Who, however, w ill decide in what direction w e are moving and whether that is the right direction?The answer o f course will be derived from the directional source/ the ultimate definitional authority/ the god w e choose.Perhaps its a good idea to start o ff answering this question by stating what aChrist-centred sociology is not.• Firstly it is not necessarily the same as a Christian sociology.O f course it could perfectly correspond with a Christian sociology in so far as Christian sociologists are truly Christ-centred in their lives and work.This category would include those people Moberg (1989:8, 9) calls "committed Christians" who have the follow ing characteristics: Their identity as Christians is the result o f consciously entrusting themselves to God through Jesus Christ for salvation.They are members o f God's family voluntarily through faith, not merely by creation, location, church membership, citizenship, ethnic identity, nor even rituals imposed upon them by parents and priests.They accept the Bible as their normative guide in all matters o f faith and conduct."• Secondly it is not a church-based sociology though it definitely could be insofar as the particular church is Christ-centred and fulfilling its Godintended purpose.With the religious and church scene in America for example (and one could validly argue, for many other countries as wellincluding South Africa) increasingly operating on the basis o f an open market system and on the basis o f creating social space for cultural pluralism (Warner, 1993), these two bases could easily be given higher priority than Christ and what He requires -and would thus refute the possibility and feasibility o f a church-based sociology.

A
ttem p ts to m ake a C hristian sociology on b oth sides o f the A tlantic grew from a socially -m in d ed C hristian feeling o f inadequacy to cope w ith m o d em industrial capitalism .T hey w ere, in o th er w ords, m otivated by precisely the sam e desire to com prehend the social w o rld as others w h o are m ore com m only regarded as fo unding fathers o f sociology.N ew forces a pparently b e yond the control o f individual citizens w ere shaping their lives.H ow could authentic h um anity be sought in a w orld increasingly d o m in ated b y m ass-production, bureaucracy, new social classes and econom ic theories?The crucial questions were certainly not born o f detached academic curiosity.In America, Christian sociology had overtones (but not the content) o f the American Dream, as great faith was placed in human ability for social improvement and the transcending o f social evils.In England, on the other hand, Christian sociology often involved a nostalgic backward look at the ideals o f medieval Christendom, and an attempt to translate them into terms appropriate for the alleviation o f suffering in the bitterly depressed 1920s and 1930s.Here again, there are parallels with the motivational thrust o f the classical founding fathers, Marx, Weber, Durkheim and others who also sought a social science related to the perceived social ills o f their day."The social criticism o f the Christian Sociologists is a reflection o f their membership o f social movements.To a certain extent it is plausible to speak o f the common roots o f Christian sociology in England and America as being in Christian Socialism."Both o f these efforts though seemed to have developed into some social movement which immediately takes the focus away from the Christ o f Christianity.A lso Harold Fallding (1984) in an article: "How Christian can sociology be?" looks at this topic and suggests that a "Christian sociology" is judged to be mistaken, but what can be defended is an open-door sociology that admits Christian proposals regarding both areas o f subject matter and conceptualization.Although Moberg (1989:20) acknowledges that there are Christian sociologists centred around commitment to Jesus Christ and taking their ultimate values from the Bible, he finds the question o f whether there is a "Christian sociology" more problematic.In so far as a set o f distinctive theories, methods, and subjects in addition to distinguishing presuppositions and other values, are the basic criteria, he concludes there is no such thing as a "Christian sociology."Thequestion then: "What is a Christ-centred sociology teleologically speaking?"needs some attention.In distinction from a Christian sociology, a Christ-centred sociology is a sociology not so much characterized by its own paradigms, models, theories and concepts, though these could form part o f a Christ-centred sociology, but first and foremost by the following: Sociologists who choose to accept God through Jesus Christ as their Saviour and Lord and who at that, accept His Word -the Bible -and Holy Spirit as their directional source, as Ultimate Definitional Authority not only for their personal lives but also for the way in which they practise sociology.Sociologists who will derive their directional visions for society and the role they as sociologist could play, from God. Sociologists who, when on a particular directional course or m ission, will be guided by Gods Word and Spirit -not by power or by might.S ociologists who will be blessed and pleased to see a directional destiny unfolding; to see not a perfect society or humanity, but small steps towards individuals, families, organizations, nations being delivered from the bondage o f sin whether it be in the form o f political oppression, racism, ethnocentrism, corruption, crime, violence, addiction, corruption, sexual and other kinds o f abuses, etc. and set free to experience life in abundance i.e. the kind o f life intended by God (John 10:10).From sociologists thus Christ-centred in their lives and work, will follow a Christ-centred sociology.Inspired by God's agape love and by His truth, spreading agape love, forgiveness, hope and joy to colleagues, students, the public and whoever might witness the way in which they practise their sociology -as they act according to their purpose as human beings and as representatives o f God and His love.In this sense then, it is not so much the tool (sociology) that changes, but the one who uses the tool (sociologist) in the same way as a Christ-centred (Christian if you wish) surgeon would use his tools (knowledge and skills).With agape love and because o f this love, a surgeon would operate on his patient as if he were operating on him self -with compassion, care, devotion and respect as opposed to another surgeon who might be purely profit and honour-driven.In the same vein there is hardly any tension or contradiction between science as tool and the Christ-centred social scientist (scientist if you wish) as the user o f the tool.The latter is simply moulded and applied with agape love as it is used by the former as an instrument.Once again, the major change occurs not so much in the tool, but in the user o f the tool who now chooses to redirect his or her life to correspond to God's purpose -namely to be His representatives on earth -and to use his or her sociological tools towards fulfilling that purpose: Always living according to that purpose, always proclaiming the Good N ew s but never coercing, never blaming, never rejecting others -be they students, colleagues, members o f the public or whoever -if they choose to live by another purpose.Not even God coerces or forces anybody to acknowledge or follow Him through Christ Jesus, though He consistently and softly pleads and invites all o f us to choose Life.Those sociologists choosing to practise a Christ-centred sociology will experience a radical directional reorientation in their work -a paradigm shift if you wish -from a human-centred paradigm to a Christ-centred paradigm(Smith, 1988:218).Perhaps this should be qualified to read as follows: A paradigm shift from an exclusively human-centred, to a firstly Christ-centred and only secondly -as a consequence or result o f the first and in the Light o f the First -a human-centred paradigm.

Cherbonnier ( 1956 :
21) calls the issue o f good and evil "ev eryb o d y's problem " -an issue which demands a verdict from each and every individual in each and every situation and which cannot be evaded.Accepting this " ... fo rces the inquiry: 'What is the true good'"(Cherbonnier, 1956:23).Human history to a very large extent is the history o f a continuous struggle between good and evil withGod as representative o f good and being the Ultimate D efinitional Authority on definitions o f good and evil/ good and bad/ right and wrong.He is also not only the ultimate source o f truth but also ultimate Truth itself.In John 14:6 Jesus states that "I am the way, the truth and the life.No one com es to the Father except through m e".Satan represents evil and the lie and is him self the ultimate lie.Both God and Satan operate through human beings who choose to obey them -God unto life and Satan unto death.Satan's ultimate aim is to achieve a p o la r transpositioning o f evaluative opposites o f cosmic proportions in a futile attempt to destroy God, God's creation, God's kingdom, God's children.This he does by trying to portray him self as the true God and the true God -Christ being the prime target -as the Evil One, trying to portray God as the liar and him self as the one who speaks truth.We as sociologists witness this battle -which is also a battle o f life and death (spiritually and otherwise) -and which also rages with vehemence in our own hearts and minds.We see it in tendencies and efforts to blur the substituting, within the psychological climate thus created, definitions o f bad for definitions o f good, which ultimately amounts to attempts to transpose these evaluative opposites.Basically attempts like these, in practice, manifest itself in explicit or implicit statements calling the truth a lie and the lie the truth; calling what God calls good, evil and what God calls evil, good; presenting death as life and life as death; love as hate and hate as love; darkness as light and light as darkness etc. Examples abound: Calling adultery swinging; calling cigarettes Life; calling crime "innovation" (Merton, 1968:230); presenting sexual contact between adults (hetero-and homosexual in nature) and children, as good (René Guyon Society and Naambla -National American Man Boy Love Association -with their slogan: "Sex before eight or else its too late"sociologists will accept God's definitions o f good and bad -right and wrong also as basis for their evaluation o f social phenomena.Accepting His words -as coming from the Ultimate Definitional Authority -Christ-centred sociologists will see non-material reality -especially evaluative reality, spiritual, sociocultural and sociopsychological realities in its social, political, economic and other sociologically relevant manifestations -as it really is.This is also the general idea o f Ellul's work in his The humiliation o f the w ord (1985) Walter Lippman suggested: "First w e look, then w e name and only then do we see" (quoted in Bredemeier & Stephenson, 1962:2).If w e name reality using God's Words as ultimate source o f our definitions o f situations, w e not only see what really is, but we also see G o d 's better alternative to the broken situation w e might have in front o f us.If w e choose, in obedience, to act accordingly, we not only bring hope to the situation, but also the source o f hope, namely Christ.
Garden o f Eden to obey Satan instead o f God.A s a result sin entered the human realm, causing not only spiritual death and blindness but also physical death -a death which also permeates the physical realm in the process o f continual decay.Humans have inborn knowledge -genetic knowledge if you wish -and therefore a natural tendency to sin (o f course not always manifested in actual or observable behaviour).N o father finds it necessary tell his boy: "Son, today Dad would like to teach you how to lie ..." His son knows it right from the start without having been taught how to do it.O f course this should remind both father and mother o f their own sinful nature and the fact that God loves them in spite o f their sins, forgives them in Jesus Christ's sacrificial death on the cross in their stead, and that the same agape love should guide them as they teach their children to do what is good and right.Humans have been created by God with an inescapable freedom o f choice -a freedom o f choice to acknowledge Him as God or to acknowledge some substitutional god (idol) in His stead.Humans also carry an inescapable responsibility for their choices.
they o f the nature or nurture variety -reduce humans to objects surrendered to the blind dictates o f external or internal forces, which could originate from the sociocultural, psychogenetic or biophysical category.Voluntarism on the other hand tend to underplay the influence o f social structures and tend to grant too much autonomy to individual choice.The concept o f obedience probably combines in a powerful way the best o f two explanatory worlds: It acknowledges on the one hand the external influencesbe they social, econom ic or political -and the internal psychological or biological pressures to which w e are subjected, but without stepping into the pitfall o f determinism which tends to exalt these influences to the status o f forces that cannot be resisted or challenged.It also acknowledges -on the other hand -the individual's ability -i.e.our freedom to choose to respond and to initiate -without stepping into the pitfall o f voluntarism which tends to exalt the individual's will to the status o f sole causative factor in social life.In short, Christ-centred sociologists will therefore probably tend to bring back the causa sui (on a human level) in explanations o f human and social behavioural phenomena.This would in other words probably involve a redefinition o f causality in non-natural-scientific terms as being linked to the concept o f obedience to some ultimate and/or lesser (i.e.sociocultural, psychological, biological) definitional authority as w ell as to teleological considerations in human behaviour without denying the human capacity to initiate or generate structures, to consciously and willingly submit to, i.e. obey, act defiantly towards, i.e. disobey, structural prescriptions and proscriptions, abandon or change these structures.Being guilty o f sin, humans across time and space, suffer from the burden o f guilt and the need to rid themselves o f this guilt either through denial, sacrificial religious rituals -or even sociological theories which transfer guilt, blame and responsibility for the things that went wrong, to somebody or something else (i.e.society or a particular class, race or gender).
How do w e know what w e claim to know?How can w e really know what is really out there in the different realms o f our existence -be they supernatural, natural (physical/organic) socio-cultural, psychological etc?The first premise that Christ-centred sociologists would probably agree with, is that knowledge about the different realms o f our existence is not only discovered on a human level (via science for instance) but has an origin external to the human category i.e.God as the omniscient Creator.This implies the existence o f ultimate knowledge (revealed knowledge if you wish) and enters the human category through God's Word (the Bible), his Son Jesus Christ and his Holy Spirit.If w e as sociologists were to interpret, evaluate and apply the sociological knowledge w e discover by means o f social scientific efforts in terms o f and in the light o f God's revealed knowledge, our directional orientation will be guided by God's purpose.In the human category this external and potentially life-giving source o f knowledge demands a choice -a choice either to accept and obey it as true or accept and obey some other source (and this could imply exclusive faith in scientific knowledge as provider o f answers).God respects the capacity to choose for or against Him -a capacity which He created into us by not encoding directional knowledge genetically into us but leaving it to us to make a conscious, voluntary choice to acknowledge Him as God.This is illustrated by God not placing the tree o f knowledge o f good and evil in the Garden o f Eden behind bars, but only giving His word, directing Adam and Eve not to eat o f the tree, while still acknowledging the freedom o f choice He created into them.In the non-human category, especially the physical realm, God instituted knowledge in terms o f the natural laws according to which physical objects behave.The organic reality contains knowledge in the form o f genetically encoded information which directs the course o f biological life in animals and plants.Gitt (1989:7) refers to the existence o f information in creation as the third quantum in physics, the other two being energy and matter and concludes that this information can only have an external origin -implying God.There is therefore a reality out there and that reality can to a large extent be known at least as far as is necessary for our physical survival and spiritual redemption.In so far as the words -especially the words o f science -about the empirical and other realities out there w e generate and use, are enlightened and directed by Gods words, our scientific enterprise will not only be o f greater use and relevance to humankind but also be guided by God's purposive wisdom as w e become co-workers in the enterprise o f establishing a new and uplifting kind o f sociology.The reality w e look at with our eyes (empirical reality -the focus o f our sociological efforts) should be seen, interpreted, responded to, improved, directed according to the word -God's Word -if w e really want to see validly.The beauty o f it all is, God gives us the freedom to check Him out -not making us robots who have no other choice but to accept his Word without having discovered that it is true.It is furthermore inspirational in the sense o f differentiating between the realm o f reality and the realm o f the truth o f the Word (a distinction discussed by Ellul, 1985:22-23).Faith in Christ, as the truth, inspires us to look at and respond to reality with hope and anticipation.Looking at an apple seed through the eye o f empiricism, one sees a small, physical, round, black object, a few millimeters in diameter.Looking at the same apple seed through the eyes o f faith in terms o f the truth o f the Word -one sees an orchard with thousands o f apples, with thousands o f seeds, etc. (illustration used by M iles Monroe in a sermon).Applying this principle o f G o d 's truth superseding reality, to the way we look at human beings and society and to the way w e do research, could have an uplifting impact on our sociological enterprises beyond imagination.
above has important implications for the research Christ-centred sociologists would be interested in.Although the basic mechanisms would remain largely unchanged, the intent, focus and goal o f research would probably change from being less diagnostic -to being more prognostic, more visionary in our research.(D iagnostic for the purposes o f this argument implies researching and reporting on the nature and extent o f our societal illnesses and in fact creating a negative feedback loop, further infecting societal members with depressing and discouraging scientific findings.)For example, instead o f focusing too extensively and too intensely on what's wrong in family life, the focus could be more on research on how to improve marriage and family life; instead o f focusing so extensively on e.g.how someone becom es an alcoholic, a criminal, a prostitute, a gangster, a homo sexual etc. and focusing on the destructive dynamics o f these social phenomena, the focus could also and rather be on how people have moved out of, have become delivered from, have had an exodus experience with regard to alcoholism, a life o f crime, prostitution, gangsterism, homosexuality, adultery etc.In this way, Christ-centred sociologists would also be empirically documenting the fact that people can and are being liberated from these phenomena through submission to, and placing their trust in Christ.Important here o f course is that also visionary research has to be directed by God's Word in order to be purpose-guided and in order to result in true improvement o f society.In this way Christ-centred sociologists would not only create and sustain an uplifting, inspiring and encouraging feedback loop towards society with a research focus o f this nature, but would also be creating a sociology o f hope, a sociology which is life-directed and would furthermore, in so doing, start balancing the overwhelming quantity o f research in sociology which inculcates a sense o f despair in its audiences as a result o f it being predominantly death-directed in its focus.3.5.2 Teaching SociologyStudents have the right to know what directional source is making a lecturer tick.In fact the word professor means to openly declare your faith in some belief, i.e.Marxism, Socialism, Feminism etc.By knowing one's point o f departure, students will know how to interpret and respond to what one says in class.It goes without saying that no sociologist, whatever his or her faith/belief7 conviction, should abuse their position as teachers to coerce or pressurize students to accept what they believe -not even God goes that far -or to penalize students in any way for believing or living according to -i.e.obeyingthe evaluative directives o f another directional source.
This article in general terms gives a brief overview o f what a Christ-centred sociology would entail in terms o f the following dimensions: the teleological, ontological, anthropological, epistemological, and methodological.Would a Christ-centred sociology for South Africa be possible?It could become a reality depending on whether any sociologist or sociologists would, out o f thenown free will and consciously, choose to accept Christ as Saviour and Lord and practise their sociology in the light o f His Word -taking Him as their directional source, or Ultimate Definitional Authority, allowing their personal and sociological directional visions to blend in with His; navigating their directional courses according to His evaluative directives and His Spirit and seeing a directional destiny being fulfilled according to the purpose intended by God.Marxist and other sociologists have been doing so for decades with Marx, or whoever else they have chosen as directional source.Perhaps the time for Christ-centred sociologists to do likewise with Christ Jesus as their directional source, has arrived.Such sociologists might be surprised at the resonance between their Christ-centred personal and sociological lives and public expectations and needs outside o f academia -particularly in South Africa in which almost 80% o f the population claim to be Christian, and in which fundamental forgiveness and healing is very desperately needed at this point in time.