Like Salt (Part VI): The “Third Way” as the Salty Way

In late 2019 my most recent book, Resilient Faith: How the Early Christian “Third Way” Changed the World, was published.  I argued that in the ancient world Christians followed a unique way of life.  Rome knew it as the “New” or “Third Way.”

Which of course implies a first and second way.

The first was the Roman way.  Roman civic life and religious life were inseparable.  Public officials were responsible for managing the religious affairs of their community, including maintenance of temples and presiding over various rituals.  People worshiped and sacrificed to the gods; they visited temples, shrines, and monuments; they participated in pagan feasts and festivals; and they kept household deities at the family altar.  Their religion was largely transactional.

Rome exhibited an amazing capacity to absorb new religions into its pantheon, assuming that adherents, whatever they believed and however they lived, would submit to Rome and swear allegiance to the emperor as a god.

It was the way of accommodation.

The second was the Jewish way.  Rome respected Judaism because the religion was ancient.  Jews had survived opposition for over a thousand years and, in spite of that opposition, had spread throughout the Roman Empire, and beyond.  Jews were observably different, too.  They worshiped one God, Yahweh, and they followed a way of life that set them culturally apart.  The Jewish rite of circumcision kept curious Romans from wholesale conversion.  Jewish kosher laws, dress codes, and other religious/moral practices protected them from assimilating into Roman culture.

This was the way of isolation.

And then there was Christianity, the “Third Way.”  Christians appeared to look and live like everyone else.  They spoke the local language, lived in local neighborhoods, wore local styles of clothing, ate local food, shopped in local markets, and followed local customs.  At a surface level Christians appeared to blend in to Roman society quite seamlessly.

Yet they were different, too.  Christians believed in the reality of another and greater kingdom.  It was a spiritual kingdom—“not of this world,” but certainly over this world as superior and supreme, for this world’s redemption, and in this world as a force for ultimate and eternal good.  Christians believed that God’s kingdom impinges on this world, and would someday subsume it, as a rising sun overwhelms the light of moon and stars.

The Christian way—this “Third Way”—was neither accommodating to the culture nor isolated from it.  Christians believed in and followed Jesus, whom they considered not only the way TO true life but also the true way OF life.  Facing suspicion and, on occasion, persecution, Christians created a movement that flourished for some 250 years.  It grew powerful enough to force the ruling elite to choose one of two pathways: annihilation or acceptance.  The emperor Diocletian tried the former; the emperor Constantine chose the latter.

The “Third Way” was like a peaceful resistance movement, which seems almost a contradiction in terms.  Early Christians did not bother much with Rome, at least not directly.  There is little evidence that they tried to reform Roman society or change Roman institutions.  They never led protests against Rome, imposed their way of life on Rome, or demanded their rights from Rome (except for a fair hearing).  Instead, they operated independently.  They asked to be left alone so that they could live and serve as they wished, which proved to be threatening enough.

At just this point we face a problem.

Unlike today, Christians back then had little opportunity to shape social and political institutions.  Rome and church, pagan religion and Christian religion, were simply too different.  Rome did not tolerate religious involvement and interference unless it reinforced Roman values and dominance, which Christians for the most part were unwilling to do.

Many readers have asked me how this approach would apply to our system of government, which is based on the consent of the governed.  In short, Christians in America can exercise influence.  We have the power to vote, campaign, lobby, protest, educate, argue, and effect change, unlike early Christians.

We have opportunity, but we also face danger.  “If salt has lost its taste,” Jesus said.  “How can its saltiness be restored?”  Salt is only salt if it tastes like salt.  If not, it is little more than a white placebo.  Salt’s usefulness is in its function.  Jesus calls Christians to be salty.

What does that mean?  The answer is simple: live exclusively for the kingdom, which both transcends this world and yet promises to transform this world.

Christians should never confuse God’s kingdom with any political order or party.  If we do, we will either impose the kingdom on politics and become ideologues, absolutists, and tyrants, or we will impose politics on the kingdom and become unprincipled and spineless, tolerating almost anything to remain in power.

The kingdom allows for no compromise.  It embodies a pristine and pure vision of reality as God defines it.  Not so politics, which requires debate, compromise, negotiation, and concession.  It is the only way work gets done.  It is slow, incremental, clumsy, and often frustrating.

The early Christian “Third Way” challenged Christians to live for the kingdom, which means that they never quite fit in.  They didn’t altogether accommodate, nor did they completely isolate.  They were salty.

The truth is that salty Christians never fit in ANYWHERE, no matter the political system, or institution, or profession.  Yet you will find them EVERYWHERE: in the Republican party and the Democratic party, in Bible schools and secular universities, in small social service agencies and in large corporations, in conservative think tanks and liberal lobbying organizations.  Never accommodating, never isolating.  But always influencing.

It is the salty way.