Jesus told his disciples, “You are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hidden” (Mt 5:14). Since then, Christians have pondered how best to live up to those words, and how best to be a positive influence in the affairs of this world.
Today, one popular approach is called the “Seven Mountain Mandate.” The story goes that around 1975, three Protestants, Loren Cunningham (founder of Youth with A Mission), Bill Bright (founder of Campus Crusade for Christ) and Presbyterian theologian Francis Schaeffer, all received a revelation that Christians were supposed to take over seven key areas that shape human society: family, religion, education, media, arts and entertainment, business and government.
The true origin of the Seven Mountain Mandate is less dramatic. It goes back to the beginning of the 20th century and the thought of the Dutch neo-Calvinist pastor (and later Prime Minister) Abraham Kuyper. He argued against state control of certain “spheres” or social institutions that did not owe their existence and obedience to the state but to God.
As examples, Kuyper mentioned family, business, science and art. He inspired Dutch-American Calvinist theologian Cornelius Van Til, who argued that since human nature was totally depraved on account of original sin, there could be no neutral common ground between Christians and non-Christians.
Van Til influenced the “Christian Reconstruction” movement led by Calvinists R. J. Rushdoony, Greg Bahnsen and Gary North. They advocated a reconstruction of society by Christians, beginning with the individual and family, then the reformation of other “spheres” up to and including the state and its laws, emphasizing the areas of philosophy, politics, economics, business, education systems and sciences.
This anticipated four of the Seven Mountains. Although Christian Reconstructionists represent a theological minority in American Protestantism, since the 1970s they have played an outsized role in American politics.
When Cunningham and Bright first spoke of the “seven mountains,” and then found that Schaeffer was saying something very similar, their emphasis was on evangelism. The emphasis shifted when New Apostolic Reformation figures latched onto the seven mountains idea and took it in a new direction.
In 2013, NAR leaders Lance Wallnau and Bill Johnson published the book Invading Babylon: The 7 Mountain Mandate, which included contributions from NAR leaders C. Peter Wagner and Che Ahn. This book shifted the emphasis from evangelizing and bearing witness to taking over and dominating the seven spheres of influence. Christian believers, it taught, should not only preach the Gospel and win converts but also “establish the Kingdom of God on the earth” and bring about cultural transformation.
Militaristic metaphors abound. Believers are told to “see themselves as active agents of change who can establish strongholds of truth and justice” and “begin taking land for our King.” Believers should “invade” Babylon and “strategically” transform the seven mountains. The Great Commission Jesus gave to make disciples of all nations (cf. Mt 28:18) is reinterpreted as the restoration of man’s original commission to rule the planet. The citizens of the Kingdom, then, must “invade” and then display God’s “dominion and rule” within the seven mountains. This may involve “covert ministry,” believers acting like secret agents who work to change the culture while hiding their true identity and goals. Many of our cities are dominated by demonic powers who “occupy the gates;” believers must learn to “retake” the gates and “cast down the ruling spirits.”
Johnson’s thinking aligns with Van Til’s. “The Western mindset values reason as the only proper measure of truth, and this has undermined the Gospel.”
Wallnau wants to see Christians take over the seven mountains. Making more converts to Christ does not solve the problem of unbelievers controlling the seven mountains. Christians do not need more conversions to shift a culture but more disciples “in the right places, the high places.” If the Church focuses on changing the world from within, it will lack “cultural power,” and he sees that as a bad thing.
Catholics look at these matters differently. On the one hand, we do believe that Christians should transform the culture. Pope Leo XIV wrote in his apostolic exhortation Dilexi te, “ … we must never forget that religion, especially the Christian religion, cannot be limited to the private sphere, as if believers had no business making their voice heard with regard to problems affecting civil society and issues of concern to its members.” At the same time, the Pope affirms that the Church must show a preference for the poor and powerless as opposed to focusing on “the high places.”
Also, Catholics do not have the same negative view of human reason as Van Til and Johnson. Pope St. John Paul II famously compared faith and reason to “two wings on which the human spirit rises to the contemplation of truth.” Last month, Pope Leo XIV wrote to participants in an International Congress on Philosophy: “Faith and reason not only do not oppose each other, but support and complete one another in admirable ways … ” He reminded participants that Pope “Pius XII, in his encyclical Humani generis, warned against the attitude of those who, pretending to exalt the Word of God, ended up demeaning the value of human reason.”
If reason and faith can work together in the believer, it is also true that Christians can cooperate with all people of good will, including non-Christians, to improve society. This includes the possibility of working together with non-Christians in “high places” toward cultural improvement and transformation.
Related to: ‘Move of God’ doesn’t align with Catholic tradition – Catholic Times: Read Catholic News & Stories