American Revolutionaries by Lesley Barker
When Samuel Adams addressed the public on the subject of American Independence in Philadelphia, his speech wove the woof of a political imperative through the warp of a clearly nuanced, intimate, and deeply personal biblical faith in God. Whereas his words applied to how abusive but theoretically Christian governments had produced impure expressions of Christianity around the eighteenth century world, they may also provide an equally apt evaluation of the state of twenty-first century American Christianity at large.
Our glorious reformers when they broke through the fetters of superstition effected more than could be expected from an age so darkened. But they left much to be done by their posterity. They lopped off, indeed, some of the branches of Popery, but they left the root and stock when they left us under the domination of human systems and decisions, usurping the infallibility which can be attributed to Revelation alone. They dethroned one usurper only to raise up another; they refused allegiance to the Pope only to place the civil magistrate in the throne of Christ, vested with authority to enact laws and inflict penalties in his kingdom. And if we now cast our eyes over the nations of the earth, we shall find that, instead of possessing the pure religion of the Gospel, they may be divided either into infidels, who deny the truth; or politicians who make religion a stalking horse for their ambition; or professors, who walk in the trammels of orthodoxy, and are more attentive to traditions and ordinances of men than to the oracles of truth.
The players: infidels, politicians, and professors, remain- all made visible by the recent rise and possible demise of the “Religious Right.” Each group has gained a voice in the media and in the marketplace. None of them seems to possess the argument, authority, or acumen needed to bring truth to bear against the besetting problems of our time.
Today’s “infidels, who deny the truth” assert that there is no moral absolute, a position only tenable if there is no deity to whom accountability is due. These assert the individual’s “right to happiness”, “right to choose,” “I’m OK- You’re OK,” and “me first” mentality as the basis for moral, legal, and social decisions. Using a grass-roots shock and awe PR strategy, small under-represented counter-cultural groups have been able to burn their bras, flags, and draft cards in front of television cameras often enough to sway a formidable following. The polarity between these “infidels” and the “professors” has been mitigated recently by today’s “politicians,” however.
Today’s “politicians, who make religion a stalking horse for their ambition” include the Republican political machine as described by David Kuo, (recent assistant to Pres. G. W. Bush and author of Tempting Faith,) and the “new” face of Hillary Clinton whose recent rhetoric is peppered with phrases cut from but not credited to Christian hymns and familiar Bible passages. Meant to mobilize the votes of people whose highest allegiance is to their faith by creating a coded co-affiliation, this is a “did God really say” stratagem of the most subtle variety.
Today’s “professors, who walk in the trammels of orthodoxy” continue to proclaim a merciless God whose favors are based on the kinds of outward righteousness that caused Jesus to label as being practiced by “broods of vipers” and “white-washed sepulchers.” Without decrying the behaviors evinced by these proud, exclusive, power-mongering members of the ruling religious elite, Jesus presented contrast after contrast to demonstrate the approachability of the God who heals the sick, casts out demons, forgives adulterers, and touches the untouchables. Where are the “tax collectors” of our day who are honest enough to stand exposed in the presence of this God and plead for mercy even though next to him, in the same pew, the Pharisee boasts of his own superiority?
Is the real problem that the American church at large- no matter what denominational or non-denominational stripe we consider- has taken its place on the “throne of Christ” so that its demand for allegiance and loyalty to the institution masks the need for individual reliance on the Gospel, Revelation, and a pure expression of the Christian faith? George Barna, a social scientist whose Barna Research Organization concentrates on investigating the state of the American church, concluded that those individual Christians whose lives are the defined by their faith are, with more and more frequency, abandoning the institutional church. Like the Americans to whom Samuel Adams addressed his remarks on independence, these Christians whose allegiance is to that city “not made with hands” have been dubbed “Revolutionaries".
Our glorious reformers when they broke through the fetters of superstition effected more than could be expected from an age so darkened. But they left much to be done by their posterity. They lopped off, indeed, some of the branches of Popery, but they left the root and stock when they left us under the domination of human systems and decisions, usurping the infallibility which can be attributed to Revelation alone. They dethroned one usurper only to raise up another; they refused allegiance to the Pope only to place the civil magistrate in the throne of Christ, vested with authority to enact laws and inflict penalties in his kingdom. And if we now cast our eyes over the nations of the earth, we shall find that, instead of possessing the pure religion of the Gospel, they may be divided either into infidels, who deny the truth; or politicians who make religion a stalking horse for their ambition; or professors, who walk in the trammels of orthodoxy, and are more attentive to traditions and ordinances of men than to the oracles of truth.
The players: infidels, politicians, and professors, remain- all made visible by the recent rise and possible demise of the “Religious Right.” Each group has gained a voice in the media and in the marketplace. None of them seems to possess the argument, authority, or acumen needed to bring truth to bear against the besetting problems of our time.
Today’s “infidels, who deny the truth” assert that there is no moral absolute, a position only tenable if there is no deity to whom accountability is due. These assert the individual’s “right to happiness”, “right to choose,” “I’m OK- You’re OK,” and “me first” mentality as the basis for moral, legal, and social decisions. Using a grass-roots shock and awe PR strategy, small under-represented counter-cultural groups have been able to burn their bras, flags, and draft cards in front of television cameras often enough to sway a formidable following. The polarity between these “infidels” and the “professors” has been mitigated recently by today’s “politicians,” however.
Today’s “politicians, who make religion a stalking horse for their ambition” include the Republican political machine as described by David Kuo, (recent assistant to Pres. G. W. Bush and author of Tempting Faith,) and the “new” face of Hillary Clinton whose recent rhetoric is peppered with phrases cut from but not credited to Christian hymns and familiar Bible passages. Meant to mobilize the votes of people whose highest allegiance is to their faith by creating a coded co-affiliation, this is a “did God really say” stratagem of the most subtle variety.
Today’s “professors, who walk in the trammels of orthodoxy” continue to proclaim a merciless God whose favors are based on the kinds of outward righteousness that caused Jesus to label as being practiced by “broods of vipers” and “white-washed sepulchers.” Without decrying the behaviors evinced by these proud, exclusive, power-mongering members of the ruling religious elite, Jesus presented contrast after contrast to demonstrate the approachability of the God who heals the sick, casts out demons, forgives adulterers, and touches the untouchables. Where are the “tax collectors” of our day who are honest enough to stand exposed in the presence of this God and plead for mercy even though next to him, in the same pew, the Pharisee boasts of his own superiority?
Is the real problem that the American church at large- no matter what denominational or non-denominational stripe we consider- has taken its place on the “throne of Christ” so that its demand for allegiance and loyalty to the institution masks the need for individual reliance on the Gospel, Revelation, and a pure expression of the Christian faith? George Barna, a social scientist whose Barna Research Organization concentrates on investigating the state of the American church, concluded that those individual Christians whose lives are the defined by their faith are, with more and more frequency, abandoning the institutional church. Like the Americans to whom Samuel Adams addressed his remarks on independence, these Christians whose allegiance is to that city “not made with hands” have been dubbed “Revolutionaries".
Labels: Christianity, church, religious right
posted by Lesley | 10:44 AM
|
0 comments
