We Were Gods Once We ll Be Gods Once Again
During the Ceremonious War, Abraham Lincoln was purportedly asked if God was on his side. "Sir, my concern is not whether God is on our side," said the President, "my greatest business concern is to be on God's side, for God is always right."
If you detect these ideas absurd and repugnant, y'all are most likely a secularist. If you detect them to be embarrassing truths, you may be on the religious left. If you lot detect them so obvious that they hardly need stating, you lot are probably a member of the and then-chosen "religious correct."
I cover them wholeheartedly"with reservations about how they are applied"which makes me a certified member of the religious right. Although I've often been uncomfortable with that term, I detect that as my political convictions develop, the term fits me more than and more than, as if I'm growing into it. So exist it.
Over the past several years I take served in various positions that accept allowed me the opportunity to engage with people who limited business firm religious and political convictions. My experiences with the religious right have been, at various times, aggravating, encouraging, fulfilling, funny, frustrating, provocative, and, on occasion, downright weird.
In full general, I remain optimistic about the role of politically bourgeois evangelicals, mainline Protestants, Catholics, Mormons, and Jews. At that place are, however, a number of issues that withal requite me interruption. Information technology is worth reminding ourselves of lessons we've learned that can easily be overlooked. Here, then, are nine thoughts I want to share with my young man religious conservatives:
1) As a matter of political freedom I believe there are justifiable reasons to support such problems every bit prayer in schools and public displays of religious symbols. But I tin can't imagine that on the Solar day of Judgment I'll hear, "Well washed, good and faithful servant"you accept faithfully fought to keep the 10 Commandments in the courthouse." Information technology'south more likely we'll all be asked why we didn't spend more time concerned near our neighbors in Darfur or fighting the global AIDS pandemic. Perhaps we should rethink our priorities and put showtime things first.
2) Nosotros have ideological enemies (such equally Islamic terrorists) and ideological opponents (such as secular liberals). While our ideological opponents want us to lose political debates, our ideological enemies desire us to lose our lives. That's a crucial stardom that we should always keep in mind. While nosotros are called to honey them all, we shouldn't lump them all together.
3) In a classical statement of ecumenicity, St. Augustine once said, "In essentials, unity. In non-essentials, liberty. In all things, love." Those of u.s.a. on the religious right should adopt a similar principle and clearly define the boundaries between what is essential and what is non-essential in matters of policy and politics.
Protecting the sanctity of innocent human life and defending the traditional definition of union are clearly essentials. Those matters are based on principles that can exist clearly derived from our traditions and holy texts. Other issues, however, are less opaque. For example, can someone be a role of the "religious right" and non support the war in Iraq? The fact that question tin fifty-fifty be asked shows how we've muddied the waters. While I personally think that, on the whole, the war was morally justified and necessary as a humanitarian intervention, I tin can respect those who disagree. Indeed, the alternate opinion may be as rooted in Biblical and conservative principles as I believe my own position to be. Nosotros must be conscientious and deliberate nearly where we draw the lines of political heresy.
iv) We must go along in listen that the term "religious right" encompasses two unique spectrums. Considering of our commitment to the faith, we often find ourselves in understanding with the religious left. And because our conservatism is informed by our religion, we volition besides observe ourselves in disagreement with the secular right.
Our political alliances, therefore, volition oftentimes exist tenuous and shift based on particular issues. Adherence to our principles trumps loyalty to those who simply share our religious identity. Several years agone, at Family Research Councils Values Voter Summit, Southern Baptist leader Richard Land said he'd vote for a Jewish pro-life pol who promised to heighten his taxes before he'd vote in a Christian pro-choice candidate who promised to cutting them. The rousing applause he received was as disturbing to many Republicans as it was to many Democrats. But Land knew how the issues should be prioritized. Nosotros should likewise.
5) Our allegiance to any party should exist pocket-sized, contingent, and made with a full awareness that both the Republican and Democratic parties will attempt to distance themselves from us as shortly as elections are over. Both parties accept e'er done and so and will likely proceed that tradition until the Eschaton. Our goal, so, should merely be to usher in the side that volition irksome the process of disorder, assuasive united states of america the room to maneuver to re-strengthen and fortify society'south other institutions.
6) Cultural reform is needed more urgently than political reform. Every bit Andrew Fletcher, an 18th century Scottish patriot, in one case boldly proclaimed, "If one were permitted to make all the ballads one need not care who should make the laws of a nation." Fletcher understood that cultural influence was vastly more than important than political power. Nosotros once understood this point as well. It's fourth dimension to remind ourselves that, to paraphrase James Carville, "Information technology'south the civilisation, stupid."
7) Information technology is not enough for religious conservatives to only cognominate the conservative calendar; our political beliefs must be derived from our religious worldview. Deriving them, notwithstanding, requires a complementary worldview and knowledge of how to our worldview and principles interpret to sound political policy. While the difficulty of the task makes it easier to have off-the-rack conservatism, we need to be able to tailor our policies using the material of our organized religion every bit a guide.
8) There are those who telephone call u.s.a. "Christianists" and claim nosotros are attempting to "impose a theocracy""because name-calling and scaremongering are easier than engaging us in contend. Merely in that location are also those who make such claims out of honest ignorance. For example, many of them are likely unaware that the largest Protestant denomination in America, Southern Baptists, cannot even tolerate a centralized church building regime, much less a central authorities controlled by the church. Thinking that a nation full of Southern Baptists wants to found a theocratic authorities is nigh as absurd as assertive anarchists want to create a centralized government. Absurd or not, communicating this reality and addressing misunderstanding is a task we must take upon ourselves.
9) Our beliefs are often informed by tradition and sacred texts. This does non, as our ideological opponents oftentimes merits, make them invalid. But it does brand it necessary to interpret them into common political vernacular when we bring them into the public square. Premising a political argument on "Because the Bible says so . . . " is rarely effective or convincing"even when presented to our beau believers.
Fortunately, God provides us full general revelation"conscience, rationality, empirical observation"which is often effective in expressing his foundational principles in a way that anyone can accept and empathize. Nosotros must use these tools to make obvious the overlooked connections between secular and religious argument. For instance, we can use logic to show how same-sex marriage affects children and religious liberty, or employ empirical enquiry to bear witness how family unit structure influences poverty. It is non enough to be correct in our views; we must also be persuasive.
And finally, nosotros must recognize that America is non a "Christian nation," though we should aspire to be a nation whose Christians are admired every bit good and noble citizens. America is not a "shining city on a hill," though we should let our calorie-free of liberty be a shining example for the unabridged world. America is not the "greatest blessing God gave mankind," though it is a peachy nation worthy of our faithfulness. Patriotism has a function but must not be allowed to expand across certain intellectual borders. Nosotros are citizens of both the Metropolis of God and the Metropolis of Man, and must always be certain not to confuse the ane for the other.
Joe Carter is web editor of Commencement Things His previous manufactures for "On the Square" tin exist found here .
Source: https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2010/12/being-on-gods-side-an-open-letter-to-the-religious-right
0 Response to "We Were Gods Once We ll Be Gods Once Again"
Post a Comment