RSS
May
06
2

Saving The Church Part II, or, A Case For Libertarianism

Stained Glass

For all the talk by and about the “Christian Right” as a political force in modern America, one should be inevitably drawn to question their very premise: Should Christians intentionally affect worldly governments, and what would be the ultimate goal of their action?

This article is the conclusion in specific terms of Saving The Church, which in a nutshell warned against the Church operating on the terms of the world and sinking to its level. But there is another danger to political involvement, and that is making culture operate on our terms. Thinking of political action in the light of long-term goals brings to light a mindset that sounds almost ridiculous when verbally stated, yet drives so much legislation: A land governed by Biblical principles will be more conducive to Great Commission activity. The “Protect the kids” line of reasoning is a much more popular and vocalized subset of it.

Yet even the idea of protecting the children proves counterproductive to Great Commission work. Protecting secular children from homosexuality in the culture, to use a hot-button example, or even instilling within them that it is for whatever reason wrong, does them no good without the Gospel. In fact, such a saturation of Christianity in the media and government may produce the exact opposite effect: an inoculation against the Gospel. If the idea (not necessarily the content) of Christ is drilled into the mass culture, as we see even now in incredibly large numbers, people close themselves off to hearing anything new - or, perhaps even more dangerous, falsely consider themselves Christians.

Protecting our own Christian children from cultural debauchery by legislation then is often simply an excuse for lazy parenting. Yet even if a child is diligently sheltered from worldly influences, whether by the government or by parents, that child must have some idea before leaving home of what’s out there and how to fight it in order to be an effective agent of change. Complete shelter is counterproductive for the very reason that when the influence is inevitably encountered, the child has no idea how to react or counter it.

Christians are defined by being different from the established cultural order. Our ultimate goal is to take people out of the culture - which is more a mindset than a group of people - not conform the culture to ourselves. Just as we cannot succumb to culture in our efforts, as was the warning in the prequel article, we cannot drag culture kicking and screaming to us. Though the culture itself ends up in dramatically different places in each of these situations, the end result is the same: the Church is no different from its surrounding culture. Jesus “did not come to call the righteous, but sinners”. If the culture becomes pure in our eyes, then what is there to convert from?

The Christian Right’s sociopolitical strategy is akin to treating the symptoms of a disease rather than the disease itself. Treating the symptoms gives the illusion of wellness, even if the patient consciously believes what the doctor says is true. Yet beneath the surface, the disease is still as deadly as ever. If they do succeed politically, the inoculation of America will be total and irreversible.







 Comment