Quite often I feel like our Churches have confused the American Gospel with the Gospel of Jesus Christ. This confusion runs so deep in some places that the American Gospel has even supplanted the Gospel of Jesus Christ and become hostile to it. This is evident in larger society when Christmas Trees and signs saying, "Merry Christmas" are banned from public areas. This is really a shame because the two can co-exist quite well. The American Gospel was actually designed to allow them to co-exist.
To begin with, let's take some time and define what the American Gospel is. Much of this material I owe to John Meacham in his book, "American Gospel." The definition becomes sticky because it has changed over the past two hundred years. The American Gospel in the 18th century was articulated differently than it is today. When this nation was founded, the great experiment was one of religious liberty. Countless wars had been fought in Europe over what the official state religion would be. The founding fathers wanted to avoid this, so they wrote into the first amendment, "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religon, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
There are two parts to this amendment. Congress shall not establish a religon, and Congress shall not prohibit the practice of religion. This was an idea of religious liberty. The so-called "Separation of Church and State" was enacted to protect the Church from the state as much as it was to protect the state from the Church. However, it was never intended to suppress religious expression completely, as some may assert. The experiment was based on the assumption that religion created moral individuals. Moral individuals in turn created a moral society. However morality has never been something that can be dictated or enforced by law. Hence the separation, allowing the freedom for religious institutions to funciton on their own merit.
Today the message has changed. No longer is the idea to allow religious liberty, but to promote religious toleration, and religious respect. It may sound like a good idea but in reality it hasn't worked very well. Religious toleration is just patronizing. "I don't share your beliefs, but I will tolerate you in my presense" is an extreme example. Religious respect requires one to suspend their uniqueness in order to consider the point of view of another. This may be fine as an intellectual experiment, but it can seriously undermine an institution if it remains unchecked. For example, recently a priest in the Episcopal Church went public saying that she was both a Christian and a Muslim. She didn't see any conflict between the two. However, Christianity believes that Jesus Christ is the second person of the Trinity, become incarnate as a human being, thus worthy of worship. Islam believes that Jesus was a prophet, but not God. Either He's God or he isn't - you can't have it both ways. This religious respect blurred the distinctions between the two religions, and developed something that was neither. Left to its own devices, religious respect will end in a form of neo-paganism. This will then become the only acceptable religion in the public eye, and we will have an unoffical state religion.
Returning to the idea of religious liberty however, allows for a plethora of religions, all with their uniqueness. It does not result in the syncrotism we have seen before because it allows for some clear boundaries. For example, there is a Buddhist community near where I live. They're currently under attack by the local government because the zoning laws do not allow for a place of worship in their current location. I'm actually in favor of the Budhists remaining where they are, and being free to practice their religion. At the same time I do not believe any of the tenants of Budhism. I'm a Christian and they're two completely different things. What I do believe in is that they have the right to practice their religion as they have received it. That is religious liberty, and that's what America was founded upon.
So where has the confusion come from? It seems that lately we've allowed the idea of religous toleration and religious respect enter into our pews and pulpits. We've then had to abandon some of the ideas that makes Christianity unique and exlusive. "I am the way, the truth and the life, no one comes to the Father except through me (John 14:16 NIV)" has no place in an age of religious respect. It does in an age of religious liberty though, and as Christians, we do have the right to believe in the unique salvation that comes through Jesus Christ.
So what is this unique salvation. To describe it fully would require a completely separate post. I can sum it up out of our Eucharistic Prayers. Every Sunday we proclaim the mystery of faith, "Christ has died, Christ is risen, Christ will come again (1979 Book of Commoon Prayer p. 363)." To this I will add a lesson we heard in Church a few Sundays ago, "If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will give life to your mortal bodies also through his Spirit that dwells in you (Romans 8:11)." Through our Baptism we are united to Christ in his death and resurrection. We then have died to sin, and risen to a new life through the power of the Holy Spirit, in fellowship with God the Father. No amount of religious toleration or respect can come close to this Gospel.
As Christians, actually as Americans we need to claim this religious liberty, and exercise it. We do not have to cow-tow to every doctrine and belief that comes our way - it just isn't necessary nor is it helpful. What we do need to do is claim our uniqueness as disciples of Jesus Christ our Lord, participate fully as members of His body, and live in the grace and fellowship of the Holy Spirit.
Amen.
To begin with, let's take some time and define what the American Gospel is. Much of this material I owe to John Meacham in his book, "American Gospel." The definition becomes sticky because it has changed over the past two hundred years. The American Gospel in the 18th century was articulated differently than it is today. When this nation was founded, the great experiment was one of religious liberty. Countless wars had been fought in Europe over what the official state religion would be. The founding fathers wanted to avoid this, so they wrote into the first amendment, "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religon, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
There are two parts to this amendment. Congress shall not establish a religon, and Congress shall not prohibit the practice of religion. This was an idea of religious liberty. The so-called "Separation of Church and State" was enacted to protect the Church from the state as much as it was to protect the state from the Church. However, it was never intended to suppress religious expression completely, as some may assert. The experiment was based on the assumption that religion created moral individuals. Moral individuals in turn created a moral society. However morality has never been something that can be dictated or enforced by law. Hence the separation, allowing the freedom for religious institutions to funciton on their own merit.
Today the message has changed. No longer is the idea to allow religious liberty, but to promote religious toleration, and religious respect. It may sound like a good idea but in reality it hasn't worked very well. Religious toleration is just patronizing. "I don't share your beliefs, but I will tolerate you in my presense" is an extreme example. Religious respect requires one to suspend their uniqueness in order to consider the point of view of another. This may be fine as an intellectual experiment, but it can seriously undermine an institution if it remains unchecked. For example, recently a priest in the Episcopal Church went public saying that she was both a Christian and a Muslim. She didn't see any conflict between the two. However, Christianity believes that Jesus Christ is the second person of the Trinity, become incarnate as a human being, thus worthy of worship. Islam believes that Jesus was a prophet, but not God. Either He's God or he isn't - you can't have it both ways. This religious respect blurred the distinctions between the two religions, and developed something that was neither. Left to its own devices, religious respect will end in a form of neo-paganism. This will then become the only acceptable religion in the public eye, and we will have an unoffical state religion.
Returning to the idea of religious liberty however, allows for a plethora of religions, all with their uniqueness. It does not result in the syncrotism we have seen before because it allows for some clear boundaries. For example, there is a Buddhist community near where I live. They're currently under attack by the local government because the zoning laws do not allow for a place of worship in their current location. I'm actually in favor of the Budhists remaining where they are, and being free to practice their religion. At the same time I do not believe any of the tenants of Budhism. I'm a Christian and they're two completely different things. What I do believe in is that they have the right to practice their religion as they have received it. That is religious liberty, and that's what America was founded upon.
So where has the confusion come from? It seems that lately we've allowed the idea of religous toleration and religious respect enter into our pews and pulpits. We've then had to abandon some of the ideas that makes Christianity unique and exlusive. "I am the way, the truth and the life, no one comes to the Father except through me (John 14:16 NIV)" has no place in an age of religious respect. It does in an age of religious liberty though, and as Christians, we do have the right to believe in the unique salvation that comes through Jesus Christ.
So what is this unique salvation. To describe it fully would require a completely separate post. I can sum it up out of our Eucharistic Prayers. Every Sunday we proclaim the mystery of faith, "Christ has died, Christ is risen, Christ will come again (1979 Book of Commoon Prayer p. 363)." To this I will add a lesson we heard in Church a few Sundays ago, "If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will give life to your mortal bodies also through his Spirit that dwells in you (Romans 8:11)." Through our Baptism we are united to Christ in his death and resurrection. We then have died to sin, and risen to a new life through the power of the Holy Spirit, in fellowship with God the Father. No amount of religious toleration or respect can come close to this Gospel.
As Christians, actually as Americans we need to claim this religious liberty, and exercise it. We do not have to cow-tow to every doctrine and belief that comes our way - it just isn't necessary nor is it helpful. What we do need to do is claim our uniqueness as disciples of Jesus Christ our Lord, participate fully as members of His body, and live in the grace and fellowship of the Holy Spirit.
Amen.
Comments