Thinking-Christianly

It’s difficult to name an organization in such a way that you accurately describe the purpose of the entity. The National Rifle Association (NRA) primarily advocates the private ownership of firearms. The name is not misleading, but it’s not totally clear. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is a more comprehensive title, and encompasses much of its mission.

Sometimes the name of an organization remains static while its mission changes. The Young Women’s Christian Association (YMCA) has evolved to the place where the “Christian” part of the agency has virtually disappeared, and the “young women’s “ is hard to define. In many communities the YMCA builds shelters for abused, battered, and threatened women and their children (of both sexes).

Sometimes the name is chosen to imply an ownership or a mission that is deceptive. The National Organization of Women (NOW) advocates for women who represent a certain political and social agenda, as does CWA (Concerned Women for America).  Perhaps the most obvious examples of a name choice that are designed to mislead is the name dictatorships and totalitarian states give themselves. The title People’s Republic of China is a state that is neither republic nor populist.

In Fargo, one organization calls itself the Freethinkers. The title implies an open-mindedness in the area of thought, reflection, discourse, and debate. In reality, the group argues for the elimination of certain kinds of expression in the public square. Statements that reflect Judeo-Christian beliefs should not appear on public property. In recent years, this group has argued for the removal of an old monument on which the laws of Moses’ Decalogue appear.

Given people’s inattention to significance of any inscription on any monument on public property, the objections seem more symbolic than substantive. I have yet to meet anyone whose life was transformed by carved words on a stone—unless it was their headstone. (And the change happened before the headstone was put into place!)

If some expressions have no place in the public forum, then someone will have to decide what stays and what goes. The question then becomes , “What is the standard we apply here?” In our post-modern culture, that standard will be arbitrary because of the rejection of absolutes. So the issue devolves into the battle for power and control where groups battle to define and enforce their definition of what is fair.

If freethinking was as inclusive as the name implies, it might welcome all ideas to the table and challenge people to seek truth based on evidence and logic without imposing a naturalistic grid on the process. But that would be redundant in some ways. Wherever Biblical Christianity has shaped a culture, it has done simply that. (Admittedly, “Christianity” that abandoned the ethics and values of Christ often produced repression and injustice. But the failure of aberrant Christianity in no way destroys the integrity of the original Christian ethic.)

Christianity does not fear sharing the marketplace of ideas with other worldviews. It can easily stand up in the area of ideas. And it endorses the kind of free thinking that allows all ideas a seat at the table.

The current political climate is marked with hostility and contention as individuals compete for places of power and authority. Pundits debate whether or not the current climate is more negative, more vitriolic than in the past. Whether it is or not, it reflects a tension as old as the human race. We are desperate for good leaders and perpetually at odds with each other about who qualifies as worthy of our trust.

Somewhere in the common list of qualities we seek are such qualities as wise, just, compassionate, courageous, honest, visionary, relational, fair-minded, and balanced. Finding such a person among the race of men is an enormous challenge. There will come a time when the earth finds security under such a ruler, according to the Bible. It will coincide with the reign of Christ as depicted in Revelation chapter 20. That period in history will fulfill the hope reflected in Psalm 67:4 “May the nations be glad and sing for joy, for you rule the peoples justly and guide the nations of the earth.”

Some mistakenly view the rule of Christ as oppressive. It will instead be a time when repression and corruption are dealt with using a perfect balance of mercy and justice. It will be a time when the citizens of his kingdom will be able to flourish in ways we cannot today. It will be an age in which our greatest aspirations find their expression in his loving leadership over mankind.

Our human inclinations to desire a righteous government will not find their fulfillment in any political campaign. We ought to labor toward the most just and compassionate society man can create. Our participation in this process is an important obligation. But in the end that which we long for will be fulfilled only in Christ. Our best efforts are but a shadow of what the rightful ruler of our lives has in store for those who trust in him.

The ACLU this week persuaded a judge to rule against the Tangipahoa Parish School Board in Louisiana. The issue was that on one day during the school year 5th graders could pick up a Bible from a visiting Gideon if they wanted to.

The judge ruled that “Distribution of Bibles is a religious activity without a secular purpose.” That raises two interesting questions.

First of all, what constitutes religious activity? In the mind of many, I suspect that religious activity would include praying, reading sacred documents, and worship. But such activities are only a fraction of what Biblical Christianity advocates. Jesus and his disciples urged his followers to love their neighbors, care for orphans and widows, and embrace moral actions that honor God. If children or teachers in school were to engage in such behavior as part of their religious devotion to Christ, should such behavior be banned? Should a teenager be prohibited from bringing comfort to a peer who loses their sister in a car accident if her motivation is spiritually grounded? The notion that religious activity can be compartmentalized into certain kinds of actions reflects a significant misunderstanding of the Christian faith.

The second question is, “What constitutes as secular purpose?” Is a secular purpose one which is non-religious? Or must it be anti-religious? Who decides? Is harassment of a student acceptable or not? If it is deemed bad behavior, on what grounds? If we take a utilitarian approach to interaction in the schoolyard, what determines whose definitions we use in that context? The “secular purpose” eventually becomes whatever an individual or an elite group prefers.

The problem with arriving at a secular purpose is that some moral propositions must be in play. Without some guidelines chaos will prevail. And the choice of what those will be is either going to be arbitrary and subjective or based on some kind of objective standard. Appealing to the notion, “Most educators believe” or “Most judges have ruled” is still subjective, since truth is not the byproduct of human opinions. A public schoolroom ultimately will be ruled by force and coercion if there are no supra-cultural values.