At the 2022 Annual Meeting of National Religious Broadcasters (NRB), Pastor Allen Jackson delivered a keynote address coping with the response of Christians within the midst of a cultural drift away from traditional morals and conservative norms. Jackson noted transgender athletes, gay marriage, abortion, COVID mandates, and a wide range of other socio-political oddities as evidence of the erosion of truth in American society. He encouraged Christians to be lively in evangelism and speaking the reality. Unbelievers must know Christ.
Yet, sooner or later, Jackson moves from the apolitical witness of the church to a conversation in regards to the United States and the preservation of a specific heritage. For instance, Jackson notes:
“We’ve done that [practiced a policy of appeasement]. They took prayer out of the faculties, and we nodded: ‘’Well, we’ll pray elsewhere.’ They took the commandments out of the faculties, and we nodded, and we said, ‘We can say the commandments someplace else.’ They redefined marriage and put a rainbow on the White House…and we shrugged our shoulders and said, ‘Well, we will still practice our faith the best way we wish to….Folks, the heritage of this nation is of a Christian worldview. It didn’t demand that you just be a Christ follower. We’ve at all times been a melting pot with people from many religions and lots of backgrounds, however the values which have sure us together as a people have at all times come from a Judeo-Christian worldview, and if we sacrifice that, we are going to lose our freedoms, our liberties, and our opportunities. Our children won’t know the things which have defined our lives.”
I don’t have any desire to defame Jackson. He is a talented preacher and robust biblical teacher. In this instance, nonetheless, the attitude he advances is lacking in theological nuance. In particular,r Jackson (1) collapses Christian conviction with a national Christian (or Judeo-Christian) worldview, (2) suggests a connection between Christianity and political freedom, and (3) elevates the rights we have now within the United States to a definitional status.
Why does one keynote address from 2022 matter? It matters since it is representative of a perspective that has turn out to be somewhat normative in certain Christian circles. As I discuss at greater length in Serpents and Doves: Christians, Politics, and the Art of Bearing Witness, collapsing the excellence between the church and American civil religion (ACR) has turn out to be fairly common. Maintaining the excellence is crucial because Christians will not be called to embody and even preserve America’s heritage unless doing so emerges from discipleship.
Collapsing Christian Conviction with a National Christian Worldview
Jackson and others seem willing to explain the worldview of the United States as “Christian” or “Judeo-Christian,” despite the fact that Christ and, thus, the Triune God will not be essential to it. As I note elsewhere, “When the nation or conservative values or institutions which have decoupled themselves from or marginalized Christ are described as ‘Christian,’ we empty ‘Christian’ of appropriate nuance.” Without a recognition of Christ, no worldview—no matter how moral or healthful—ought to be described as “Christian.”
You could also be pondering that this argument is comparatively trivial because it only involves language. Consider, nonetheless, the difference between describing yourself as “blessed” versus describing yourself as “lucky.” The former is a theological assertion—God has provided you with the nice things you will have in your life. The latter is ambiguous—it suggests that the nice things you will have in your life haven’t been given to you with any intentionality. “Luck” dismisses God’s lively presence in our lives and robs him of agency and glory. Words matter.
Instead of asserting that the United States was founded on a “Christian worldview” (or perhaps a “Judeo-Christian worldview), it will be more accurate to say that the United States drew inspiration from the Christian tradition. Our nation doesn’t recognize the authority of Jesus Christ, even when it recognizes the wisdom of select facets of Christ’s instruction. As I suggest in Serpents and Doves, “Using the Bible as an inspiration is much different than recognizing the Bible as inspired.” The former denies the Bible’s authority by choosing those portions of it that serve one agenda or one other. The latter recognizes the Bible as God’s disclosure and seeks to permit the scriptures to manipulate each life and faith. Distinguishing between these perspectives isn’t simply semantic, but is crucial to maintaining any meaningful substance of the Christian faith.
Political Versus Theological Liberty
On July 4th, Americans rejoice our independence from Great Britain. For residents of the United States, freedom—particularly political freedom—is central to our national narrative. Being free politically is indeed a blessing, yet we must keep two ideas in mind: (1) political freedom isn’t theological freedom, and (2) political freedom isn’t vital for theological freedom.
First, there are lots of Christians who’re free in Christ but living under a political regime that curtails all types of liberties. One of my friends, for example, grew up in communist Romania as a Christian. He was free in Christ, but restricted in his political freedom. Christians, whatever the political freedoms they lack or enjoy are at all times free to serve Christ.
Second, in 1 Corinthians 7, Paul encourages Christians to stay as they were when Christ called them. If they’re uncircumcised, they mustn’t feel the need to turn out to be circumcised (7:18). Paul’s point isn’t that Christians mustn’t change, but that they don’t need to vary to serve Christ. This comes out in his instruction to bondservants who will not be to be concerned about their position but mustn’t ignore opportunities to realize their freedom (7:20). The bondservant may not have freedom within the sense that they will not be under an earthly master, but that doesn’t mean that a bondservant cannot serve the Lord (7:22). In fact, the way through which one conducts oneself as a bondservant is crucial to representing Christ well (1 Tim 6:1; Eph 6:5-8; Col 3:22-25; Tit 2:9-10).
The freedom we rejoice on July 4th is neither trivial nor ultimate. We should be thankful for and luxuriate in the freedoms God has provided to us via the governing authorities he has established (Rom 6:1-4). We try this, partially, by ensuring that our political freedom doesn’t diminish our service to Christ. As Christians, we will not be free to do whatever we wish. We are freed for obedience and free to obey all Christ commanded, having been liberated from the oppressive rule of sin (Rom 6:15-22).
Lives Defined by Christ
Jackson seems to suggest that if we lose “our freedoms and our liberties and our opportunities,” “our kids won’t know the things which have defined our lives.” Is that the case? If so, Christians within the United States may have to rethink how central our freedoms, liberties, and opportunities have turn out to be to who we’re. Political freedoms are actually a part of the experience of Christians in America, but they don’t define our lives. Christian lives are to be defined by discipleship. We work out that discipleship in a wide range of contexts and situations which will change the best way that discipleship looks, but never a lot that it isn’t intelligible as discipleship.
When we mistake political freedom for theological freedom, we will easily turn out to be servants of a political system in service to ourselves. When we exercise theological freedom—the liberty to watch all Christ has commanded (Matt 28:20)—we don’t necessarily give up our political freedoms (Acts 16:37-38; 21:39; 22:25-29; 23:27). Instead, we recognize that there could also be a time when surrendering our rights may serve the gospel (1 Cor 9:1-). To achieve this, we cannot make a fetish of our freedoms. They should be taken up or put aside as our commitment to follow Christ dictates. Our rights cannot define our lives.
It is crucial that church and state remain distinct, but not separate. Christians who refuse to bear witness to Jesus Christ have forgotten the core mission of the church: to make disciples. Confusing church and state or political freedom and theological freedom diminishes Christian witness and elevates our national affiliation to an improper place.
We are right to rejoice our freedoms, but we’re flawed if we don’t acknowledge God because the source of those freedoms. We are flawed if we don’t see our freedoms as gifts given to advance the gospel and construct the Kingdom of God. We are called to make disciples no matter our political situation. Losing our political freedoms is probably not desirable; nonetheless, our primary concern isn’t to guard our freedoms, but to bear witness to Jesus Christ. Any political motion we take must emerge from discipleship in order that God’s people don’t turn out to be political lobbyists looking for to preserve a specific lifestyle but men and women with an unwavering commitment to living under the authority of Jesus Christ.
Photo Credit: ©Unsplash/Jonas Von Werne
, Pastor Allen Jackson delivered a keynote address coping with the response of Christians within the...){kind=link}