Protecting Our Little Platoons | Christianity Today | A Magazine of Evangelical Conviction

Free Newsletters:

RSS Feeds |

Audio |

Twitter

Home > 2009 > June

Christianity Today, June, 2009 |

Protecting Our Little Platoons

There's reason to be concerned for the future of voluntary organizations.

Charles Colson with Anne Morse | posted 6/10/2009 09:03AM

2 of 2

Alexis de Tocqueville understood the vital role America's little platoons play. Voluntary associations, he argued, are a buffer against the all-powerful state, which has a natural tendency to want to take from individuals "the trouble of thinking and the pain of living," turning citizens into "timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd."

Hannah Arendt, a brilliant 20th century political theorist, observed this phenomenon firsthand in Germany, describing in her classic book The Origins of Totalitarianism how totalitarian regimes succeed by the atomization of society—creating a mass of individuals isolated from the structures that hold civilized societies together. The result is that individuals are left to stand alone before the immense power of the state.

America is far from this, but when I realize how easily it could happen, I am reminded of the unknown man who, in 1989, bravely stood alone in Tiananmen Square before a row of Chinese army tanks.

Ensuring this doesn't happen in the U.S. is a solemn responsibility of every Christian.

Related Elsewhere:

Christianity Today's recent coverage of the White House Office of Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships include:

'The Perfect Hybrid' | At 26, Joshua DuBois has already been a pastor and a congressional fellow, and is now the President's faith-based point man. (May 12, 2009)

New Director Offers Vision for Faith-Based Office | Joshua DuBois tells CT how the new Office for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships is different from the Bush administration's office. (February 6, 2009)

Recent Charles Colson columns for Christianity Today include:

Doctrine Bears Repeating | Evangelicals need to brush up on basic Christian teachings. (March 24, 2009)

Political Exile | A strategy for social conservatives in a socially liberal era. (February 5, 2009)

A Serious Decay | We're paying the bill for relativism. (December 31, 2008)

first page |

2 of 2

share this page

June 2009, Vol. 53, No. 6, Page 64

E-mail this page

Write CT

Print this article

Post a comment

Reader Reviews are below

Subscribe to Christianity Today and get 3 free trial issues. No credit card required.

Please allow 4-6 weeks for delivery. Offer valid in U.S. only.

If you decide you want to keep Christianity Today coming, honor your invoice for just $19.95 and receive nine more issues, a full year in all. If not, simply write "cancel" across the invoice and return it. The three trial issues are yours to keep, regardless.

Click here for international orders

2-for-1 Gifts!

[Reader Reviews]

Average User Rating:

Displaying 1 - 3 of 23 comments.

See all comments

Dave N.

Posted: June 15, 2009 11:28 AM

As many have already noted, this article is full of inaccuracies and logical non sequiturs--he goes from gay marriage in Scandinavia to out-of-control prison kids in the US in two sentences. Maybe Colson should try writing his own articles rather than turning everything over to Anne Morse. Colson (like many of the reformers he quotes but seems to not have bothered studying) simply desires state money and power for his own causes. Aren't there any fact-checkers at CT?

bill wald

Posted: June 12, 2009 6:28 PM

Para church organizations are evil for the following reasons: 1, They give people an excuse to avoid church membership and church attendance. 2. They eliminate support for the local Christian community. 3. They eliminate the need for taking responsibility for their personal faults - people can support para church organizations without being subject to local discipline and responsibility e.g. I give my tithe to Colson's outfit and therefore have fulfilled my obligations to God.

Patrick Gann

Posted: June 12, 2009 10:52 AM

Dear Chuck -- "Perhaps the most important intermediate structure—the family—will be irreparably damaged if our courts impose same-sex 'marriage' by judicial fiat, as in Iowa, Connecticut, and Massachusetts." Agreed. But you need to acknowledge the true solution. If "marriage" and "family" need to be defined individually by families, communities, and religions, then the government has no place acknowledging or upholding "marriage" of any sort: heterosexual, or homosexual. The "civil union" compromise for homosexuals should be applied to straight couples as well. The state acknowledges that I have a "civil union" with my wife, and my church and community acknowledge my marriage. Let me know when you see the light ... I'm so right about this that I can't stand to talk about it with ignorant people anymore. This country must not be turned into some sort of sick twisted theocracy. "Banning" gay marriage is a step in that direction.

The allotted time for commenting has ended.