All Comments for: Civil Religion's Sharper Teeth | Christianity Today

Free Newsletters:

RSS Feeds |

Audio |

Twitter

Home > 2009 > April

Christianity Today, April, 2009 |

THROWING INKWELLS

Civil Religion's Sharper Teeth

All believers welcome, so long as they aren't religious.

Mollie Ziegler Hemingway | posted 4/27/2009 10:56AM

Shortly after he was asked to deliver a prayer at President Barack Obama's inaugural festivities, Episcopal Bishop Gene Robinson proudly announced it wouldn't be a Christian one. He had been "horrified" ...

[Reader Reviews]

Average User Rating:

Rate and Comment on this article

Displaying 1 - 25 of 60 comments.

Page: 1 2 3

Show All

Howard Pepper

Posted: May 09, 2009 10:11 AM

Dawkins and Schweitzer: As to the sentence near the end of the article. Dawkins' thinking indeed may not have inspired sacrifice in service. However Dr. Schweitzer, unknown to much of our younger generation, went precisely to Africa, founded and ran a hospital, while seeking to flesh out a universal ethic of compassion and service. Not a follower of either the popular liberal German theology of his day, nor of traditional orthodoxy, early in his theological career he wrote the classic "The Quest of the Historical Jesus." Near the end of his long and accomplished life, he became a Unitaritan-Universalist. I wouldn't be surprised if there are not a number of people who might say Schweitzer and his example of sacrifice and compassion inspired them to similar service.

susan

Posted: May 08, 2009 3:48 PM

Christians have been doing the missions and sharing the gospel without the "help" of the gov't since the beginning of the church. We do not need this gov't to "give". Taxpayers are paying for everything, not the gov't. The gov't needs to get it right, and stop paying for abortions and giving aide to corrupt gov'ts that is not getting to the dear people who need basic food, water, sanitary conditions, and health and education. Let these corrupt gov'ts be subject to accountability of we, the taxpayers, who are the US gov't. First, we need to get rid of the corrupt persons who are supposed to be our representatives.

Anthony

Posted: May 07, 2009 3:42 AM


Uh...don't accept the money? I don't see what the fuss is...

Steve Skeete

Posted: May 06, 2009 5:09 PM

"Being forced into silence about one's faith and being told you can't hire fellow believers is too high a price to pay". I would like to add that no self-respecting Christian organisation should accept those terms. It is also my conviction that no group of Christians should be so dependent on any source for funds that they feel constrained to do whatever that source requires of them. Many Christians involved in charitable work still believe that when we do God's work he supplies the resources, and he does so using the faithful. Our help does not come from Governments, but from the one who "made heaven and earth". I believe that the Church' works of charity should be conducted in a way that causes people to sit up and take note. Rather than being reduced to begging for funds, the quality and integrity of our work should so "commend the gospel" that state agencies should be looking to us for assistance. Giving up the gospel for state funding is the same as selling out.

Sue	Posted: May 04, 2009 6:52 PM

I'm confused about this publication's own perspective. First, I read about Joe the Plumber in a straightforward interview, no position taken, and some of the commenters suggest that we are mature enough to form our own opinion on the man. Then I read here about the new President's position on what 'faith-based charities' should have to do to avail themselves of tax money, overlaid with a heavy dose of opinion. If those charities do not like his position, then do not take the money - if they are motivated by their desire to follow Jesus, then it wasn't for federal money that they got started doing their work. Frankly, I don't want to see radical Islamic charities taking federal money and using it to foment jihad alongside their good works - I imagine they feel the same way about us, and it is, after all, secular money. Let us support our good works with the Lord's money and keep the government honest.

Paul	Posted: April 29, 2009 11:02 AM

Two points: (1) Why is "Render to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's", thought of as Jesus making an equal claim between the two? As if Caesar and God are simply rivals, both on equal footing and both staking claims as to what is rightfully theirs. Really? After Jesus makes this claim, he is arrested and crucified--maybe there was something to this statement after all. (2) Civil Religion is very specific. In Great Britain there is a joining of State and Religion and in the U.S. a 'Separation', yet the U.S. possesses more Civil Religion by far. Civil Religion is not the church being a part of the state, it is the church following the state precepts; such as war, militarism, police worship, using money to influence the church, etc... The 'world' system is determined based upon people having worth based upon what they can do for the state, not for who they are.

janice

Posted: April 29, 2009 2:47 AM


we have to trust in God, no matter what happen,,just trust in HIm

Ted Voth Jr

Posted: April 29, 2009 12:37 AM


Sisters and brothers, I told you so! Quit your whining! Get off the take; you take someone's money, you're beholden to him. He will tell you what to do. Guess the separation is a good idea after all, huh?

JDK	Posted: April 28, 2009 5:29 PM

Jesus said His Kingdom is not of this world (John 18:36). When are Christians in the U.S.A. going to hear these words and realize that includes us. No matter how good we are in comparison to other countries the U.S.A. is not synonymous with the Kingdom of God. The scripture tells us that no soldier goes to war at his own expense (1 Cor 9:7). We need to believe and trust that Christ will build His Church and advance His Kingdom through us without a "bail out" from the federal government.

Chuck

Posted: April 28, 2009 4:27 PM


Praise God for those leaders like Rick Warren with the faith & courage to profess Christ Jesus on the public stage. Too bad there are so many others that want to be politically correct.

Oscar

Posted: April 28, 2009 4:19 PM

The Church has already abdicated most of its command to the world. "35For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, 36I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me." (Matthew 25:35-36 - ESV). Now we complain if the government wants to set conditions on the money it gives us to do our mission. Remember the admonition of 2 Corinthians 6:14, "Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness?"(ESV) Let us just serve those in need without any involvement from the government. When our help succeeds and the government programs inevitably fail, God's glory will be revealed.

Roger

Posted: April 28, 2009 2:55 PM

American Christians have become too willing to sterilize their faith, voluntarily, for the sake of "separation of church and state," when they should be aggressively opposing it at every opportunity. This is not the language of the Bill of Rights, despite the questionable judgment of the Supreme Court. We must obey the law as it stands, but we do not have to agree with it or "go the extra mile" in our compliance. This "sterilization" is perhaps the greatest reason why the Church in the U.S. has become marginalized and impotent. What a long way from where the Founders were and the degree of influence the Church had. I don't think this merely happened to us; I believe it was our unnecessary meekness that made it possible, along with near vacuum of intellectual opposition. Authentic Christians who sacrifice their identity and liberty to "get along" sacrifice their authenticity, influence, and power at the same time.

David L

Posted: April 28, 2009 2:19 PM

As an Orthodox Christian I can say with experience that civil religion is a very bad thing. Being conservative I have always believed in a strong separation between church and state. The government should never have an expectation that I am going to water down my faith to make it palatable to other false faiths. It drives me crazy when my own churches hierarchs seek to be part of the political in crowd. Recently a Greek Orthodox Bishop sucking up to Obama called him another Alexander the Great. He was criticized by roundly by his own flock, to add insult to injury Obama insulted His Grace for making such a silly statement. I fear the faith that Christians put into political leaders like Bush and Obama. It isn't healthy.

ERS	Posted: April 28, 2009 1:35 PM

Matthew Parris' comments are pretty damning for the idea of a secular religion or of the social programs very popular in the US and Europe. Those programs pre-suppose the very Christian faith (and its fruits) which they deny the need for, while further undermining in their recipients and involuntary donors the faith they deny. How often have you heard in past decades "I don't need to be a Christian to be a good person?" It may take multiple generations, but ultimately Parris' statement shows that notion to be false.

Lewjay

Posted: April 28, 2009 11:03 AM

The federal government is obligated to be impartial and, if you will, ecumenical when doling out taxpayer funds. This means that such money should not be used to support proselytizing by Christians, Muslims or any other religious group. Evangelical angst in matters such as this stems from the myth that our founding fathers intended to create a monolithic conservative Christian republic. Despite protestations to the contrary it seems clear enough that they intended for the state to run itself and the church to to likewise. For Christians the answer seems simple enough. What we render to Caesar is Caesar's; what we render to Christ is to be used solely for Him. Depending of government to support the work of the gospel is folly of the worst kind.

Genie

Posted: April 28, 2009 10:12 AM

You can't have it both ways. If you accept government money, then you must abide by their rules. Most Christians would be horrified to see their tax dollars given to a Muslin faith-based group who can mix their ideology in with the relief and ministry they provide. When are Christ-followers going to begin thinking--about anyone besides themselves. If I work for an organization and show Christ's love to others, as we are commanded to do, I don't need to worry about playing God by pushing my beliefs on them, I just need to love them and let God to the work in their hearts.

Jay	Posted: April 28, 2009 9:57 AM

Now if God so clothes the grass of the field, which today is, and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, will He not much more clothe you, O you of little faith? --- But seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these things shall be added to you. Oh, fear the LORD, you His saints! There is no want to those who fear Him. The LORD is my shepherd; I shall not be in want (lack), And my God shall supply all your need according to His riches in glory by Christ Jesus. ---- I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it, etc, ---. The Church needs trust God to be their God. Our Heavenly Father is either a reliable source of provision or He is not. We need to quit beinging double-minded and stand firm on His Word, a Word that He has promised fulfill if we will believe it. The Church would send a strong witness to our nation and the world if we would cut all governmental control by rejecting all Federal and State finances and start paying taxes.

Twolfpb01

Posted: April 28, 2009 9:28 AM

There has to be a "One World Religion" first. How else do you think the Ati-Christ will get the world to follow him; especially during a time of tribulation that will be upon the earth during his reign. (Rev 13:11-14) 11And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon. 12And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed. 13And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men, 14And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live.

K.	Posted: April 28, 2009 9:17 AM


I agree with the comments that note that the faith-based initiative was a bad idea when Bush introduced it. Anyone who accepted money from this initiative should have known that it gave the government the right to dictate certain things. It's best if faith-based charities do not accept any government money.

Tim	Posted: April 28, 2009 9:13 AM

Back when Bush first proposed this measure, I said it was a bad idea. Any church that relies on government money for their programs is letting the devil in the door. The government doesn't give money with no strings. If you take their money, they now own you. This is why, despite how hard it may be, ministries must rely on God's provision, not the governments. Churches dealing with this now are merely reaping what they have sown.

Chessie

Posted: April 28, 2009 8:57 AM


The immediate solution is to stop taking government money. Ultimately this will not suffice the secularists who run our country, however. The next step will be taxing charities. In the end, those who want to do any good at all will have to do it underground... in secret.

Slider

Posted: April 28, 2009 8:34 AM

It's not suprising that some "Christian" leaders are compromising the gospel with their politically correct dogma, it's been going on for 2000 years. As far as I'm concerned there's no wiggle room when it comes to the narrow gate--sadly many will find this out the hard way. As far as the church cozying up with the state, Shane Claiborne's Jesus for President sheds some excellent light on the subject. I believe we're seeing the second coming of Rome.

Robert Srigley

Posted: April 28, 2009 6:36 AM

People who chime in with hatred directed toward conservative Christians should question if it might be somewhat perilous, spiritually, to so readily echo the spirit of the age. In judging others' motives so severely are you quite certain that the members of the church who feel called to salvage the Christian elements of our culture are not in fact motivated by love? If it can be argued that the jettisoning of Christian values has increased the misery of people in general, and the misery of those on the bottom of society in particular, are you certain that in attacking those whose faith most impells them to engage what they see as the evil of this age that you are not allying yourself with the one whose mission statement is to lie, to kill and to destroy?

Wendell Franklin Wentz

Posted: April 28, 2009 3:11 AM


Mollie Ziegler Hemingway will make a good replacement for Rush Limbaugh on his radio show or sit in for James Dobson on his program broadcasted daily into the homes and cars of millions of far right believers. Aman. -Wendell Franklin Wentz

John	Posted: April 27, 2009 11:32 PM

To expect a religious organization not to hire on the basis of religion is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard. What is next? Should a computer firm not hire people because they know computers and enjoy working with them? Should the Government not hire people who are politically minded and in agreement with the philosophies of the U.S. Government? Obama sure seems to appoint leaders who agree with his worldview and agenda. Should not religious leaders who hire people do the same?

Page: 1 2 3

E-mail this page

Write CT

Print this article

Post a comment