Revival at the Tip of the Sword

Can We Re-Christianize America?

God forbid.

Recent presumably well-intentioned mandates proposed by government officials in Texas, Louisianna, and Oklahoma do not portend well for religious liberty or for the restoration of Biblical literacy in the U.S. A knowledge of the Bible was not lost due to the government, nor can it or should it be restored by government. It is the American church that has failed to maintain the eminence of the Bible.

Since labels seem to be a prerequisite for getting an audience I guess I'll cave and say I am a boomer steeped in postwar patriotism and anti-communism, politically and religiously conservative, leaning Libertarian in thought but void of rightist extremism or Christian Nationalism. I hesitate to call myself an intellectual but I have spent half of my career in a college classroom and have earned a Doctorate in Education. My conservatism was forged in the "roots of my raisin'" in the Midwest (the Ozarks, more specifically) Bible Belt, military service, decades of law enforcement service and leadership, and active involvement in what are commonly called evangelical churches (meaning that I feel a personal responsibility to live and share my belief in Jesus.)

Now that the reader can put me in an ideological box, there might be some cognitive dissonance over my opposition to mandated public school Bible study. I'm less concerned about the posting of the Ten Commandments, but not unconcerned. 

The notion that we are a Christian nation, as well as the notion that any public entity, including schools, must be scrubbed of any Christian artifacts are both poorly understood and poorly articulated. What we should be able to agree on is the historical connection between notions of a Creator and American life. We can go even more broadly to say religion in general, but few religions engender the uncivil wars between the believer and the heathen (calm down - Oxford online defines heathen as "a person who does not belong to a widely held religion as regarded by those who do" so it's not automatically a judgmental pejorative) as does Christianity. 

The imprimatur of "Christian nation" generates an implication that is different from claiming that the U.S. is a nation of Christians. Let's also admit that the notion of Christianity can be more cultural than devotional. The predominant system of theological belief at the time of our nation's founding was Christianity. Historians and commentators like to claim that either the Founders were mostly mere deists rather than Christians, or that they were under the profound influence of devout Christians, depending on what facts we pluck. Our founding documents recognize a Creator as the author of our innate rights and liberty. 

Educated persons were taught the Bible, and church attendance or denominational affiliation was very common, a condition that, while ebbing and flowing, existed until the recent era. Church attendance is at its lowest, and those claiming no religion is at its height. Having a devotion to, recognition of, or expedient acceptance of the common faith was characteristic of our Founders. Within that theological and cultural milieu, the Constitution very intentionally was authored to include "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." This was a brilliant inclusion, born of the pain of European history, that has been mounted and galloped to death by the Freedom From Religion folks who tend to ignore the free exercise clause in favor of Jeffersonian quotes about that "wall of separation". 

Let's deal with the proposed Ten Commandments mandates. As a teacher of the law, regardless of my affection and devotion to the Bible, it would be malpractice for me to ignore the impact of the Ten Commandments on American jurisprudence. To prohibit its inclusion is simply irresponsible and hostile to history. To mandate its inclusion is another matter. For students and other citizens to see that there is an ancient code of conduct that implies the existence of objective truths or at least long-held societal standards can't be a bad thing. The argument that it might make some people uncomfortable because it drags all of biblical religion with it is no more valid than having to read that we are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights. Or that we have to accept Zeus as God if we read the Justinian Code, or bow down to King Hammurabi if we post his ancient laws. 

It's just history folks. It's part of a fabric of heritage, thought, and precedent. A monument or plaque is not a mandate, expressed or implied, that one must bow down to it. I don't think the public display of the Ten Commandments is a First Amendment issue at all, either establishment or free exercise. It is history, a chapter heading, a discussion, an artifact. To say that takes nothing away from its sacredness to me, but it does not impose a religious anything on the viewer. Tearing them down, as has been done in courthouses across the country, was a terrible disservice to the citizenry. 

Similarly, allowing the Bible to be studied as literature should in no way be prohibited. Does the value of this amazing book deserve to be studied by mandate? The historical, cultural, and literary value certainly merits attention, but the demands within its pages to follow its teachings need not be satisfied at the tip of the government's sword. 

A mandate that students and teachers must be immersed in it is chilling to me, even as one who would desire that every tongue confess its Truth. Let me tell you why. Were this vestige of education a continuance of the days before Christianity was scrubbed from schools, we might have a population that could, wholesale, appreciate and revere the Bible in the classroom. That era is gone and with it the requisite respect and honorable approach to scripture is gone. It's not just gone from the public square, it's gone from too many pulpits and too many homes. 

There was a tragic shooting of a citizen who intervened in a criminal attack at the cost of his own life. He was described by most as a "Good Samaritan". There was a day when any schoolboy would likely know that this is a reference to one of Jesus' parables in which a humble outcast cared for a beating victim after the poor bloke had been passed by far more righteous citizens. But an article by a Denver Post reporter ignorantly stated that the reason the helpful citizen was called a Good Samaritan remained unknown. So we have entered a time when fewer and fewer people understand references to a prodigal son, a lost sheep, a Pharisee, a burning bush, or a patient Job. 

The loss of that rich literary treasure is tragic, but it will only be restored by genuine academic inquiry, not mandates. More importantly, it will be restored when Christians return to reading and teaching the Bible in their families and from their pulpits. 

Another reason that mandates scare me a little is that, while I do believe that the Bible has its own power to transform lives and draw people to God, we risk - especially in our illiterate season of American history - condemning the classroom Bible to mythology taught by persons pressured to do so with no passion for its power. I took Roman and Greek mythology in high school. We studied gods, supernatural events, forms of worship and allegiances, and no one - no one - had the slightest objection that we were teaching an ancient religion in a public school. No one in my home state of Missouri cares one tiny bit that the statue that crowns the state capitol is of Ceres, the Roman goddess of agriculture. Why? - because that religious system has been relegated to myth. Is that how our Bible will be taught?

We Christian who are lovers of country embrace the Old Testament promise that "If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves and pray and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land." That doesn't say my people vote. Doesn't say my Congress legislate. My teachers teach. Doesn't say we point out the sins of others. This was directed at people whom God claimed as His own. America has seen times of revival and spiritual renewal. None to my knowledge ever came from the edict of those in marbled halls. 

Let me show my evangelical colors in closing. I love the Bible. Ask me and I'll tell you about it! It holds life and Truth. It tells about Jesus who is the key to abundant and eternal life. It is a love letter from heaven. It is the very breath of God. It is in no opposition to science and history as every new discovery speaks of an amazing Creator, every move of history validates its prophecies, and every archeological dig confirms its historicity.  It is the assurance of God's sovereignty.  It is worthy of the martyrs who gave their all to live it, preserve it, study it, and preach it. For such a Divine gift, must we defer to the force of government, or shall we do our duty as believers to take up this Word and make it ours to teach?