For a long time I really struggled with understanding American Evangelicalism - how can, for instance, American Christians support the bombing of Lebanese Christians? How can Janet Jackson’s bare breast be more worthy of outrage than the destruction of thousands of lives? What happened to “love thy neighbour”, let alone “love thy enemy and pray for those who persecute you?” How did a theology of triumph win over a theology of sacrifice? Made no sense.
So I went back to my notes from the All Nations courses: anthropology, sociology of religion, folk religion, and it became clear to me. You’re not going to like this, but I’ve come to believe it’s true: The situation only makes sense if you consider a separate entity called “American Christianity” which is an entirely separate religion to Christianity. Not a branch of Christianity, not a form of Christianity, but something with absolutely no connection to Christianity at all. It’s a separate religion. And what is the goal of this religion?
“They said, ‘You’re not doing what the church is supposed to be doing, which is supporting the Republican way.’”Go for it; look at it phenomenologically, look at it sociologically, and what do you see? Basically a syncretic folk religion, based primarily on American nationalism, an expression of the “pervasive religious dimension of American political life”. (Bellah; see also “Civil Religion in America”) Its purposes are basically civil and political. Its morality is taken from a highly selective and individualistic reading of the Old Testament, and it mixes in bits of consumerism, Zionism, Republican political values, and corporatism for good measure. Add to this an almost romantic sentimentality concerning the person of Jesus, much like the contribution of Catholicism to Vodou religions, and suddenly it all makes sense.
Via Wood, who adds, “This really deserves to annoy many more people than it has.”
{ 30 comments… read them below or add one }
Steve 10.31.06 at 4:33 pm
I’m not sure that I would go as far as to say there is a separate “American Christianity,” but certainly a large number of American Christians have subscribed to the heresy of subjugating Christ to Caesar rather than the other way around.
Which, come to think of it, is pretty much the way the majority of Christians living in empire have always done it since Constantine first blended it with the state.
I think rather than only poking the eye of American Christians, it would be better to realize that Christianity and empire do not mix well for any of us. Like serving God and wealth, it is impossible to serve God and Caesar.
DH 10.31.06 at 4:43 pm
What is so “Caesar” about America when there is no US empire? Iraq is a seperate soverign nation than the US and in fact every military involvement in nations where there were evil dictators that the US was involved in the US quickly gave independence to that nation. so Caesar doesn’t work in that there is no American Empire.
Also, how is love of nation go against Christ if love of Christ is greater than love of nation. Christ never went against the OT being that it is God’s Word. Christ is included in the all of the NT beyond just the Gospels in that it too is God’s Word so I don’t see the connection you are saying. It is very judgemental and an extreme overgeneralization. If you have problems with nations being founded on Godly principles then you must have a thing against God who established the Jewish nation state. The fact is nations need to have Godly principles as a foundation or it will not stand.
DH 10.31.06 at 4:49 pm
Also, we didn’t support the bombing of Lebanese Christians we support the bombing of terrorist organization who are not happy till Israel ceases to be an tion. There is a difference.
Joel 10.31.06 at 4:51 pm
DH,
The fact that a nation may have been founded on Godly principles doesn’t make evil actions it engages in righteous.
Our nation at times has been swept with evil perversions. We slaughtered Native Americans, promoted segregation, witnessed the Ku Klux Klan having immense influence in the early part of the 20th century, etc.
steve` 10.31.06 at 5:00 pm
Very interesting.
I think what makes this read very aptly for me, is that I don’t see many who in the amreican christian/conservative arena questioing or considering their support for these things. Rather it seems to be a question of abolute support, coupled with an ‘in or out’ for anyoen who does.
I understand how Christians could support the things questioned above (when framed from a different perspective), but not how they could do so without consideration, discussion and at least some questions.
Steve
Donny Pauling 10.31.06 at 5:20 pm
As an American, I really hate the overwhelming belief that Christians should support the Republican party. Jesus definitely would not have done so. Please don’t get me wrong: I’ve been a registered Republican since I turned 18, and I used to vote exclusively Republican. That’s what I was taught to do in Church.
Now, however, I vote for candidates, not parties.
Here’s something I wrote on another blog:
While I’m a registered Republican, I vote for candidates instead of parties. I don’t always vote for conservatives. Personally, I think Jesus would hate much of what the Republican party stands for… and I think many Republican candidates simply PRETEND to hold conservative values simply to gain votes.
I asked my ex-wife what makes her vote for a candidate. She replied “whether or not they’re pro-lifeâ€. I then pointed out to her that Republican Presidents have held office for a total of more than 20 years since Roe-v-Wade, yet abortions are still legal. In fact, a Republican was in office when Roe-v-Wade originally came to be.
The point is that some issues aren’t going to change, and we should focus on issues we believe in that can actually be changed by those for whom we vote.
Wood 10.31.06 at 6:29 pm
““This really deserves to annoy many more people than it has.â€
I was right when I said this. I feel quite smug now.
Pam 10.31.06 at 8:07 pm
The author of the original post is absolutely correct, in my view.
I don’t think he meant to say “All American Christians are like this” but that he was pointing out a mutant child of Christianity that worships America and diefies the Republic.
As someone who grew up fairly close to that environment in the States, I’d say he’s got it spot on. American Civil Religion is a religion of “us and them”, a religion of who is “in” with God and who is “out” with God. Which just proves it’s 180 degrees opposite of Jesus taught and died for.
DH 10.31.06 at 8:09 pm
I guess one must define evil actions. I personally don’t think taking on Hezbollah, Saddam’s regime, etc as “evil actions” and I definitately don’t put that in the same breath as KKK, segregation and the like. To say America is “Caesar” when there is no “American Empire” like the one the Romans had. It seems your argument is strawman and redherring on your last sentence.
DH 10.31.06 at 8:13 pm
Well Pam, no one is “Worshiping America” or whatever. You also mention “whose in” and “whose out”, Well Jesus said “If you deny Me I will deny you before My Father in heaven.” or “Except a man be Born Again he cannot see the Kingdom of God.” It isn’t anybody who says in or out but God from His Word. Jesus accepted all people but He never condoned immoral behavior. Now if you want to talk about the attitude that is another story. I totally agree with you. People who “lean toward my camp” need to show more love. So Pam, I agree with you there. However, the theology takes into account ALL of Scripture and ALL of what Christ says into account without contradiction.
Steve 10.31.06 at 11:50 pm
DH,
The United States military is larger than the combined militaries of the rest of the world’s nations. The United States economy is head and shoulders above that of any other country in the world. The United States regularly uses those two factors to intervene in the internal affairs of nations around the world. Just because you don’t tend to hold territory doesn’t mean you aren’t an empire.
But lets set aside the whole “are we an empire or aren’t we” argument, because that obscures the point. The fact is, by and large, the church in America is swimming along with the currents of American culture rather than swimming upstream with the teachings of Christ. Want to apply Acts 2? You must be a communist. Desire to live by the teaching that “where your treasure is, there your heart is also?” You’re undermining our economy. Choose to live by the mantra of “neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, but all are one in Christ Jesus?” You are providing aid and comfort to our enemies.
It’s one thing to have a love for the ideals, the land, and the people of the nation you were born. It’s quite another to wrap yourself in the flag and declare that anyone who doesn’t subscribe to your particular brand of “us-versus-them” religion is unAmerican and unChristian. Which, far too often, is what many (most?) American churches do.
J 11.01.06 at 2:05 am
The recent graduate of All Nations Christian College stood up and prayed about himself: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other men–robbers, evildoers, adulterers–or even like this American Christian.
Wood 11.01.06 at 12:58 pm
Now, that analogy wouldn’t be stupid if the guy seemed even slightly smug about it.
He seemed more puzzled and angry to me.
Lee 11.01.06 at 2:23 pm
I’d say there is some truth in this but the claim that “The situation only makes sense if you consider a separate entity called ‘American Christianity’ which is an entirely separate religion to Christianity. Not a branch of Christianity, not a form of Christianity, but something with absolutely no connection to Christianity at all” is way overstated. And, anyway, it’s not like American Christians invented the concepts of civil religion, folk piety, wedding religion to nationalism, etc. Europe has no mean record here either.
It’s also uncharitable to assume that all or even most Christians who support the GOP are therefore identifying Christianity with “Republicanism.” Many Christians support their party of choice because they judge it to be the best among the available imperfect options. It’s also worth pointing out that a significant group of American Christians who tend to be conservative evangelicals strongly support the Democratic Party, namely African-Americans.
Which is not to deny that there is a strong and dangerous strain of American nationalism in the thought of many Christians, but I think to claim that they are somehow practicing an entirely different religion that has no relation to Christianity is a big stretch.
DH 11.01.06 at 3:46 pm
Lee, I totally agree with you. Steve, I totally 100% disagree with this “Just because you don’t tend to hold territory doesn’t mean you aren’t an empire.” Also, you mention Acts 2, the reason they did that was for their own safety and the survival of the church. You say “Choose to live by the mantra of “neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, but all are one in Christ Jesus?†I agree the message is made available to all but not all will receive the message of Jesus and thus would fall under what JESUS said “If you deny Me I will deny you before My Father in heaven.”
Also, Steve, did I ever say you were unChristian? I do think supporting gay marriage is unChristian but that is entirely different than Democrat and Republican.
Steve, you are totally “over-the top” and hostile while I wasn’t. To say people can’t defend themselves or support people so they can defend themselves seems strange.
Just because we have a strong military and economy doesn’t mean we are so terrible. Many poor nations have been helped by the US. In absolute dollars we help the poor, help poor nations defend themselves against evil tyranical dictators, etc. Should the US do more to help poor nations? absolutely Should nations like Darfur, Somalia, etc. need help against evil dictators? absolutely but to say America is an empire in such a that it implies they are so terrible is an overgeneralization and shows a lack of recognition of the good of the US. While I disagree with Europeans on their support of Saddam AFTER UN sanctions were passed, I don’t say their terrible because the stance against North Korea was correct. To me we must state the good when the good presents itself. I try to do that but sometimes I fail in that regard. However, I’m trying to be an encouragement at least.
For info sake here is the main definition of empire:
1 a (1) : a major political unit having a territory of great extent or a number of territories or peoples under a single sovereign authority; especially : one having an emperor as chief of state (2) : the territory of such a political unit .
I think Steve you are wrong based on this definition of empire and the post is wrong as well. I don’t see territories or peoples under a single soverign authority. The US respects soverign authority just as long as it is supported to the greatest benefit of the consistiuency of the particular soverignty.
Steve 11.01.06 at 5:21 pm
DH,
By caveating Acts 2 into irrelevance, I believe you are missing out on much of what Jesus has for us. Acts 2 was an outgrowth of the application of Jesus’ call for us to “love one another.” While certainly, the forms of its application are different in the twenty-first century rather than the first, the core values are the same. Unfortunately, for American Christianity, by and large, it’s more “every man for themselves” than “lay down your life for your friends.” We have accepted the poisonous individualism of our culture at the expense of the application of Christian community that Jesus and the early church modeled for us.
Bene D 11.01.06 at 6:16 pm
Having just returned from the US, I think the blogger is spot on.
I was deeply saddened by some of what I saw, well aware I saw/heard a tiny slice of the whole.
I believe there are thousands of US Christians who do not blend the Republican party/culture/nationalism/empirism with thier faith.
I have a lot to process, and came home needing to be quiet before God.
DH - I am sorry, I saw the ideology of US Christian nationalism and the consequences of Christian nationalism on every road I travelled. I know you won’t like me saying that, and I’m reluctant to say much for now because some of what I heard and saw was jarring once again and I have a lot to think about and pray about.
Permit me to quote Michelle Goldberg from Kingdom Coming:
“Sometimes it’s hard to reconcile this benignancy with the violence of the movement’s rhetoric (Christian nationalism). It’s tempting to think that all the talk of war, of taking the land, subduing God’s enemies and building the Christian nation is just harmless hyperbole. But it is wrong, I think the assume that people must not mean what they say just because they’re friendly.
Before I began this book, I did some reporting in the Middle East. There too, I was usually received warmly and treated with humbling generosity. It would be a mistake to conclude from that, however, that the region’s antipathy toward Jews and Americans is not real and dangerous. In my experience, people are often kinder than their ideologies, and always more complicated. Yet individual decency can dissolve when groups are mobilized against diabolized enemies, especially when they believe they’re under attack.
America is full of good people, but something dark is loose. There’s a free-floating anxiety that easily metastasizes into paranoia and hatred for the same enemies always targeted by authoritarian populist movements - homosexuals, urbanites, foreigners, intellectuals and religious minorities. Rationality is losing its hold; empirical evidence is discounted as the product of a secular worldview or a scheming liberal elite.”
DH 11.01.06 at 9:58 pm
Steve, I’m not caveating Acts 2 into irrelevance. I agree with you that we should love one another, take care of the poor, etc. However, I don’t think that Jesus through Acts 2 was condoning Communism like you pointed out. It was out of necessity that their funds were brought together. I think people aren’t willing to lay down ones life for their friends and that it isn’t every man for themselves. I see people who don’t want us to “lay down our lives” for people who are under an evil dictator like Saddam. To me I see those willing to defend those at the hands of an evil dictator as “laying down ones life for their friends”. If America didn’t care for the people who were oppressed under an evil dictator than Iraq would have people living under an oppressive regime. Putting myself in their shoes, I sure wouldn’t want to be oppressed unnecessarily under Saddam. I think the Iraqi people feel the same. Do you remember all of the Iraqi’s showing off their ink on their fingers after voting?
The fact is the Scriptures for the Body of Christ and “Accetp A MAN be Born Again he cannot see the Kingdom of God.” CAN be unified. By Faith in Christ alone we enter into the Body and as a Body each member must do as much for each other as possible. The fact is many people are outside of the Body and if we happen to be members of the Body we must as a Body value all of the members with the many gifts that are evident.
So as you can see this isn’t “poisonous individualism” but a recognition of theresponsibility of the members to the body and the Body to Christ all working together with Christ as the head. So we agree but differ in application.
DH 11.01.06 at 10:14 pm
I don’t see Bene what is so “jarring”. Bene, you aren’t blending culture with your Faith? I think based on your stance and the stance of culture I think you can see that there IS the blending you so blatantly are harsh to. To me it appears to be a double standard. IMHO
“Rationality is losing its hold; empirical evidence is discounted as the product of a secular worldview or a scheming liberal elite.â€
What empirical evidence is being referred to? When one observes Hollywood and those who condone behavior that the Bible clearly states empirically as being wrong than I don’t see what “lack of rationale” is being referred to. That is not to say weshouldn’t love all people for we do. I personally see a difference between what you call hate (cause I agree there are people who do and they should be condemned) and people who say the actions are wrong but the people should be loved. It seems in this day of age that anytime a person says a certain action is wrong it is assumed that the person is hating people. I really get tired of that type of strawman/overgeneralization going on by certain groups of people. “Can’t we all just get along?” People need to respect people who are strong Republicans and moderate Democrats but to say strong Republicans are “dangerous” seems odd when defense of Israel and people oppressed by evil regimes, defend a more moral culture that doesn’t condone sin, etc. I respect you Bene and Steve but to overly attack people or say they are against Christ when they are not seems rather odd when one observes ALL of Scripture as opposed to only the red letters. Heck, even the red letters confirm what I’m saying as well.
Beth 11.01.06 at 11:00 pm
Ooooh… Look everyone, DH brought gay marriage into a totally unrelated argument again! What fun.
John 11.01.06 at 11:23 pm
Steve wrote:
The United States military is larger than the combined militaries of the rest of the world’s nations.
Do you have a source for this statement?
Steve 11.01.06 at 11:45 pm
DH,
I was not stating that Acts 2 supports communism (I do not believe the scriptures have anything to say about any ism), but rather that I have frequently found that many conservative Christians condemn actions similar to those shown in Acts 2 as being “communism.”
John,
I should have said military expenditures.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/spending.htm.
First hit on Google, by the way.
In 2004, the U.S. spent $466 billion to the rest of the world’s $500 billion. I believe over the course of the past couple of budget cycles when you throw Iraq and Afghanistan into the mix, it’s over $600 billion.
Larry B 11.02.06 at 4:05 am
Did anybody ever stop to think that this “American Christianity” is the (apparently ugly) step child of the “Anglican state” that originated in the country of origin for this particular blog? Seems a tad ironic to be wagging fingers at “American Christianity” for “supporting the republican way” when it wasn’t that long ago that people felt opressed enough to want to leave England because of the state religion, and religion and statehood were practically inseparable in England.
Given England’s church/state history it’s a bit laughable that the behavior of some Americans described above is now such a horror. It’s like making a big fuss over a bare breast during the superbowl.
Bene D 11.02.06 at 8:00 am
DH:
Read the book, I might also suggest a trip to your your library to pick up The Origins of Totalitarianism by Hannah Arendt.
John:
Military troop size: 2003
2) USA - 1.414 million - total troops including reserves - 2.685,713 million
This ranks the US 7th in the number of troops per country - 9.23 per 1000 citizens behind Vietnam, China, Koreas, India and Russia
Defense Expenditures
1) USA - 334 billion
2) China - 46 billion
US - largest defense spending in the world - 3.7% of the GDP in 2006
Air force strength (1997) combat planes, fighters and bombers only
1) USA - 2000 with 690 thousand personnel
2) China - 4500 with 470 personnel
Navy - (2002-2003) Frigates figures include cruiser ships and aircraft carriers
1) USA - 62 frigates, 55 destroyers, 72 submarines
2) China 42 frigates, 29 destroyers, 69 submarines
Tanks:
1) Russia: 43,740
2) USA: 7,620
Sources: International Institute for strategic studies, UK, CIA Factbook, US Dept. of Defense, NationMaster
US military spending is more than the top five countries combined.
The US does not have more combined military hardware than the 193 nations on earth.
John 11.02.06 at 2:39 pm
Thanks for the clarification, Steve. I knew that the Chinese army alone was larger than ours.
DH 11.02.06 at 4:18 pm
Beth, where in my post did I state gay marriage? I wasn’t even thinking of gay marriage. I’m sorry if you got that impression but that was not the point. I was addressing Bene and Steves comments on individualism and the Body of Christ as well as the so-called “colonialism” that was brought up. When I say Hollywood it can refer to tons of things that are against God.
Bene, I don’t think we are toward totalitarianism. The fact is these expenditures are necessary to promote a free world. You do your comparison with China. China is a Communist state and a state that doesn’t support freedom in all of its forms including religion. Bene you forget that millions in China are being persecuted for their Beliefs. For me the amount of military is necessary in light of China and all of the other hot spots around the world where freedom is not in those respective countries. However, this view is seperate just like LEE said in his previous post.
Lee, I totally agree with your response.
Larry B, your response was humorous and I totally agree with that response as well.
John, it is wonderful that you have your point proves. Great job and I agree with what you are trying to get at. Wow, there are so many people on this thread I agree with. This is such a breath of fresh air to me.
Mark Byron 11.03.06 at 3:56 am
I’m not sure I’ll be the first to add this to the fire, but Ted Haggard seems to be a decent example of the breed, or should that be an indecent example, given his current issues.
DH 11.03.06 at 3:28 pm
Mark, Ted Haggard is a red-herring. Actions from people don’t change the truth of what is said. When one reads Romans 1 and 1 Cor 6 it is pretty clear that all forms are wrong.
Wood 11.04.06 at 11:08 pm
So the fact that Haggard was a prejudice-exploiting hypocrite is a red herring?
DH 11.06.06 at 4:36 pm
It is a red-herring to the fact that what God says in Romans 1 and 1 Cor 6 areactually referring to sinful behavior. Just because Haggard didn’t practice what he preached doesn’t mean that what he preached was incorrect. God’s Word is constant and irrespective of individuals response either to accept or reject.
The point I’m trying to make is irregardless of his actions Roams 1 and 1 Cor 6 stand on their own in light of what God says about the actions. An example was in Elijahs day when 1000 people didn’t bow their knees to Baal the rest of the nation was worshipping false gods and doing many dispicable acts but it didn’t change the fact of what the one true God was and is and what God considers to be sin and not sin. Just because Haggard didn’t foloow what God says doesn’t make what God says any less powerful. God and what He says are constant and our actions to follow or not follow are independent of that. Haggard sinned and will be dealt with as well as anyone who sins and doesn’t repent. The bigger sin never accepting Christ as one Savior.