Abiding

[pecunium]

On the flip side of my last post, there are those Christians who don't subscribe to the pernicious doctrines I was railing against in my last post (disjointed though the beginning was).

Sojournors

An excerpt.

Confessing Christ in a World of Violence

Our world is wracked with violence and war. But Jesus said: "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God" (Matt. 5:9). Innocent people, at home and abroad, are increasingly threatened by terrorist attacks. But Jesus said: "Love your enemies, pray for those who persecute you" (Matt. 5:44). These words, which have never been easy, seem all the more difficult today.

Nevertheless, a time comes when silence is betrayal. How many churches have heard sermons on these texts since the terrorist atrocities of September 11? Where is the serious debate about what it means to confess Christ in a world of violence? Does Christian "realism" mean resigning ourselves to an endless future of "pre-emptive wars"? Does it mean turning a blind eye to torture and massive civilian casualties? Does it mean acting out of fear and resentment rather than intelligence and restraint?

Faithfully confessing Christ is the church's task, and never more so than when its confession is co-opted by militarism and nationalism.

3. Christ commands us to see not only the splinter in our adversary's eye, but also the beam in our own. The distinction between good and evil does not run between one nation and another, or one group and another. It runs straight through every human heart.

We reject the false teaching that America is a "Christian nation," representing only virtue, while its adversaries are nothing but vicious. We reject the belief that America has nothing to repent of, even as we reject that it represents most of the world's evil. All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God (Rom 3:23).

...The Lord Jesus Christ is either authoritative for Christians, or he is not. His Lordship cannot be set aside by any earthly power. His words may not be distorted for propagandistic purposes. No nation-state may usurp the place of God. "

Comments

Re: Respect means that G_d is a word that entails many religious teachings

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

There is a long argument about that sort of thing. When it was weak, and trying to spread, the Church allowed a lot of power to rulers, even in affairs which were rightly church matters (the appointment of Bishops and abbots).

Then came security, and they tried to take those privileges back. Various rules were more, and less acquiesent in that.

Comes the Reformation, and all sorts of headaches ensue, not the least of which was rulers figuring they could use it as leverage to get concessions from the Church, and the Church fighting to keep what it had so hard won (in part to keep doctrinal purity).

That Henry VIII had gone to a lot of work to get the permission to marry Catherine, and that having been done for dynastic purpose; and his being very religious (not for nothing did he "Defender of the Faith", which England still keeps in her royal titles), he came to think he had committed a sin.

But Phillip (who was in a better position to pressure the Pontiff) didn't wan't his sister put aside and embarrassed... which led to the Anglican Church.

TK

Re: Respect means that G_d is a word that entails many religious teachings

[cakmpls.livejournal.com]

Sure, I know I'm not the only one to speculate on it! It's just that I'm one of those people given to endless discussion of things that can never be proven . . .

(Fortunately, I married the same kind of person.)