Christian patriotism

A good teacher knows where he wants to take his students but begins where they are. A teacher who can’t speak the language of his students won’t be able to teach them his. And this is one of the key features of Christianity. It sneaks into a culture wrecked and dysfunctional and cures it from the inside. I thought about this a lot this semester teaching Mozambican young men about the epistles of Paul. In Philippians and Titus you can see so clearly the contrast in approach he uses to address different cultural ills. In Philippi, a Roman colony where the culture worshiped power and despised those of lower station, Paul presents Christ as the Emperor of all Emperors who attained his position not through power-grabbing but through humiliation. On the wild isle of Crete where men were lazy and ignorant savages, Paul presented the model of an overseer as someone of moderation and education.

In the trajectory of the Gospel’s influence you will see invasion, syncretism, transformation, and often decay. I come from the USA where Christianity’s influence is waning. But, I work in Mozambique where Christianity is at the stage of syncretism, absorbing Christian Kingdom concepts and joining them to traditional values. Every good Christian thinks his own Christianity is good. That is, he thinks that his worldview is that of the Bible. But it’s not. We are colorblind to the influence of our own culture tinting our theology. This can lead to nationalistic versions of the faith, each interacting with, changing and being changed by the dominant worldview.

I thought about this a lot this week reading My Utmost For His Highest. Oswald Chambers (pictured left) writes in wartime to young men who might the next day face fire in the trenches. That context gives his writings a distinctly patriotic and almost macho swagger. He talks often about sports and battle metaphors. We must “buck up” and “take risks.” The same thing happened during the next World War in the writings of CS Lewis. His radio addresses were to a nation troubled by the threat of invasion and he often sounds to me like he’s giving Churchillian pep talks from a Christian perspective. Now in this century, America is seeing a surge of religious fervor/patriotism fighting the twin perils of a shifting public worldview and a menacing external threat. This leads to unfortunate slogans like JesUSAves and even a newly released, American Patriot’s Bible with an American flag on the cover.

One benefit of the global village is that we can see how others are absorbing Christianity. Is it syncretism or cultural transformation? It’s a little bit of both and as long as imperfect people are being redeemed by a perfect God we will see a spectrum of Christianities. Not for us to judge, but rather to look to our own hearts, where the Holy Spirit is transforming men created of dust and trained on the rough playground of life into the likeness of Jesus Christ.

Login to comment

Comments (24)

For God and Country! I spent 24 years on active duty, then another several years and even today working with the military teaching. My first thoughts were that all things must be true and that the truth will win out in all things. So far and it has been many years, the truth has won out on many things. Again I chose Jesus, as my example to follow in all that I do. I have had to be in combat areas, but I knew that what was taught to me in the bible could be used everywhere I went. I still chose Jesus and in his grace I dwell John
My concern with the most recent iteration of this one is that it seems to work the other way just as much. We aren't just plugging into feelings of patriotism to help people understand Jesus. We are plugging into people's feelings of commitment to Chrsitianity and using them to bully politically. It seems that bad patriots, war protesters, and democrats are casted as bad CHRISTIANS, not that christianity is presented in terms of current political concerns.
As regards the current American nationalism: I'm sure we're witnessing echoes of the Crusades, where a lot of looting, pillaging, and other horrors were executed in the name of Christ.
I'm a patriot as I have for many years put my life on the line for this country. I am also a Christian and would lay my life down for God's children. I follow the teachings of Christ Jesus as told in the bible and will defend all who profess to be Christians. I will not defend those who say they are Christians to get a vote.
First of all, thank you for your service, John. That being said, you have an interesting definition of Christianity:

"I follow the teachings of Christ Jesus as told in the bible and will defend all who profess to be Christians. I will not defend those who say they are Christians to get a vote".

"Protect and Defend" those that agree with your religious belief and refuse to defend and protect those that don't. I'm sure Jesus would think that's a great idea. Did he teach that philosophy in the Bible? So much for "love thy neighbor". I mistakenly thought His approach was:

You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you. (Matthew 5:43)

Once again, it is the Christian dogma that you promote which makes me very proud to be Buddhist.
Jay, I think you misunderstand John. I don't believe he is talking about defend, as in taking up weapons to protect. John is talking about philosophically defending every brother and sister in Christ. To enter God's family, you must be born again and adopted by Jesus, which He freely offers to anyone. John is saying he will stand behind them. All the chanting, meditation or good behavior in the world will not gain you access into the Kingdom. God designed it so the weakest, most ignorant, least intelligent and poorest person on the planet can simply say Yes to God's free offer. This is grace as opposed to Karma.

These are the people John is supporting, honest recipients of God's unmerited favor. John hesitates to support those that simply assume a Christian mantle in order to gain support for their political positions. Who can support or philosophically defend those that wrap their hateful right wing (or left wing) Ideology in a cloak of pious Christianity. That is a tactic of the Klan and some left wing liberation movements.

As a soldier you are sworn to protect and defend all the citizens of this country. The military does not check your religion or race before taking up arms to protect it's citizens.
Rick,
If that is the case, then yes, I have misunderstood John. I speak as someone who has been steadily told that what I believe is wrong (Buddhism) and that I need to change. I have had a great deal of disrespect shown to my beliefs, even while showing great respect and support for the beliefs of others. I have dealt with the attitude that because I am not Christian, then my opinion and my value is less. So, when I read John's post, I heard more of the same.

I read this post, as a Buddhist, to gain greater understanding of other people's beliefs and attitudes. I feel the more I know, the better I can understand their perspective. I will state that I was raised Christian then became Buddhist about 10 years ago. But I do attempt to gain greater understanding of others' beliefs as the years have brought me greater perspective and a more open mind.

So, thank you Rick for the post and I apologize if my understanding of John's post was incorrect. I also have issues with those who simply use religion as a front in order to gain popularity or support. If that was the essence of the post, then I agree completely.
Jay, I really wish more Christians did what you did, with trying to find our about others; beliefs and dialogue with them. 'Good on ya!' as us Kiwis say. I apologize for all of the hurtful things Christians have said and/or done to you. Unfortunately also I have engaged in such things also, so I am guilty as well.
wow, I didn't get that from what John wrote at all, but it makes more sense than what I got.
"It’s a little bit of both and as long as imperfect people are being redeemed by a perfect God we will see a spectrum of Christianities"

i live in the Phils and as i read the posts here, there are really differences. issues that you wrestle with like culture war, homosexuality etc are not so much big concerns here. but the thing is, i do learn a lot from the articles and from the various points of view. i think this is the essence of being church. that we can all learn, struggle and live in God's grace together in spite of or even amidst our different contexts and culture.

thanks for an insightful post.
I'm quite sickened by that red, white and blue graphic with Jesus and the USA map. That's almost worse than pornography.
This is a good article, but it ended with a GREAT sentence: [It's] "Not for us to judge . . . " Yes, when do we learn that Christians in my community have our truths and Christians in another country or culture or neighborhood have their truths. Isn't it about time we realize the Bible is written in such a way as to give different truths to different people? It is terrible for us to judge whether some other group is following the "truths" of the Bible . . . who are we, Paul? The Bible wasn't written to convey one "truth" that should be defended by the Church, rather it was composed of principles and ideas that anyone can mold around their own proclivities.

What makes Christianity so great is that we can find statements in the Bible to shore up our own worldview and be comforted by not being judged by others who call themselves Christian. It's a wonderful Gospel--whatever that might mean to each of us.
I'm probably a bit more judgmental than you on this, jimmmme. I think Christ takes us as we are and transforms us bit by bit into his image. Steven's comment below reflects my thinking pretty well. Culture and cosmos can be redeemed in their diversity, not with the end of making us all alike but like Him.
you wrote "Not for us to judge, but rather to look to our own hearts, where the Holy Spirit is transforming men created of dust and trained on the rough playground of life into the likeness of Jesus Christ."
I looked, and I found a woman. I find it interesting that all your examples are, well, as you say, "macho". Where do women fit into this understanding of Christianity? Should we also celebrate more feminine readings of God's word?
Bethany, one thing I notice is that the image has a very feminized depiction of Jesus. It's an odd juxtaposition don't you think? My friend JK Gayle has been blogging about the feminine genius behind My Utmost For His Highest. See here:
http://speakeristic.blogspot.c...

http://speakeristic.blogspot.c...
that is interesting, and in some ways I think uses the feminine Jesus to justify the violence of the US. I think sometimes feminization of men is used to cover over the exclusion of women, which is problematic. For example, if Chambers was writing for soldiers, was the experience of women in the period included at all?

I'm also trying to gently suggest that you avoid using the male generic in the future, as it makes some of us left out.
I was being sloppy. I like generic "they" a lot and sometimes use it just to irritate grammarians. :)

I think there is a corollary trend in our churches the feminization of worship with gooshy Jesus Is My Boyfriend songs (but that will have to keep for another post).
I have heard this reference to “gooshy Jesus Is My Boyfriend “ songs several times. Give me an example. Personally I like the more direct worship songs where we address Jesus personally. It makes me feel like I am part of the heavenly crowd that surrounds Jesus singing “Worthy is the Lamb who was slain”. To sing “He is holy” is a song addressed to another person. But to sing “You are Holy” is directed only at one–The Lord Jesus.

I am always mystified by this concept of feminizing Jesus or the Church. Usually the inarticulate hairy knuckled preacher assigns poetry, art and ballet to the feminine side and war, football and beer to the masculine side. But I am a 100% red-blooded male, never watch football games and have painted for years and write and read poetry. As do my two sons and many of their friends. Think of the poet, spontaneous dancer and “gooshy” songwriter David or Bezalel the artist who was the first person in the Bible who was said to be “Filled with the Holy Spirit”. I think such arbitrary misogynist categories betray a lack of intelligence or education. I am not accusing you of this, I just disagree with the arbitrary categories of masculine and feminine.
This is unrelated to your main point, so I hesitated to bring it up at all, except that it really bothers me. FYI, generic they is acceptable to most real grammarians.
Like Rick, I'm skeptical of people who complain about the church being too "girly" but I'm also very sensitive to when female experience is excluded.
Amen. Too often church seems to be run by an all-male bonding club. Sermons and teaching are illustrated with testosterone fueled anecdotes. My denomination (I hate to say that) was founded by a woman and still ordains women (Foursquare). Yet it still seems to be dominated by the mens club. Make no mistake, they are a great bunch of Godly guys and I love my fellowship, but I need to hear Bethany's perspective too.
I too have often been disturbed by our confusion between God and Country. We are citizens first and foremost of the worldwide multi-ethnic Body of Christ. Yet our nations deserve respect.

So I wonder then, what is a good theology of Nation? What does appropriate Christian patriotism look like, whether that be American, Canadian, Nigerian, or Iraqi Christian patriotism?

I have some not particularly well-integrated angles on this:

First, our nations are gifts of God, much like a family. They are both second to God's New Family, the church, but gifts to be loved, cherished, and honored nonetheless.

Second, Governments of all sorts are part of God's creation to keep order and restrain sin in our broken world. They are accountable to Him for abuses, and generally speaking, deserve our respect much as parents do. (Restraining evil is also the basis of military service and just war, but let's leave that off for now.)

Third, the cosmos and human culture are good creations of God, thought twisted by sin. Therefore we are called as redeemed people to redeem them as God intended them to be as much as we can.

Anybody else have a good theology of patriotism?
First, where did you get the idea that Crete was a wild island where men were ignorant savages? Crete was the cradle of one of the earliest Mediterranean civilizations, preceding the classical Greek culture, and that was 1500 years before Paul. It wasn't top dog in the first century AD, but it was prosperous and civilized.

Second, there is no such thing as Christian patriotism. Christians can be patriots, as long as we remember that governments (at best) derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, who all fall short of the glory of God. Therefore, we may at times have to act as the conscience, rather than the pep band, for our rulers. Incidentally, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, atheists, among others, can also be good patriots, although their witness to the nation will be different.

Finally, as to C.S. Lewis, he made a very clear point that for the salvation of a man or woman's soul, s/he could be a pacifist or a patriot, and, either one could be used to secure said soul for "our father below." Is his patriotism selfless, or egoistic and opportunistic? Is the pacifism based on trendy shallow rebellion, or is it the sincere conviction of a person of great physical courage? I didn't find The Screwtape Letters to be Churchillian propaganda at all.
Thanks for disagreeing with me. I learn a lot from my critics. :)

I am aware of the history of Crete but I'm taking at face value Paul's less than flattering comments about the Cretans that either reflected prejudice or first-hand experience.
You are very gracious. Thanks for moderating a complex topic so well. I will cheerfully attribute the misapplied stereotypes about Crete to Paul's prejudice, rather than assuming ignorance on anyone else's part. I wonder what the Greek lawyers would say, who sued to stop a biographical movie about Alexander the Great from portraying his well known homosexual side (he was a pagan after all, three centuries before Christ). Was Paul wrong? UnOrthodox. Were the Greeks on Crete savages? Unthinkable, only non-Greeks were barbarians. Stereotypes can be fun, if you don't take them seriously.

See the latest in:

Promotion

promo 1 promo 2
promo 3 promo 4

Donate Now