I participated in Tim Dalrymple’s ongoing series on whether or not patriotism is idolatrous for Christians. You can find what I wrote through the link, but a few other posts there got me thinking about how we detect when Christians have become idolatrous in their relationship to the State.
I have a suggestion for you to consider, and I’d like your feedback:
Christians become idolatrous when they believe more in the State than the Church (not to mention Christ), when their focus for change is on what the State can accomplish instead of the church locally embodying that change, when their energies are spent electing one candidate vs. another instead of on the ministries at their church, and when they find their time spent at their local church less than time spent reading news about the State/election/parties or working for political change.
Patriotism is idolatrous when our hope is in the State and when our “agent” of change is the State, or the election and a specific candidate.
Patriotism becomes idolatrous when our politic becomes State and not Church.
For the follower of Jesus, the hope of the world is Jesus Christ and his embodiment in the Church, the People of Jesus.
Some who read this will say “But we need to have both.” Fair enough. That’s not the issue, as far as I’m concerned. The issue is that too many Christians spend too much of their time supporting partisan politics and think in doing so they are furthering the justice of the gospel. So, I would urge us all to take a good look and ask ourselves these two questions: “When it comes to justice, where does my energy focus? Is that energy shaped toward the Federal and State governments, or is it shaped toward what my local church/the churches of my community are doing?”
I suggest the answer to that second question may well inform us about idolatries among us.
Maybe it all comes down to this: Who is your agent of change?
[Yes, that's a pic of Duke Chapel, not a church, but a nice picture nonetheless and a good image for what we're talking about.]
Patriotism becomes idolatrous when it leads us to have concern for the people of our nation (self-interest) AT THE EXPENSE of other people. When we are determined to turn a blind eye to our own shortcomings while highlighting everyone elses, and when we assume that God’s blessing and protection should elevate people who live near us rather than those who live far away.
All these tendencies suggest that the Kingdom of God – which transcends geographic and socio-political borders – is less sacred, holy or important than the kingdom to whose flag we’ve pledged our allegiance.
This seems right to me, but incomplete.
Yes, it is idolatrous when we put too much of our faith in secular politics (of the right or the left).
But what about the idolatry of “God and Country” (treated as of equal importance and closely linked), of making flag, country, etc. objects of devotion on a level similar to our worship of God, of mashing together symbols of state and symbols of Christian worship? Big flags and hymns of state-worship and pledges of alleigance to Caesar’s flag in our sanctuaries, etc.
That sets off my idolatry alarm at least as much as the “state as agent of change” form.
Excellent post.
Living in the south, I’ve been around this for many years: the tendency to see patriotism as the same thing as worshipping God. I didn’t even really notice it, for many years. But now, it seems to be getting more blatant than it has ever been before.
Oh, and let’s not forget, divisive.
(by the way, your photo made me grin…..I’m currently in the building to the right of the Chapel in your picture, checking my e-mail in the divinity school library.)
Well “spoken” Scot. There’s nothing wrong with having our Kingdom views influence our secular politics. However, I have heard too often the phrase “It’s too big for the church to handle”. That is my buzz-phrase for idolatry of patriotism. We put the spin on it that we cannot do it alone and, after all, God can work through the state, too, right? Well, yes, God can work through the state, but when we start saying we can’t do it and the state needs to do it, THAT’S when my alarms go off.
My blog (link in my name) has my own article on this called “US National Religion”. It seems to echo your words, Scot.
I would ask is our energy focused in the direction of the gospel because sometimes our churches aren’t even doing what they should.
This could also be at least a partial answer to James Davison Hunter’s criticism of neo-Anabaptism.
If one truly believes the local church is the hope of the world, then it is not an abandonment of the culture to focus first on the body of Christ and it’s practices – before turning outward.
Great question – much room for thought. When I read your question, “When it comes to justice, where does my energy focus? Is that energy shaped toward the Federal and State governments, or is it shaped toward what my local church/the churches of my community are doing?” – that raises for me the question of justice. JDD Dunn had a great little book about justice and righteousness. On one hand we see justice as adherence to a standard of goodness, thereby allowing for a huge diversity of definitions, and Dunn argues that righteousness is more accurately seen as being in right relationship – vertically then horizontally. I have captured by Hauerwas and his views about the church in America speak to this question (my postings on New Habits) which raises the more frightening question, if we should not look to government and politics, is looking at a church that has assumed the same goods as the government (freedom, liberty, etc) going to make any real difference?
I think patriotism becomes an idol when it is needed and used to feel good about ourselves.
I find your definition of idolatrous behavior convicting to me, but I also think it is lacking. At the risk of being very simplistic, it seems as though your definition would put the civil rights movement, for example, under the label of idolatry.
While I believe that the local church should be the focal point of our energies and hopes for change, it seems to me that the Church has often participated in great evil in part because of an unwillingness to get out beyond the bounds of what is considered church related and fight for social/political change.
Again, I have the civil rights movement in mind. It was very easy for white Christians to say, “oh, that’s just politics,” and believe the comfortable fiction that it had no bearing on their Christian responsibility (especially if they treated blacks well in their individual life). In reality, being on the wrong side of that “political” issue was to be negligent in their Christian faith.
I don’t know, I guess I would just argue that sometimes Christianity, faithfully lived out, will at times become unavoidably political.
I disagree in the case when someone is active politically as an agent of change and accomplishes real outcomes. I think the danger for everyone else is most evident in that it is too easy for people to be armchair quarterbacks when don’t actually get in the game when it is politics. Forcing action in a local church expression ensures alignment much more than whining about politics.
Great post, Scot.
I think a good litmus test for what may or may not be an idol in one’s life is by asking, “What if it went away?”
I wish the Church (and those who are of her) would speak as loudly about the Good News of a kingdom which is not of this world as they tend to love to do about their favorite political platform or ideologue.
p.s. Great picture!
And Duke Chapel IS a church, btw
Chad@12 – Good litumus test! If the US government went away, what then? I’d hope we in the church could say “well, it doesn’t make that much difference because we’re doing it anyways”. Unfortunately, whether you are left or right, I don’t think that answer can be said these days.
In regard to your Facebook question, I believe that patriotism becomes idolatrous when our political views conflict with our ideas about and experience of God, and we live the former.
Chad, thanks for that. I forgot that Duke Chapel is a church, too. When we were down there someone told me that.
I agree wholeheartedly with Jesse–consider the level of inequality in the US is at record numbers. Over the past 30 years Middle and working class wages have stagnated and actually decreased while wages for the wealthiest 3% have skyrocketed. But I don’t recall many denominations speaking out against this? Now it appears that our Banking system has failed us again, commuting fraud to foreclose on innocent homeowners, but again I don’t see the Church speaking out for justice. Why the silence and the implicit condoning of these injustices?
Mich and Jesse, yes, good points about the civil rights movement. But I would want to add that Martin Luther King’s vision for civil rights emerged from Ebenezer Baptist Church, and was not just a political action. It was the church going public.
I think we’ve just been too indoctrinated and inculturated into the Christendom/state church mindset. I’m a “Resident Aliens” kind of guy which is not popular with the state church crowd.
However, I think another tempation to politicize faith, justice, mercy, etc, is because it is more convenient. We don’t have to get our hands dirty if we legislate rather than incarnate. I am guilty. My said beliefs and practice so often incongruent.
Regarding Scot’s argument and the civil rights movement, wouldn’t the question be, if the movement couldn’t achieve it’s goals without being a political movement (I’m not suggesting it was only political, but I’m guessing that was major component) would it have succeeded at all?
It seems to me that most of the time politics will follow society, and so we change the nature of politics by changing the societal landscape. If we try to shortcut that by only focusing on political power to achieve goals, then we become tied to that political power and it becomes idolatrous.
For instance, if the rise and fall of “Christian morality” in America depends solely on who’s in charge in Washington, we’re in deep deep trouble. That sounds like a political idol.
It is topics like this that I think we could learn a lot from Roman Catholicism.
From that tradition you have the notion of subsidiarity. Government exists in a subsidiary role to the rest of society. It is not the problem solver in chief. Problems should be solved at the societal level closest to the problem. The federal government exists to address those problems that can’t effectively be dealt with at the lower levels (and contrary to many libertarians such problems do exist.) When it comes to economics, as remarkable as markets are they do not address all problems well.
So the challenge should be to discern the proper role of government with regard to any particular problem rather than a default embrace of a government solution or resistance to any government influence on wooden principles. Subsidiarity is an important check on the machinations of the Christian left and right.
I also like how the RC’s tend to address themselves to broad policy outcomes without delving too deeply in tactics … leaving room for conscientious people to disagree. Unfortunately, Mainline denominations virtually make you subscribe to progressive ideology to be counted among the faithful and conservative churches veer too close to diefication of political conservatism.
I think some reflection on subsidiarity would help us break the hold of seeing the government as the solution to every problem while helping us recognize the essential role government plays.
Mick #18: “We don’t have to get our hands dirty if we legislate rather than incarnate.” I couldn’t have said it better.
Michael #20: “Unfortunately, Mainline denominations virtually make you subscribe to progressive ideology to be counted among the faithful.” You speak the truth on that one, brother.
As one who sees the hand of God uniquely active in the establishment of our nation, it seems to me an appropriate act of gratitude for Christians to seek to preserve that which God has wrought. There is an undeniable effort to erode the values and traditions that have made our country great, and while the starting place for restoration is on our knees, the polling place is where leaders are elected. They, then, will either preserve and protect our constitution, or seek to recreate it in their own image. God has gifted each of us differently, and if one of us has been gifted politically, I would encourage that person to serve accordingly. That said, I think that a lot of well meaning folks are counterproductive in their efforts to effect “justice”.
Marks remarks brings up some interesting reflections. It seemed we possibly modeled our Nations establishment upon the replica of Israel entering into the Promised Land. We cleared out and depopulated the pagan natives and took the Land that appeared to be our birth right. Along the way we brought in our own Egyptian Slaves to build our southern edifice and embraced our manifest destiny and extended it toward the wider world. Yes we are truly a biblical people in some regards and many are proud and patriotic of our heritage. Do we continue being that light upon the Hill? Better yet have we atoned for our sins as a Nation? With the pride one should recognize the warts.
I’d like to ask if it is idolatry of the state to expect the state to structure a health care system that does not allow people with pre existing conditions to be locked out of access to health care financing. Consider that many of these pre existing conditions come out of childhood: juvenile diabetes, birth defects, survivors of childhood cancers, inflammatory conditions, etc. Before the passage of the health care bill we had a system that allowed privately run insurance companies to determine whether people with these conditions had to live with the constant threat of poverty and bankruptcy over their heads. The state allowed that system to develop. Is the church prepared to deal with paying for the care for these people if we decide not to allow to state to structure health care financing differently? I ask this because this is the issue most pertinent to considering how Christians should vote on the role of the state vs the role of the Church.
Great post and stimulating comments. I was mildly shocked and definitely chagrined recently in seeing an American flag flying over a Christian flag on the same flag pole. That could indicate an idolatrous posturing to a national identity, in this case of course, America. And I wonder if people unwittingly do this in the name of what has been mentioned here, a true belief that God is at work in and through America, at least in America’s essence. They end up usurping the kingdom of God in Jesus found in the community of God in Jesus, the church, with America and God’s supposed work through it. Or somehow hold that in both God is doing something of his work in the world, which I really think a lot of Christians do. But in so doing the real cause of God in Jesus in the world takes a back seat to the nationalistic ideal.
or the real cause can take a back seat I should say
…and in my view invariably does in some very true sense when this is done. At least human government plays a role it is never intended to play in this world as far as God’s will in Jesus is concerned.
But like Michael Kruse says, and others here, it indeed can be an instrument to good ends. But never ever can it replace or is it meant to displace the kingdom of God active and at work in Jesus in the world, which today means those in Jesus (and in a sense always did upon the inception of Jesus’ ministry and gathering of his people).
@Ava
I don’t see what your comment has to do with the discussion at hand. It is just a collection of talking points in favor of health care reform. It is not idolatry to affirm or oppose the extant legislative solution to the problem.
Ava, thank you for a very insightful and pertinent comment.
@ kevin s.
“Christians become idolatrous when they believe more in the State than the Church (not to mention Christ), when their focus for change is on what the State can accomplish instead of the church locally embodying that change….”
The issue of the role of the State vs the role of the Church in providing health care to a nation’s citizens is relevant to the question of this blog. It is especially timely because of the health care debate of the past two years. If as Christians we decide that it is inappropriate for the State to structure health care in such a way that the sickest among us are not disenfranchised, what is our better plan for their earthly health and well being?
Every form of nationalism walks a tightrope over the abyss of idolatry. To add to Scot’s original post, a nationalism becomes idolatrous when it co-opts religious faith to legitimise its cause. Or in other words, when the gospel narrative gets used to prop up a temporary nationalist one.
A national identity becomes idolatrous when my identity as an American (or whatever) is as important or more important than my identity as a Christian.
Nation states are pretty recent inventions. We need to see them as temporary human cultural creations and ‘sit loose’ with our loyalty to them.