Is There A Conspiracy Against Christians in America?

 Today, Thanksgiving Day, many of those who seek to follow Jesus Christ and the Word of God are convinced there is a dangerous conspiracy against such followers and other conservative voices in this country. Certainly, former president Donald Trump and his followers believe that to be true. Modern news outlets are spouting "fake news." Elections are rigged. Washington is biased. The far left socialists are planning to take over this country. On and on it goes, fed by Facebook and other social media.

However, this is not a modern phenomenon. Many serious Christians for years have held to conspiracy theories and projections. From a dire projection of the Tribulation days cited in the book of Revelation, to various number theories about "666," to the evil happenings in our nation and world today, such people truly believe we are living in end times and dark days. They are hoping for a reprieve and praying that Jesus will come again -- the sooner the better. All that is happening politically and socially, they claim, point to such terrible times. And a number of them believe this darkness is being engineered by a secret government society seeking to overcome this country and, in fact, the whole world. After all, the Antichrist will rise up and take control of the media outlets and the freedom loving nations of the world. Perhaps he is already here at work.

In a more sophisticate vein, places like Hillsdale College and its newsletter, Imprimis, are publishing authors and speakers who are telling us that far left conspiracies abound and why they are growing and increasing in this country. Classic college and university institutions have been invaded by woke-inspired professors and administrators (Issue April/May 2022). The Department of Justice has become politicized (Issue August 2022). Inflation in America has been spawned by radical economists and pundits. And on and on it goes. The Constitution is being assaulted and overtaken by anti-God socialists and others, pretending that they are supporting human rights and American freedoms. Conservative think tanks are producing papers and court cases citing the effects of conspiratorial thinking in America.

Is there a conspiracy against Christians in America? Well, yes and no. It all depends on your view of freedom, government, the Bible and the reality of sin and evil spawned by a real Devil and his forces in this world. Most non-Christians I know do not have a secret agenda against Christians and Christian churches. To claim they all have been brainwashed by left wing media and woke-inspired institutions and policies may be over the top. There is indeed anti-Christian godlessness in the news rooms and governmental institutions in this country. They have an anti-God point of view and claim that conservative religion is harmful to American freedoms. To say that this is a thought out conspiracy against followers of Jesus may be saying too much. That people have been "brainwashed" by anti-Christian and anti-biblical media teachers, professors and outlets may be very hard to prove, at least not in the classic definition of brainwashing.

What we can say, I believe, is that there are indeed anti-God forces at work in the media and governmental institutions at all levels. Anti-biblical, yes, conspiratorial, not really. There is a blindness to God and biblical spirituality that is apparent. Most non-Christians do not even think these things through. There is also a growing degree of biblical illiteracy among many Christians, and this increases their lack of informed perception about what they hear and read. We should not be shocked by anti-Christian reports and influences on us. This has always been the case in Christendom in any age.

How should we respond to such forces? It does not help to try to pin conspiracy theories on most non-Christian social and media and institutional pundits. There may be a few who want to overthrow all biblical Christian teachings and churches in this country. They may even try to convince many that we as biblically minded believers should be silenced, fined and even jailed for our beliefs. Such a day may increasingly come upon us (this is not to say there are not instances of such happenings today). We need to be informed, perceptive and smart Christians, people who indeed understand the times and sinful forces around us, but seek to lovingly and patiently teach those who will listen God's Word and God's truth. Becoming more and more "closet" or "cocooned" Christians who read and study only what we agree with will not help our country. The Bible instructs us to "test" all things, to hold fast to what is good and not to repay evil for evil (1 Thessalonians 5:21, 22; Romans 12).

The Church In A Divided America

 The Church in a Divided America. Recently, Barna Associates published a survey result called, "Does A Divided Public Look to Pastors for Guidance?" (https://www.barna.com/research/midterms-pastors-guidance/) (October 19, 2022). Unsurprisingly, Barna found that the majority of the American public look to government or themselves for guidance and answers to the current divided agendas. The American Christian public will seek guidance from pastors and other Christian leaders as well. There are always many ways to look at these survey results. Here are some of the ways I look at this.

The Church is not (and should not) be in the business of political infighting or resolution. The Church is charged by Jesus Christ with the proclamation and dissemination of the gospel message, that repentance and faith in Christ is the only way to really change and transform a heart or many hearts. Our mission and mandate is to respect and honor governmental leaders and institutions, but only to a point. We are not to become political allies or servants of a political party or parties. We are to keep the main thing the main thing in our witness and contact with the world. To go beyond biblical teaching and dissemination is not to be the purview of the Church.

Individual transformational change by the grace of God in Christ Jesus is the only final solution to infighting of any kind. The heart must be changed for the head to be different. We are to think God's thoughts after him--not before him, not in addition to him, not above him, not in place of him. For this to happen, the center of our being must be radically transformed, from the inside out. This has always been the message and mandate of Christian pastors and the church.

Do such changes make divisions disappear? Unfortunately no, due to remaining sin and selfishness in us. But such changes, when they are sincere and real, make divisions less divisive and less offensive and easier to navigate. I remember days when we could have town and church debates without heckling one another or fighting with one another or shooting one another. We respected one another. I am saying that we must regain respect and honor of one another, and such perspectives come from a heart wedded to Jesus and his Word. 

The fact that most of the public see themselves as the ultimate solution to our divisions (40+ percent) betrays the source of those divisions. We want our way, and only our way to be the final solution. This cannot happen apart from the above transformative thinking that I have stated. We do not trust anyone except ourselves, and that is the root of all corporate problems in America. We cannot solve what we have created and what we sponsor and fight for. We need Jesus!

Roe vs Wade Reversal: A Pyrrhic Victory?

 In 279 BC a warrior king, Pyrrhus, fought the Roman army at the Battle of Asculum, winning a costly victory. Commenting on his victory, Pyrrhus stated, "If we are victorious in one more battle with the Romans, we shall be utterly ruined."  It is from reports of this semi-legendary event that the term pyrrhic victory originates.* It is a victory to be sure, but perhaps won at too great a cost to the victor. I wonder if the Roe vs Wade Supreme Court reversal isn't one of those victories for pro-life conservatives.

I write this as a Christian conservative, a pastor-theologian who has worked with and for pro-life groups and defended anti-abortion actions through the years. Yet, the hue and outcry against the Court's decision has made the seeming victory quite hollow and inconsequential, given that many states, including my own (PA), have sought to guarantee a woman's right to abortion on demand. We live in an increasingly fractured society moving toward increasing civil strife. While we pat ourselves on the back for a hard fought 50-year victory in the nation's highest court, we had better watch those same backs for the resounding flak from a decidedly godless society and cultural order. This may prove to be a pyrrhic victory.

Our problem with abortion and other societal ills we blame on progressive leftists is not about a single decision from a single court case. It is deeply rooted in an anti-Christian framework that keeps getting larger and bolder and more encompassing day by day and year by year. We are not, and never have been, a "Christian nation." Sorry that such a historical fact shakes us up. At best, we were founded by, and the Constitution and Bill of Rights, was written by Deists who were far less than biblical Christians following the lordship of Jesus Christ. They were Victorian moralists at best, and that is not Christianity. We applaud their commitment to principles such as the Ten Commandments, school prayer activities and so forth, but that was far from biblical faith and hope.

The problem with our anti-Christian society is a problem of the heart. Our hearts are not aligned with God's truth because they are not infused with God's work of grace and new life. The debate about post-modernism and beyond is quite beside the point. We have chucked God's Word and thus God's truth with our own take on what is proper and not proper. Not only have we become situational ethicists, we have become rebellious overtakers of God's world, imposing our own standards, if there are any, and decrying any attempt to bring society back to submission to what God wants. We have remade God in our image, our likeness, and have defined him to be our projection of him.

We do not want to look at the heart because we assume that at root we are "good" people. A few of us may prove to be bad, but that is due to mental illness or a harsh childhood. The Bible defines us as sinners, rebellious at the core, and seeking our own ways to run from God and his rule in our lives. We can and have debated the essence of the human soul, and one can trace the historical, philosophical, and theological argumentation to show how "clever" we have been to redefine good and evil and dispense with sinful depravity. 

Consequently, in all arguments with abortionists, they choose to ignore and refuse to acknowledge the humanity of the unborn child--it's just a mass of tissue, at the control and desire of its carrier. A woman therefore has the inalienable right to terminate this blob of tissue wherever and whenever it is convenient. Every abortionist cites rape, incest and poverty as key ingredients to a woman's right to abortion. Few, if any, address the human child that is being murdered in the abortion procedure. And few talk about the woman who has an abortion simply because the child is "inconvenient" to her life and her career. The discussion is openly biased against a pro-life stance. Where are the protective rights of the unborn child?

At heart is the blatant denial of what true human freedom should cherish. Dumping the strictures of the moral code of the Bible means freedom without responsibility and accountability. We can do whatever we want, and the only guard to that freedom is what the majority of unbiblically minded people propose. We are horrified at mass shootings of children and comfortable with mass abortions of the unborn. Not only is that obviously one sided and unfair, it is criminally negligent.

However, abortion proponents are not only not giving up. They are actively resisting and rebelling against the Court's decision and any state that seeks to enact laws protecting the unborn. And federal and state judges sympathetic to their cause are blocking the High Court's decision. 

What can be done now to avoid a Pyrrhic victory of pro-life rights? We need to ramp up pregnancy clinics that treat a woman and her unborn child as children of God, made in the image of God. We need to provide rape and incest and poverty victims with love and alternate solutions to their forced pregnancies. We need to proactively work to fill doctor's offices with pro-life medical caregivers. We need the Church to speak for pro-life against anti-God and anti-biblical sentiment and policies. This is not going to bring America "back to God." That is a failed and false dream. But it will show the resurrection hope that Jesus Christ brought to this world. And that is worth fighting for.

*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyrrhus_of_Epirus

All Truth Is God’s Truth: A White Paper on Integrational Christianity

 I write a daily devotional, mostly for myself and a group of Christian leaders from various church backgrounds and missions. I am moving through Proverbs, chapter by chapter, selecting those thoughts that God especially points out to me for me. Today, I came to Proverbs 22 noting that there is a normal division between verses 1 – 16 and 17 – 29. “Have I not written thirty sayings for you, sayings of counsel and knowledge, teaching you to be honest and to speak the truth, so that you bring back truthful reports to those you serve?” (Prov. 22:20, 21)  The “thirty sayings” according to most commentators are closely related to the Teaching of Amenemope, an Egyptian source of wisdom.¹ This does not devalue the inspiration of the Word of God or the following thirty proverbs cited, but rather reveals God is not merely Lord of Israel but also the God of all nations in all time. God can use truth found in non-Christian contexts for his honor and glory and for the instruction of his people.

 

Many Christians fail to properly and thoroughly integrate God’s Word with truth found in their professions or work. They look at their profession, mostly in the scientific realms, as separate and distinct from biblical revelation and its authority over their work. They value God’s Word as only moral authority for proper Christian behavior, but not applicable to their science or their professional work. The Society of Christian Scholars is a worldwide group of dedicated Christians in the various professions of the world, especially academic professions.² They see an integrational Christianity where God’s created order and truths are fused and integrated with biblical truth and revelation. They see all truth as God’s truth, not separate truths for a divided life between faith and science or academia. Organizations such as CMDA (Christian Medical and Dental Association) has chapters all over the country with doctors and medical personnel seeking to wed Christianity with their medical professions.³

 

When we say “all truth is God’s truth,” we do not mean that there is a neutral category of “truth” out there to be discovered and then brought under the authority of Scriptural revelation. What we mean is that any and all truth, no matter where it is found or uncovered or discovered, has already been revealed by the Creator God as part of his glorious creation. New “discoveries” are merely the unpacking or unveiling to our eyes and minds what God has already given to us in his created order. This is called by presuppositional Christian apologists “analogical” truth telling, where the Creator has given all truth to be used and discovered by us, his creatures.

 

We have this kind of “unveiling” even in the history of redemption. The Apostle Paul says it this way — “Now to him who is able to establish you in accordance with my gospel, the message I proclaim about Jesus Christ, in keeping with the revelation of the mystery hidden for long ages past.” And “No, we declare God’s wisdom, a mystery that has been hidden and that God destined for our glory before time began.” (Romans 16:25; 1 Corinthians 2:7) This “mystery” is not like a spy novel mystery or an unexplained phenomenon, but rather God’s progressive revelation of the gospel through the ages. Paul was the one who “discovered,” or rather “uncovered,” this mystery of progressive redemption by divine revelation. Even in our day, we “see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.” (1 Cor. 13:12) What is “hidden” to us due to our sinful insights and human frailty will be made known at the Last Day, when Jesus comes again and reveals everything fully to us. 

 

The fact that God can use Egyptian wisdom writings as part of the Scriptural record should both astound and humble us. Our work is God’s work. We are to do everything to the “glory of God,” 1 Corinthians 10:31 declares. This means so much more than merely doing a “good job,” or making a “useful discovery” or giving a medical treatment that heals a disease. It is not merely that we are to be morally upright in doing these things, but the things themselves should reflect and point people to the “weightiness” of God in this world.⁴Until and unless we as Christian doctors and scientists and IT people and garbage collectors see and integrate God’s truth into what we say and do and think and discover, we are not glorifying God. We are treating the faith as a separate and almost “hidden” part of our lives and our thoughts. That, according to Rousas Rushdoony, a former conservative Presbyterian Christian writer, is “intellectual schizophrenia,” not biblical integration.⁵

 

I am watching a rerun of the TV series JAG (Judge Advocate General Corps). One episode is about the court martial of a Gulf war commander, an outspoken Christian man, claiming that this war was a war against Satan inspired Islam.⁶ He had made public comments to this effect in a sermon he gave in a Baptist church in Alexandria, VA as well as in chapel after 9/11. He was found innocent of the charges against him, but the prosecuting attorney and judge cited administrative misconduct on his part and that “religion” has no place in the military, especially by commanders to their units. And the prosecutor took his comments on Islam on and noted that JIHAD or “holy war” as practiced by Islamic extremists has no part in “regular” Islamic teaching and practice. The problem with this caricature of Islam is that the Koran does indeed contain “holy war” practices against Christians and non-Islamic combatants. This has been amply proved by a Brethren in Christ Ph.D. on the subject.⁷

 

The question of how biblical truth and faith can influence supposedly neutral subjects has been written on extensively, though not acknowledged by academics in the various fields. Rusdoony and his followers have provided biblically based writing on various subjects, like economics.⁸ I have written a paper on biblically based mathematics, citing the underlying philosophy of number theory and arithmetical processes as foreign to the Scriptures and the revelation of God’s order in the universe.⁹ 1 + 1 does indeed equal 2, not because of some assumed philosophy of science approach, but because God ordered it so. We can therefore trust our mathematics, for the most part, as accurately reflecting God’s universe and God’s standards of counting.

 

Does our work or profession indicate the calling and blessing and wisdom of God upon it? Many Christians would say so, but then deny that truth in the laboratory or hospital or computer room. The result of evolutionary based science, separated from God’s revelation, is to make a division of truth that has never existed. When we read the Psalms about created actions, like storms and hail and snow and vapors and so forth, this is not merely poetry and thus to be taken not literally. God in his profound wisdom and providence and involvement in this world creates and orders and determines the weather and its blessings or destructive power. Gravity works because God ordained and uses it to make things fall down and not up. He is the grand “why” of universal truth. Absenting ourselves from this revealed fact makes us agnostics rather than God-glorifying Christians.

 

November 15, 2021

 

Notes

1.   This the generally agreed upon position by Derek Kidner in the Tyndale Commentary Series and by Roland Murphy in the Word Biblical Commentary Series on Proverbs. (Donald J. Wiseman, General Ed., Proverbs, Vol 17, Tyndale Commentary Series, Tyndale Press & InterVarsity Press, 1964. Roland E. Murphy, Proverbs, Vol. 22 of the Word Biblical Commentary Series, Thomas Nelson, 1998)

2.   Society of Christian Scholars. The Society of Christian Scholars equips Christian academics to have a missional and redemptive influence for Christ among their students, colleagues, institutions, and academic disciplines. https://scshub.net/. This is a membership driven organization open to all Christian academics globally.

3.   CMDA. This organization helps Christian healthcare students and professionals practice with ethical standards and share their faith as a part of patient treatment. https://cmda.org/# The author is a mentor and friend of Dr. Tom Grosh, the Northeast Director of CMDA.

4.   The term for “glory” or “glorious” indicates the “weightiness” or gravity of God. In the Old Testament, ‘Glory’ generally represents Heb. kāḇôḏ, with the root idea of ‘heaviness’ and so of ‘weight’ or ‘worthiness’. It is used of men to describe their wealth, splendour or reputation (though in the last sense kāḇôḏ is often rendered ‘honour’). The glory of Israel was not her armies but Yahweh (Je. 2:11). The word could also mean the self or soul (Gn. 49:6).

The most important concept is that of the glory of Yahweh. This denotes the revelation of God’s being, nature and presence to mankind.

5.   Rousas John Rushdoony (April 25, 1916 – February 8, 2001) was an American Calvinist philosopher, historian, and theologian. He was ordained into the Presbyterian Church of America (PCA). He is credited as being the father of Christian Reconstructionism and an inspiration for the modern Christian homeschool movement.  His followers and critics have argued that his thought exerts considerable influence on the evangelical Christian right. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_reconstructionism

6.   JAG was a nationally rated TV series from 1995–2005, with ten seasons. This episode was from Season Nine, “Fighting Words,” aired on 30 April 2004.

7.   Dr. Jay Smith. Smith believes that although Western actions in the Islamic world can instigate Muslim discontent, it is the Islamic scriptures that encourage the violence. He also rues the fact that moderate Muslims are not able to challenge the radicals using scripture because he believes the radicals have the scriptural authority. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jay_Smith_(Christian_apologist)

8.   Dr. Gary North. He is known for his advocacy of biblical or "radically libertarian" economics and also as a theorist of dominionism and theonomy. He supports the establishment and enforcement of Bible-based religious law, a view which has put him in conflict with other libertarians.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_North_(economist).

9.   H. Carl Shank, “Why Does 1 + 1 = 2?” in Arguing for God: A Monograph on Logic and the Christian Faith, Lulu Press, 2018.

Sermons in the Modern Church

I have been corresponding with my son lately about sermons and how they should be preached in the modern church. My son is a pastor of a smaller typical evangelical church. I have been a pastor for over forty years, now semi-retired. This issue of the sermon came up as to how to preach to modern ears. We ended up agreeing for the most part, but disagreeing about style and sermon content. A bit of background is in order.

I have been trained in expositional preaching and teaching from Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia, with a 1973 M.Div and a 1979 Th.M in systematic theology along with post seminary course work at Gordon-Conwell Seminary in Massachusetts. My son has been trained at Bethel Seminary as well as mentored by leadership trainers from a large, mega-church in the area. We approach this area of the Sunday sermon differently. I have always maintained a thoroughly exegetical approach to the message, with taking a text of Scripture and going through it intentionally and carefully, noting the context, words, language issues and so forth. My son uses a broader sweep for a message and has been attracted to story-telling and other means for sermon delivery. We both agree that sermons must be biblically based, but the delivery is up for grabs because of the different audiences that hear sermons today, especially young adults and unchurched people.

I would maintain that the minister's job is to communicate God's Word contained in the Scriptures. To say that church people have "enough information," and all they need to do is to "act upon the years of sermons they have already had" is beside the point, I believe. God's Word is always fresh, always convicting, always modern and always relevant because it is God's inspired declaration that we are seeking to get across to people. People deserve to know what the text of Scripture says and means, without assuming that personal or group Bible studies will fill that gap. In fact, most Bible study periods are people sharing their own, sometimes misguided, insights to Bible passages and stories. This sharing of one's ignorance is no substitute for trained and careful declaration of Scripture. And the internet is even less helpful giving a variety of ideas and "takes" on modern topics and claiming biblical proofs for them.

I believe that congregations need to be able to go home after a sermon or teaching and able to open their Bibles to the message given and understand the passages referenced and tell their children and others the meaning and application. It has been claimed that people hear "differently" today than beforehand and learn better by story-telling and group interaction. Perhaps. But the issue in preaching a sermon is the declaration of the written Word of God to a person's mind and heart and conscience. Citing different learning styles and people not hearing the message because of their sinful desires does not diminish the job of the biblical preacher or teacher. He or she is to declare faithfully and fully the text of Scripture, not their own considered "relevant" ideas and topics and try to find biblical passages to line up with those ideas.

Moderns will claim that this often considered "outdated" method of preaching or teaching does not reach a modern audience. I would rather contend that moderns, especially younger moderns, are biblically illiterate and need the careful and faithful rendering of the text of Scripture and then apply it to their situations and needs. No one is saying that application is unimportant, but it must be application that is not merely timely and relevant, but true to the text of Scripture. 

I have heard and preached hundreds of sermons to thousands of people in my career. My most gratifying comment to a message has been, "Thank you for helping me understand and live out this passage of the Bible." That is what we are called to do. That is our task in sermon delivery under God.

1984 Again!

 People thought that George Orwell's 1984 book was fictitious and could never come true in a democracy. It was about the State taking over the minds of its citizens with what it called "doublethink." Orwell defined "doublethink" this way — "To know and to not know, to be conscious of complete truthfulness while telling carefully constructed lies, to hold simultaneously two opinions which cancelled out, knowing them to be contradictory and believing in both of them. to use logic against logic, to repudiate morality while laying claim to it, to believe that democracy is impossible and that the Party was the guardian of democracy. To forget, whatever it was necessary to forget, then to draw it back into memory again at the moment when it was needed and then promptly to forget it again, and, above all, to apply the same process to the process itself." It was a chilling proposal of what could happen in a democracy look-alike controlled by the Party.

I would maintain that we are moving toward doublethink in our construct of society today. And I am certainly not the only one who maintains this construct. In a lecture at the conservative Hillsdale College, Christopher Rufo, director of Battlefront, noted that "critical race theory" is fast becoming America's new institutional orthodoxy. (https://imprimis.hillsdale.edu/critical-race-theory-fight/) While many Americans have possibly heard about such a theory, it is much more than just another way to look at race and equality in America. It is a Marxist-style political theory asserted by the radical left inserted into the discussion of racial equality that engages, I believe, in doublethink. Rufo sys that "Critical race theorists, masters of language construction, realize that “neo-Marxism” would be a hard sell. Equity, on the other hand, sounds non-threatening and is easily confused with the American principle of equality. . . . To them, equality represents “mere nondiscrimination” and provides “camouflage” for white supremacy, patriarchy, and oppression."

"Equity" in such a theory is simply reformulated Marxism, according to Rufo. But we are increasingly to understand "equity" as "equality" under law, a rethinking of the Constitution. And when someone tries to argue against "equity" they are simply arguing against our Constitutional guarantees. Rufo again says, "An equity-based form of government would mean the end not only of private property, but also of individual rights, equality under the law, federalism, and freedom of speech. These would be replaced by race-based redistribution of wealth, group-based rights, active discrimination, and omnipotent bureaucratic authority."

Lest we think this is a tempest in a teapot, Rufo goes on to say giving examples — "When I say that critical race theory is becoming the operating ideology of our public institutions, it is not an exaggeration—from the universities to bureaucracies to k-12 school systems, critical race theory has permeated the collective intelligence and decision-making process of American government, with no sign of slowing down."

So, here we go with doublethink —The 14th and 15th Amendments and Civil Rights Acts of 1954 and Voting Rights Act of 1965 = mere non-discrimination; camouflage for white supremacy and oppression. Rejection of these Constitutional laws = true equity and antiracism. "White male culture" = white supremacy and white privilege, even mass killings. The solution is to renounce white privilege and write letters of apology to people of color. White teachers are guilty of "spirit murder" against black children.

Rufo says "Disagreement with their program becomes irrefutable evidence of a dissenter’s “white fragility,” “unconscious bias,” or “internalized white supremacy.” and instructors in this critical race theory when confronted with disagreement "should adopt a patronizing tone and explain that participants who feel “defensiveness” or “anger” are reacting out of guilt and shame. Dissenters are instructed to remain silent, “lean into the discomfort,” and accept their “complicity in white supremacy.” This is Orwell's doublethink in action today.

Modern media will dispute such findings as overreach and conservative fodder not worth challenging. The Party (radical Leftists) wants to control our minds, our language, our institutions, our children and our way of life. It is hard, however, to negate the facts and examples Rufo gives. He suggests conquering this "take over" with employing moral language built on moral principles, a grass roots rejection of critical race theory in all of its tentacles, and courage to stand and speak out against Orwellian doublethink. 

Will you take a stand?

Newport, New England & Religious Toleration: Observations

In the midst of a pandemic, and working from home, I have had the opportunity to read through Lively Experiment LLC and Rockwell Stensrud’s well-written 560 page account of Newport, Rhode Island in their Newport: A Lively Experiment, 1639 – 1969. Stensrud has done his history homework well and has covered the culture and history of this seaside town in great detail and with astute fairness. My wife and I had the enjoyment of visiting the town in 2019, with my special interest in the International Tennis Hall of Fame. We drove the streets and the seashore road dotted with the palatial homes of the rich and famous. This peeked my interest in Newport’s history and contributions.

 

What struck me, as a Christian theologian and church history buff, are the many references in Stensrud’s book to the religious history and characters of Newport. Most people know that Rhode Island, or “Rogues Island,” as it was called by other New England settlements of the period, was founded by Roger Williams, an exile from the Puritan colony of Massachusetts. He founded Providence and established the first Baptist church in the town. Stensrud’s description of the Puritans as seeking religious freedom in the new world “along the lines of John Calvin’s austere teachings. ‘They wanted to reduce Christianity to its most primitive form of four bare walls and the literal words of the Bible’” (17) is key to much of his comments on New England Puritanism — cold, harsh, stiff, solemn and cruel. He says, “The road to Newport began in Boston and Salem. The very harshness of their uncompromising elites forced those of a more liberal spiritual–and mercantile–persuasion to seek destinies free of the theocratic handcuffs of the Bay Colony.” (18)

 

The author maintains that the Puritans were opposed to liberty of conscience, as for instance, citing the hanging of the Quaker Mary Dyer in Boston in 1660 as well as the Salem witch trials of the 1690s. (19) Stensrud claims that Williams “forged America’s first real attempt at secular government. The separation of church and state, and tolerance for conflicting religious beliefs, were the hallmarks of the community from the beginning, in 1636.” (21) Added to the religious strain of the times was the fervent teaching of the “spiritist,” Anne Hutchinson, who taught the “notion of ‘free justification by grace alone,’ of an ecstatic and overpowering intimacy with the divine.” This threatened the Puritan concept of living by the moral law of God (21-22). One of her sponsors, William Coddington, first governor of Newport, bought Aquidneck Island from the Indians through the efforts of Roger Williams. Joined later by the Hutchinson band and others, the town of Newport became an English colony, ruled not by biblical law but the laws of England until the American Revolution. Dr. John Clarke, also strongly influenced by Hutchinson, founded the second Baptist church in Newport in 1644, calling for a “rebaptism of all adults because people could only find true grace of their own free wills.” (41) Calling this “Anabaptism,” however, would be going too far technically and historically.

 

Coddington, a royalist at heart, hungry for power and domination was less a champion of freedom of religion and much more a power-hungry leader who wanted to have his own way in Newport and surrounding areas. Later he would soften his overbearing lust for control and meekly submit to other forces around him. Dr. John Clarke, whom many see as the real hero of freedom, was the vision behind the town’s 1663 Charter, “the first enduring republican government in the new world, based on an individual’s right to choose his or her own faith freely without temporal control or punishment.” (57-58) Some say this Charter would influence the later American Bill of Rights. This Charter framed not merely the rights but the ongoing religious climate and boundaries of the town of Newport until the 1880s. Professor Sydney Ahlstrom noted that this Charter made religious liberty in this commonwealth not simply a degree of toleration but “a cardinal principle of its corporate existence and to maintain the separation of church and state on these grounds.” (69)

 

With this infusion of religious liberty, English Quakers first arrived in Newport in 1657, becoming prominent citizens. As long as they obeyed the laws of England, they could freely associate and proselytize. The sad story of the Quaker Mary Dyer put to death in Boston on June 1, 1660, is hard for modern eyes to read. What is little told is that she was warned several times not to return to Puritan Boston or she would face severe penalties. She refused to listen and paid the price for her efforts by a death sentence. Some say this was her brave stand for religious freedom and tolerance. Others might say she was duly warned and given opportunities to change her beliefs or vacate Boston. Jewish immigrants also arrived in Newport with the famous Touro Synagogue completed in 1772. They formed their own clubs and freely associated with people from other religious persuasions. Roman Catholics had a much harder time being accepted, but they finally were welcomed as part of Newport society.

 

Here we must stop and make an observation. Much of American Protestantism owes its theological foundations to the Puritans. While we shudder at the church/state complications and severity of early Puritan law, to discount them as hated monsters out to kill anyone who disagreed with their biblical stance is far too general and judgmental. Many modern writers have taken up the cry against Puritanism and catapulted it to a cry against any form of biblically defined Christianity. The Puritans generally followed the Westminster Confession and Catechisms in their definitions and descriptions of biblical theology. They most certainly did believe in justification by free grace, but they also saw a place for the law of God ruling the moral habits of society. 

 

The religious freedom and toleration that Newporters enjoyed and expected also produced Unitarianism under William Ellery Channing, a Newport native, who preached a faith based on “the inherent goodness of mankind, not a theology that stressed human depravity. In short, Channing humanized Protestantism.” (311) “By 1810, the long-held authority of Boston and other New England Congregational churches was beginning to be challenged by a growing number of pastors who believed he hellfire and brimstone Calvinist orthodoxy was basically corrupt because there was no room in the theology to recognize mankind’s innate optimism or potential for good works. A revolution was in the wings.” (312) Channing is looked upon as the champion of the new America with his staunch antislavery and antiwar philosophy and a proponent of public education. “The characteristic New England mixture of individual self-culture and social reform owed much to Channing’s precept and example.” (313) 

 

Indeed. Newport has always been a haven for the elite rich and famous. She has had her dark days, to be sure, but her proud spirit of innovation and freedom of religion has framed her existence. Unitarianism begets Universalism and Universalism forgets and ignores and disputes any biblical authority, including Jesus’ own words about his being the “only way, truth and life to the Father” (John 14:6). Any way to God is valid and to be sought after by man’s essential goodness, it is believed and proffered. It does not matter how we even define “God.” Newport’s culture and religious openness have taken universal hold on the America of the twenty-first century. We can now have it all — endless enjoyment, promised riches, freedom from any religious or theological restraints. It is the New England playground, maybe even vaunted hope, of America.

Black Lives Matter & Rewriting History

 2020 has been a year of the roller coaster of events — the Donald Trump saga, the pandemic, George Floyd shooting and marches and the Black Lives Matter movement. A new President has offered to heal the nation and provide racial equity and justice. 

However, we have torn down statues, defaced Civil War Confederacy sites, toppled Christopher Columbus statues, renamed streets and institutions, and have tried to rewrite history, claiming that Columbus had slaves, Thomas Jefferson had slaves, and in fact, most of the writers of the Constitution and Bill of Rights had slaves. For that, we are told they should be punished, and history should be rewritten to tell America how awful and terrible they really were. Roger Williams, the religious founder of Rhode Island owned slaves, yet christened what is today the town Providence and the liberties that few northeastern states then enjoyed. Confederate generals, like Stonewall Jackson, a true Christian believer, it is said should be castigated and thrown in the trash pile of history. Instead of learning from history, and all its mistakes and errors and missteps, we now trash history and rewrite history to sooth and satisfy guilty consciences and political correctness advocates.

Larry Arnn, president of conservative Hillsdale College in his article, Orwell's 1984 and Today (https://imprimis.hillsdale.edu/orwells-1984-today/) notes that, like in Orwell's 1984, we have "Thought Police" roaming the halls of our newspapers and institutions of higher learning and even the halls of Congress itself to spy out "wrong" thinking and incorrect history and to put into our minds, and especially our children's minds, the "right" history. We want to forcefully change the past. We have discarded the law of contradiction that says we cannot change the past and that contradictory slogans, like those in Orwell's 1984, "War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength," repeal what is and what was. Arnn writes — "American schoolchildren today learn two things about Thomas Jefferson: That he wrote the Declaration of Independence and that he was a slaveholder. This is a stunted and dishonest teaching about Jefferson." He goes on to note that what they do not learn is that Jefferson wanted the Northwest Territory to be eternally free of slavery. That he truly believed when he wrote that all men are created equal. 

Yes, America forced out native Indians as we moved west and displaced native peoples for our own use and land grabs. Yes, Christian men and women owned slaves in the South. Yes, in World War Two, American Japanese peoples were sent to internment camps. Yes, Jim Crow laws abounded in many places in this country after the Civil War. This was all a travesty of human rights and just treatment for all peoples. To rewrite history, however, that it happened because people were evil, despotic thugs and that we should disown and separate ourselves from their writings and essays and speeches neglect fair and just reporting of all the facts about these men and women.

I am not an historian. I am a theologian and have written and spoken on historical theology. The present Black Lives Matter push reminds me of history trying to erase Who Jesus Christ really is and was. A number have tried to rewrite the New Testament of the Bible, trying to prove that Jesus was either not fully human or not fully God. They have fiddled with the text of the Bible, seeking to eliminate what Jesus said and did. All of these efforts have wilted in the clear record of religious and theological history. Jesus is and was fully man and fully God. To try to remake Jesus that is "acceptable" to modern ears has miserably failed, even with university secular professors constantly seeking to teach our young people differently about Jesus and Christianity. You either accept the Jesus of history or discard Him in favor of a fantasy Christ that soothes our sensibilities.

The Bible recognizes and deals with slavery. And the way it deals with slavery rankles many "Thought Police" today. What about slaves in the Apostle Paul's writings?  “Bondservants are to be submissive to their own masters in everything; they are to be well-pleasing, not argumentative, not pilfering, but showing all good faith, so that in everything they may adorn the doctrine of God our Savior.” (Titus 2:9, 10; 1 Timothy 6:1, 2) The obvious question that comes up in these contexts is, Why doesn’t Paul just outrightly denounce and condemn slavery? There are actually several reasons for such neglect.

First, to denounce slavery might mean promotion of a slave revolt, while saying nothing would mean supporting the staus-quo. It would also mean or indicate that it would be permissible for Christian slaves to disobey their masters. This was evidently one of the problems in the Ephesian church (Ephesians 6:5–9). Slavery in Paul’s day was not limited to racial inequality, but people became slaves due to being prisoners of war, condemned criminals, debtors, kidnapping, or those sold into slavery by their parents. Slavery was a complicated social ill of the times and not easily resolved socially or politically, let alone theologically and practically. Moreover, Paul’s main concern in these letters is the cause of the gospel  “. . . so that the name of God and the teaching may not be reviled.” (1 Timothy 6:1b)

While all people under Christ are free in Christ --“There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:28) -- one’s freedom in Christ cannot be used as a cloak for treating, in this case, one’s masters disrespectfully. Freedom in Christ does not permit disregarding one’s station in life, disobedience to lawful orders, or treating nonChristian authorities with disdain (cf. Mark 10:43–45; 1 Corinthians 9:19; Galatians 5:13; Ephesians 6:5–9; Colossians 3:22–25). A more powerful and penetrating way to change and challenge inequality is to work from the grace of God from within outward. As Christian slaves gave their masters obedience and respect, and Christian masters gave fairness and kindness to their slaves, the institution could be changed from inside out. Real change begins in the heart and soul of a person, slave or free. 

So, how would we rewrite this history except by deleting it from the Apostolic records? The Bible is not a political tool or a platform for any and every kind of movement declaring what we consider as unacceptable social norms. It is a record and declaration of the Gospel of Christ and the freedom, real inner freedom, it brings to those who bow before and under the rule of the Savior. While it has been, and continues to be, sadly and unfortunately used for political gain and movements, that is not it's intention.

The equality in Christ would become, in time, the force behind the abolition of the slave trade in the British empire under Wilberforce and the recognition of women as equal voters under Susan Anthony and others. The issues are vastly much more complicated than what the Black Lives Matter movement could ever imagine. Arnn writes, "The astounding thing, after all, is not that some of our Founders were slave-holders. There was a lot of slavery back then, as there has been for all of recorded time. The astounding thing--the miracle, even, one might say--is that these slave-holders founded a republic based on principles designed to abnegate slavery."

Do Churches and Ministries Really Want What God Wants?

Recently, a dear friend, an administrative assistant of a local church, who had been serving the church for over thirty years, was dismissed. No reason was given, except that the church leadership thought it was "time for a change." She had not only done nothing wrong, but she had gone the extra mile in church work during pastoral transitions, staff changes and building changes and stresses. She is hurting and suffering through another church related decision and change which may have nothing to do with what God really wants.

I say this with over forty years of ministry in different sized churches and a denominational leadership ministry in which I participated in many of those same kinds of decisions. We all claim to follow God's direction and leading, and some decisions are even "prayed over," but to be frightfully truthful and exceedingly honest, many of those decisions are human based business operational desires and mandates. Very little Scriptural evidence exists for such decisions. They are simply what some hot-shot "successful" pastoral or ministry leader touts or teaches as the best way to advance the "cause of the kingdom of Christ." Yet, I have often wondered if what we are advancing are our own little fiefdoms and not God's kingdom wants and revealed truths.

Many of these decisions, especially regarding staffing and church direction, are whims of an aggressive senior leader or leaders who want a "place" and a name in their denominational purview. Such a statement would be hotly debated by many, yet the question remains -- do we really want what God wants for our church or ministry? Unless we have heard from God specifically and particularly and clearly, we are left with impressions of what God may want. We claim to read the Bible and follow its directives, yet I would say in confession that most of us are woefully ignorant of the will of God revealed in the totality of Scripture. Some of us don't even care to check the Bible in an important decision and follow our own, often misguided personal preferences. Some of us even defend those preferences, doing what we want and hoping beyond hope that God is pleased with what we have decided. No matter who gets hurt and no matter who pays the price.

Quite some time ago I read the story of the pastor who wrote that famous hymn, "God Be With You Til We Meet Again." He and his wife had been called from their small country parish to a bigger, more visible and prestigious city church. As they were seated in their wagon with their moving goods, this song was sung by their small congregation and such love flowed that the pastor decided to stay and continue to minister to them. Success in a larger ministry and church no longer mattered. The lives and hopes and dreams of his people mattered. He reinstated himself under God as their shepherd.

John Maxwell and many others have said, "People don't care what you know until they know that you care." And that is true. We have to stop wanting what we want and start listening--really listening--to what God wants from us for our people. Yes, sometimes hard and difficult decisions have to be made. Yes, sometimes people need rebuked and will be unintentionally dismissed and hurt and disregarded. But those times are rare, and should be rare. We need to stop thinking about our "careers" and our "successes" and "wins" and start submitting--yes, submitting-- to what God really wants. That may mean personal oblivion for us in ministry and being okay with the place and assignment God has for us. We say it is all about the honor and glory of God. Well, we need to really mean it and proceed in that direction.

Another Look At Black Lives Matter and Racial Reconciliation

Instead of rehearsing what we all know about the Black Lives Matter movement and why it sprang up in our day, I want to admit several things as an older white, evangelical male and a retired pastor, now a church consultant. I took the plunge and submitted to a "racial reconciliation" course well-taught by a friend and a professor from Lancaster Bible College this summer. I learned much about our racial problems and dived into how to tackle them in our present tension-filled day.

First, we must admit, if we are truthful and frightfully honest, that we live in a prejudiced society and systemic racism abounds in America today. Many would deny this or refuse to admit it and address it, but there are plenty of examples of institutional racism today, not merely against blacks, but Asians and American Indians and others. By refusing to address these issues and uncovering the racial biases in our society, we simply perpetuate racism and its ugly results. Being "color-blind" to racial injustice or refusing to know and address "white privilege" only adds fire to the Black Lives Matter movement and its consequences.

I grew up in a home where racism was not talked about but practiced by my parents in their opinions of other races. While they would personally disavow such racism, my father used the "N" word freely, as well as "spics" and other pejoratives in speaking of blacks and Hispanics and Asians. As long as they kept "their place," we were okay with them. Later in life I ministered in a predominantly white church when a young white woman and black man came to me for marriage counseling and help. The woman's parents were shocked and upset that their daughter would think of union with a black man. They wanted me to stop the wedding and help their daughter come to her senses. This was obviously racist, but they insisted the "normalcy" of their request. 

I read an interesting and provocative summary of a speech given by Wilfred McClay, author of Land of Hope: An Invitation to the Great American Story, called "Rediscovering the Wisdom in American History" (https://imprimis.hillsdale.edu/rediscovering-wisdom-american-history/) In that speech he rehearsed the problem of racism and the Civil War (or War Between the States, if you come from the South). What he said and wrote was insightful -- "How, we wonder today, could such otherwise enlightened and exemplary men as George Washington and Thomas Jefferson have owned slaves, a practice so contradictory to all they stood for? As I write in the book: There is no easy answer to such questions. But surely a part of the answer is that each of us is born into a world that we did not make, and it is only with the greatest effort, and often at very great cost, that we are ever able to change that world for the better. Moral sensibilities are not static; they develop and deepen over time, and general moral progress is very slow. Part of the study of history involves a training of the imagination, learning to see historical actors as speaking and acting in their own times rather than ours; and learning to see even our heroes as an all-too-human mixture of admirable and unadmirable qualities, people like us who may, like us, be constrained by circumstances beyond their control. . . ."

He goes on to say -- "The ambivalences regarding slavery built into the structure of the Constitution were almost certainly unavoidable in the short term, in order to achieve an effective political union of the nation. What we need to understand is how the original compromise no longer became acceptable to increasing numbers of Americans, especially in one part of the Union, and why slavery, a ubiquitous institution in human history, came to be seen not merely as an unfortunate evil but as a sinful impediment to human progress, a stain upon a whole nation. We live today on the other side of a great transformation in moral sensibility, a transformation that was taking place but was not yet completed in the very years the United States was being formed."

The point is that solutions to incipient systemic racism are complicated and will take serious time and costly efforts. Marches only point to the depth of the problem and do not solve it. In fact, they may merely exacerbate the racial tensions now so apparent. We need policy change, not merely protests. Policy change comes in stages, slowly and sometimes imperceptibly. Elections help, but do not guarantee such change.

What has to change and be successfully addressed is the heart of people and the soul of a nation. God alone can change the heart and inform the emotions and mind to a better, more biblical model of transformation. The Gospel of Christ, submitting to Jesus as Lord and Savior, is not merely a religious point, but a moral transformative point. Conversion to Christ, real and deep conversion, as well as biblical instruction and implementation can transform racial inequality to racial justice and compatibility.

The naysayers will claim that such transformation has not worked, and that churches have been often staging grounds for racism and inequality. I would simply point to the fact that many church goers are not really Christians. They name the Name but deny the implications of deep, heart change and transformation of thoughts, intents and motives. I say this as a pastor and denominational worker who has seen and preached to and taught thousands of Christian adherents and worked with dozens of churches of many sizes and stripes. Deep seated change requires costly discipleship and rigorous study and application of Scriptural truth.

The question in my mind is, Are we willing to wade through the difficult and time-consuming task of policy change and discipling others? Are we willing to take a hard look at ourselves in he mirror of history and admit the wrongs and seek to correct the conscience of a nation?

Reflecting on Ernest Reisinger Biography by Geoff Thomas

A newly released biography of the life and times of Ernest Reisinger has been written for Banner of Truth publishers by Pastor Geoff Thomas of Wales. Though written in 2002, it has recently caught my attention through friends at Banner of Truth and Grace Baptist Church of Carlisle, PA. For the many who do not know Ernie Reisinger, or his history, Ernie was one of the founding fathers of Reformed Baptist history in the states, particularly in south central PA in Carlisle with the establishment of Grace Baptist Church.

Ernie was one of my early mentors and friends. He served for two years at a mission church of Grace Baptist Church in Mechanicsburg, PA, and I had the privilege of being a summer intern while a student at Westminster Theological Seminary in the early 1970s in Philadelphia. On a personal note, Ernie helped finance part of my education at Westminster and provided money to repair the transmission of an automobile we desperately needed in those years. The money was always "anonymously" given, but we knew where it came from. God used Ernie Reisinger in my life and formation as a minister of the gospel of God's grace. He could never sing very well, and those Sundays I led the small congregation in Mechanicsburg, he would "grunt" along behind me in leading worship hymns. He made a joyful "noise" to the Lord!

Ernie was always handing out books, especially Reformed Puritan literature, which he came to love and follow. The biography describes his business prowess in leading the Reisinger Brothers construction company and its many projects in those years, his friendship with the Irwin family in Carlisle and his massive influence in the establishment and theology of Grace Baptist Church. This church, like no other Baptist church in the area, held to the Reformed standards of theology and worship in the London (and then Philadelphia) confessions of faith, which followed much of the theology in the Westminster Standards (Confession of Faith and Catechisms). Ernie gained his theological knowledge as a layman, a very serious student of Scripture and theology. Wanting to be ordained as a legitimate professional pastor, he was so ordained by the Carlisle Church to minister in Mechanicsburg, at which place he stayed for two years.

I am not in the same place ecclesiastically in my present ministry assignments. In fact, I am a retired minister of the Brethren in Christ Church, a church that follows the Wesleyan-Arminian theological positions and its Anabaptist heritage. I have been a Reformed Baptist church planter, an Orthodox Presbyterian pastor and a Brethren in Christ pastor and church leader in my ministry history. I now work as a church health consultant in the Northeast for NCDAmerica out of Michigan. That is another story, but suffice to say, Ernie helped establish my Reformed roots but also soured my ecclesiastical associations with Reformed Baptists.

Like Ernie, I became enthralled with the Reformed faith and historic Puritanism as a student at Dickinson College while attending Grace Baptist Church in Carlisle. The minister then, Walter Chantry, took me and other students under his wing, and mentored us in the Reformed faith and life. Ernie was a historical part of that training and development. However, his theory of doctrinal purity and church purity became the foundation of Grace Baptist and other RB (Reformed Baptist) churches in the northeast. As stated in his biography, in Reisinger's pamphlet, Doctrine and Devotion, he wrote: "God must be worshipped in truth as well as in Spirit. Truth can be stated in real words, and when that is done there is Christian doctrine. To be a disciple of the Lord Jesus without knowing what Christ taught must be a vain quest. It is impossible to over-emphasize the importance of sound doctrine in the Christian life. Right thinking about all spiritual matters is imperative if we are to have right living. As men do not gather grapes of thorns, nor figs of thistles, so sound Christian character does not grow out of unsound doctrine. The church that neglects to teach sound biblical doctrine weakens church membership. It works against true unity. It invites instability in its fellowship. It lessens conviction and puts the brakes on vital progress in the congregation."

This thinking and the application of it framed the basis of Grace Baptist Church. While many would rejoice over its stance for historic orthodoxy after the likes of Calvin and others, others would have a less than stellar opinion. Other Christians and other churches in the Carlisle area, just as rooted in the fundamentals of biblical authority and inspiration, but avowedly non-Calvinistic would label Grace Baptist as cold, severe, judgmental and downright mean to those who do not come up to their "standards" of faith and life. While I do believe there was much heart warmth and devotion in Ernie and the other elders of Grace Baptist, their refusal to sponsor Billy Graham Crusades and other evangelistic endeavors in that area placed them outside of regular evangelical thought and practice. And to some extent, they revelled in their separateness and distinctiveness.  I know this to unfortunately be the case, having served a Brethren in Christ Church in the town in the 1990s.

Ernie was foremost an evangelist. He loved to preach and teach the gospel and reach out to many in that area and beyond with the Good News of Jesus. I loved his passion for souls and that passion rubbed off on me. However, I found that his passion for Calvinism almost matched his passion for souls, thinking that true religion can only be found in true doctrine. The many non-Calvinists who love the Lord are therefore not merely in error, but following a false God. So, the heritage of Ernie and Grace Baptist Church is also joined with this isolation from other serious Christians and churches. The impression that has often been given is, "we have the truth, and you must come to our side to find it."

The biography is just as much a biography of of Grace Baptist Church in Carlisle as of Ernie Reisinger's life. I love the people my wife and I have known from Grace Baptist. I believe they are serious Christians who see Calvinism as the only way to think and live. I know they are earnest and passionate about that system of doctrine. But to judge others and almost make the claim that other Christians are almost "sub-Christians" is wrongheaded and damaging to the unity of the Church of Christ. The problem I have seen in Reformed circles, first as a Reformed Baptist and the as an Orthodox Presbyterian, is that such a faith becomes judgmental and cold-hearted to others in the Christian camp. It can become self-congratulating and self-consuming. It can blunt what Ernie spent much of his life in evangelizing others for the gospel of God's grace. It can forget about the love of God and replace that with the harshness of God's choice of those who believe. All of this I have also seen and witnessed in Reformed circles and churches.

I am still thoroughly Reformed in thought and doctrine, but much more open to other systems of Christian doctrine and life and thought. I believe when we all get to heaven we will have much to learn in how God has worked on this earth and among people. We may even be surprised that many of those we doctrinally fought against are there beside us praising God and singing with the angels. I do commend Geoff Thomas in his biography of Ernie Reisinger and praise God for the life of a great man of God.

Reflecting On The Message of Simon & Garfunkel for Today

With more and more people quarantined at home due to the spread of the coronavirus, I have had time to do some reflecting on the songs of Simon and Garfunkel from the 1960s. For me, a Baby Boomer, these were the stirring upheaval years of the Vietnam War, Students for a Democratic Society (SDS), and folk artists like Simon and Garfunkel. To modern ears these mournful, folksy, haunting songs have little of the brashness and harshness of modern popular music. What they do contain, however, are reflective songs of a changing America and a changing society. They signaled a major shift from the swoon songs of the 1950s and the post-war dance songs that my parents enjoyed. What do they tell us for today's world and society?

They tell us that separation and aloneness can be both a boon and a sadness for people. Isolation can protect us, but leave us sad and lonely, prone to no one caring or even knowing our state — listen to "I Am A Rock" and "A Most Peculiar Man" —
I've built walls
A fortress deep and mighty
That none may penetrate
I have no need of friendship, friendship causes pain
It's laughter and it's loving I disdain
I am a rock
I am an island

I have my books
And my poetry to protect me
I am shielded in my armor
Hiding in my room, safe within my womb
I touch no one and no one touches me
I am a rock
I am an island

And a rock feels no pain
And an island never cries.

------------------------------------------------

He was a most peculiar man.

He lived all alone within a house,
Within a room, within himself,
A most peculiar man.

He had no friends, he seldom spoke
And no one in turn ever spoke to him,
'Cause he wasn't friendly and he didn't care
And he wasn't like them.
Oh, no! he was a most peculiar man.

He died last Saturday.
He turned on the gas and he went to sleep
With the windows closed so he'd never wake up
To his silent world and his tiny room;
And Mrs. Riordan says he has a brother somewhere
Who should be notified soon.
And all the people said, "What a shame that he's dead,
But wasn't he a most peculiar man?"

They also tell us that class separation and a desire to be "top dog" and admired by all can end in bitterness and suicide — "Richard Cory"

They say that Richard Cory owns one half of this whole town,
With political connections to spread his wealth around.
Born into society, a banker's only child,
He had everything a man could want: power, grace, and style.

But I work in his factory
And I curse the life I'm living
And I curse my poverty
And I wish that I could be,
Oh, I wish that I could be,
Oh, I wish that I could be
Richard Cory.

He freely gave to charity, he had the common touch,
And they were grateful for his patronage and thanked him very much,
So my mind was filled with wonder when the evening headlines read:
"Richard Cory went home last night and put a bullet through his head."

They haunt us with the desire to be "homeward bound" and feel rest from the frantic pace of work, popularity and busyness —

I'm sittin' in the railway station
Got a ticket to my destination
On a tour of one-night stands
My suitcase and guitar in hand
And every stop is neatly planned
For a poet and a one-man band

Tonight I'll sing my songs again
I'll play the game and pretend
But all my words come back to me
In shades of mediocrity
Like emptiness in harmony
I need someone to comfort me

Homeward bound
I wish I was
Homeward bound
Home where my thought's escapin'
Home where my music's playin'
Home where my love lies waitin'
Silently for me

And finally they tell us that we all need to be like "bridges over troubled waters" for one another —

When you're weary, feeling small
When tears are in your eyes, I'll dry them all (all)
I'm on your side, oh, when times get rough
And friends just can't be found
Like a bridge over troubled water
I will lay me down
Like a bridge over troubled water
I will lay me down

When you're down and out
When you're on the street
When evening falls so hard
I will comfort you (ooo)
I'll take your part, oh, when darkness comes
And pain is all around
Like a bridge over troubled water
I will lay me down
Like a bridge over troubled water
I will lay me down

So take some of this "time out" and listen carefully to the messages that meant so much in the 1960s and beyond.

Rights, the Constitution, and the Partisan Divide

In a recent issue of Imprimis newsletter put out by Hillsdale College, a privately funded conservative school, Christopher Caldwell talks about "The Roots of Our Partisan Divide." (https://imprimis.hillsdale.edu/roots-partisan-divide/) In that speech and from his book, The Age of Entitlement: America Since the Sixties, Caldwell, among others, traces the roots of the extreme political and social divide in America between the progressive left and the conservative right back to the vestiges of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Passed by Congress to seek to address the segregation of the Jim Crow southern states, it was slowly expanded to outlaw discrimination in every sector of society and every walk of public and private life. He notes, "They did so by giving birth to what was, in effect, a second constitution, which would eventually cause Americans to peel off into two different and incompatible constitutional cultures." This was done by taking a "lot of decisions that had been made in the democratic parts of American government and relocate them to the bureaucracy or the judiciary." Consequently, while Americans never voted for bilingual education, the office of civil rights simply established it. Sexism cases for women's rights have exploded to this day with the #metoo movement. Hate crimes are now against every form of anti-lesbian or homosexual or transgender speech or actions or legislation.

"Let's say you are a progressive gay man in a gay marriage with two adopted children. The civil rights version of the country means everything to you . . . Quite likely, your whole moral idea of yourself depends on it too. . .. You are on the side of the glorious marchers of Birmingham, and they are on the side of Bull Connor. To you, the other party is a party of bigots." "Gender fluidity" taught in the first grade in public schools cannot be defeated or even complained against. You are designated as a bigot, a hate monger. "To you, the other party is a party of totalitarians." So, indeed, the sky may be falling in the future for this American republic. Whether we agree with Caldwell or not, it is fairly evident there is a great divide in this country that never existed, even during the decade of the 1960s.

I went to college in the 1960s. We had sit-ins, marches, the  SDS (Students for a Democratic Society) who marched beside my ROTC cadet corp placing roses in the gun barrels that we carried. The Vietnam War was moving ahead, and truth be told, well-heeled students in colleges got deferments while garage mechanics out of high school were drafted. A two-tiered society resulted. The war was most unpopular and my wartime friends who came back from Nam were booed and hated or dismissed for their efforts. Many of them suffered PTSD effects. It took many years and much pain to honor these wounded veterans. However, that revolution of the sixties took place against a background of morality rooted in the Judea-Christian codes of the Bible. Little did we know then that "civil rights" meant a dismissal of those codes and the substitution of it for individual rights individually defined.

I trace this great divide today to spiritual and religious reasons. Leonard Sweet said way back in 2009 that we are living in a "cut flower society," where the flower of religious activity may exist, but there is no longer any rooting in the Scriptures or in any Judaeo-Christian law code. Young adults now dismiss any absolute truths, favoring whatever "truth" may seem to be in their favor for the moment. Thus, Bernie Sanders' promise of free education and universal health care especially for those with higher educational or health debts is most appealing. It doesn't matter how we pay for it, since the government becomes our mother and father, entitling us to these human freedoms and benefits. This is pure socialism and may indeed move into pure communism or Marxism as the anti-God trends travel down the road. Then we will be without God and without freedom rooted in a God-centered framework of morality. Individual freedom of whatever sort will be substituted for responsible social freedoms. And the sky will indeed fall.