The Church in America

You are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to God,

that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his

wonderful light. ( 1 Peter 2:9)

"For God and Country" ( Motto of the American Legion)

AMERICA! Here I stand! My body strong to fight your battles! My mind trained

to keep your democracy virile! My spirit true to uphold your ideals!

To God and to you I pledge my service: ON MY HONOR, I WILL DO MY BEST...!

(Conclusion to Boy Scout Handbook, 1959, p. 439)

I

The 500 year migration, settlement, and transformation of the Western Hemisphere by those of European ancestral origin has until recently rested upon stated Christian motivation and justification. Yet underlying this Christian impulse to destiny and earthly kingdom too often has lurked venal passions of will to power and wealth. Christopher Columbus with conviction declared his purpose to win the new land and its inhabitants for Christ, yet in practice he extracted not souls but gold and slave labor. Nevertheless, the hope, confidence, and enthusiasm inherent within people of Christian faith or cultural influence have also engendered an enormous vitality to engage and transform an untamed, resource-rich continent into powerful civilizations.

Christian religion and the development of The United States are inseparable, its fruits both sparkling and blemished. Today, as evinced in the cultural wars, many critics castigate the role of Christian religion in the shaping of America, citing for examples the often unchallenged predations of capitalism, rape of natural resources, dispossession of the Native Americans, and global economic imperialism as evidence of spiritual blindness and hypocrisy, while on the other hand, apologists cite the development of democracy, relative tolerance for pluralism, The Bill of Rights, and class mobility as fruits that legitimatize Christian influence. One can fall off the saddle of a spirited horse on either side. The acculturation of Christianity and nation has spawned blessing and curse, for it is in one sense the story of a people gravitating between The Fall and The Redemption.

If one views Christendom as a cultural amalgamation of Christian faith with political power, then The United States and Canada display uniquely the consequent fruits of an experiment in pluralism and disestablishment underneath an overarching umbrella of consensus Judeo-Christian worlview. With this consensus eroding through secular and wider-ranging religious pluralism, these countries' foundations are shifting. In the undertow of this shifting current, the church, too, is undergoing an identity crisis. Where this will lead has most significant implications.

II

Key Factors Which Have Shaped The American Church

Our father's God to thee, Author of liberty, To thee we sing, Long may our land be bright,

With freedom's holy light; Protect us by thy might, Great God our King.

( My Country 'Tis of Thee, 4th Stanza, Samuel Francis Smith )

Although motivations by Europeans to migrate to North America were multi-faceted, those during the formative 1st century of major settlement prior to the French & Indian War were typically religious-based. The 16th Century Protestant Reformation in northern Europe had sparked both momentous theological vitality as well as a blood-soaked trail of bitter power contests. North America was viewed both as a haven from persecution as well as a foothold to establish new local hegemonies. Puritans, Anglicans, Presbyterians, Baptists, and to a significantly lesser extent the Catholics, Quakers, German Anabaptist sects and others (Moravians, etc.) each sought to carve out of the "virgin land" a manifestation of the kingdom of God on earth, unencumbered by other tainted religions' influences, confident of God's especial favor.

Yet the daunting task of domesticating a wilderness to harness its wealth, the precarious relations with the indigenous Americans on the expanding frontier, along with the tenuous dependency upon self-serving, competing European powers, all this and more impelled people of diverse ethnic, religious, and cultural background to cooperate together. Faced with the mighty challenges and golden opportunities of the new land, settlers opted for the practicality of pluralism over against the isolationist vulnerability of intolerance.

Without a strong centralizing governing force, an institutional religious hegemony was impossible to attempt, let alone maintain (although vestiges of establishment religion persisted into the 19th century). Nevertheless, the necessity for cohesiveness, moral will, and social order to survive and thrive as a nation necessitated the broad consensus for a national philosophy, a civil religion. The resulting Protestant ethos—conducive to pluralism and toleration, relatively compatible with Enlightenment philosophy, motivative to self-discipline, thrift, and industriousness, and nurturing of individualism and free association—was remarkably well-suited to undergird the collective ambition of a birthing nation.

Although in its historical context highly separate as institutions, in function Protestantism and the State merged, as evidenced, for example, in the 19th century public school movement. The 1950's revision to the Pledge of Allegiance, "One nation under God indivisible", was the reality of perception for the people of The United States in the 19th century.

The prophesies seemed to be fulfilling as the young nation grew in virility and wealth—God's favor rested upon its brawny shoulders. And if rectitude slackened, God would send revival to chasten toward renewed moral fiber and vision. America was confident that it was on the side of the right. Despite momentary setbacks, the expansion to the Pacific Coast, victories over Spain in the 1890's and overseas in 1918 and 1945, extraordinary technological creativity and proficiency, and historically unprecedented wealth and affluence within a middle class, all lent credence to a belief in God's favor.

III

Commentary on the History of the Church in America

When you eat and are satisfied, when you build fine houses and settle down, and when

your herds and flocks grow large and your silver and gold increase and all you have

is multiplied ... you may say to yourself, "My power and the strength of my hands

have produced this wealth for me." ... If you ever forget the Lord your God and follow

other gods and worship and bow down to them, I testify against you today that you will

be surely destroyed. (Deuteronomy 8:12, 13, 17,19)

It is perhaps a maxim of classical anthropologists and sociologists that a nation must have a religion to survive. Even atheist nations such as communist China and the Soviet Union have elevated Mao and Lenin to cult status in order to unify and motivate the masses. The United States, too, has had its tribal religion, a meld primarily composed of Protestant Christian belief, moderate Enlightenment rationalism, and Renaissance-spawned capitalism, with a rich smattering of religious, ethnic, and cultural pluralism, all cast together in the hot melting pot of a new land. Its fruits have been far-reaching, epitomized by the innovation of Constitutional Democracy, The Bill of Rights, and separation of powers. The creation and implementation of ideas, the acquisition of wealth in its broad middle class, the facilitating of socio-economic upward mobility, and finally, the welcomed exporting of its culture to other lands, all manifest the dynamism of an America girded, to use ancient belief, with powerful gods.

The crucial question, however, to anyone whose overarching loyalty is to Jesus and His Kingdom is this: Has American civil religion—the integration of Christian faith with national identity and destiny—undercut the integrity and vitality of the gospel message and witness? This question has often been posed toward the Constantinian usurpation of the Church. Indeed, is the American experiment a wild shoot off the branch of Constantinian Christianity, yet another attempt at triumphalism? Finally, the question must be posed to a nation which revels in its wealth and power: How much has the American tribal god been seen as a Baal, a fertility god, a deity who when appeased by the blood of its defenders, the moral uprightness of its citizens, and the justness of its cause, poured forth a cornucopia of wealth and security?

Robert T. Handy, in his A Christian America: Protestant Hopes and Historical Realities, writing of the Protestant leaders in the 1930's, notes, "Instead of the church having Christianized civilization, they found that the civilization had captured the church" (p. 182).

In Smylies words, "Instead of Christianizing the nation, the churches have been nationalized." The evangelicals of that period did not see—perhaps could not see—

what seems obvious to us, looking back, that they were often expressing quite

understandable class and economic interests in their speeches and actions, but

always interpreting their aims and deeds almost wholly in a religious frame of

reference. They found a sense of unity in a concept of civilization which had

socio-economic and racial aspects, yet they interpreted their position in simple

evangelical terms." (Handy, p. 97, on the period 1860-1890)

God's judgment was in the wings, in rising Assyrian forces of secularist philosophy and science, modernist and comparative religions, and technological totalitarianism. Massive tectonic plates of Christian faith and societal culture began to shift. God does not promise to save nations (indeed, they are judged) but He does promise to keep alive His church, His witness, even through fire.

IV

The State of the American Church Today

Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a

wise man who built his house on the rock. The rain came down, the streams rose, and the

winds blew and beat against that house; yet it did not fall, because it had its foundation on

the rock. But everyone who hears these words of mine and does not put them into practice

is like a foolish man who built his house on sand. The rain came down, the steams rose, and

the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell with a great crash. (Mt. 7:24-27)

America is paralyzed in gridlock over defining its moral foundation, its purpose, and its destiny. As James Davison Hunter explains in Culture Wars, "The contemporary culture war is ultimately a struggle over national identity—over the meaning of America, who we have been in the past, who we are now, and perhaps most important, who we, as a nation, will aspire to become in the new millennium" (p. 50). Certainly the Protestant ethos has lost its hegemony, despite continued protestations especially from the Religious Right [see Gabriel Fackre, The Religious Right and Christian Faith, Eerdmans, 1982]. Yet the American people are just as far from consensus in endorsement of a secularized society of moral subjectivism, despite media and academic pressure.

Ironically, while the complexities of a highly technological, global society are magnitudinous, polarities of right and left demonize the other with simplistic sloganeering while offering self-serving, trite solutions. Much of the church is uneasily caught between and largely immobilized between these powerful, zealous polarities which perhaps comprise but 20% of the total population. It is the sway of this large middle segment which may tip the scales to the form of a new American culture. What is this middle, and how is the church influential?

I will first offer a conceptualization of cultural American religion in three categories, with hesitation naming them left, right, and center, the center not implying so much a mixture of left or right as rather both a discriminating attitude and a moderation of intensity. James Davison Hunter, in Culture Wars, utilizes the useful terms orthodoxy and progressive, constructively demonstrating that the polarizations are along cultural lines much more than ecclesiastical lines.

The religious left ["progressive" - Hunter] is dead in the water. That is, the religious culture as represented by The National Council of Churches and liberal Catholicism and Judaism offers little vitality and vision that their secular counterparts in cultural values cannot do as well or better themselves. Deeply divided between the hierarchical elites and their grassroots constituencies, spiritually befuddled in theological relativism, unable to elicit passion in its flocks, the religious left can do little but ride the coattails of the secular left while cutting its losses.

On the other hand, the religious right ["orthodoxy" - Hunter] is thriving though far from dominant. To my mind, the right are those who have seen traditional American culture and religion (primarily Protestant hegemony) as so congruous that their own personal Christian faith is threatened as American culture dramatically shifts. That is, their identity as a Christian is tied up in their identity with traditional America. This is why in my opinion the right is so zealous, akin to the modernist-fundamentalist debate on evolution in which a disproving of the literal chronological historicity of Genesis 1 and 2 would topple the integrity of the entire Bible.

In contrast to the religious left, secular left relationship, the religious right appears much more influential in relationship to the secular right. For example, in spite of discomfort and embarrassment, the Republican Party by necessity had to give prominent space at its 1992 convention to the religious right.

The religious right appeals to the fears of people threatened by discomforting change. Stability and predictability are important. Yet its proposals to contain society elicit sharp fears and hostility from those outside the religious right. Short of calamitous national disaster which could conceivably propel the religious right, with its decisive, ready solutions, into power, I foresee the right stalled in its conquest for American culture by hostile opposition. Feigned moves to a moderate position, such as with Pat Robertson's Christian Coalition, will be seen through their sheepskins. Nevertheless, however much the right has been maligned for not engaging social construction, it is building strong, stable families. It is yet too early to foretell the impact of the millions of children now in Christian and home schools, predominantly influenced by the religious right, when they reach adulthood.

The vast numbers of those who take centrist, discriminating positions, judging issues and cultural values on merit, argument, tradition, or through propagandistic sway, have relatively little impassioned voice or creative influence, so drowned-out and confused as they are by the noise from the clanging polarities. Nonetheless, they may reap the benefits of a cultural dialectic; some signs point to this among both conservative mainline Protestants and progressive evangelicals as well as in their catholic counterparts. For example, personal salvation as well as social well-being is viewed as foundational. Personal morality, family stability, and biblical integrity are valued along with ecological stewardship, social justice, and harmonious community pluralism.

The church of today, especially that of the baby boom generation and younger, is no longer Pollyanish, naive, uncritical of America. The assassinations of the '60's, Vietnam, Watergate, the S&L scandal, and more have exposed naked the underbelly of American pretension. Addicted to consumerism, conditioned to instant gratification of desires, neurotically voyeuristic, wealth-sated, media-jaded, American churchgoers of right to left persuasion along with their secular counterparts are preoccupied with themselves. Community is downplayed, for the individual with her or his needs is paramount. "Taking care of number one" is the encompassing goal. Of such is a house built on sand.

V

Predictions for the 21st Century American Church

"I conclude before my God that worldly power .... is not needed in the Kingdom of Christ."

( Confessions of Pilgram Marpeck — January 1532, Strasbourg )

What is pertinent in a prediction for the 21st century church in America is not so much its institutional strength but rather its spiritual vitality in obedience to Christ. At times institutional expressions are faithful, fruit-bearing, and vigorous, while at other times they are stagnant, even villainous.

Currently, institutional vigor is shifted away from many denominations to parachurch organizations and cultural issues' alliances. Denominations unadaptable to this trend due to paralyzing internal theological conflicts will continue to lose ground, while those with clear purpose will gain, particularly as they align with para-organizations.

Spirituality is rebounding from the cold secular skepticism earlier this century. This interest may well continue. Whether the church will meet this growing spiritual questing may depend in part upon the sincerity of the seekers as well as the ability of the church to articulate a clear vision, effectively contextualize its message into the social milieu, and genuinely provide spiritual nourishment.

Although factors of affluence, the wide menu array of diversions, and the continued onslaught of secular philosophies and values, and the fragmentation of community may continue to negatively influence the church, my greatest concern involves the technicization of the church. This concern not only is that the church will lower itself to the efficiency and effectiveness of sophisticated scientific church growth strategies and program maintenance tactics, but that it will become a means itself, not deriving its existence and purpose as relationship with Christ but rather perverting its purpose for self-fulfillment.

In what I feel is generally a positive trend, lay participation and influence in the life of the church should continue to increase in the 21st century. House churches, cell groups, bible studies, and a host of special interest groups will result out of laity involvement. Denominations, seminaries, and congregations would do well, in my opinion, to welcome and facilitate this trend.

I do not believe America will return to the days of being a "Christian nation", that is, a Protestant-ethic hegemony. Nor do I feel this would be desirable or healthy for the life of the church, anyway, for reasons in like manner to the effect of Constantinianism to the health of the church. However, America is floundering for an ethos, a public consensus of moral purpose and definition. All can agree, for example, that most inner city communities are deficient in holding to a consistent, effective, strengthening commonly-held moral value system. The prescription is of course contested. Whether society will make a place on the public square [to use Richard Neuhaus' coinage] for Christian influence may depend upon many factors, perhaps most especially integrity and humility from people of faith.

The world is spinning so fast it is difficult to predict ahead even 10 years, let alone 40 or 70 years ahead. But God's word holds true, and we must hear it clearly, unobscured by national and self-interests. The life of the Church, as always, will be most yeasty, most fruitful, among those who witness in word and in cruciform lifestyle to the One who took upon himself the form of a servant, who poured out his life for the present and eternal good of others, who sought not after his own needs but rather gave for the needs of others. The tasks of this church in 21st century America will be daunting. But its power will be that given by Almighty God.

-End-