The New Christians’ Kool-Aid
Written by Michael Cline : April 17, 2008
What do the following people have in common:
Tony Jones
Frank Schaeffer
C. Wess Daniels
And as of now, 28 readers (and counting) of Jesus Manifesto?
Somewhere along the line, they’ve slurped long and hard from the Obama Kool-Aid.
This post is not suggesting that to vote for Obama is to be a blind follower of the Jonestown pedigree. Everyone has their reasons (some better than others) and I believe none of the above mentioned people are mindless zombies when it comes to politics or voting. But boiling just below the surface is the cult like worship that has manifested in Obama’s run. When he galloped into the Twin Cities a few months back, there were reports of woman fainting and grown men crying, as if The Beatles were the opening act. The Church of Obama was in session.
It would be much easier for me to dismiss voting for Obama if that’s all there was to it- ridiculous rock star homage and a pretty face (of which there is some). But it is much harder to look at the core of why Barack Obama has gained such a voice in what is the largest popularity contest in America only held every four years. His buzzwords of “hope,” “change,” and “unity” appeal to all of us. He appears to be the prime candidate to move the United States forward, with neighbors hand in hand, into a tumultuous season of worldwide violence, corporate greed, and expanded poverty. His platform reaches across simple party lines and brings a holistic Christian voice for those progressive members of the Church that for years have wanted to see politics be about more than just abortion and sexuality. So why shouldn’t we all drink from the same grape flavored trough?
Because I’m fearful it could turn out to be poisoned with Valium, chloral hydrate, and cyanide.
This has less to do with Mr. Obama’s stances on any political issue of our day, and more with the historical precedent Christianity has set for itself. When I see Christianity (fundamentalist, progressive, liberal, or any other type) get behind a movement or person, I can usually rest assured that we are at least two years late and five feet short. Rather than express Christian revelation in a way that is specific and adequate to the social realities in which we live, as Jacques Ellul writes, the Church too often “looks for ways to adapt Christianity to the dominant intellectual and sociological trend.” As a result, we guarantee ourselves a “small place in the new social order.”
The tendency to do this in understandable. It is the failures of the Church that has so often pushed well-meaning Christians to adopt new strategies for social change just as much as a bright new star appearing on the scene. But timing is everything and Ellul saw this in the “newly discovered” relationship between Marxist thought and Christianity. Christianity failed to answer the big questions and problems of the day, while Marxism offered a palatable answer that seemed Biblical enough. The two became one. The process of the inevitable co-opting in Ellul’s day looks eerily similar to our own situation:
(1) Injustice
The unjust society actually resulted after 20 centuries of Christianity.
· Communism loudly trumpets equality across classes
(2) Poverty
Rather than helping, the Church became just another “power” and sanctified the poor.
· Communism (in theory) always sides with the poor
(3) Authenticity
The Church had a serious disconnect between theory and practice. Hypocrites owned the hour.
· Communism consistently puts theory into practice; they practice what they preach
(4) Material Reality
Christianity offered a disembodied, private spirituality.
· Communism rubs our nose in this betrayal. It reminds us of the decisive importance of concrete, human life before death, and of the body and daily activity.
(5) Communal Aggressiveness
Christians sit besides each other on Sunday and yet ignore each other ’s lives.
· Communism promises to birth a communal spirit of militancy, sacrifice, and commitment.
This should in no way be read as an endorsement of Communist thought. In fact, it’s the exact opposite of an endorsement of any political/social “ism.” But it’s not hard to see how drinking the Obama “hope and change” kool-aid could lead to the same place Ellul’s communist brothers and sisters found themselves in. Ellul describes the process this way:
Recognizing this challenge moves us to take the next step: to take Christianity seriously again, to desire at last to be authentically Christian. Thus we were, to a great extent, encouraged to come to ourselves… But we move beyond the stage of listening to a challenge to noting an agreement, and from this observation we move on to seeing conformity at the level of action. Christians find they are no longer called just to become more Christ-like, but they believe that in order to become better Christians, they must cooperate with the Communists. (pp. 9-10, Jesus and Marx)
And as we again carve out our niche in the political realm, except this time while “caring about more than just abortion,” we will do whatever we have to do to stay there. And instead of once again taking Christianity seriously, we’ll turn to the latest message of “social justice” and “political reconciliation” being peddled by the loudest voice and ask them to do our share of the work. The flavor may have changed, but I’m afraid it’s still laced.
Comments