Monday, February 21, 2005
What Is Worthy of the Church's Moral Authority?
This morning I posted on using the moral authority of the church to force people to some behavior because someone thinks that a certain behavior is necessary, particularly when the church and Scripture are not entirely clear on the issue.
That set me to thinking -- What issues around today are worthy of that moral authority, particularly in the societal and political realms. That is to say, what issues do I think the church should lend its moral authority to in order to change the societal and political climate.
I trying to develop this top 5 list I used three basic criteria:
A) Scripture is clear on the issue without the use of external hermeneutical tools. Some might call this "historical Christian understanding," but I am going to stick with the sentence as I have drafted it. I think it is less prone to misunderstanding.
B) There is sufficient consensus within the greater church on the issue so that Christianity will not appear somehow split on the issue of concern.
C) The issue is vitally important to human and/or societal survival, even aside from religious or spiritual considerations.
And so, without further introduction, my list of five issues that the Church should be putting its moral authority behind. They are in order of importance, most important first.
Genocide
Christians cannot afford to stay on the sidelines when entire people groups are being wiped from existence out. The church's failure to speak out about Hitler's evil, and it's relative silence about the evil of Stalin are to its shame. Come to think of it, I haven't heard much from the church on Rawanda. This is pure evil -- Why are we quiet?
Abortion and Related Issues (Stem Cell, for example)
This is really just an extension of the first issue. From a spiritual standpoint, this disregard for life can only lead, in the end, to murder. Would Terri Schiavo even be an issue if people had not been previously desensitized by things like abortion?
Institutionalized Oppression
Whether it is chattel slavery or Jim Crow in the US, apartheid in South Africa, or the caste system in India the church should be at the forefront. It certainly was in the civil rights movement in the United States, but the problem continues to exist throughout the world. We should be equally active.
Homosexuality
Yes, its a sin, but more importantly sexuality is necessary to the propagation of the species, and the preservation of society and the general moral order. Yes, we have technology never before available to achieve reproduction, but it can only rob us of our essential humanity. I do not think is coincidental that the fall of many great empires was accompanied by a rise in homosexual practice and acceptance.
Character In Leadership
The last several years are an object lesson in how important this is. In a country with a secular government, I am not talking about making sure our leaders are Christians -- that can be a huge disaster. (e.g. Jimmy Carter) What I am talking about is making sure our leaders are people who are direct, strong, and true to their word. If Bill Clinton had George W. Bush's character (even without his religious commitment) I would have disagreed with his policies, but not felt him a truly bad President.
Well, that is my list. What's yours?
That set me to thinking -- What issues around today are worthy of that moral authority, particularly in the societal and political realms. That is to say, what issues do I think the church should lend its moral authority to in order to change the societal and political climate.
I trying to develop this top 5 list I used three basic criteria:
A) Scripture is clear on the issue without the use of external hermeneutical tools. Some might call this "historical Christian understanding," but I am going to stick with the sentence as I have drafted it. I think it is less prone to misunderstanding.
B) There is sufficient consensus within the greater church on the issue so that Christianity will not appear somehow split on the issue of concern.
C) The issue is vitally important to human and/or societal survival, even aside from religious or spiritual considerations.
And so, without further introduction, my list of five issues that the Church should be putting its moral authority behind. They are in order of importance, most important first.
Genocide
Christians cannot afford to stay on the sidelines when entire people groups are being wiped from existence out. The church's failure to speak out about Hitler's evil, and it's relative silence about the evil of Stalin are to its shame. Come to think of it, I haven't heard much from the church on Rawanda. This is pure evil -- Why are we quiet?
Abortion and Related Issues (Stem Cell, for example)
This is really just an extension of the first issue. From a spiritual standpoint, this disregard for life can only lead, in the end, to murder. Would Terri Schiavo even be an issue if people had not been previously desensitized by things like abortion?
Institutionalized Oppression
Whether it is chattel slavery or Jim Crow in the US, apartheid in South Africa, or the caste system in India the church should be at the forefront. It certainly was in the civil rights movement in the United States, but the problem continues to exist throughout the world. We should be equally active.
Homosexuality
Yes, its a sin, but more importantly sexuality is necessary to the propagation of the species, and the preservation of society and the general moral order. Yes, we have technology never before available to achieve reproduction, but it can only rob us of our essential humanity. I do not think is coincidental that the fall of many great empires was accompanied by a rise in homosexual practice and acceptance.
Character In Leadership
The last several years are an object lesson in how important this is. In a country with a secular government, I am not talking about making sure our leaders are Christians -- that can be a huge disaster. (e.g. Jimmy Carter) What I am talking about is making sure our leaders are people who are direct, strong, and true to their word. If Bill Clinton had George W. Bush's character (even without his religious commitment) I would have disagreed with his policies, but not felt him a truly bad President.
Well, that is my list. What's yours?
