Bemoaning ... Part II

In my last post, I referenced a poll done by George Barna from which he came to some critical conclusions about the theological understandings of Americans. I hope you have read them and thought about them. Here are some questions and reflections I have:

*** I would agree that Americans need to think more about their theological beliefs. I have thought that for some time. Nearly 15 years ago, I used John Cobb's book, Becoming a Thinking Christian, in a study at the Hillcrest Baptist Church in Mobile Alabama. Cobb's position was that American Christian churches had abdicated their rightful role in helping their members reflect on Biblical teachings and how they apply to current reality.

*** I don't think using wisdom from other faith traditions in shaping one's morality is a problem. Truth in whatever form it is found and wherever it is found is still truth.

*** Having people serve as their own "theologian-in-residence" is also not a problem for me. I would actually prefer people wrestling with theological issues instead of accepting someone else's explanations wholesale. I would reiterate, however, having discussions about theological issues within the context of a church community ought be done.

*** Based on other things that I have read from Barna, I know that he has very conservative Christian beliefs. Thus, his theological understandings on some issues would be different from mine, even if we used the same language to express them. So, he would probably dismiss me as a person who is theologically in error as he would many others in the broader Christian realm. He would say that his beliefs are based on the Bible, as if he distilled the one and only truth from each passage. I would say that his beliefs are based on his understanding of the Biblical text. This leads to another question I have. Is Barna's theological perspective the only "correct" one or can one have different understandings and still be considered Christian?

What do you think, good reader? I would love for these two submissions to generate much discussion.

Bemoaning American's theological views

George Barna is the pre-eminent conservative Christian pollster. As such, his polls and analyses display a particular orientation. That is said as background for a recent piece posted by him giving the results of a poll conducted on January 12 of this year. The article describing the poll results is entitled, "Christianity Is No Longer Americans’ Default Faith."

In his analysis of what the poll results mean, Barna came to these conclusions:

• The Christian faith is less of a life perspective that challenges the supremacy of individualism as it is a faith being defined through individualism. Americans are increasingly comfortable picking and choosing what they deem to be helpful and accurate theological views and have become comfortable discarding the rest of the teachings in the Bible.
• Growing numbers of people now serve as their own theologian-in-residence. One consequence is that Americans are embracing an unpredictable and contradictory body of beliefs. Barna pointed out, as examples, that millions of people who consider themselves to be Christian now believe that the Bible is totally accurate in all of the lessons it teaches at the same time that they believe Jesus Christ sinned. Millions also contend that they will experience eternal salvation because they confessed their sins and accepted Christ as their savior, but also believe that a person can do enough good works to earn eternal salvation.
• In the past, when most people determined their theological and moral points of view, the alternatives from which they chose were exclusively of Christian options - e.g., the Methodist point of view, the Baptist perspective, Catholic teaching, and so forth. Today, Americans are more likely to pit a variety of non-Christian options against various Christian-based views. This has resulted in an abundance of unique worldviews based on personal combinations of theology drawn from a smattering of world religions such as Christianity, Buddhism, Judaism, Hinduism, and Islam as well as secularism.
• Faith, of whatever variety, is increasingly viral rather than pedagogical. With people spending less time reading the Bible, and becoming less engaged in activities that deepen their biblical literacy, faith views are more often adopted on the basis of dialogue, self-reflection, and observation than teaching. Feelings and emotions now play a significant role in the development of people’s faith views - in many cases, much more significant than information-based exercises such as listening to preaching and participating in Bible study.

Ponder these. I will post some reflections and questions relating to Barna's conclusions in two days.

Melting Pot or not?

Part of the American story is the view that our country is a melting pot blending together diverse groups of people. After all, the words on the Statue of Liberty speak of "your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to be free" coming to these shores.

And, according to a recent Pew Center Poll (from December 2008), Americans say they believe that living in diverse communities is best. Quoting from the report, "About six-in-ten Americans say they like the idea of living in politically, racially, religiously or economically mixed communities, while about a quarter take the opposite view: They would rather live in communities made up mostly of people like themselves."

The only problem with this poll result comes as we consider further data that suggests, despite what our nation's citizens may say, most of us live in communities and worship in churches that are pretty much monochrome. The Pew Report includes this analysis: "While it's impossible to know for sure, it is worth noting that residential segregation has long been a fact of life in America, and that, at least by certain measures, some varieties of segregation appear to be on the rise.
The most pervasive forms of residential segregation, by far, are racial and ethnic. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, while blacks comprise just 12% of the U.S. population, about half of all blacks in 2000 lived in majority-black neighborhoods. Hispanics also tend to be clustered into segregated enclaves, though not quite to the same degree as are blacks. Latinos made up 12.5% of the U.S. population and 43% lived in majority-Latino neighborhoods as of 2000."

A recent analysis of diversity among churches I have seen points up the same thing. While there are more predominantly white congregations with some racial diversity than existed 10 years ago, the over-whelming majority of African-American congregations have no racial diversity.

As we look at the birthday of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr tomorrow - January 15 - and the inauguration of Barack Obama on Tuesday - January 20, it would be appropriate for us to ask, "How far have we really come?"

South Carolina strikes again.

On November 21, 2008, I mentioned the controversy over a proposed license plate in South Carolina. Many states have specialty license plates promoting some cause - like wildlife preservation - or some institution - like a college. This particular plate was to have a unique message, though, in promoting a particular faith - Christianity. The plate would have included a stained glass motif and a large cross. As you can imagine, folks opposed to such a thing brought suit, and the courts ruled the state could not continue with its plans for the license plate.

That was then. Now, as you can also imagine, the folks supporting the plate have organized. They have launched petition drives to demand their rights to have such a plate and have held at least one rally to pump up their supporters. According to a news article from the Spartanburg Herald-Journal, there was a religious rally last weekend attended by the lieutenant-governor and the attorney general, both of whom appear to be preparing to run for governor, at which the faithful Christians in South Carolina were encouraged to stand firm for their right to have a state license plate that proclaims the Christian message.

The pastor of the church where the rally was held, the Reverend Arnold Hiette, was described in the article in this way: Red-faced and angry, shaking his fist alongside his Bible, Hiette told the congregation that the four complainants - especially the Unitarian - and one judge who took away the people's right to witness via their vehicle tags "along with the ACLU, they're going to burn in hell."

Lt. Governor Bauer was quoted as saying, "There is free speech for every group in this state besides Christians," Bauer said. "Every citizen has the right to free speech in this country. I don't understand why witnessing in public is considered unconstitutional. You don't even have to be a Christian to believe everyone deserves the freedom of speech."

The issue is not about witnessing in public. The issue is not that, somehow, the constitution forbids people from giving witness to their faith. The legal issue is, as always, what entity is expected to provide the witness. Individual Christians can plaster their car, their clothing, their briefcases, and their houses with signs and stickers proclaiming their Christian faith. Christian churches can have billboards and signboards and special events to promote their faith.

It is when the state is expected to be involved that the problems come. The state should make it possible for people of all faiths to gather when and where they desire and to worship according to their conscience. The state should also protect the rights of people who have no faith. Thus, the state should be religiously neutral in the sense that its role is to guarantee the religious rights and freedoms of its citizens, but it should not promote any religion through state means. Just as the state should not produce a license plate promoting Christianity, it should also not produce one for any other religion practiced within its boundaries. The state should stay out of the religion business.

Worth Pondering

Today, in my wanderings through cyber space, I came across this quote attributed to Reinhold Niebuhr.

Humanity is the creator of history. But we are also the creature of the history we create.

When I read it, I stopped, mentally, for a beat or two, and then re-read it. It may have the same impact on you.

Think about what it means for human beings to be both the originator of and the servant to the history we create.