Secularism. Pluralism. Terms like that engender a sort of hatred, or strong distaste among many Christians. I supposed libertarianism does as well, in as much as it is often associated with the libertine nature of grotesque public displays of immorality disguised as personal liberty. Should those terms cause Christians to withdraw?
No matter your feelings on the recent SCOTUS decisions, I hope they at least raise a degree of concern that we are yet again dealing with more tribalist contention. Either the government is going to be utilized as a tool against some, or its bludgeoning power is going to be reduced. Regardless of the issue, tribalists from both parties scream in horror or delight, only exchanging one for the other based on the concern being addressed.
In the past, when disagreeing parties aligned with or feigned religious belief, they would garner support from the faithful. That political power became authority, once they gained the power of the state by leveraging their political clout, and they weaponized the state against their opponents. This is the underlying threat that secularism attempted to remove. By separating religious authority and state authority, the idea is that an administrative state could focus on the general well-being of the citizenry and simultaneously reduce the violence among adherents of different faiths by effectively removing the weapon.
Secularism may not be a purely Christian concept, but it is notable that the idea of a secular government to oversee a pluralist society was founded in Western culture where and when Christianity dominated the ideological landscape. Likely influenced by Christian thinkers and understanding their own historical mistakes or missteps, as well as the conflict and violence that arose from those errors, Western societies adopted versions of secular governments. From that system, humanity had a freedom revolution in terms of personal liberty and free markets which led to tremendous wealth and prosperity.
In the US, the idea of a secular government is embodied in our 1st Amendment, in which freedom of religion is guaranteed. Codifying religion into law is prohibited because it would prohibit the free exercise of another ideology or religion that doesn’t share the religious views of the contemporary powers.
These basic concepts tend to resonate with most voters in the United States, but I fear in our prosperity, we have grown lazy at identifying religious ideologies. Simultaneously we have not been actively restricting the government imposition of those ideologies on others. The result has been an ever-increasing cultural tribalism and growing resentment. In reality, we have eroded the strength of what secular government represents.
Many seem to have little issue with providing state subsidy or welfare through government action. On its face, they do so with the intent of caring for the poor or oppressed, but by using the government apparatus to scale these operations to their own ideological likings, they are forcing the participation of others who may have dissimilar ideas for how to best approach addressing those concerns.
Many embrace the idea of moral prohibitions on the use of illicit substances. They adopt measures to imprison and otherwise punish those who do not share their moral qualms with the same narcotics.
There are many examples of similar issues. Access to healthcare, border security, property rights, gun rights, animal rights, bodily autonomy, etc… all fall increasingly under the purview of an encroaching government. There is not a single issue that our government has centralized control over that we cannot come up with nearly infinite ideas of how to implement those police powers to get the best result based entirely on the ideological persuasion of the person you ask. The result is animosity when the party is not in control, and condescension when the party is.
No matter the concern, society seems driven into their respective corners, always getting amped up to come back out swinging at the next legislative proposition, SCOTUS decision, or Presidential address. It would seem that our secular exercise has been an epic failure as the animosity has driven us towards a massive civil conflict.
I don’t think secularism failed, however, as much as we tossed it out in favor of an ideology that simply appeared secular. Statism, or the belief in a central government authority to help or control society, has become an ideology of its own. It is the “sword of Damocles” in which secularism had successfully, though perhaps only temporarily, removed from consideration.
The secular state quickly became attractive to atheism and progressive ideologues who elevated the state alone to positions of worship. The “sword of Damocles” is only safely controlled when small or completely abolished, it turns out.
These progressives were not just leftists, as political actors and talking heads have attempted to caricature them. They come from all political persuasions. If you think the state can be used as a force for good in implementing law or regulation to improve society, you are progressive in that belief.
No matter the issue, as constituents grow the power and influence of state authority to solve respective problems, the draw to the power of the state continues to grow stronger. Christians are just as guilty as others in falling to this ideology. I see it in every church I’ve gone to. The stars and stripes proudly displayed in full view of any attendee is to let them know that the congregation aligns with the federal government. Never have I seen the 1st or 2nd Commandment just as proudly displayed next to or more highly honored as that idol of state. The hypocrisy would speak for itself, though I’m sure some legalist would claim he wasn’t bowing to it while he removed his hat and put his hand over his heart, or perhaps saluted, as the pledge of allegiance was said in hearty unison among his ideological brethren.
I’ve seen more men shed a tear reciting the national anthem then I see during a prayer or song of worship.
Nothing in Christian doctrine or scripture prescribes secular government or libertarian political views, and yet the commandment to love your neighbor as yourself certainly implies both. Pluralism isn’t Christian, but neither is forced conversion or violence. In fact, the very nature of faith is a voluntary act of belief and submission, and the act of aggressively enforcing ideology is anti-scriptural in the sense that it is forbidden in implication in the command to love your neighbor. Although pluralism, like libertarianism, is not in scripture, it is a human attempt to best live out the scriptural commands.
Secularism seems to be the preferred method of state authority for the same reason. It allows for pluralism and voluntary relationships among the citizenry, which increases our exposure to new ideas and helps us navigate our way through tough problems. Collectively, though, we are only stronger as long as those bindings are assumed voluntarily.
State authority erodes the voluntary nature of those relationships. It forces many into apathy as they grow tired of fighting for their right not to support or subsidize something they think is immoral, unethical, or otherwise abhorrent. Those that continue the fight over the weapon of government grow more tribalistic. They retreat to their echo chambers less willing to entertain new ideas or to engage with others in a loving way.
As the government subsidizes everything from the food we eat, to the schools we attend, or the businesses we shop at and the banks who fund it all, every disagreement becomes political. As the government grows, real secularism has to fade. Pluralism requires a tolerance that cannot exist in a regulatory state. That state being an ideology of its own, and the sub-ideologies which vie for the worldly throne of the state, will oppress dissent and minorities by its nature, and will inevitably result in destruction. Unless the voting populace adopts a libertarian approach of drastically reducing the size and scope of government, political powers of varying ideological views will simply fight harder.
It is pride and power. It is hatred and oppression. It is sin. Mankind seeking power to rule over mankind and willing to use whatever feigned innocence which best helps them gain the political power necessary to rule. Power in this world only belongs to one source, and we shouldn’t be seeking approval from that source. Our kingdom is with God, and not of this world.
Christians everywhere should be united in standing against growth of government authority. We should be united in reducing its current size and scope. Where government exceeds the prescriptive boundaries laid out in Romans 13, and where it errs from Christ’s commands, it has only illegitimate authority. A worldly government focused solely on protecting the rights of the individual and restoring to them what was wrongfully taken by another can be appreciated and welcomed. A government exceeding any of that is evil, and should be treated as such.
Thoughts?
