Church and State
Honzo October 27th, 2007
I took this picture a few weeks ago while I visiting my hometown.
A couple of things leap out at you at first:
- The American Flag draped around the Cross
- The lack of any Church officials on the parade, just two service persons.
However, the most striking part of the float is the captions at the bottom:
The Savior and the soldier
paid the price to set us free.
The Savior and the soldier ~
we give our thanks to thee!
This is a haunting image. It animates the term, American christianity.
One of the things I have been rethinking this year is the role of the Christian in a government. This picture serves to remind me that it is a topic worthy of consideration.
At what point does one meld the Christ and the military? Where is the message of peace? How does this function to a) define Christians from other cultures/nations; b) tie our faith to the state; c) link criticism of one to criticism of the other?
On the one hand, military personnel are responsible for the creation and sustention of my political freedoms and Christ has freed me from the bonds of sin. I like both of these things. On the other hand, the float serves to equate the two, to meld them together, to raise up the political (earthly) to the religious (heavenly). Should we, as Christians, be overly concerned with our political freedoms, or should we simply focus on furthering the Kingdom of God and let our political/economic conditions take care of themselves? I can justify the words and the float a variety of different ways. However, I keep coming back to one question:
Why did this church decide to interweave the message of patriotism with the message of Christianity in their singular public statement to the thousands of people that would be watching the parade?
I’d like to get your thoughts on the matter.
- Culture
- Comments(10)
Wow. How disturbing.
I’ll give more thoughts later. Right now, I think I’ll go gouge my eyes out.
ugh.
that. is. awful.
I have written a bit on this topic here.
And some other good articles here and here.
Dave,
Thanks for the links. I think I am actually going to use this photo in a paper where I am comparing nationalism in American Christianity to nationalism during the reformation period and the use of woodcuts.
As I am looking into this more, it turns out that the theme of the Festival was “United We Stand,” so at least that is something.
This is especially interesting to me right now. I’m taking a seminar called New Testament, Biblical Studies, and Empire. For part of the class, we’ve looked at ancient Roman art and architecture, seeing how the very artwork itself puts forth a rhetorical argument that is part of the larger imperial discourse. Art says something, it performs a type of work in identity formation. I’ve found it quite fascinating.
Now, when I look at this float I must pause. What is the rhetoric that this piece of art is putting forth? What work is it doing? The mixing of Christian, American, and especially Military images is quite the powerful statement. This statement in turn affects the way the surrounding community conceives of itself. It’s quite the circular reinforcement.
I wonder what work has been done comparing ancient Roman art-rhetoric with that of present day art. Such a project would potentially be pretty immense if done in appropriate detail. Perhaps I’ve got a paper to write…
People just don’t know any better. A lot of Christians seem to have this notion that America is this sort of Israel and God needs to be yoked with American Patriotism. Not that patriotism is bad, I certainly don’t want to endorse the growing “being politically and theologically progressive and Christian is cool” camp. I guess my biggest qualm is the slogans and the cross and flag together. Putting the teachings of our Lord and instrument of His death whereby He saved His elect side by side with American patriotism seems to belittle the work of Christ unintentionally.
does anyone know of a good primary text that explains the type of thinking exemplified in the picture?
In THE COST OF DISCIPLESHIP, Bonhoeffer treats the change from nation to congregation with some detail that might be elucidating here. I don’t have access to all my books (sigh) or i’d quote for you. The upshot is that the congregation has no native civil rights. It’s a great read, although not easy.
That OT Israel is confused with America now is the fault of dispensationalism. I really don’t see how the OT concept of “nation” (heterogeneous people group), has anything to do with modern nation states.
As Tom is fond of pointing out, the NT does not espouse a "theology of the Land".
The people of God, the nation of God, the Kingdom of God is no longer bound by political or ethnic identity. We are all peoples, tribes and tongues.
….echos JR….. America is no shining city on a hill - but we are to all be lamps!
The caption at the bottom is in song or poem form, almost like a Scriptural quote. That is odd. Does anyone recognize those lines? They are disturbing.