Independence Day

Regarding the upcoming observance of Independence Day, I thought it appropriate to share the thoughts of this Sunday's sermon:

Confessions of a Pastor on Independence Day
There is a yard sign on the east side of Willmar--I know that’s pretty far away; Kim and I joke that when we go further than Hwy. 71 in Willmar, we know we’re really out of town--but there is a sign right on Hwy. 12 there that reads in bold letters, “America--love it or leave it.”

That sign always makes me cringe. Sometimes, I try to think of something clever to yell at the sign as we drive by, but somehow, yelling at inanimate objects doesn’t seem very sophisticated. I find the sign offensive, because I believe it intends to claim that any criticism of the United States is unpatriotic, disloyal, or treasonous. I could stand up here and try to explain how the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is designed to allow for governmental criticism, because our country’s founders wisely understood that political power without criticism becomes power unchecked, and furthermore that if one were to take the Bill of Rights as a whole, the natural conclusion would be that it is meant to encourage dissent as patriotic obligation. Moreover, I could even tack on the famous quote by Benjamin Franklin--often called the “First American”--that “the first duty of every citizen is to question authority.”

But, despite my pretensions otherwise, I am no constitutional scholar. I am a Christian pastor. My vocation requires me not to look at the practices of our government and society through the lens of the Constitution or the principles of the Revolution (principles, by the way, that apparently allowed one in every five people across the colonies--that’s north and south--to be legally owned as property), but to proceed with commitment to discerning the will of God as revealed in the Gospel, even if that leads to criticism that is heard as disloyal, unpatriotic, and treasonous. I wish I could say that a view from that angle makes things more clear, bringing into sharp focus the difference between righteousness and sin, between right and wrong. But it doesn’t. It actually makes such discernment more difficult.

Scripture’s attitude toward earthly power is varied at best. The birth of the Hebrew nation takes place when slaves put their trust in the sovereignty of God instead of the Egyptian pharaoh. But after the Exodus and the time in which the Twelve Tribes were ruled by the Judges, the Hebrew Scriptures appear to become quite comfortable with a king being chosen to rule on behalf of God, and in God’s name. However, when the monarchy strayed from God’s commandments--as it so often did--the prophets arose to criticize their government in bombastic and inflammatory ways. Eventually, the Hebrew kingdoms were conquered, and the New Testament opens with an oppressive, authoritarian Roman Empire ruling the Mediterranean world and on its way to rising to even more power. This situation, in turn, fuels 1st century hopes for a Jewish Messiah, who--like Moses--will again deliver the people from bondage. It would seem that the Christian New Testament might be more unified in its approach to earthly authority, but we read in Paul’s Letter to the Romans the admonition, “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities; for there is no authority except from God, and those authorities that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists authority resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment” (13:1-2). And yet, we find in the Book of Revelation, the Roman Empire imagined as the Beast that ruthlessly consumes the righteous. The fact of the matter is that rendering unto Caesar what is Caesar’s and rendering unto God what is God’s is not a compromise for a people who believe that the “earth is the LORD’s and all that is in it” (Ps. 24:1).

The truth is that Christian pastors--and other people of faith--all over the land find it a challenge (to say the least) to integrate their vocation of faith with their American citizenship. If my ultimate loyalty is to the God revealed in Jesus Christ, then I have trouble pledging allegiance to a flag, or to the republic for which it stands, regardless of how good it may or may not be. You might not realize it, but it is a common struggle among mainline pastors how to address civic national holidays like the Fourth of July.

I feel like this internal conflict is further intensified within our own faith tradition--a tradition in which stands Zion Reformed Church (now Zion Reformed United Church of Christ) of Allentown, Pennsylvania where the Liberty Bell was hidden in 1777 to protect it from British plans to melt it down. A tradition in which Old South Congregational Church (also now known as Old South Congregational United Church of Christ) of Boston, Massachusetts stands, where the Boston Tea Party was planned in 1773. It is a tradition in which stands the Battle of Lexington-Concord in 1775, the opening battle of the American Revolution that was sparked by the British manhunt for two Congregationalists by the names of Sam Adams (who had taken the lead in planning and executing the Boston Tea Party) and John Hancock (who would serve as President of the Continental Congress when American independence was declared and therefore had the honor of being the first to sign the Declaration of Independence in July of 1776).

Ours is also the same faith tradition that joined with others in speaking out against the official legality of racial segregation and American imperial policy in Vietnam. It is the same tradition whose leader was arrested last year in front of the White House for protesting similar policies in Iraq and who has endorsed the Campaign Against Torture that condemns the immorality behind our government’s treatment of its enemies. (This leader has noted with both humor and seriousness that he is the first President of the UCC not to be invited to the White House.) And this faith tradition is the only religious denomination in U.S. history to be investigated by the Internal Revenue Service. What we may not realize is that all of these actions, whether from colonial days or periods within our own memory, violated the strictest sense of the words we find in the 13th chapter of the Letter to the Romans and have all been called disloyal, unpatriotic, and treasonous. Of course, so it was with Moses and the prophets of the Hebrew Scriptures, as well as any New Testament Christian who refused to acknowledge the Emperor as Lord, Savior, and God.

To speak in terms of ultimate loyalty is both bold and dangerous. It is to reject any notion of “both-and” and opt decisively for “either/or.” The dilemma of the Christian gospel is its demand for ministry to the “both-and,” while at the same time showing that loyalty can be to only one. We cannot serve two masters as Jesus reminds us in Matthew’s gospel; we cannot serve both God and mammon, and neither can we proclaim both Christ and Emperor as Lord. This is true regardless of which candidate or what party is in office. Some of you may know the name Jim Wallis, a minister who heads up the group Call for Renewal and its journal Sojourners. A few years ago, he became better known for writing a popular book entitled God’s Politics: Why the Right Gets It Wrong and the Left Doesn’t Get It. But in an earlier work, The Soul of Politics, he warns of the danger of misplacing ultimate loyalty. He writes, “Both conservative and liberal religion have become culturally captive forces that merely cheer on the ideological camps with which each has identified. And religion as political cheerleader is invariably false religion.”

We’ve probably been taught the secular value of religious freedom--many of our ancestors came to North America to escape conflict fueled by religious differences. What we may not have heard is that there are theological reasons why the church should resist becoming one with the state. People of faith, as well as people of no faith, must always be free to criticize the government, to lift up a prophetic voice, to speak truth to power. I believe we are called always to live out our ultimate loyalty (apart from the state) and yet to engage the political process and forces of society in the name of the God of peace, justice, and love. I believe Christians are called to be “permanent dissenters,” never confusing our earthly citizenship with our loyalty to the Gospel; to be in the world, but not of the world. Another pastor writes, “Someone has said that the best citizen is not the one who says, ‘My country, right or wrong,’ but the one who strives always to direct his or her country to the right.” And I believe that holds true no matter what flag happens to be flying over our heads. Thanks be to God. Amen.