To Celebrate Or Not To Celebrate July 4th, That Is The Question

July 4th has so many warm memories for us American Christians that an unfortunate association flies in under the radar. That association pairs one's nationalism with one's religion. The similarities between the two are the ideals involved. And the closer that one's concept of their own nation comes to one's religion, there occurs a blurring between the two to the point that an attack part of one's nationalism is perceived as a threat to one's religion.

The result of the above connection is disturbing. The equating of the two leads to idolatry and polytheism. Here, one's own nation becomes the idol, the new god, with its founding fathers deemed as neoapostles. But along with the worship of this new god is a glorification of the self by association. And because the feelings of worshipping one's nation are so similar, if not the same, as workshipping one's god, it will likely be perceived as a call from above rather than spiritual adultery.

But the two don't have to be equated for sin to result; the sin of favoritism, mentioned in James 2:1-9, is a natural consequence of placing too high a priority on one's own national identity. For us Americans, this becomes evident when we care more about the welfare of fellow Americans than we do justice such as when we are more concerned about our nation's success than when our country treats others unjustly. 

How does the problem with one's national identity and, what we call, one's own patriotism start? It starts with celebrations like the ones that will occur this July 4th along with the need to belong. On July 4th, we learn that much if not all that we have are because of our country and those who have served and sacrificed for it. Here, all that we have can be boiled down to our prosperity and freedom. Of course, those who lack in either may not be inclined to be as patriotic as we are; but, nevertheless, national identity and patriotism are generally considered to be semi religious ideals. And, generally speaking, the more patriotic one is, the more noble one is seen to be.

The problem is that while Christian should want to show that one's devotion to one's nation plays second fiddle to our worship of God, what stirs our feelings for both are the same. Our devotion to both shows that we can be dedicated to something that is bigger than ourselves. In addtion our affection for both is in response to what each has provided for us. Finally, we are expected to show gratitude and commitment to that which has provided so much for us.

Returning to our memories of celebrating July 4th, we have fireworks to symbolize the courage and willingness to fight (a.k.a. the violence and wars) that have kept us free from the tyranny of others. And not only that, we are told that the prosperity that surrounds us is the result of that freedom and calls us to serve our country when asked. Compare that with Exodus 20:1-2 shows God declaring that because He has brought His people out of the land of slavery that now they are to serve Him by following his commandments.

 And before the above mentioned the Mosaic Covenant was the Abrahamic Covenenat recorded in Genesis 17. In verses 3-8, God tells Abraham what he has or will provide for him while verses 9-16 record how Abraham was to serve God in return for His provision.

What was good in the Old Testament is good in the New Testament. Consider Romans 12:1 where God, speaking through Paul, tells us that based on the the mercy He has shown u, each of us are to serve Him by offering ourselves as a "living sacrifice."

So how should we act on the fourth of July? Should we attribute our freedoms and prosperity to our nation, its founding fathers, and its armed forces knowing that if we do, we are inclined to respond with worship, something God calls us to exhibit for Him only? Also, we should note that if we don't give the above credit for what we have in this country, we risk being thought of as spoiled ingrates.

One way to both pay respect to the past without practicing idolatry is to tell the whole story of our nation's history. That yes, many of us experience an abundance of prosperity and freedom because of the sacrifice of our troops and the wisdom of our founding fathers;  but such came at a very high cost to others. Our land was stolen by force from the American Indians. Much of the early wealth of our country came from slave labor before the civil war and Jim Crow enhanced prison labor after reconstruction. In addition, our country has interfered and even altered the state of affairs of many countries for economic reasons. We helped overthrow Iran's elected Prime Minister Mossadegh in '53 for cheaper access to oil and Guatamala's government to reserve the land for an American company in 1954. The vintage example of U.S. intervention came in Chile in 1973 when, on 9-11, we helped enable a coup that replaced a leftist leaning democratic government with a neoliberal totalitarian government again for the sake of American businesses. 

There are plenty of other examples of how U.S. foreign intervention has often been in the business of replacing democratic governments with totalitarian leadership. So our good fortune has costs others their freedoms and lives. At this point, we should note the political math formula that says, Liberty - Equality = Privilege. That is, all of that courage, sacrificing, and fighting done for the enrichment of our country was done to give us privileges over others in the world rather than freedom and thus an equality with others.

 Compare our history with the Gospel. Whereas those who serve and sacrifice for our country have been slain by external enemies, that is others than ourselves, Jesus was slain by our own sins. And whereas our troops have fought so we can take from others, Jesus died so we can give. And whereas patriotic pride boasts of what we do for ourselves, faith destroys pride by pointing to our utter dependence on God as our sole provider.

The question Christian Americans should be asking on this and every July 4th is: Can we proudly celebrate our whole history while seeking for God's justice to be done? For without the Gospel, nobody can survive that justice and that is what we should note anytime we are tempted to mix our nationalism with our religion by reveling in patriotism.

Should We Belong To An Evil Empire

I don't know if Kurt Willems is well known perhaps because we come from two different theological traditions. While I come from a Reformed Theological tradition and Willems comes from an Anabaptist one. The two were at odds during the Reformation but "tolerate" each other today. Nevertheless, he has important challenges for those of us who were raised on Romans 13 and a Christian based patriotism. In his sermon on Revelation 17, Willems implores us to first see the connection between America's  empire with the great whore from Revelation 17 and then to react by coming out from this prostitute so as to escape her coming judgment.

Regardless of whether Willems' association of America and the Empire with which this woman from Revelation 17 is biblically correct, that by building an empire, America has much in common with the past empires. And in our case, one of those similarities include how the union of civil religion with nationalism led to the massive shedding of blood and the grand theft of land and resources.

According to Willems, the Christian response to America's empire should be to separate oneself from participating in the creation and maintenance of empire less we become like those who eat meat sacrificed to idols by freely enjoying the fruits of the American empire which are the results of exploitation or the worship of idols, that is becoming united with the great whore from Revelation 17, by how we pay homage to the state. Willems' view here challenges Christians from the Reformed tradition in two ways. First, whereas Willems sees that America is founded on sins of violence and domination, many from the Reformed tradition see America as being founded on the Word of God. This does not imply to the latter group that all has been kosher. Rather, they are just saying that the foundation of America were based on the Bible and that the Bible played a key role in its development despite the sins.

Of course another challenge to Reformed Christians which Willems presents is his depiction of the character of America's empire regards the inferences Reformed Christians have drawn from Romans 13 and I Peter 2. In these scriptures, both Paul and Peter command us to submit to the authorities because all who are in authority have been ordained by God. From their teachings on submission comes an unfortunate patriotism and even reverence for one's nation which has sometimes achieved a quasi-religious significance. For many Reformed Christians, patriotism ranks at least third behind cleanliness and godliness.

But Willems presents still another challenge to the Reformed view of Romans 13. Whereas those from the Reformed Tradition look at Romans 13 as addressing personal piety, Willems directs our attention from making sure we dot every 'i' and cross every 't  to thinking about doing our small part to address the needs of those who suffer because of America's empire. And it is at this point where we see how we from the Reformed Faith define piety differently from how Willems does. Whereas those from the Reformed Traditions measure piety by what rules one follows, Willems is thinking of piety by how our actions affect others and what we can do for them. In other words, it seems that piety according to the Reformed Traditions is inner or self-directed while Willems' is outer or other directed.

Something else can be observed here. With the Reformed Traditions, there is a strict division of labor, a modularization if you are a Computer Scientist or rigidity if you are a Psychologist, where social justice is the sole concern of the government while our responsibility is to keep ourselves pure. With Willems, social justice is a concern of both the government and the individual. So that when the government fails to practice and promote social justice,  the individual is to pick up the slack and that is for the sake of the victims of injustice.

As much as I believe and value the theologies of the Godhead and soteriology (study of salvation) that come from the Reformed Traditions, what Willems says here is a breath of fresh air. That piety and our relationship with God is not just about our own worship of God, our personal purity, and our relationships with those who live in the small circle of our lives; it includes a broader and less rigid view of how we relate to the world. So that if because of the system in which we live we hurt others by what we enjoy, then it is our God given duty to resist the system by at least breaking with conventions.

The above is not an easy message to hear by some Reformed Christians for a few reasons. First it goes against the narrative some have heard their whole lives. Second, those who idolatrously revel in patriotism gain more than a fair amount of self-signficiance through their association with this country and its history. And third, some are not ready for the personal changes that are implied by admitting such a narrative.  For such changes required, especially of those who would call themselves Christians, would revolve around being more concerned about the injustice visited on others than their own personal religiosity. This showing concern for the victims of injustice can incur the high price of being at odds with those close to us as well as the prevailing view of the society in which we live.

Very few have really struck an adequate balance between the implications of the injustices practiced by one's own nation and the Biblical commands to recognize the source of the authority of those who are our elected leaders. Both Gandhi and Martin Luther King provided fallible examples of providing such a balance. And if we attempt to continue what they started, perhaps we can make the Christian faith more relevant for today without sacrificing the Gospel's message.