One of the blogs I read regularly is called JESUS CREED by Scot McKnight, a New Testament scholar with impecible evangelical credentials and thoughtful reflections. His posting yesterday I thought was worth passing on for your prayerful consideration.
Posted: 19 Aug 2009 03:49 AM PDT
The recent inflagration in rhetoric, comparing Obama to socialism or Hitler and the like, is a lazy, morally inexcusable way of getting an emotional response and often carried off in the absence of concrete evidence or knowledge of actual policy.
But it works, and so both sides have tried it -- from Nancy Pelosi to Rush and Sean Hannity. The issue for us is what kind of rhetoric Christians should use in public discourse.
Example: Is it accurate and non-distorting (or inaccurate and distorting) to say Obamacare is socialism?
When done well, apocalyptic rhetoric has an important place in American politics. Apocalyptic and politics are friends. We should not blame this on Republicans though; the Democrats were full of it during the Bush and Reagan years. It's the way our politicians and whistle-blowers like to warn. But it has moral limits and we need to know them. It has a power and an intent, and we need to know them too.
What might surprise the Democrats is that, in our own history of public rhetoric about politics and religion, we have seen a regular use of the jeremiad, the threat that if we don't change, God will judge us or our country will fall apart. Sometimes political rhetoric gets ratcheted up with apocalyptic warnings, by both sides in American history. I read a collection of essays by American historians, and I reviewed some it on this blog (Prophesies of Godlessness), and it really surprised me how often the language became apocalyptic -- including Jefferson and Emerson -- when their major ideas got involved. The Puritans and their opponents had the same form of rhetoric.
The Democrats famously resorted to this under Reagan and then again under Bush, and now the Republicans are resorting to it and Palin's "death panels" was a good example. So, let's not get all bent out of shape about it. Instead, let's learn how to use rhetoric wisely as Christians. A few thoughts:
I have to admit that (1) I have begun to resent this sort of language in public discourse today because it is so common and so extreme that it is losing its force. It's becoming a bit like shock talk instead of genuine rhetorical persuasion. (2) But, let's admit this: the prophets of ancient Israel through Revelation used extreme rhetoric often. (3) I have become convinced apocalyptic rhetoric is a form of "ultimate warning" rather than genuine expectation.
What most of it means, then, is "our country's future hangs in the balance and, if we make the wrong decision here, something irreversibly bad may happen."
Posts
#1. Great post - your words are accurate and highlight a tremendous problem in the current political milieu. Using rhetoric and fear as control mechanisms has nothing but negative effects. Playing on people's fear is immoral - simply put. But keep in mind, the Bush regime (specifically Karl Rove) wrote the book on this subject. Both parties are guilty of manifesting this rhetoric, so lay the blame equally.
ReplyDelete#2. I've been more dismayed by fear-mongering rhetoric from preachers than from politicians. I expect politicians to fall prey to weak logic and fallacy, but when preachers do it, I'm disgusted. I've stopped attending numerous churches because the pastor threatened the congregation into voting for the right because if they don't, they'll surely go to hell. I can remember 4 pastors who quite clearly told their congregations to vote based on their values. After saying this, they were clear to note that by 'values', they mean ABORTION, as if it's the ONLY value Christians should possess. WHY? Why must I vote Republican because of their abortion stance when there are many other values for me to base my vote on? Long story short, why do pastors use poisonous rhetoric to influence their congregations? I've seen it over and over and it's the reason I no longer go to church. Granted, I'm not calling anyone of the posters here into question - I'm just wondering what you think.
I once told a woman whose ONLY issue was abortion that Jesus is not a "one issue" God. More about that in a later posting. But to your question, I believe pastors should reflect the character of Jesus Christ in their actions and their speaking. "Poisonous rhetoric" does not fit the standard of "speak the truth in love." We are called to be salt and light. I am reminded that too much salt actually spoils things. The other thing I believe is that my first responsibility is always to represent the Kingdom of God, not any earthly party or political philosophy. Political parties do not exist to advance spiritual agendas, although some spiritual agendas coincide with theirs--so as I pastor I am very wary of telling people to see one party as God's party. I do, however, believe that Christians should chose values that reflect Christ and vote for politicians and positions that support what they understand to be those values.
ReplyDelete