This episode of Dispatches is
worth watching. It's one of those documentaries where you find yourself not
really agreeing with anyone but it's informative and helps to make you aware of
what's happening.
It's quite biased but I suppose
that must be expected. As I watch this I sometimes wonder why these Christians
are consenting to this. Do they not recall the teaching of the Scripture? The
world will think we are fools. To put it on display (in this sense) is not
helping the cause. We're sideshow freaks to them.
It's all the more striking when
one considers that if you went back to say 1850, when the British Empire was in
its full glory and splendour, the Nonconformists were hardly the people celebrating
it.
Their present angst over the
state of society is blinding them to greater truths and realities. Rather than
look back we need to think differently.
There's not a verse in the New
Testament that supports what they're doing and precious little in the way of
Early Church witness. These folks are all thoroughly adherents of the theology
which finds its genesis in the Constantinian Age.
The Old Testament certainly can
be appealed to but I will continue to insist the New Testament teaches us how
to rightly read and understand the Old Testament. The Christocentric reading of
the Old Testament nullifies the Israel analogy. Neither Britain nor America nor
any other nation is analogous to Israel. That was true in the Old Testament
period (as is verified by the prophets) and is even more verifiable in this New
Covenant era.
As far as the solicitor that is
one of the primary subjects in the film, it is sad to me that while she seems
to be lacking a great deal in terms of Biblical knowledge she believes she is
serving God through politicking and social action.
Remember in the
Constantinian/Dominionist paradigm the Church is being faithful only when it's
acquiring and wielding power. If that's
your criterion than indeed, it must be a depressing time. I will admit that if
you ask her, she would deny that's what she is. She's not even aware of her
ideological foundations. This type of theology has simply become the orthodoxy
of our day. To these folks there is no label. They think it's simply Biblical
Christianity.
We would all like to see
abortion stopped but scheming with parliamentarians to get a few weeks shaved
off of the legally allowable period isn't accomplishing anything.
And look at what's lost...
Notice how the solicitor is
desperate to try and give a perception. She thinks that by seeming more
credible and being politically savvy in her choice of words she'll be respected
by the media and reach a wider audience. She doesn't want to be one of the
raving nutters.
But look, she has to dance
around her words and is constantly tripped up because she can't be honest. She
can't walk with integrity.
At the end of the video the
documentary maker was trying to score some points by showing the solicitor and
the MP being rather chummy and then attempted to trap them on camera. He was
trying to get the Christian solicitor to sound 'extreme' which would have put
the MP on the spot. The MP should have just said that the solicitor's views on
Islam or Creation had nothing to do with abortion legislation. It was a
manipulative gimmick on the part of the documentary maker but I was even less
impressed with how the solicitor stumbled. At that moment she wasn't that
concerned with truth. She was thinking politics, public perception and loyalty
to a politician, and that was guiding her response or lack thereof.
Watching the school portion I
was once again struck by the branch of Christian apologetics (which I'll grant
is fairly dominant) that is still trying to approach the veracity of Scripture
in empirical terms. They are still thinking of Scriptural foundations in terms
of scientific evidence. The nature of the discussion needs to be changed. The
empiricist assumptions of science in the mainstream of culture need to be
challenged and demonstrated as fallacious. They too have preconceived notions when
they approach empirical data. They too rest upon unjustifiable metaphysical assumptions
which are not falsifiable and thus not 'facts' according to their own criteria.
If we're left with a certain amount of epistemological scepticism on all sides
then I think we can actually begin to have a discussion and can offer a more
credible proclamation and explanation of our faith. It will not satisfy their
empiricist criteria but that's not really our concern.
I say this as one who does indeed
believe in Six Day Creation, one who believes the Earth isn't more than about
10,000 years old and who certainly believes in the historicity of Adam, the
Flood and all the miracles of Scripture. The Scriptures themselves are a
miracle.
But at the same time I am less
than impressed with apologetic efforts of people like William Lane Craig,
Norman Geisler and Ken Ham. All of them are trying to approach issues of faith
in terms of scientific evidence. The whole nature of the discussion needs to be
changed and we should work toward forcing secularists to acknowledge that
reality is something larger than the material universe. Some will acknowledge
this but still refuse to accept the idea of revelation. In the end all we can
do is demonstrate they have no answers and proclaim Christ.
But a huge stumbling block is
the relationship between Biblical doctrine and how it has been used
historically by the Christian Church. These well meaning folks are trying to
defend what I would consider gross and heretical abuses and distortions of
Christian doctrine. I have no desire to defend Christendom or its deeds.
When you stand by Scripture and
yet argue against Constantinianism (and thus the Christian Right), believe me,
you get people's attention. They will listen. You're something quite different
and while offensive, less threatening.
Lastly, I had to chuckle when
saw the solicitor was working with Jeffrey Ventrella. I didn't know he was now
with Alliance Defense Fund. And yes, American money is backing a lot of these
legal projects in Europe and elsewhere.
I remember Ventrella from
almost 20 years ago when he was (and maybe still is) affiliated with Greg
Bahnsen's SCCCS. It's interesting how Calvinistic Theonomists will morph into
different forms when it comes to fighting the culture war. Suddenly they will
become best friends with Pentecostals even though if they were ever to take
over society, the Pentecostals would be heretics in their sights as well. Like
the Jesuits of old they operate in many circles and the ends always justify the
means.
The real issue with the folks
is once again... power.
Sadly our Bibles make a
division between what we call Romans 12 and 13. Just as Paul finishes teaching
that the Church is to eschew vengeance he takes up the sword-bearing avenger
called the state. He explains its necessity but is contrasting it with the
Church. The state needs to be but it has nothing to do with us. We sure can't
build the Kingdom through the auspices of the state.
Law only has meaning when it is
backed up by the threat of violence. It doesn't always come to that point in
our society, but ultimately if a court rules against you and you refuse to
comply then at some point down the bureaucratic checklist, men with guns and
badges will show up at your door. That's what the law is... a threat of
violence and retaliation. That's why we pull over when the flashing lights come
on. That's why we pay our property taxes. It may take a few years but if we
don't pay, eventually men with badges and guns will show up and force us to
comply even if that means handing over our property to the state or a creditor.
We're not to have anything to
do with that. We're not part of it, nor do we utilize it. I'm not saying that
we can't have anything to do with the government. That's impossible, and far
from necessary. But we need to think about courts and police and how we view
these institutions. We need to think about violence and how we seek to use (or
not use) the state.
These folks are very busy but
they're perishing for lack of knowledge. The one fellow that I respected was
the young man who was planning to get married and operates a driving school.
While I think his zeal is often not according to knowledge, his devotion is
compelling.
Altogether I found this video
to be an exercise in frustration and in many ways it was depressing. But I'm
glad I watched it. It's interesting to see what forces are at work in the
Church and also how Nonconformity in England is being shaped by the outside. I
encountered this while in England many years ago. Watching this video my wife
even noticed the one group was using a Twila Paris song during her worship and
was surprised to hear American music (she was a CCM teenager of the 80s) being
employed in Churches across the pond. The outside influences are interesting to
observe. They're not all good or bad. I'm not making a comment about Twila
Paris. I just find it all rather interesting.
The British church is changing
in order to survive but I fear they've imbibed a lot of ideas that in the end
will prove harmful.
