I don't know how many times I have heard the reason for the moral decline in our part of the world being due to the fact that "they took prayer out of schools." As a result, "kids these days just don't understand" and "America is no longer a Christian nation" and that's the reason "things aren't like they were back in my day." "If only we had prayer back in the schools" and "if only we had more Christians in the government" and "if only we taught the Bible in public schools." These are just a few of the "if onlys", but some of the most common I hear.
All of these statements are great adventures in missing the point. These are statements made by good people that I respect and are, as far as I can tell, sincere Christ-followers. These are also statements that I once bought into and statements I used to make myself, but now realize they are a bit shallow.
First, I don't know of any school anywhere in the United States that prohibits a student from praying. How can they? How can anyone at anytime stop someone from praying? There may be a few instances where public assemblies have been prohibited on public school campuses, but no student has ever been sent to the principal's office for bowing his or her head and praying. What aggravates me is when people use prayer as a form of protest or a way of saying "screw you." I don't know how many times at public gatherings (i.e. high school football games) where they once had public prayer, but no longer do, have I witnessed a mass organization of people stand and recite the Lord's Prayer and then cheer for themselves for how Godly they think they are. Of all those who participated and patted themselves on the back, I wonder how many of them actually prayed back when they had public prayer. How many of them actually have a conversation with God throughout the day? How many of them will be in a local church the following Sunday?
The point is that if suddenly tomorrow, Congress passes a resolution and President Obama signs it, ordering public prayer in schools by only devout Christian pastors, is that really going to change one thing?
Second, I'm not sure exactly what constitutes whether or not a nation is Christian or not. How many people in a land have to be Christian in order for the land to be considered "Christian." What I do know, drawing from my BA in History, is that many of the people who were here when this nation was founded are not the devout Christians we like to think they are. (Yes, it was a shock to me when I started investigating this in my college days and a little depressing for me). Some of our Founding Fathers were Christ-followers, based upon what we know about them. Others though, made no secret of their deistic convictions (sounds Christian, but it's not) and the fact that they could not equate reason with the supernatural. For example, Thomas Jefferson rewrote the Gospels, excluding the miracles of Jesus. Ben Franklin contributed to and was a regular attender of the local church. But he also contributed to and supported other religions and belief systems convinced that he found an element of truth in all of them. Sounds a lot like the pluralism in our world today! So we can't exactly say that this nation was founded on God or the Bible (at least not the way that Evangelical Christians such as myself understand God or the Bible). I realize this may strike a nerve in you, but do some research on this before you start throwing things at me.
Third, as a believer and follower of Christ and as a pastor in today's world, I don't give a lick about whether or not there is public prayer in public places, it doesn't matter whether or not we have a monument of the Ten Commandments in federal places, and I don't believe that organized protests and public demonstrations are going to make the government or the nation suddenly turn to God. I'm more concerned about the local church and her impact on the world. That's the problem with our world! The church is not being the antidote to many of the things that are wrong in our society, but tends to behave just like the world. Instead of sitting back and griping about the fact that there is no public prayer in our public schools, let's ask this question; is there prayer in our church?
Oh sure there is. We pray for Ms. Bernice's urinary tract infection and Mr. Ernie's colonoscopy. We prayed for them and took cookies by their house. We also made sure they got a visit from the pastor because that would be awful if he didn't stop by to console them. Oh, how we just love each other! But have we prayed for the family across the street with the beer bottles in their yard and the strong stench of marijuana? Have we prayed for their salvation and opportunities to speak truth into their life? No, we just gripe about how bad they are and how they wouldn't be that way if only we had prayer in schools and God in the government.
Have we taught our students how to be salt and light on their school campuses? No, we don't have much contact with our youth. We hired someone to baby-sit them and to keep them out of our way (a.k.a. the Youth Minister).
Have we done anything to address the problems in our community? in our nation? in our world? Nope. So, as a result of our inactivity, Daddy Government steps in with a costly and ineffective program that will halfway address the problem, if even that.
Don't misunderstand my rant, I'm not opposed to the idea of a Christian nation or public prayer in schools. I hope that this nation becomes so filled with sincere Christ-followers that we see that happen. I also would like to see our government filled with sincere believers who pray for guidance and wisdom from God before each decision they make. But it's not that way. The reason is because our churches are dead. Instead of praying for a movement of God, we feel that we have to plot and protest our way into making everyone believe and behave the way we do. The only hope for our world is when the church starts being the church. No other way and no other method. Question: Are you being the church in the world or are you just being a gripey old hack?
Friday, March 26, 2010
Friday, March 19, 2010
Enough of the Health Care Debate!
After a year of the back-and-forth on the proposed health care bill, I don't believe any of us reallyknow what is in it. I don't believe those who are actually voting on it really know what is in it or the implications of what they are voting on. It has turned into a matter of setting a precedent and proving a point rather than actually passing something that is going to be beneficial to our society. Ultimately, we're going to end up getting something that nobody wants if this continues.
My suggestion is to step-back from this and let's take care of some other pressing issues for now. We have a nation that is still knee-deep in economic woes and in desperate need of an overhaul (don't read too much into that, I'm just saying that all-around we have been spending money we don't have and all of us need to stop). We have an education system that has never run effectively or efficiently. We are still fighting two wars. I'm sure there are other pressing needs out there, but in my own little world, it's hard to keep an eye on everything.
Don't get me wrong. Health care is important. In a nation where health care is readily available, it shouldn't be difficult for anyone to receive. We should have a system where no one is denied the best possible health care available. The only problem is that there is no nation out there where such a system exists. An example is Canada's health care system, which has a model that many in Washington are seemingly trying to follow. Yes, in Canada health care is available to all regardless of social or economic status. The only problem (and this is a huge problem) is that Canada has inadverdently established a health-care caste system. Social and economic status actually do come into play there. Your status determines the level of health care you receive. There has to be a better way than this and certainly we can devise something that provides health care to everyone without anyone getting short-changed.
My advice (not that it's worth anything) is to throw away and forget all the proposed legislation that is being tossed around Congress right now. Take a break from it for about a year or two and then step back into the dialogue again with a better plan. It doesn't mean anyone loses and it isn't a sign of bad leadership. It's doing what is in the best interest of the nation and would be leadership that I respect.
My suggestion is to step-back from this and let's take care of some other pressing issues for now. We have a nation that is still knee-deep in economic woes and in desperate need of an overhaul (don't read too much into that, I'm just saying that all-around we have been spending money we don't have and all of us need to stop). We have an education system that has never run effectively or efficiently. We are still fighting two wars. I'm sure there are other pressing needs out there, but in my own little world, it's hard to keep an eye on everything.
Don't get me wrong. Health care is important. In a nation where health care is readily available, it shouldn't be difficult for anyone to receive. We should have a system where no one is denied the best possible health care available. The only problem is that there is no nation out there where such a system exists. An example is Canada's health care system, which has a model that many in Washington are seemingly trying to follow. Yes, in Canada health care is available to all regardless of social or economic status. The only problem (and this is a huge problem) is that Canada has inadverdently established a health-care caste system. Social and economic status actually do come into play there. Your status determines the level of health care you receive. There has to be a better way than this and certainly we can devise something that provides health care to everyone without anyone getting short-changed.
My advice (not that it's worth anything) is to throw away and forget all the proposed legislation that is being tossed around Congress right now. Take a break from it for about a year or two and then step back into the dialogue again with a better plan. It doesn't mean anyone loses and it isn't a sign of bad leadership. It's doing what is in the best interest of the nation and would be leadership that I respect.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)