‘McChristianity’ a new conservative-evangelical God discovered in Oxford?
You join us in the middle of a theological colloquium at an Oxford college .
[Names of academics in initials for various legal reasons as this was a closed-private-conference. The following is a faithful approximation of what was said, any misrepresentations of the speakers views have been carefully avoided]
Dr L-O’D (at times ‘She’) ‘And considering the nature of the semiotics of rule making and the way in which rules are made and laws are put into place in the public sphere, that is to say instituted by people of sin, suffering from the effects of sin, and hoping to clean up the results of sin’ she said ‘mankind cannot hope to stem the tide by the devices and actions of the state-without the help of God.’ She continued:
‘Human rights or equality legislation, in particular in Europe and the UK, some of which Dr McC has already touched on in terms of its relations to Papal teachings and Canon Law; has, in my view, gone too far in favour of a rights based agenda rather than a deontological [duties] agenda. This is yet another example of human error falling short of the standard of God.’
‘However isn’t it quite clear that as human beings’ Prof JR suggested ‘we are acting with powers of reason which make us capable of understanding what basic moral rightness and wrongness looks like, and the apparatus of the courts and state allow us to execute this (however imperfectly in the eyes of God)?’
‘ I would say sir’ [she said, in that wonderful tone that Americans use when disagreeing politely with a member of the English establishment]: ‘God is the only standard of moral rightness and wrongness. All of our judgements, because of the nature of sin in our lives, are inherently flawed.’
[There was general stirring in the room at this point and a few hands went up, mine was chosen.]
‘So let me get this clear in my mind so I don’t misrepresent what you are suggesting here. Do you believe we are created imago dei, that is, “in the image of God”?’ I asked.
‘I do sir’
‘And this would leave us with, if you will, a delegated level of authority on earth as creations of God, say over beasts, nature, our own selves and the permission and prohibition of actions etc of others despite our propensity to sin?’
‘To a certain extent…yes’ she nodded.
‘OK so far so good’ I said ‘Would you also go so far as to say that a non-Christian human being and a born-again human being are created in the image of God?
‘Well both are created in the image of God as human beings but only one is a child of God in terms of sharing the inheritance of Christ and therefore being able to make the god-ordained decisions, under the authority of God that I would recognise as legitimate in a state actor.’
‘So are you suggesting that the only legitimate form of law making or state-sanctioned ideas of justice would be that which is exercised by what a conservative evangelical Christian (for we have to allow for the differing Christian denominations) would call the ‘elect?‘ I asked.
[silence in the room]
‘Yes’ she said, ‘I would say that there is no part of our society that God should not play a part in and the only legitimate state of play for the theatre of public politics and the execution of justice to take plaice in is that of the human law under the divine law.’
[the panel of academics, and the room in general at this point, became very agitated]
Dr JC ‘You do understand don’t you, that to admit to this, or something that amounts to this in your paper, is to sanction a form of ‘Divine Appointment’ theory that is effectively, and I in no way wish to be flippant here, a heresy?’
Prof JR ‘And not only that but it is completely out of step with any of the legal systems understanding of natural law…’
Dr C McC ‘I mean, may I first of all say that I find your paper…interesting’ [general laughter] ‘however I would respectfully question, firstly, your understanding of how the legal system justifies its ability to redress imbalances, prevent harms, and rectify wrongs, things incidentally, I think the justice system can do very well; but, secondly, especially as a Catholic myself, just what you mean by the term ‘Christian morals’ as to me your idea of the word ‘Christian’ hyphenated before ‘morals’ here may differ from mine.’
Dr L-O’D ‘ To the point about divine appointment; it is not at all an alien concept, to the Christian familiar with their bible, to have a man of God choose godly leaders to take part in matters of justice and law and order- over and above those of the pagan kings.’
Dr JC ‘But to say that one individual, or a group of the elect, ought to exercise a form of divine rule over citizens who may or may not consent to that said spiritual authority, is morally abhorrent, and when this sort of government has been tried in history we get civil wars and genocide-how can there be ‘justice’ and Christian-justice? surely they are one and the same thing?’
Dr L O’D ‘If that has been the case with the wars and so called ‘genocides’ you mention; then either what we would see as negative conflict was actually divine judgement, and may I remind you that God, as sovereign, has a right to execute divine judgement over us, and will in the end-(for we expect an eschatological judgement) or those leaders were mistaken as to whether or not they were hearing from God.’
[ delegate’s hands up again, and when chosen I asked]:
‘ Firstly I don’t seem to understanding your grounding of eschatology, do you see humanity’s eschatological judgement before God as being in an hour-glass, running out of sand, and when there is no more sand/time we are judged?’
‘If you want to use that analogy, yes’ she said.
‘So what about the fact that the Christ-event, happening to history not just in history means that we are judged currently and eventually in the eyes of proper eschatological thinking. We are open to judgement now if you will?’
‘Well yes I can see what you are saying but it is Jesus who will do the judging in the end and all forms of human judgement or justice are flawed in comparison to this.’
‘So God’s judgement isn’t happening now, eternally, by the very reality of the existence of the logos in numerous and varying places and forms at once in and outside of time though specifically in the resurrected Christ?’
‘I think that’s perhaps now moving away from what I mean when I say eschatology’ she said.
[further questions from the panel and then this]:
I asked: ‘I get the impression from your paper that in ancient civilisations which are the parents and antecedents of our own, Egypt, Babylon, Greece, Rome, etc (and even in places that we have yet to know of) or any place where a court-like system, or systems of adjudication exists, or a state structure has been set up; that unless, when they punish for crimes or reward for good deeds, they do all that they do in the name of Christianity or in light of the God of the Bible that we adhere to: they have never once acted with the same moral decision making abilities that God has given us all as human beings?’
Dr L O’D ‘I think that they would perhaps have an idea or inkling of justice but it would not be as clear as the type laid out for us by God through the Christian faith and as such those systems and civilisations, in all of their legal dealings, fall short of the glory of God and are in error or were/are operating under false pretences. If we were living right with God we would not need these systems to ‘protect’ or ‘guide’ us to do good, we just would. As we are not right with God then we have His laws to guide us and we must implement those laws in our society or incur God’s wrath through our continually failing juridical systems’ [author’s bold highlighting]
Dr C McC ‘I would love to talk to you further about this ‘God’ you’re speaking of Dr O’D because, it seems to me, that your idea of God is a very particular type of God, namely, one who is primarily concerned with, wrath, judgement, instituting His laws universally in state structures, and subduing all other ideas of the moral good to your very paticular understanding of Christianity which I don’t feel is shared by the rest of the Church-universal.’
I myself am also interested to know where Dr L O’D’s concept of God comes from, or on what basis this concept of God can be supported?
It seems to me to be a very poorly supported mish-mash of Americanised, conservative-evangelical, Old Testament-meets-‘End Times’ God. This type of Christianity has admittedly sold well, it is still prevalent in the west, is being exported to developing nations and can [believe me] be very addictive. It is also terribly bad for your heart, growth, and general well being.
Not that unlike McDonalds come to think of it.
NG
till we have faces 