American Civil Religion and the Gospel of Jesus Christ tagged: , , ,

American Civil Religion and the Gospel of Jesus Christ

Posted by in Bible & Theology, Church & Missions, News & Culture

From time to time, in my reading on various topics, I have come across the term civil religion—or, more specifically, American civil religion. Although I have had a general notion of what these terms were referring to, it was only this past week, in relation to various articles (here, here, here, and here) I read commenting on the Glenn Beck “Restoring Honor” Rally, that I decided to do a bit of research and find out exactly what civil religion and American civil religion are. The fruits of my investigation have been quite rewarding.

I learned, for instance, that the term civil religion was first coined by Jean-Jacques Rousseau to refer to “what he regarded as the moral and spiritual foundation essential for any modern society.” According to Rousseau, the core beliefs of civil religion, in all of its different iterations are the following:

1. life to come,
2. the reward of virtue and the punishment of vice, and
3. the exclusion of religious intolerance

I also learned that the term has a different meaning for different people in different contexts. From the viewpoint of sociology of religion, civil religion encompasses:

● the invocation of God in political speeches and public monuments;
● the quotation of religious texts on public occasions by political leaders;
● the veneration of past political leaders;
● the use of the lives of these leaders to teach moral ideals;
● the veneration of veterans and casualties of a nation’s wars;
● religious gatherings called by political leaders;
● the use of religious symbols on public buildings;
● the use of public buildings for worship;
● founding myths and other national myths

and similar religious or quasi-religious practices.

From the viewpoint of political commentators, it includes the following practices:

● crowds singing the national anthem at certain public gatherings;
● parades or display of the national flag on certain patriotic holidays;
● oaths of allegiance, such as the Pledge of Allegiance of the United States;
● ceremonies concomitant to the inauguration of a president or the coronation of a king;
● retelling exaggerated, one-sided, and simplified mythologized tales of Founding Fathers and other great leaders or great events (e.g., battles, mass migrations) in the past;
● monuments commemorating great leaders of the past or historic events;
● monuments to dead soldiers or annual ceremonies to remember them;
● expressions of reverence for the country or the Constitution or the King; and
● public display of the coffin of a recently deceased political leader.

None of this, however, is specifically American. According to historians and sociologists, civil religion goes back to the ancient Greek city-state, or polis, and can be found, in various versions and to various degrees, among practically all societies in the world today. During the time of the Early Church, Christians were persecuted not so much for refusing to worship the various gods of the Greco-Roman pantheon as for refusing to pledge a token allegiance to the Roman civil religion, declaring that Caesar was Lord—Kurios Caesar—instead of Jesus—Kurios Christos.

I also learned that the term American civil religion was first used by sociologist Robert N. Bellah in an essay published in 1967. The entire essay (originally 21 pages) can be viewed and read here, and I recommend that anyone interested in the topic take the time to read it. But, for those who don’t want to take the time, here are a few choice quotes I picked out (bold font mine):

Isn’t Dwight Eisenhower reported to have said “Our government makes no sense unless it is founded in a deeply felt religious faith—and I don’t care what it is.”

Although matters of personal religious belief, worship, and association are considered to be strictly private affairs, there are, at the same time, certain common elements of religious orientation that the great majority of Americans share. These have played a crucial role in the development of American institutions and still provide a religious dimension for the whole fabric of American life, including the political sphere. This public religious dimension is expressed in a set of beliefs, symbols, and rituals that I am calling American civil religion.

Benjamin Franklin writes in his autobiography,

I never was without some religious principles. I never doubted, for instance, the existence of the Deity; that he made the world and govern’d it by his Providence; that the most acceptable service of God was the doing of good to men; that our souls are immortal; and that all crime will be punished, and virtue rewarded either here or hereafter. These I esteemed the essentials of every religion; and, being to be found in all the religions we had in our country, I respected them all, tho’ with different degrees of respect, as I found them more or less mix’d with other articles, which, without any tendency to inspire, promote or confirm morality, serv’d principally do divide us, and make us unfriendly to one another.

The words and acts of the founding fathers, especially the first few presidents, shaped the form and tone of the civil religion as it has been maintained ever since. Though much is selectively derived from Christianity, this religion is clearly not itself Christianity. For one thing, neither Washington nor Adams nor Jefferson mentions Christ in his inaugural address; nor do any of the subsequent presidents, although not one of them fails to mention God. The God of the civil religion is not only rather “unitarian,” he is also on the austere side, much more related to order, law, and right than to salvation and love. Even though he is somewhat deist in cast, he is by no means simply a watchmaker God. He is actively interested and involved in history, with a special concern for America. Here the analogy has much less to do with natural law than with ancient Israel; the equation of America with Israel in the idea of the “American Israel” is not infrequent.

What we have, then, from the earliest years of the republic is a collection of beliefs, symbols, and rituals with respect to sacred things and institutionalized in a collectivity. This religion—there seems no other word for it—while not antithetical to and indeed sharing much in common with Christianity, was neither sectarian nor in any specific sense Christian.

The American civil religion was never anticlerical or militantly secular. On the contrary, it borrowed selectively from the religious tradition in such a way that the average American saw no conflict between the two. In this way, the civil religion was able to build up without any bitter struggle with the church powerful symbols of national solidarity and to mobilize deep levels of personal motivation for the attainment of national goals.

American civil religion is still very much alive.

“God” has clearly been a central symbol in the civil religion from the beginning and remains so today. This symbol is just as central to the civil religion as it is to Judaism or Christianity. In the late eighteenth century this posed no problem; even Tom Paine, contrary to his detractors, was not an atheist. From left to right and regardless of church or sect, all could accept the idea of God. But today, as even Time has recognized, the meaning of “God” is by no means so clear or so obvious. There is no formal creed in the civil religion. We have had a Catholic President; it is conceivable that we could have a Jewish one. But could we have an agnostic president?

The civil religion has been a point of articulation between the profoundest commitments of Western religious and philosophical tradition and the common beliefs of ordinary Americans. It is not too soon to consider how the deepening theological crisis may affect the future of this articulation.

Behind the civil religion at every point lie biblical archetypes: Exodus, Chosen People, Promised Land, New Jerusalem, and Sacrificial Death and Rebirth. But it is also genuinely American and genuinely new. It has its own prophets and its own martyrs, its own sacred events and sacred places, its own solemn rituals and symbols. It is concerned that America be a society as perfectly in accord with the will of God as men can make it, and a light to all nations.

Since Bellah first wrote his essay, a lot of water has gone under the bridge. American society, in general, and especially in certain sectors, has become much more secular and anti-religious. Indeed, as Bellah observed, the 60s marked an era in American history in which time-tested values were challenged, and, on many fronts, disowned. In a sense, it could be said that (at least, for many) the basic tenets of American civil religion were reworked and revised. What has actually happened, as I understand it, is that a longtime underlying divergence of opinion and corresponding tension within American society regarding the accepted beliefs and practice of civil religion has escalated and come to the forefront, provoking today’s culture wars. The Moral Majority, the Religious Right, and other related movements have largely been focused on saving American civil religion, and restoring it to what it once was. Certain advocates of Dominion Theology, or Reconstructionism, have even argued that socialism is the new American civil religion. Though liberation theology, per se, is a relatively new concept, there is a real sense in which American civil religion, even from the times of the Founding Fathers, including the important role of Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War, has leaned on liberationist motifs supported by mostly Old Testament images and symbolism. For many social and political conservatives, Obama is the new high priest of American civil religion gone awry. As I see it, Glenn Beck, and his Revival of faith, hope, and charity, is basically the “same song, new verse” of an ongoing move to return American civil religion to what he and his coreligionists consider to be its authentic roots.

My main point in all of this, though, is that no form of civil religion, whether that favored by political conservatives or liberals, is the equivalent of the biblical gospel of salvation by grace through faith in Jesus Christ. And, the moment we begin to mix the concepts of spiritual revival and Christian unity in with civil religion, we have seriously compromised the exclusivity of the Christian faith.

And, yes, in case anyone is wondering, a big part of what motivates my thoughts here is my concern about the involvement of Evangelical leaders in Beck’s rally, and what I consider to be a corresponding lack of discernment on the part of many within the Evangelical world in general related to this (for any who may have still not read it, see Russell Moore’s excellent article on this here). But, as I see it, all this goes much deeper than just Glenn Beck. It is true that Beck is a Mormon, and the discrepancies of Mormonism with Biblical Christianity are indeed significant and troubling. This point (at least for some) is fairly easy to grasp. On a slightly more subtle level, however, I think it is also crucial to for us as Christians to face head on the fact that American civil religion, even though it may share some tenets with Christianity, is not, at the core, Christian, and, even when championed by those with a bona fide Evangelical pedigree, is not the stuff true Christian revival is made of, nor is it the cause we as blood-bought disciples of the Lord Jesus Christ should unite around, when we come to making hard choices about who is really “one of us” and who is not.

As Christians, we are, first and foremost, gospel people. And, while each of us may have his/her own views on American politics, or understanding of what it is that makes America tick, that is not the basis of our fundamental unity in Christ. And, we could conceivably return to the America of the Founding Fathers, and restore the values that “made America great,” and not, at the same time, experience true spiritual revival, or be any closer to the true and living path that Jesus opened up for us on the cross of Calvary (John 14:6; Hebrews 10:19-20).

While it is true that there are certain overlapping elements between Biblical Christianity and American civil religion, it is also true that they can become, and have become in many cases, competing loyalties in the heart of the would-be follower of Christ. I am not suggesting we rid ourselves of all of the truly biblical elements that happen to show up in various versions of civil religion. All truth is God’s truth. And, as Christians, we should seek to be faithful representatives of God’s truth in the public arena as well as in our private lives. But the danger of religious syncretism—pagan religion practiced behind a veneer of Christian imagery and symbolism—is ever present. We must be on guard, and continually ask ourselves, Who is it we are really serving? “No one can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other” (Matthew 6:24).