| Topic: |
Sociology > Education |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
12 Mar 2007 12:02:50 PM |
| Object: |
Atheists, Conservatives, and Christianity (comment) 1 |
Atheists, Conservatives, and Christianity (comment) 1
Christianity and American way of life (updated)
March 11, 2007
Vel Nirtist
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2007/03/christianity_and_american_way.html
I think Mr. Warshawsky's essay today, while obviously
well-intentioned, if so widely off the mark in terms of realistic
assessment of the influence of Christianity in America that an
opposing voice is clearly in order.
Let's examine Christian influence without fulsome apologetics - it
doesn't do anybody any good to veer off the factual basis in
discussion, and resorting to unjustifiable statements like
"...in modern times, the worst crimes against humanity have
occurred, and are occurring, in the non-Christian and anti-religious
(i.e., communist and fascist) countries. Is this a coincidence?
Orlet would have us believe that it is. Orlet makes light of the
connection between the atheistic ideologies that motivated Hitler,
Stalin, and Mao, and the genocides they committed. I am not nearly as
confident as Orlet that atheism, per se, played no role in these
tragedies. In any event, I believe the historical record is clear:
While life in Christian countries has not always been free or humane,
the alternative has been much worse."
Not so.
First of all, atrocities caused by Hitler, Stalin and Mao were caused
not by their atheism - but by the perception that they discovered the
ultimate Truth. Once Truth gets into one's head, violent suppression
of dissidents is not far off - whether this Truth be religious or not.
This quote from my site (on which I call those in possession of such
Truth "idolaters") explains that sort of violence in the following way:
"Idolater's Truth inspires him to a noble action - because others
also need to see the light of the Truth and deviations from the Truth
must be punished. Free thought must be suppressed, for where can it
lead but away from the Truth? Iran, and North Korea, and China, and
Saudi Arabia are all based on the Truth - which explains why they are
so oppressive. Idolater's Truth, be it religious, social, or any other
kind, leads only to oppression and spiritual death. And physical
death, too - on 9/11, 2001 we saw idolatry in action."
Second of all, Christianity went through such periods just as did
other religions. Let's not white-wash frightful and bloody
Christian-on-Christian crusades - like those against Albigensians and
Hussites - which were inspired not by atheism but by deep-felt piety
(very much like the one animating today's non-atheistic - and in fact,
very pious - Shias and Sunnis, who blow each other up with a gusto);
let us not overlook the True-faith-upholding Inquisition established
in the aftermath of Albigensian crusade, and the horrible wars of
religion that ravaged Europe in the wake of the Reformation. History
teaches us that both the atheists and the believers in God are equally
capable of inflicting unendurable suffering.
And yet, Mr. Warshawsky is right in praising Christianity for its key
role in the formation of this county. But that role was so benign not
because of the magnanimous spirit of tolerance of other religions
exhibited by the dominant Christianity, as he would have us believe
when he tells us that
"another very important part of the American tradition is
toleration for religious minorities and non-believers. As a Jew, I am
very grateful for this tradition, which has been one of the
distinguishing features of America's national greatness."
The fact that any and all religions can be openly practiced in America
is an outcome of the phenomenon that was very different - and, in
fact, exactly opposite - to Christian tolerance; it grew out of
Christian intolerance to Christians, and of the oppressed Christians'
desire to put an end to it.
This is not as confusing as it sounds. Before the reformation, there
was only one Church and only one Christianity, Catholicism - all other
ones being successfully suppressed. Reformation - the split of
Christendom into the Catholics and the Evangelicals - broke not only
the Pope's monopoly on creed but, far more importantly, on his ability
to enforce it, because allegiances of those wielding secular power
split too. Many powerful princes and communities - first in Germany,
but later in Switzerland, Low countries, Sweden, England and France -
also took the reformist's side. The split of Christendom into two
roughly equal centers of power resulted in wars that were horrifying -
far exceeding in bloodshed and misery the present-day's dust-off
between Shiahs and Sunnis in Iraq - and taught the European and,
later, American Christians that sticking one's Truth, no matter how
obviously True, down the neighbor's throat is not going to do anybody
any good.
Moreover, the logic of evangelicalism with its stress on coming to God
through personal acceptance of Christ, and realization that only the
few were really intended to be saved, meant that religious coercion
not only didn't make any sense theologically, but was in fact an
ultimate act of irreligion. Hence, John Milton could react to the
attempt to institute licensing of clergy in the Cromwellian England by
describing such clergymen as "hireling wolves whose Gospel is their
maw" and appealing to Oliver Cromwell to thwart the efforts of those
who "threaten to bind our souls with secular chains." Conscience that
was free on any coercion - and hence, free speech and free exercise of
religion - were to become the gateways to God.
American Christians got this notion from their English puritan
fore-fathers, who came to this conclusion in the crucible of the
English Civil war of mid-seventeenth-century. Around 1640 there was a
clash between two opposing, intolerant, ayatollah-style forces:
Anglican church under heavy-handed Archbishop Laud, and the equally
narrow-minded Scottish Presbyterians, a clash which left the puritan
non-conformists squeezed in the middle and harassed by both sides,
developing in the process a notion of separation of church and state,
and producing in Roger Williams a brilliant advocate of the idea that
the matters of religion should better be left to each individual
alone. The separation of church and state which ensures our freedom to
believe just as we see fit was, thus, not an act of generosity on the
part of Christians towards non-Christians as Mr. Warshawsky would have
us believe, but a vital necessity, effected by the Evangelicals and
for the Evangelicals.
And it is this separation of church and state - that in effect outlaws
the very notion of "True Faith" which bedevils today's Moslems and
causes them to resort to violence - is the main legacy of Christians
in America and, being enshrined in the first amendment of the US
constitution by the very religious, very Christian, very conservative
yet very clear-minded founding fathers, is Christianity's chief
contribution to American way of life, and an enduring symbol of the
fact that the religious can overcome narrow-mindedness and not be the
brainless, intolerant, monomaniacal, homicidal and suicidal idolatrous
two-legged creatures like those populating present day's Moslem Middle
East.
Vel Nirtist writes on the role of religion in fostering terrorism. He
is author of "The Pitfall of Truth: Holy War, its Rationale and
Folly." His blog is at http://www.rootoutterrorism.com
.
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
