The clash over the ten commandments in the Supreme Court is highly ironic. The desire to display the ten commandments seems to be part of an attempt to slow the moral decline of our culture. The moral decline is obvious. Isn’t there a flood of hatred, perversion, injustice, lying, stealing, and just plain selfishness sweeping the whole planet? Hal Lindsey, a well-known dispensationalist Christian, has recently detailed the list of moral woes facing our world (January 20, 2005).
The irony is that those currently advocating the public display of the ten commandments are people from religious systems that reject the continuing validity of the ten commandments. These systems argue that the ten commandment law was done away with and nailed to the cross, that it can’t be obeyed, or that the ten commandments were meant only for the Jews. How can a law nailed to the cross two thousand years ago, impossible to obey, and meant only for the Jews, be a solution to the problem? Isn’t it a bit hypocritical to ask others to obey what you think is no longer normative?
Conservative Christians, aka, the Religious Right, often express sharp disagreement with liberal Christians who create doubt about the authority of Scripture (and thus the ten commandments) with their use of “higher criticism.” However, conservatives undermine the ten commandments and the entire Old Testament with their dispensationalist theology. Thus, both conservative and liberal Protestants end up threatening the authority of the ten commandments. In addition, many conservative
Protestants see Pope John Paul II as a “giant among giants” and a great moral leader when his Catholic tradition views the ten commandments as a thing to be tampered with by the authority of the church?
The churches look for authority but haven’t found it. All of these Christian traditions—conservative Protestants, liberal Protestants, and Roman Catholics—offer solutions for the woes of our society and the world. But aren’t these traditions part of the problem rather than part of the solution? They each, in their own way, fail to submit to the authority of Scripture. The only unity to be seen among these three groups is the general agreement against the continued authority of the ten commandment law as written 3500 years ago. Each group rejects the law in its own way, but reject it, they do. The great irony is that rejection of divine law is the cause of the moral chaos in the world.
A recent survey by the research group Public Agenda showed that “church-going Americans have grown increasingly intolerant” and “were growing bolder about pushing their beliefs on others.” But are these beliefs authoritative? Where does their authority come from? When Fox News announced that “Faith Takes Center Stage at Super Bowl,” it was interesting to observe the contrast between this year’s event and last year’s, with its infamous “wardrobe malfunction.” But when “faith” took center stage at Super Bowl events, what sort of faith was it? There was a lot of vague talk of a “personal relationship with God,” “religious orientation,” “faith-based activities,” and being “inclusive” so that “everyone would be comfortable.”
Well, what is the identity of this comfortable faith that took center stage? What is its creed? What are its commandments? The faith that goes by no name is not much of a faith.
America is creating a religion with no divine authority. Democrats are, Time magazine notes, “trying to talk about God on their own terms” by referring to the fifth commandment (honor your parents) in the argument over Social Security. The Republicans respond with derision that “Talk is cheap. We’ll see if their actions fit their words” (Tom Delay, House Majority Leader). What creed does Mr. Delay stand for? When American presidents refer to America as a “city on a hill,” quoting John Winthrop, the famous American Puritan, we know about his creed when he said it in 1630. But what does the President mean now?
We are watching the birth of a new civic religion in America. It is a hodge-podge of some truth, some well-worn traditions, and some gross superstitions. It is being embraced by people of all religious persuasions or no persuasion at all. A recent column in Newsweek poked fun at the debate over the commandments. The writer, a self-described atheist, conducted an informal survey on the streets of New York City. He found that “nobody knows all 10 of the Ten Commandments,” and that “pretty much everyone thinks the Ten Commandments are a non-religious series of commonsense rules that should be posted everywhere.” In other words, the people don’t know much about the commandments they are “for.” That is a danger for American freedom.
Marcus Sheffield
msheff@southern.edu