Part 2 (2/2)

A HISTORY OF PERSECUTION IN JESUS' NAME What followed was a long and terrible history of people using the sword ”in Jesus' name for the glory of G.o.d.” Though there are, of course, many wonderful examples of Christlike people and movements throughout church history, the reigning church as a whole-”Christendom”-acted about as badly as most versions of the kingdom of the world. The Holy Roman Empire was about as violent as the Roman Empire it aspired to replace. It just carried out its typical kingdom-of-the-world barbarism under a different banner and in service to a different G.o.d.

Augustine was the first theologian to align the church in an official way with the use of the sword, and it happened to be against a fellow Christian group, the Donatists. Among other things, the Donatists believed that the alliance between the church and the state that had been forged since Constantine was undermining the purity and integrity of the church, and they wanted to keep the church pure.14 Though Augustine had previously spoken against the use of coercion for religious purposes, his ongoing battle with the Donatists led him to reverse his view. Though Augustine had previously spoken against the use of coercion for religious purposes, his ongoing battle with the Donatists led him to reverse his view.

Augustine now justified the use of force by arguing that inflicting temporal pain to help someone avoid eternal pain is justified. Since G.o.d had given the church the power of the sword, Augustine reasoned, it had a responsibility to use it to further G.o.d's purposes in the world just as a stern father has a responsibility to beat his child for his own good. Since G.o.d sometimes uses terror for the good of humans, we who are G.o.d's representatives on earth-the church-may use terror for the sake of the gospel.15 If the end justifies it, the use of violence as a means to that end is justified. (This is, in essence, Augustine's ”just war” policy.) Augustine thus invoked a recent edict of the emperor Theodosius to criminalize the ”heresy” of Donatism and attempt to persecute it out of existence. This set a tragic precedent for handling doctrinal disagreements for the next thirteen hundred years. If the end justifies it, the use of violence as a means to that end is justified. (This is, in essence, Augustine's ”just war” policy.) Augustine thus invoked a recent edict of the emperor Theodosius to criminalize the ”heresy” of Donatism and attempt to persecute it out of existence. This set a tragic precedent for handling doctrinal disagreements for the next thirteen hundred years.

Throughout the Middle Ages and into the Renaissance, millions were burned at the stake, hung, beheaded, or executed in other ways for resisting some aspect of the church's teaching or for failing to operate under its authority.16 Thousands upon thousands were tortured in unthinkable ways in an attempt to elicit a confession of faith in the Savior and the church; some of the macabre torturing devices were even inscribed with the logo ”Glory be only to G.o.d.” Christian sectarian groups such as the Paulicans, Cathars, Albigensians, and Waldensians were ma.s.sacred by the towns-often including women and children-and Christians in both the West and the East slaughtered each other in Jesus' name as ruthlessly as they slaughtered Muslims. Terrible atrocities were carried out on Jews, especially when the Crusades needed to be financed, and mult.i.tudes of women (estimates range between sixty thousand to several million) were burned or hung for allegedly being witches-most of whom denied the charge. Thousands upon thousands were tortured in unthinkable ways in an attempt to elicit a confession of faith in the Savior and the church; some of the macabre torturing devices were even inscribed with the logo ”Glory be only to G.o.d.” Christian sectarian groups such as the Paulicans, Cathars, Albigensians, and Waldensians were ma.s.sacred by the towns-often including women and children-and Christians in both the West and the East slaughtered each other in Jesus' name as ruthlessly as they slaughtered Muslims. Terrible atrocities were carried out on Jews, especially when the Crusades needed to be financed, and mult.i.tudes of women (estimates range between sixty thousand to several million) were burned or hung for allegedly being witches-most of whom denied the charge.17 The church of resident aliens had become a horde of savage warlords. The church of resident aliens had become a horde of savage warlords.

The militant, Constantinian mindset carried into the Protestant Reformation. So long as they remained a persecuted minority, Reformers generally decried the use of violence for religious purposes. But once given the power of the sword, most used it as relentlessly as it had previously been used against them. Indeed, with the exception of the Anabaptists, every splinter group of the Reformation in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries spilled blood. Lutherans, Calvinists, Anglicans, and other Protestant groups fought each other, fought the Catholics, and martyred Anabaptists and other ”heretics” by the hundreds. It wasn't until the bloodshed became economically unbearable and unfeasible in the Thirty Years' War that a truce (the Peace of Westphalia) was called and Christians agreed, at least theoretically, to end the violence.

Yet while the Christian use of the sword subsided in Europe, it continued in the New World. As G.o.d gave Canaan to Joshua, many argued, so G.o.d gave other lands over to white European Christians. To the thinking of many, the church ”militant and triumphant” was on the move to conquer the world for Christ, and all who resisted it were seen as resisting G.o.d himself and deserving death.18 Christians coming to the long-inhabited land of America partic.i.p.ated in the slaughter of millions of Native Americans, as well as the enslavement and murder of millions of Africans as a means of conquering and establis.h.i.+ng this new land for Jesus. Such, it was claimed, was the ”manifest destiny” of Europeans, Christians coming to the long-inhabited land of America partic.i.p.ated in the slaughter of millions of Native Americans, as well as the enslavement and murder of millions of Africans as a means of conquering and establis.h.i.+ng this new land for Jesus. Such, it was claimed, was the ”manifest destiny” of Europeans,19 and it wasn't simply warriors who died at the swords of Christians. As is common with kingdom-of-the-world conquests, raping, torturing for sport, pillaging, and treatise breaking were widespread. and it wasn't simply warriors who died at the swords of Christians. As is common with kingdom-of-the-world conquests, raping, torturing for sport, pillaging, and treatise breaking were widespread.

While the violent expression of the Constantinian mindset has been largely outlawed, the mindset itself is very much alive today. To be sure, in some parts of the world Christians still engage in violence against other Christians, Muslims, Hindus, and other groups. But even within the borders of America, the mindset is alive and well. When Jerry Falwell, reflecting a widespread sentiment among conservative Christians, says America should hunt terrorists down and ”blow them all away in the name of the Lord in the name of the Lord” (emphasis added), he is expressing the Constantinian mindset. When Pat Robertson declares that the United States should a.s.sa.s.sinate President Chavez of Venezuela, he also is expressing the Constantinian mindset. And when Christians try to enforce their holy will on select groups of sinners by power of law, they are essentially doing the same thing, even if the violent means of enforcing their will is no longer available to them.

A DEMONIC IRONY.

It has been a profoundly sad and ironic history. In the interest of effectively accomplis.h.i.+ng what it thought was an immediate and discernable good thing, the church often forsook its kingdom-of-G.o.d call. As a result, it frequently justified doing tremendously evil things. The moment worldly effectiveness replaces faithfulness as the motive for an individual's or inst.i.tution's behavior, they are no longer acting on behalf of the kingdom of G.o.d but are partic.i.p.ating in the kingdom of the world. The so-called good end will always be used to justify the evil means for those thinking with a kingdom-of-the-world mindset, and in doing this, the church succ.u.mbed to the very temptation Jesus resisted. It wanted to fix the world with its superior wisdom and run the world with the sword because it naively believed it could do so better than secular authorities. So, submitting itself to the cosmic ”power over” G.o.d, it established itself as the ruling Caesar of the West. Far from improving on the old version of the kingdom of the world, however, it brought about a regime that was often worse than the version it replaced.

In fact, a kingdom-of-G.o.d citizen could (and should) argue that the Christian version of the kingdom of the world was actually the worst worst version the world has ever seen. For this was the version of the kingdom of the world that did the most harm to the kingdom of G.o.d. Not only did it torture and kill, as versions of the kingdom of the world frequently do-it did this under the banner of Christ. If violence and oppression are demonic, violence and oppression ”in the name of Jesus” is far more so. The church of Christendom thereby brought disrepute to the name of Christ, a.s.sociating his kingdom with the atrocities it carried out for centuries. The resistance most Islamic countries have to Christianity today, in fact, is partly to be explained by the vicious behavior of Christians toward Muslims throughout history. version the world has ever seen. For this was the version of the kingdom of the world that did the most harm to the kingdom of G.o.d. Not only did it torture and kill, as versions of the kingdom of the world frequently do-it did this under the banner of Christ. If violence and oppression are demonic, violence and oppression ”in the name of Jesus” is far more so. The church of Christendom thereby brought disrepute to the name of Christ, a.s.sociating his kingdom with the atrocities it carried out for centuries. The resistance most Islamic countries have to Christianity today, in fact, is partly to be explained by the vicious behavior of Christians toward Muslims throughout history.

This tragic history has to be considered one of Satan's greatest victories, and the demonic ironies abound. In the name of the one who taught us not to lord over others but rather to serve them (Matt. 20:2528), the church often lorded over others with a vengeance as ruthless as any version of the kingdom of the world ever has. In the name of the one who taught us to turn the other cheek, the church often cut off people's heads. In the name of the one who taught us to love our enemies, the church often burned its enemies alive. In the name of the one who taught us to bless those who persecute us, the church often became a ruthless persecutor. In the name of the one who taught us to take up the cross, the church often took up the sword and nailed others to the cross. Hence, in the name of winning the world for Jesus Christ, the church often became the main obstacle to believing in Jesus Christ.

THE CHURCH VERSUS JESUS.

While we, of course, have no business judging people's hearts and deciding who is and is not ”saved,” kingdom-of-G.o.d citizens must have a vested interest in discerning and declaring what is and is not the kingdom of G.o.d. If we we don't declare that this barbaric religious version of the kingdom of the world was not, and is not, the kingdom of G.o.d, who will? While Christian apologists sometimes try to minimize the harm the church has done, making excuses for it whenever possible and insisting instead on the good the church accomplished, kingdom people should rather be on the front row declaring that insofar as the church picked up the sword, it had don't declare that this barbaric religious version of the kingdom of the world was not, and is not, the kingdom of G.o.d, who will? While Christian apologists sometimes try to minimize the harm the church has done, making excuses for it whenever possible and insisting instead on the good the church accomplished, kingdom people should rather be on the front row declaring that insofar as the church picked up the sword, it had nothing nothing whatsoever to do with the kingdom of G.o.d. Far from defending the church, kingdom people should lead the charge in critiquing it, for when it exercised power over others in Jesus' name, not only was it not the kingdom of G.o.d-something that is true of all versions of the kingdom of the world-it const.i.tuted a demonic distortion of the kingdom of G.o.d. whatsoever to do with the kingdom of G.o.d. Far from defending the church, kingdom people should lead the charge in critiquing it, for when it exercised power over others in Jesus' name, not only was it not the kingdom of G.o.d-something that is true of all versions of the kingdom of the world-it const.i.tuted a demonic distortion of the kingdom of G.o.d.

For the sake of the kingdom of G.o.d, we need to proclaim with our lives, and with our words when necessary, that the sole criteria for whether something is a manifestation of the kingdom of G.o.d or not is the person of Jesus Christ. To the extent that an individual or group looks like Jesus, dying for those who crucified him and praying for their forgiveness in the process-to that degree they can be said to manifest the kingdom of G.o.d. To the degree they do not look like this, they do not manifest G.o.d's kingdom. Hence, to the extent that the church throughout history has persecuted ”sinners” and ”heretics” rather than embracing them, serving them, and sacrificing for them in love, it was simply one religious version of the kingdom of the world among a mult.i.tude of others-only worse, precisely because it claimed to represent the kingdom of G.o.d.

To say the same thing a different way, kingdom people need to lead the charge in proclaiming that the church has nothing to do with the kingdom of G.o.d whenever it wields the sword instead of loving. While those who wielded the Constantinian sword throughout history undoubtedly convinced themselves they were wielding the sword in love-this is a common self-delusion among religious power brokers-lording over, torturing, and killing people does not communicate their unsurpa.s.sable worth to them; it is not not loving. loving.

Love is patient and kind (1 Cor. 13:4); enslaving and torturing people is neither. Love is never rude (1 Cor. 13:5); burning people alive is. Love does not insist on its own way and is not irritable or resentful when others disagree (1 Cor. 13:5); compelling people to agree with you by using force is the direct ant.i.thesis. Love doesn't rejoice in wrongdoing (1 Cor. 13:6), even if (especially if) those rejoicing credit G.o.d, who supposedly gave them the power to do it. Love bears all things while believing the best in others and hoping the best for others (1 Cor. 13:7); imprisoning, enslaving, and killing others in the name of your religious views is not bearing their burdens, believing the best about them, or hoping the best for them. It's that simple.

Given how obvious this is, one wonders how it was so often missed and why it is yet so often missed today. One wonders why no one in church history has ever been considered a heretic for being unloving. People were anathematized and often tortured and killed for disagreeing on matters of doctrine or on the authority of the church. But no one on record has ever been so much as rebuked for not loving as Christ loved.

Yet if love is to be placed above all other considerations (Col. 3:14; 1 Peter 4:8), if nothing has any value apart from love (1 Cor. 13:13), and if the only thing that matters is faith working in love (Gal. 5:6), how is it that possessing Christlike love has never been considered the central test of orthodoxy? How is it that those who tortured and burned heretics were not themselves considered heretics for doing so? Was this not heresy of the worst sort? How is it that those who perpetrated such things were not only not deemed heretics but often were (and yet are) held up as ”heroes of the faith”?

If there is an answer to this question, I believe it lies in the deceptive power of the sword. While G.o.d uses the sword of governments to preserve law, order, and justice, as we have seen, there is a corrupting princ.i.p.ality and power always at work. Much like the magical ring in Tolkien's Lord of the Rings Lord of the Rings, the sword has a demonic power to deceive us. When we pick it up, we come under its power. It convinces us that our use of violence is a justified means to a n.o.ble end. It intoxicates us with the unquenchable dream of redemptive violence and blinds us to our own iniquities, thereby making us feel righteous in overpowering the unrighteousness of others. Most of the slaughtering done throughout history has been done by people who sincerely believed they were promoting ”the good.” Everyone thinks their their wars are just, if not holy. Marxists, n.a.z.is, the Khmer Rouge, Islamic terrorists, and Christian crusaders have this in common. wars are just, if not holy. Marxists, n.a.z.is, the Khmer Rouge, Islamic terrorists, and Christian crusaders have this in common.

KEEPING THE KINGDOM HOLY.

As we have said, kingdom disciples need to be as outspoken in repudiating the dark side of church history as non-Christian critics could ever be. We should have no more interest in defending a religious version of the kingdom of the world than we have in defending an Islamic or Buddhist or Marxist version of the kingdom of the world. But we should have a great investment in criticizing it, for the Christian version hinders our call to advance the kingdom of Calvary-like love.

We need to repudiate the violent ”power over” side of church history not just for the sake of others, but for our own, for we need to continually remind ourselves how easy it is to give in to the Devil's temptation and, thereby, desecrate the holiness of the kingdom. We need to always remember how subtle is the pull to be conformed ”to the pattern of this world” (Rom. 12:2 NIV). We need to remain aware of how easy it is for us to be seduced by the demonic G.o.ds that pollute the American air we breath-the G.o.ds of wealth, self-centeredness, greed, racism, nationalism, and violent triumphalism. Without noticing it we can find ourselves morphing the radical gospel of Christ into a self-serving, Americanized, violent version of the kingdom of the world.

Jesus taught us that our life, prayer, and mission must be to keep the Father's name (character, reputation) holy, and to work to see his kingdom come ”on earth as it is in heaven” (Matt. 6:910). To the extent that we fail to do this, we fail to obey Christ's commission and example. Yet as history testifies, nothing is easier for us than to give in to the Devil's temptation to do just this. Indeed, all indications are that we American Christians have, to a large degree, already succ.u.mbed to this very temptation and have been doing so throughout our nation's history.

The kingdom of G.o.d is not a Christian version of the kingdom of the world. It is, rather, a holy alternative to all versions of the kingdom of the world, and everything hangs on kingdom people appreciating this uniqueness and preserving this holiness. We must always remember that we are ”resident aliens” in this oppressed world, soldiers of the kingdom of G.o.d stationed behind enemy lines with a unique, all consuming, holy calling on our life. We are called, individually and corporately, to look like Jesus to a rebellious, self-centered, and violent world.

CHAPTER 5.

TAKING AMERICA BACK FOR G.o.d.

But Jesus called them to him and said, ”You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones are tyrants over them. It will not be so among you; but whoever wishes to be great among you must be your servant, and whoever wishes to be first among you must be your slave; just as the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life a ransom for many.”

MATTHEW 20:2528 Every war...with all its ordinary consequences...the murder with the justifications of its necessity and justice, the exaltation and glorification of military exploits, the wors.h.i.+p of the flag, the patriotic sentiments...and so on, does more in one year to pervert men's minds than thousands of robberies, murders, and arsons perpetrated during hundreds of years by individual men under the influence of pa.s.sion.

LEO TOLSTOY1.

Having accepted the falsehood that we must run the world, we seek to get hold of the mantle of power. Consequently, ”disciples.h.i.+p” gets transformed: ”following Jesus,” rather than denoting a walking in the way of the humble Suffering Servant, denotes being ”spiritual” as we seek to wield power over our fellows.... Christians become convinced that they are pursuing the purposes of G.o.d by pursuing the purposes of the empire.

LEE CAMP2.

AN IDOLATROUS CELEBRATION.

Shortly after the Gulf War in 1992 I happened to visit a July Fourth wors.h.i.+p service at a certain megachurch. At center stage in this auditorium stood a large cross next to an equally large American flag. The congregation sang some praise choruses mixed with such patriotic hymns as ”G.o.d Bless America.” The climax of the service centered on a video of a well-known Christian military general giving a patriotic speech about how G.o.d has blessed America and blessed its military troops, as evidenced by the speedy and almost ”casualty-free” victory ”he gave us” in the Gulf War (Iraqi deaths apparently weren't counted as ”casualties” worthy of notice). Triumphant military music played in the background as he spoke.

The video closed with a scene of a silhouette of three crosses on a hill with an American flag waving in the background. Majestic, patriotic music now thundered. Suddenly, four fighter jets appeared on the horizon, flew over the crosses, and then split apart. As they roared over the camera, the words ”G.o.d Bless America” appeared on the screen in front of the crosses.

The congregation responded with roaring applause, catcalls, and a standing ovation. I saw several people wiping tears from their eyes. Indeed, as I remained frozen in my seat, I grew teary-eyed as well-but for entirely different reasons. I was struck with horrified grief.

Thoughts raced through my mind: How could the cross and the sword have been so thoroughly fused without anyone seeming to notice? How could Jesus' self-sacrificial death be linked with flying killing machines? How could Calvary be a.s.sociated with bombs and missiles? How could Jesus' people applaud tragic violence, regardless of why it happened and regardless of how they might benefit from its outcome? How could the kingdom of G.o.d be reduced to this sort of violent, nationalistic tribalism? Has the church progressed at all since the Crusades?

Indeed, I wondered how this tribalistic, militaristic, religious celebration was any different from the one I had recently witnessed on television carried out by Taliban Muslims raising their guns as they joyfully praised Allah for the victories they believed ”he had given them” in Afghanistan?

Now, perhaps one could respond to my many questions by insisting that the Gulf War, unlike the war carried out by the Taliban, was a ”just war.” After all, the Kuwaiti people were losing their freedom and there were reports of women being raped.

Perhaps it was; perhaps it wasn't. People still debate this.3 But as kingdom-of-G.o.d citizens who are to always have a healthy suspicion toward every version of the kingdom of the world, especially our own, we have to at least ask the question why the loss of freedom to the Kuwaiti people mattered so much to our government while the loss of freedom to millions of others around the globe does not? For example, less than two years after the Gulf War, nearly a million Rwandans were barbarically ma.s.sacred in a three-month period. Though the American government and other Western governments possessed detailed information about the genocide as it was unfolding, we did nothing. A similar question could be raised, comparing our war for ”Iraqi freedom” with our reluctance to get involved militarily in the Sudan, where atrocities-far worse and on a larger scale than those perpetrated by Saddam Hussein-have been carried out routinely. But as kingdom-of-G.o.d citizens who are to always have a healthy suspicion toward every version of the kingdom of the world, especially our own, we have to at least ask the question why the loss of freedom to the Kuwaiti people mattered so much to our government while the loss of freedom to millions of others around the globe does not? For example, less than two years after the Gulf War, nearly a million Rwandans were barbarically ma.s.sacred in a three-month period. Though the American government and other Western governments possessed detailed information about the genocide as it was unfolding, we did nothing. A similar question could be raised, comparing our war for ”Iraqi freedom” with our reluctance to get involved militarily in the Sudan, where atrocities-far worse and on a larger scale than those perpetrated by Saddam Hussein-have been carried out routinely.

Of course, the reasons why we go to war in Kuwait and Iraq but do little to help Rwanda or the Sudan are complex. Kingdom-of-the-world issues almost always are, especially when they pertain to international relations. But for kingdom-of-G.o.d citizens who are aware of the idolatrous self-centeredness of rebellious hearts and the universal influence of Satan, and who thus know better than to place undue trust in any version of the kingdom of the world, don't these inconsistencies at least call into question the claim that we as a nation operate with purely altruistic motives? Don't these inconsistencies suggest that where where a group is located and a group is located and what what their resources are (like oil) are at least one factor in whether a people's freedom is worth risking American lives for? In other words, doesn't it suggest that, like every other version of the kingdom of the world, America looks out primarily for its own self-interest? And shouldn't this curb our confidence that G.o.d is always on our side and shares our excitement over ”winning”? their resources are (like oil) are at least one factor in whether a people's freedom is worth risking American lives for? In other words, doesn't it suggest that, like every other version of the kingdom of the world, America looks out primarily for its own self-interest? And shouldn't this curb our confidence that G.o.d is always on our side and shares our excitement over ”winning”?4 My goal in raising these questions is not to critique America. To the contrary, this is the way all all versions of the kingdom of the world operate. My critique is rather toward versions of the kingdom of the world operate. My critique is rather toward the American church the American church. We expect nations to be driven by self-interest, but we shouldn't expect kingdom people to applaud this fact, especially when the national self-interest involves taking lives! Isn't our central calling as kingdom people to manifest the truth that this old, self-centered, tribalistic, violent way of living has been done away in Christ? Are we not to display the truth that in Christ a new humanity has been created, one in which there are no ethnic, nationalistic, gender, social, or economic distinctions (Eph. 2:1317; Gal. 3:2629)? Aren't we called to ”live by the Spirit” and thus put away all ”works of the flesh”-including aligning ourselves with various sides of ”dissensions [and] factions” (Gal. 5:1620)?

Whether one thinks the Gulf War was just or not (or whether one thinks this question is even relevant for disciples of Jesus), how can kingdom people not grieve the loss of Iraqi lives as much as the loss of American lives? Didn't Jesus die for Iraqis as much as for Americans? Don't they possess the same unsurpa.s.sable worth that Americans possess? Are we not to embody and manifest Christ's Calvary-quality love even for our nation's worst enemies? When a congregation, gathered in the name of the crucified Nazarene, applauds the violent conquest of fighter jets flying over his cross, is this not further evidence of the diabolic power of the sword to blind us?

THE ALL-TOO-COMMON RALLY CRY.

While I suspect-and hope-the fusion of patriotism with the kingdom of G.o.d I witnessed in that July Fourth video is not representative of most conservative churches, I also know that the basic sentiment it expressed is is far too typical. The evangelical church in America has, to a large extent, been co-opted by an American, religious version of the kingdom of the world. We have come to trust the power of the sword more than the power of the cross. We have become intoxicated with the Constantinian, nationalistic, violent mindset of imperialistic Christendom. far too typical. The evangelical church in America has, to a large extent, been co-opted by an American, religious version of the kingdom of the world. We have come to trust the power of the sword more than the power of the cross. We have become intoxicated with the Constantinian, nationalistic, violent mindset of imperialistic Christendom.5 The evidence of this is all around but nowhere clearer than in the simple, oft-repeated, slogan that we Christians are going to ”take America back for G.o.d.” The thinking is that America was founded as a Christian nation but has simply veered off track.6 If we can just get the power of Caesar again, however, we can take it back. If we can just get more Christians into office, pa.s.s more Christian laws, support more Christian policies, we can restore this natio

<script>