This topic contains 6 replies, has 6 voices, and was last updated by 
-
Posts
-
As I was reading through some blogs this morning I came across a post by Don Miller entitled Reflecting on the Two Different Spirits Guiding the Christian Church. An excerpt from it that caught my attention was this:
Today, Christians have power. The scene has changed. Even in smaller degrees, Christian leaders no longer perceive themselves as the underdog. Pastors of mega-churches see themselves, within the body, as power brokers, able to yield large weapons of social pressure. The scene is often not pretty.
I sometimes wonder if leaders like Billy Graham aren’t the Christian movements Martin Luther King’s, while other leaders are more like Malcolm X. Both kinds of leaders want the same agenda, kind of, but the power-brokering Christian leaders are willing to lash out verbally or bully from their pulpits. They lead through intimidation and fear. I think the differentiation is important to note. There are two movements growing within Christian culture in America. Both are telling the same truth, but they are driven by different spirits. I’m convinced one of them is not of God because it looks so different than the loving spirit of both Christ and the early disciples.
While I absolutely get the point here, I’m not at all comfortable with using Dr. King and Malcolm X as the measuring sticks. They definitely had differing ways of getting to the same outcome, but the big difference is they were fighting for an oppressed group. Despite their claim otherwise, the church today isn’t oppressed, but in many circumstances they are the oppressors. The infighting that exists along and between denominational lines will continue to retard any growth or change. As long as there are churches and religious leaders stating their way is the best way, there will be no cohesiveness. So yes it’s all about the same God, but the church is not about gaining the same outcome. Each has become it’s entity. Dr King and Malcolm X may have differed in their approach, but they were looking for the same end. I honestly can’t say that about the intentions of the church; not anymore. While no longer a believer, I studied Jesus enough to personally doubt he’d recognize the church in any of it’s modern presentations. This is not what he wanted, but what we made it. So of course it’s always said that Christianity is not a man-made religion, but it’s hard to deny that men shaped the hell out of it. (yes pun intended)
-
This topic was modified 2 years ago by
David Hayward.
-
This topic was modified 1 year, 11 months ago by David Hayward.
When I started reading the quotes I thought his use of King and Malcolm X were not good. I agree with your point servantgirl. I also agree with his statement “The scene is often not pretty.”
Reading the quote, servantgirl, I too was puzzled by the use of Dr. King and Malcolm X as analogies, and agree with your points. Yes, both were addressing the same challenge in different ways. And both were working for justice and equal rights in civil society – inspired by faith and ethical conviction in an all too real life or death fight against unjust, legalized – and in some things and places, legally mandated – injustice, bigotry, and tangible harm.
The leaders of mega churches and their congregations are not systematically discriminated against. Their lives and health are not in danger when attempting to engage in activities that the rest of the population takes for granted. They don’t face social, legal, fina cial, and other obstacles that prevent them from getting an education, medical care, or employment. they don’t face the prospect of being beaten or shot or fire bombed or lynched if they say the wrong thing to the wrong person. They don’t risk having hooded, angry mobs show up on their front lawns, threatening their families because they dared to enter a part of town or place of business that is forbidden to them under the law. They may perceive themselves in that way, but that perception is filtered through a thick of privilege which they are utterly blind to. Not having all the political power and authority they wish, and railing against a society which doesn’t conform to their own political gospel is so far from anything like the message of any civil frights leaders that I can think of that it is not even laughable – it’s insulting. Seems to me that the “fundamentalist” Christian movements, whether political or spiritual, are entirely different in both form and substance from the civil rights movement I grew up with. I can’t help but think that today’s religious right has far more in common with the segregationists and their ilk than with the brave men and women who put their lives on the line in defense of justice and equality. You know, the more I think about this, the madder I get – best take a breather and cool down…
Syl if it makes you feel any better, I read the entire post and still walked away thinking WTF? It was my being nonplussed that made me talk about it here because I can’t think of any other group of people who would answer me honestly. I’ve read Donald Miller long enough to know that he probably was well meaning in this, but he was way, WAY off base. It’s too bad that he likened warring Christian leaders to Dr. King and Malcolm X, because the rest of what he had to say was mostly spot on. I just can’t look past that huge error of judgment.
You know what I love about you servant girl…. you are always studying…. and sharing…. I appreciate you!
When I read the topic line, I though: good and evil.
It reminds me of something George Bernard Shaw said about the religion of the lower mind and of the higher mind. I’ll see if I can find it. All I can find on the web is a very short quote, but I’ve got the text somewhere.
-
This topic was modified 2 years ago by
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.