One of my favorite movies is Braveheart, the story of William Wallace. Wallace was a Scottish peasant who led Scotland to war with England’s King Edward the first. The movie is fictitious at numerous points, but nevertheless has a certain inspiration imbedded in it concerning the struggle for freedom over tyranny. The conflict (called a “rebellion” by the English and Scottish nobility) begins due to the murder of Wallace’s wife. Wallace had married his wife in secret disobedience to English law of ius primae noctis (Latin), “right of first night”. Once this news was uncovered, his wife was executed by the offended English lord sending Wallace into a killing rage of justice (vengeance?) which likens him to a 13th century Rambo. The village supports Wallace but now they realize they either fight England for their freedom or they all shall be killed.
When news of the decision of the peasants to fight England reaches the Scottish nobles there is a revealing dialogue between Robert the Bruce, the potential king of Scotland should freedom be won, and his leprous dad who is in hiding so none may exploit his diseased condition. It has stuck with me for years. (What follows is my recollection)
Robert: “The rebellion has begun”
Dad: “Who?”
Robert: “A commoner named Wallace”
Dad: “Embrace this rebellion and support it from our lands of the north. I will condemn it to gain English favor from our lands in the south.”
(Robert has confused look)
Dad: “Sit down, sit down, my son.”
Robert: “This Wallace, he has nothing, yet he fights inspired.”
Dad: “And you want to go off and fight with him I presume?”
Robert: “Perhaps it’s time”.
Dad: “It’s time to survive. You are the 17th Bruce. The 16 before you gave you titles and land because they didn’t just rush in. What do the other nobles say?”
Robert: “All they do is talk”.
Dad: “And why not, they have much to risk as do you. Uncompromising men are easy to admire, however, the ability to compromise is what makes a man a noble”.
The ancillary plot of the movie was this potential young king’s consternation over principles or pragmatism juxtaposed to Wallace’s uncompromising principles. Would a seat at the table of nobility and power force him to choose between those principles and pragmatism? It’s a conversation that is playing out in front of us again in the 21st century. What price tag of compromises will be tolerated in the name of pragmatism as we seek to rebuild our civilization? Where is the line drawn when it comes to our incremental strategies of recovering a Christian nation between legitimate pragmatics and perpetual compromise?
For me, and others, the decades long track record of patience and pragmatism is coming to an end. There is absolutely no indication or evidence that any incremental, pragmatic strategy has effected systemic change within our government. A case can be made that Richard Nixon’s failed presidency was the catalyst for evangelicals to begin to consider character as a required virtue in their national candidates. Grass roots Evangelicals were political neophytes (and still are in many ways) and helped to elect the self-proclaimed “born-again”, Jimmy Carter, who may have been a Southern Baptist Sunday School teacher but had no sense of biblical worldview. Conservative Christian leadership pivoted the next election to Ronald Reagan, who promised them a sympathetic ear and legislative agenda. Reagan’s presidency involved some level of pragmatism on evangelical’s conscience and a great discussion could ensue on whether any progress was made in advancing our concerns or was Reagan another wall of defense against the juggernaut of humanism. The facts are now in that however you define Reagan’s presidency, it did not stop the spiraling, downhill trajectory of this nation.
I am advocating that the time is now for the Church at large to make its stand for principles over pragmatism. It is time for us to quit trusting the promises of candidates on campaign stumps and begin trusting God’s Word with regards to civic policies and elections. Our obedience to His precepts will beget more miracles than our pragmatic compromises in politics. Our reliance solely on Him and His Word (which is our template for life) will bear more and better fruit than our attempt at “helping out” the Almighty with our ideas as to how to restore a nation.
It is noteworthy to say that often times when this is suggested the response, even from many Christians in civic service, is that I am being “unrealistic” or “simplistic” with the process and complexities of politics. There comes a certain condescension from political “experts” to call the Church to obey God explicitly and view pragmatism skeptically. It’s as if politics has this special exemption from being filtered through the lens of biblical worldview. What other arena of life does pragmatic (compromised?) decisions continually trump the implementation and obedience to God’s Word? If a wife is in an abusive marriage, how long must she pragmatically navigate her “realities” with her husband until she demands that he obeys God’s Word or face repercussions? How long must an employee pragmatically navigate his bosses sins and ethical lapses before it becomes enablement and he “shares in the sin” (I Tim.5:22; 2 Jn. 1:11). When do we simply say, “Enough!”. As I often shared with my kids as they were growing up in my house that the right time to obey God is always at the present moment. What works for your kids, will work for your nation. That may seem simplistic, but I can assure you that when you watch the squirming that ensues from those who refuse to yield to Christ’s Lordship in this arena, it is far deeper than you can imagine.
Some will say that for the church to act in principled (Scriptural) conviction that it would immediately catapult our nation into the hands of secularists and exasperate the rate of moral decline and hostility towards Christianity. They continue by stating that incremental acts of policy changes or pragmatic choices in election candidates will give us time to activate the Church in a more widespread and effective manner. I simply do not see the empirical evidence. We have been putting principles on hold and activating pragmatism continually for a generation and the results are easily seen. Rebuilding a Christian civilization means that there is no time better than the present to begin to act fearlessly in applying biblical precept to the civic arena. Yes, there may be some short term pain, but in the long term our concerns will be better represented and implemented through our resolve to act Scripturally.
No Comments