The following passages are excerpts from the “APPENDIX” of the “Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass” published in 1845.
“What I have said respecting and against religion, I mean strictly to apply to the ~slaveholding religion~ of this land, and with no possible reference to Christianity proper; for, between the Christianity of this land, and the Christianity of Christ, I recognize the widest possible difference–so wide, that to receive the one as good, pure, and holy, is of necessity to reject the other as bad, corrupt, and wicked. To be the friend of the one, is of necessity to be the enemy of the other. I love the pure, peaceable, and impartial Christianity of Christ: I therefore hate the corrupt, slaveholding, women-whipping, cradle-plundering, partial and hypocritical Christianity of this land. Indeed, I can see no reason, but the most deceitful one, for calling the religion of this land Christianity. I look upon it as the climax of all misnomers, the boldest of all frauds, and the grossest of all libels. Never was there a clearer case of “stealing the livery of the court of heaven to serve the devil in.” I am filled with unutterable loathing when I contemplate the religious pomp and show, together with the horrible inconsistencies, which every where surround me”
“The Christianity of America is a Christianity, of whose votaries it may be as truly said, as it was of the ancient scribes and Pharisees, “They bind heavy burdens, and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men’s shoulders, but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers. All their works they do for to be seen of men.”
“Dark and terrible as is this picture, I hold it to be strictly true of the overwhelming mass of professed Christians in America. They strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel. Could any thing be more true of our churches? They would be shocked at the proposition of fellowshipping a SHEEP-stealer; and at the same time they hug to their communion a MANstealer, and brand me with being an infidel, if I find fault with them for it. They attend with Pharisaical strictness to the outward forms of religion, and at the same time neglect the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith. They are always ready to sacrifice, but seldom to show mercy. They are they who are represented as professing to love God whom they have not seen, whilst they hate their brother whom they have seen. They love the heathen on the other side of the globe. They can pray for him, pay money to have the Bible put into his hand, and missionaries to instruct him; while they despise and totally neglect the heathen at their own doors.”
There are two things that jump out at me from reading these passages:
1. I’m not the only or first one to doubt that this is or ever was a Christian nation, and
2. These words ring true today over 160 years after they were written.
Greetings Jeff:
First, I think your second point should have preceded your first. You must assume point 2 in order to attain point 1. I see this a different way. Labeling this or any country a “Christian nation” is a statement showing what you are striving to be like. No nation will ever reach this goal, but putting a target in front of you is a good thing. By removing the goal, as we have done of late, we tend to stray (even farther) off the path.
The fact is that the U.S. was started by Christians who recognized the correct role of the government and citizens with respect to God and established powers and laws based on Christian morality. The fact that these same people were sinners does not change the intent of what they created.
The same could be said of any “Christian church”. Every denomination I know and certainly every church I have attended is terribly flawed because it is run by man. The best they can hope for is to be pointed in the correct direction and continue to advance.
I see this as parallel to my own personal path. We, as people, shall never reach the goal of being like Christ, however we strive to become like Him. I do not think I should stop calling myself Christian because my nature has the “widest possible difference” with His.
Hi Tim P. (I actually know more than one Tim P – so I’m not 100% sure who I am addressing…) At any rate – thanks for stopping by.
I’m not quite sure I understand the logic of flipping my two points – neither are assumptions, just observations. Maybe you could try again?
Your statement beginning “The fact is…” I think is a matter of opinion, and has certainly been debated and discussed in many forums over the last 200 years. I do not dispute the fact that the founders of this country were sinners – as we all fall short of the glory of God, but I do not believe that you can definitively state this country was started by Christians or that they understood the ‘correct’ role of government…with respect to God. From what I can tell, ones perception of our form of government/nation state is dependent on many factors such as your race, sex, socio-economic status, social class, citizenship, understanding of God, and to some degree your political persuasion (but I believe that is largely influenced by the same factors – so maybe it’s redundant).
I do agree that there are certainly parallels to any church/denomination and even our personal walk. I do not agree that our catholic nor individual purpose is to strive to be more like Christ – but that’s likely a different topic for another day. I do not believe that organized, institutionalized churches are at all what God intended for His church; and certainly our personal walks are horribly stained as well.
I struggle with calling myself “Christian” these days because of the association of that term with hateful, paranoid, racist actions that have been perpetrated by so many that not only claim that title, but also claim that their actions are within the will of God – or an act of obedience to Him (Frederick Douglass would appear to agree with this musing). Actions that are directly in opposition to the Holy Writ I find to be mutually exclusive to the claim of inheritance that calling oneself a “Christian” seems to indicate. A prime example may be found in my next blog…
I think the goal/label of Christian Nation is from a very small and somewhat vocal minority. If my neighborhood and career are any indication, we are less than 20% Christian. On our block, there is one Catholic couple where the wife might go to mass occasionally. That’s it. So of the 10 homes I guess you could say 2 are Christian. The rest are not or simply do not care.
In my career, I think I can count the number of Christians I’ve known in the office on one hand. Might need two… no more.
I think our country was founded by anti-monarchy and anti-Anglican Church people. Some of these people were Christian, some were not, and the rest did not care.
ric – good points. thanks.
Hi Badguy- its Randy. Have you been enjoying your cabin in the woods? I noticed in this post that you wrote “I do not agree that our universal or individual purpose is to be more like Christ..” I’m reminded of scriptures such as Ephesians 4:22-24 and 1 Peter 1:15-16. We will not become exactly like Christ while here on Earth, but can we agree that we are told to strive to become like him?
Hey Randy! Good weekend, eh? What with the Terps and Skins winning and the Cowboys losing…
I’ve been out to the cabin a few times of late, it’s just starting to get cool enough to have a fire out there – which will be soon I hope.
I am going to respond to your comment in a new post – since it’s a different topic that might draw some comments.
Stay tuned…
yes, I am glad the Terps and skins gave us a better showing than last weekend.