More Practice, Less Preaching Needed

Supreme Court Associate Justice Antonin Scalia shook the foundations of the secular establishment last week when he dared to pronounce the name of God without embarrassment.

At a prayer breakfast in Jackson, Miss., Scalia spoke not only of his personal faith, but of reaction by the press and the rest of the secular establishment to people who believe in an Authority higher than themselves. He even talked about his belief in miracles, which caused some commentators to place him in the category of those who phone psychic hot lines.

Cartoonist Herblock drew Scalia reading a Bible while his fellow justices read the Constitution. Would Herblock have thought ill of Abraham Lincoln, who said, “But for this Book, we would not know right from wrong”?

In his most powerful statement, Scalia urged the 650 present to ignore the scorn of the “worldly wise” and merely stand up for their beliefs. Such advice is in contrast to much of what we hear in some religious circles: There are demands for respect. There are calls for the “Christian equivalent” of the ACLU to force secularists to treat believers fairly. There is an attitude that says “how can they do this to us,” as if a servant is greater than his Master.

There is nothing in Scripture that commands those who seek to follow God to demand their rights. There is much about the benefits of obedience to what the Bible teaches. Rewards for enduring persecutions are promised, but, like an individual retirement account, they are delayed.

And there is a good deal of teaching about persecution. When experienced because of “righteousness’ sake,” persecution is to be welcomed as a sign (though not the only sign) that the person being persecuted is thinking, behaving and worshiping in a way that pleases God.

There are many Christians in other parts of the world who might gladly change places with American believers. In other nations they face torture, discrimination and murder. Here, their “suffering” is limited to occasional slights from reporters and cartoonists.

According to Christian Solidarity International, the National Islamic Front is torturing Christians in Sudan with whips and then inserting hot chili peppers into their wounds. Do American Christians think critical words and occasional discrimination hurt more than this? They should focus their outrage at the ones guilty of practicing real persecution.

Perhaps American Christians haven’t been persecuted enough. They have had it too easy, grown soft and lazy. They relax in a subculture of their own making and are outraged when the world criticizes them.

But they have refused to engage the world in sufficient numbers to make their influence felt in the very institutions they lambaste.

Many Christians refuse to equip themselves to compete on territory that once believed their views contributed to the general welfare. Instead, they have largely preferred to enter what they call “full-time Christian service,” acting as if the “mission field” is reserved only for the ordained who must separate themselves from “secular work” and, in many cases, go overseas.

Is it any wonder American institutions have suffered from spiritual deficiency anemia?

If Christians don’t like being persecuted by intellectual snobs, let them enter law school, academia, the film industry and journalism and change these and other fields from within. It’s difficult, but not impossible.

So let’s not hear any more complaints about “persecution.” It is like griping about the government when one doesn’t vote.

When the Apostles stood before the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem and were ordered flogged for preaching the Gospel, they didn’t whine about being persecuted. They “rejoiced because they had been counted worthy of suffering disgrace for the Name.” That’s the right attitude. It is far preferable to complaining about the way one is treated. It is, I think, what Scalia was getting at. And he is a man practicing what he preaches.