Tuesday 18 September 2012

The Prime Minister's Address and Christianity



                          The Prime Minister’s Address and Christianity
                                               (June 09, 2008)


The month of May was a very crucial time for St. Lucians on and off island, as word spread quickly over land and sea that we may soon be facing a political unrest. The UWP administration under the head of the late Hon.Sir John Compton was victorious and winning by a landslide in the recent election. However, whilst the people were ebullient with great anticipation for the political changes that were to be made, the new Prime Minister of St. Lucia and leader of the winning party fell ill and died. Everything began to go downhill there on. His demise gave birth to a vicious plague of confusion that relentlessly ate its way through the stability of the new government, beginning with the late Hon. Sir John’s decision to make Minister Stephenson King his candidate to succession. 

The timing could not have been any worse: the people were in a financial state of panic due to the increase in oil prices and it's domino effect on all household goods. The threat of an increase in criminal activity from the disappearing (strike) action of The Royal St. Lucian Police Force was like someone rubbing salt on a nasty flesh wound and ultimately, the concerns of citizens began to grow heavy on the present government. But where one saw distress another saw opportunity and the opposition party, no doubt, had smelt blood. They quickly held public meetings in an effort to convince the people to pressure the current administration to go back to the polls. Talk show hosts on both radio and television inadvertently aided their cause by disseminating the doom and gloom message and providing a forum for all St. Lucians to cast blame and make demands for immediate intervention, restoration and reassurance from the current administration. Unfortunately, a rapid response was not possible as the UWP administration had their hands fully preoccupied, fanning the flames of friendly fire inside the walls of parliament.

The term friendly fire is a commonly used military term when weapon fire coming from one’s own side was responsible for accidental injury or death of one’s own forces. It may be better understood when a football player inadvertently scores a goal against his own team’s goalkeeper. And such was the case with the current administration. What was the fire about the reader may ask? I dare not open that door for fear that its contents abduct me from the main purpose of this article. Thus the more pertinent question is, “What on earth has all this to do with Christianity?”  

The key to the answer lies in the speech of the then Prime Minister,  Hon. Stephenson King, in response to the political disorder. The speech was well-written, apologetic in nature and sincere as he made no attempt to masquerade the inner turmoil that was governing his government. The tall, dark and bulky figure of a man wearing an extravagant blue suit, stared the camera in the face humbly that evening and admitted that his administration had made a few mistakes, not neglecting to explain how some of them came into being. But the integrity of the man in my opinion, was fully unmasked at the point when he proclaimed to the nation that a great deal of time had been wasted dealing with his administration’s issues. He went on to reassure the public that those issues had been resolved, (due to the resignation of a certain member of cabinet) and they were now ready to deal with the negative circumstances affecting the nation at hand. More importantly, the captain of our ship seemed happy and relieved to inform the public that the storm had passed and the skies would soon begin to clear up.

"Thank God it's over," I thought to myself, but as I made my way down to church that morning, to my greatest horror and surprise, I was confronted by the same fire. It wasn't the UWP administration burning this time but the church. I would learn later that there had been a friendly fire in Christendom for decades and it needs to be put out in order for Christianity to have any huge impact in this nation or any other. Many great men of God such as Charles H Spurgeon and Billy Graham had stepped up to such a flame by holding on to the one doctrine that all Christendom had in common, "Jesus Christ and him crucified" and it resulted in a great deal of work being accomplished for the kingdom of God. For a short while, it even appeared that the fire was slowly waning but when these two died, some of their influence inevitably died with them. And so the flame still stands as a mighty force against the people of God.

I beg the reader to forgive me for staying afloat this long presenting my thesis. I will now begin to dive into the depths of my true concerns. I recall since my youth, I’ve always wondered why there were so many different churches proclaiming the same God or why it seemed as if every church ever so clearly campaigned that theirs is the right one or the closest to the truth. In most countries there was a clear distinction between church and state except during a calamity or national crisis when prayer formed the bridge between the mighty gap. But the church, way back from medieval times hitherto, has always been head on involved in politics, and by this I’m not referring to pastors and priests admonishing their congregations to vote. The church has been involved in its own politics and their political campaigns in some cases are no better than the various administrations running for government in this contemporary age. They compete for members like electoral administrations compete for votes, they feed on the weaknesses of other churches similar to how the opposition reacted during the recent crisis of the UWP in office, they vitiate each other’s work with unloving, disparaging criticisms and try to make proselytes of each other when there is clearly one conversion of salvation-through Jesus Christ. “…A division between church and state?”  I beg to differ.

It is shameful that some Christians, including myself, have felt more at ease proclaiming our faith to unbelievers than to our fellow brothers and sisters in the faith. Can you try to empathize with the discomfort and bitterness that one may feel when approached by another believer, supposedly a brother or sister, who says something like, “Oh, you’re going to that church? Hmm. That’s not the true church my friend. You need to come to ours where the Spirit of God truly dwells.” Why must Pentecostals speak that way about the Roman Catholics? Why must the Seventh-Day Adventists speak that way about the Pentecostals? Why must the Baptists speak that way about the Adventists? And why must the Church of God’s speak that way about any church? How would you feel if someone callously tells you that your church is the wrong church? And let’s just say for argument sake that there is a great deal of practices occurring in a particular church that is not congruent with the teachings of the Bible, with an approach like that, you’d be better off selling insurance if you expect to win a convert. Thus, it is quite understandable why some people would just prefer to stay at home instead of be a part of what appears to be a friendly fire in the Church of Christ. And we Christians often wonder why the effectiveness of the church in this century is handicapped. “Every house divided against itself will not stand,” were the words of Christ himself (Matt 12:25). 

The Spirit of God is yet to be untapped because the people of God are too busy fighting each other. Some are fighting in the sense of winning a competition and others are fighting because pride and self-righteousness have infiltrated their hearts. One will be busy diluting the word of God and transforming the House of God into an entertainment center or a club house to keep the attendance figures high  whilst the other; would make it their goal when preaching to prove to everybody else that they’re the closest to the truth by focusing on the faults of the other churches. An increase in knowledge without the balance of love always produces a pharisaic hippie— someone who thinks that they’re certainly holier than thou. Ultimately, none is better than the other; they both stink in the nostrils of God. 

Now, under no circumstances am I implying that the doctrinal foundations of all denominations are correct or true. If that were the case, there would be no fire to begin with. The truth is that there are as many false doctrines as there are proper and lucid ones, not excluding the obscure ones which are open to various interpretations. And that’s where the heart of problem lies. It is on this very basis that Protestantism evolved from Roman Catholicism. A different interpretation to a particular doctrine or doctrines led to men and women of God leaving a particular church or denomination and thus establishing their own or joining another. This is why we have so many different denominations, some of them differing by one doctrine and others by a variety. And I dare not say that their incongruity is trivial, when in fact it may actually draw the line between what is defined as a church and a cult. Nevertheless, I don't think it is God's will for us to be waging war on other people's faith in such a cold and abrasive manner. We ought to be waging war on the doctrine or error of teaching itself and leave it up to the individuals to connect the dots without insulting their belief system. That’s the more effective and better way-through love. After all, what have we gained over all these years in breeding an antagonistic spirit amongst each other? More converts? I most certainly think not. We all are united under the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ (most of us that is) and if that’s the only doctrine we can agree on for the time; then so be it. Here is what Charles H Spurgeon had on say on the issue:Error is always mingled with truth received. Let us war with the error but love the brother or sister for the measure of truth in them.”

Some ministers need to understand that sinners are not saved through the preaching of doctrine. I am by no means, relinquishing its importance but the average man does not care about the doctrine of predestination as the Baptists do. The average sinner doesn’t care about the doctrine of keeping the seventh day holy as the Adventists do. In fact, it is a hindrance to him. The average sinner doesn’t care about confessing to priests and praying to saints as the Catholics do. He doesn’t care that Yahweh is the proper name for God or that true worship only involves singing hymns without the use of musical instruments as many non-denominational churches do. He certainly doesn’t care whether it’s leavened or unleavened bread which is used at the Lord’s table or whether he gets baptized in the sea, a water tank or via mere sprinkle of water on the head. The average sinner cares only about the state of his soul and the only thing, person, being or doctrine which can save his soul is Christ Jesus and His gospel. “For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ,” says Paul (Rom 1:16), “for it is the power of God unto salvation to everyone that believeth.” The teaching of various biblical doctrines will come after as the believer seeks after God in search of more truth; but not before. The helmet of salvation must be put on first before he or she can join the battle.

I pray sanguinely for the day that we,  who eat of the body and drink of the blood of Jesus Christ in faith and remembrance, may come together and like the Hon. Stephenson King, admit that much time has been wasted fighting amongst each other and refocus all our efforts on the real enemy: the world, the flesh and the devil, the best way we were taught how - the preaching of the gospel.

                                                                                                                     Written by
                                                                                                                    Valentine Dantes

No comments:

Post a Comment