THE MANHATTAN DECLARATION and EVANGELICAL CO-BELLIGERENCE

Camp On This ^ | TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 24, 2009 | Steve Camp

[streetpreacher]

THE MANHATTAN DECLARATION and EVANGELICAL CO-BELLIGERENCE
...the ineffectual intersection of politics and faith

 

 

“The goal of both the church and the state is to advance the public good.”

-Francis Beckwith

 

 

The ultimate goal of the church biblically

is not the public good,

but the glory of God in the proclamation

and advancement of His gospel of sola fide.

God, not the audience, is sovereign.

The “public good” is political speak for tolerance.

The gospel, however, does divide;

it is a stumbling block, offensive and foolishness

for those who are perishing.

 

 

Here we go again!

In the face of President Obama's economic wasteland and political indecision vacuum concerning Afghanistan, Iran and Iraq; coupled with an abortion provision being slipped into the latest health care bill championed by Harr Reid yand company - the religious right has found reason again to try itself in the political arena through The Manhattan Declaration.

It is nothing more than ECT (Evangelicals and Catholics Together) and Justice Sunday revisited. Same framers and advocates of the benign philosophy of political remedy for moral malady. The religious right of the past 24 years has all but been silenced. And despite the grass-root efforts by many well respected evangelical leaders and politicians, our country remains unchanged on key social and family issues. So once again, those who are impassioned about important social issues from a "faith perspective" such as abortion, same sex marriage, and religious liberty and freedom, are all but silent about the real "faith solution" for these same issues. The solution being regeneration through the Lord Jesus Christ and not political legislation. The solution for the Christian must be Gospel-Centered; Christ-Centered; and Cross-Centered. Anything less is ineffectual in bringing real resolve spiritually to these concerns.

The lack of sea change in American society to a conservative political ethic for many of us has been frustrating. But attempting to fight spiritual battles with carnal weaponry is just as disappointing. Christians who in the past have sought real change on key cultural issues did so, in part, absent of the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ. IOW, the gospel became the afterthought, not the primary thought. That failed strategery to keep the proclamation of the gospel center in a righteous quest I have defined as Evangelical Co-Belligerence (ECB).

I offer the following definition:

Creating alliances with individuals or groups who do not share belief in or with orthodox biblical Christianity, in order to fight an agreed upon social, moral, cultural cause that seeks to undermine the traditional family and family values. This includes, but not limited to: gay marriage; abortion; euthanasia; etc. and those who aid, influence, or control such societal moral decline such as the Supreme Court, Congress, state and local officials, and a run-a-way Federal Judiciary. This is accomplished by using boycotts, petitions, picketing, legislation... any political remedies available to resolve the moral maladies in our nation.

This is further accomplished by organizing evangelicals/local churches as PAC's, lobbyist groups, or as some refer to as "Christocrats", as Christian voting blocks to threaten with militant tones sitting politicians with the prospect of not being reelected if they fail to adopt the ECB moral/family agenda. This tactic is being championed by many evangelical leaders, seminary presidents and pastors absent of the authority of Scripture, absent of the preaching of God's Word, and absent of the heralding of the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ. -Steve Camp, July 14, 2005

Christianity in culture does have impact and does produce change. But it only does so as long as Christianity doesn't become a political organization and remains at its very core deeply gospel-centered. Is it wrong for believers to enter politics? Of course not. Is it wrong for Christians in politics to use their office, driven by a biblical worldview, for the good of society and their fellow man as say Wilberforce did on the issue of slavery? Absolutely not. But the church itself is not driven by the brilliance of U.S. Constitutional ethics, but by the Scriptures of the living God.

So again, what is the solution to the plight our nation finds itself in? The gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.And that brief answer is not about offering cultural reform back to an era of family values and more virtuous days. Jesus Christ did not come to transform America, but to transform Americans. The gospel is not the new nationalism for the conservative, but the hope for any sinner (like me and you) who by God's sovereign electing love trusts that eternal life and salvation is attained only by grace through faith in Jesus Christ as Lord alone.
 

IOW beloved, in this hour in our nations history may I propose a simple mandate: it is time for the church to be the church.

Gospel-driven Worship:

Acts 2:42 And they devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers. 43 And awe came upon every soul, and many wonders and signs were being done through the apostles.

Gospel-driven Welfare:

44 And all who believed were together and had all things in common. 45 And they were selling their possessions and belongings and distributing the proceeds to all, as any had need. 46 And day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they received their food with glad and generous hearts,

Gospel-driven Witness:

47 praising God and having favor with all the people. And the Lord added to their number day by day those who were being saved.

[streetpreacher]

I have really enjoyed reading through your posts on this thread; you have given me much to think about.

[streetpreacher]

Show me where MacArthur states that he does not believe in confronting corrupt government.

On your second point, you are actually saying the Bible is wrong, not MacArthur.

[caww]

Excellant..thank you.

[caww]

(.....anyone who truly seeks Him and the comfort of His mercy will most assuredly find Him.)

I am surely such a one as this...and I know that I know.

[SeaHawkFan]

It's in the book, Why You Can't Stay Silent by Tom Minnery of Focus on the Family. I'll try and find the book and locate it for you sometime tomorrow. Today is dedicated to football and sleeping after a long night of dancing last night.

[Springfield Reformer]

Amen.

[the_conscience]

This document is NOT just a social-ethical document meant to show common concerns amongst the broad range of Christian traditions.

This document is implicitly an affirmation of the judiaizing gospel of Romanism.

It is an affirmation that the gospel is a NATURAL LAW GOSPEL. It is at it's core a rejection of the Reformation principle of the Law/Gospel dichotomy. Like all judiaizing gospels it claims that the Law saves instead of the Law driving us to the Gospel.

Notice how the main drafter, the Romanist Robby George, gloats over how he hoodwinked Timothy George and Chuck Colson.

I asked George several times if he was really hoping to ground a mass movement in abstract principles of reason so at odds with the prevailing culture. It was a bet, he said, on his conviction about the innate human gift for reason. Still, he said, if there was one critique of his work that worried him, it was the charge that he puts too much faith in the power of reason, overlooking what Christians describe as original sin and what secular pessimists call history.

It is a debate at least as old as the Reformation, when Martin Luther broke with the Catholic Church and insisted that reason was so corrupted that faith in the divine was humanity’s only hope of salvation. (Until relatively recently, contemporary evangelicals routinely leveled the same charge at modern Catholics.) “This is a serious issue, and if I am wrong, this is where I am wrong,” George acknowledges.

Over lunch last month at the Princeton faculty club, George noted that many evangelicals had signed the Manhattan Declaration despite the traditional Protestant skepticism about the corruption of human reason. “I sold my view about reason!” he declared. He was especially pleased that, by signing onto the text, so many Catholic bishops had endorsed his new natural-law argument about marriage. “It really is the top leadership of the American church,” he said.

“Obviously, I am gratified that view appears to have attracted a very strong following among the bishops,” he went on. “I just hope I am right. If they are going to buy my arguments, I don’t want to mislead the whole church.”

[Mr Rogers]

“Francis Beckwith said:

“The goal of both the church and the state is to advance the public good.”

Then Francis Beckwith was wrong on both counts.

The goal of the church is NOT ‘to advance the public good’, but what God predestined for her: “In love 5 he predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, 6 to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved. 7 In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace, 8which he lavished upon us, in all wisdom and insight 9 making known to us the mystery of his will, according to his purpose, which he set forth in Christ 10as a plan for the fullness of time, to unite all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth.”

If enough people in a country follow God, it will also be for the common good, but that is NOT why the church exists!

Nor is it why governments exist. It is why demagogic politicians PRETEND government exists, but the history of governments is not one of seeking common good, but advancing the cause of a few over all the rest. Common good is NOT what Obama is attempting!

[omega4412]

Well said.

My defense of the declaration...

There are many theological differences among Catholics, Evangelicals, and Orthodox. Some are real and fundamental. Others are relics of times when political differences were expressed in religious language.

But the Moslem infidel army is at the gates, the enemy within is working to destroy “life unworthy of life,” and political correctness unites the enemy within to the enemy without.

Catholics, Evangelicals, and Orthodox should recognize one another as fellow Christians with whom one has theological differences. But they should unite in defence of Christendom and basic principles of Christian morality. And unite with those who argue for the same moral principles, whether on grounds of Jewish tradition, other religious beliefs, or “the laws of Nature and of Nature’s God.”

Historically, the Moslems have exploited or benefited from the divisions among Christians — Coptic vs Byzantine, Armenian vs Byzantine, East vs West, Protestant vs Catholic. We can’t afford these divisions now.

[Gamecock]

“The goal of both the church and the state is to advance the public good.”
-Francis Beckwith

No, the goal of the church is to preach Christ. The public good is advanced when that is done properly.

[Kells]

Your quoted passage no where denies that the Church is supposed "to advance the public good."

Nor is it why governments exist. It is why demagogic politicians PRETEND government exists, but the history of governments is not one of seeking common good, but advancing the cause of a few over all the rest.

Many governments in history, including our current government, have succumbed to corruption but corruption is not the reason for governments. Government loses legitimacy to the extent it fails to seek the common good.

[Mr Rogers]

I showed a passage that clearly teaches the goal of the church - its focus - is not the common good of mankind. Indeed, friendship with God requires the enmity of the world. If you believe otherwise, please show scripture to explain why the church should be focused on the ‘common good’.

“corruption is not the reason for governments”

Corruption SHOULDN’T be the reason for government, but it is hard to look at history and conclude that government exists for the common good.

[vladimir998]

You wrote:

“Then Francis Beckwith was wrong on both counts.”

No, he’s right on both counts.

“The goal of the church is NOT ‘to advance the public good’,”

Yes, it is - salvation is for the public good.

“...but what God predestined for her:”

Like I said - salvation is for the public good. I can’t believe that I have to tell that to a man who claims Christ as His Saviour, but apparently I do. Salvation is good for people. The only way Beckwith could be wrong is if salvation is bad for people and only a moron would say that.

“If enough people in a country follow God, it will also be for the common good, but that is NOT why the church exists!”

Yes, it is. Again, the Church was founded for our salvation to preach the gospel and give us the sacraments of grace. Salvation is good for us.

“Nor is it why governments exist.”

Yes, it is.

“It is why demagogic politicians PRETEND government exists,”

No. I know of no Christian government that is also ‘demagogic’ that believes it must advance the public good. Can you name one? Come to think of it, can you name ONE Christian state other than Vatican City, period?

“...but the history of governments is not one of seeking common good, but advancing the cause of a few over all the rest.”

That’s often the result. That is not what Beckwith is talking about. I wish Protestants were better educated so this basic stuff wouldn’t have to be explained. If you’re a Christian, and believe all things must be retored in Christ, then you must believe that that applies to states too. And when you have heaven as your ultimate goal, then that means the Christian must envision the state’s roll as ensuring the public good since that most enables people in human society with opportunities to pursue holiness.

With all of that in mind, look at this passage from an article Beckwith wrote several years ago:

According to John Paul, a democratic regime, whose purpose is to do justice by treating all human beings under its authority with equal regard, cannot do so without embracing certain fundamental moral truths as foundational to its institutions and laws: “the dignity of every human person, respect for inviolable and inalienable human rights, and the adoption of the ‘common good’ as the end and criterion regulating political life.”

This means that governments that permit (much less encourage) abortion-on-demand and suicide, and do not protect (much less undermine) the institutions of marriage and the family, do not advance the cause of liberal democracy, because they are in fact violating its essential principles. For abortion-on-demand and suicide are inconsistent with the dignity of the person, and marriage and the family are necessary for the common good.
http://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=18-05-019-v
end paste

As Joseph McGee wrote explain Aquinas’ understanding of the common good:

The common good, for Aquinas, is that for which human society exists, it is the purpose of the human community. In absolute terms, Aquinas believes that human society, like everything else, exists to glorify God. Relative to the members of the human society, it exists for full flourishing of all of the members. That flourishing, that good of each individual, is dictated by the natural law. It is dictated by what reason determines to be the end or ends toward which God has determined every human to be directed according to his or her rational nature.
http://www.aquinasonline.com/Questions/relatvsm.html

Do you get it yet?

Why do we exist? Ultimately we exist to glorify God. That’s our purpose.

Why does human society exist? Ultmately it exists to glorify God. That’s its purpose.

Why does the state exist? Ultimately it exists to glorify God. That’s its purpose.

How do we best glorify God? By obeying His will, living like His Son and spending eternity with Him. We call that SALVATION.

How does the state best glorify God? By obeying His will, acting like Christ, and aiding people in living good, productive, edifying lives here and in aiding them in their hopes of salvation.

The fact that we - and the state - often fall short of our purpose only reminds us we must restore all things in Christ.

“Common good is NOT what Obama is attempting!”

We agree. And Beckwith would agree with the two of us on that as well.

[the_conscience]

No, the goal of the church is to preach Christ.

Does that mean the gospel isn't any moral good but Christ alone is the gospel?

[Springfield Reformer]

Soli Deo Gloria.

[Mr Rogers]

A GOAL is not a side-effect. The goal of a medicine is reduced blood pressure, and a side effect may be weight loss. The side effect in this case may be desirable, but it is not the reason for taking the medication.

“Yes, it is - salvation is for the public good.”

Salvation has some good side effects for the public, but salvation is something for individuals. The more saved individuals there are, the freer a society can be - but salvation is for individuals, not society as a whole.

“The only way Beckwith could be wrong is if salvation is bad for people and only a moron would say that.”

No, Beckwith would be wrong if the goal of the church is something other than ‘common good’. Only a moron mistakes goal for side effect.

“If you’re a Christian, and believe all things must be retored in Christ, then you must believe that that applies to states too.”

EVENTUALLY, Christ will establish his reign. State governments are not restored, but removed when He comes. States and governments are not born again - only individuals.

“In absolute terms, Aquinas believes that human society, like everything else, exists to glorify God.”

Sounds like Aquinas needed to contemplate the fall of man, and ALL of man’s institutions.

“Why does the state exist? Ultimately it exists to glorify God.”

Nope. The nations rage against God. “15 Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. 16For all that is in the world— the desires of the flesh and the desires of the eyes and pride in possessions—is not from the Father but is from the world. 17And the world is passing away along with its desires, but whoever does the will of God abides forever.”

[Gamecock]

Does that mean the gospel isn't any moral good but Christ alone is the gospel?

Yup.

There are plenty of Pagans who live moral lives.

Now what is the Gospel?

It is not moralism. It is not the change in my life.

The Gospel is

15:1 Now I would remind you, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you, which you received, in which you stand, 2 and by which you are being saved, if you hold fast to the word I preached to you—unless you believed in vain.

3 For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, 5 and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. 6 Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. 8 Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me. 9 For I am the least of the apostles, unworthy to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. 10 But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace toward me was not in vain. On the contrary, I worked harder than any of them, though it was not I, but the grace of God that is with me. 11 Whether then it was I or they, so we preach and so you believed.

The Resurrection of the Dead

12 Now if Christ is proclaimed as raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13 But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. 14 And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain. 15 We are even found to be misrepresenting God, because we testified about God that he raised Christ, whom he did not raise if it is true that the dead are not raised. 16 For if the dead are not raised, not even Christ has been raised. 17 And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins. 18 Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. 19 If in Christ we have hope in this life only, we are of all people most to be pitied.

[Kells]

please show scripture to explain why the church should be focused on the ‘common good’.

The Church is not civil government but it does have a the very important role of critiquing civil government:

Mark 6:18: For John said to Herod: It is not lawful for thee to have thy brother's wife.

John 8:4,7: Master, this woman was even now taken in adultery. Now Moses in the law commanded us to stone such a one. But what sayest thou? [...] [Jesus] said to them: He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.

Matthew 23:34: Therefore behold I send to you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them you will put to death and crucify, and some you will scourge in your synagogues, and persecute from city to city

[vladimir998]

You wrote:

“A GOAL is not a side-effect. The goal of a medicine is reduced blood pressure, and a side effect may be weight loss. The side effect in this case may be desirable, but it is not the reason for taking the medication.”

The goal of medicine use is to heal the body. The goal of man is to be saved. The goal of human institutions therefore must be to aid the salvation of man. We were created to glorify God. That’s why we exist. We do not glorify God by going to hell. Again, I can’t believe I have to explain this to someone claiming to be a Christian. You must have a Christian worldview. You don’t have one. Get one!

“Salvation has some good side effects for the public, but salvation is something for individuals.”

(sigh) Salvation has some good side effects for the public? Are there BAD SIDE EFFECTS to salvation?

The public is made up of individuals. Again, I can’t believe I have to point these things out.

“The more saved individuals there are, the freer a society can be - but salvation is for individuals, not society as a whole.”

Salvation if for everyone. But not everyone will be saved. We all live in a society. Society must be open to the gospel for men to be saved.

“No, Beckwith would be wrong if the goal of the church is something other than ‘common good’. Only a moron mistakes goal for side effect.”

No, only you would confuse one with the other. The common good allows the gospel to flourish in society. Since salvation is why we’re here, because we are here to glorify God and there’s no bigger way to glorify God then to be saved, then our common good is what allows the gospel to flourish.

“EVENTUALLY, Christ will establish his reign. State governments are not restored, but removed when He comes.”

And yet we are to turn them to Christ NOW. We do not just stand idly by and allow immorality to be the way of things if it can be changed.

“States and governments are not born again - only individuals.”

Agreed, but your point is meaningless. Individuals are saved, but they live in socities. More will be saved in a society in which the common good of all is maintained.

“Sounds like Aquinas needed to contemplate the fall of man, and ALL of man’s institutions.”

BWA HAHAHAHAHAHAHA No one probably better understood the fall of man than Aquinas. That’s exactly the point!

“Nope. The nations rage against God.”

Again, you’re missing the point. Did God make us so we would rage against Him? No, but we sin. We choose to sin. Societies and states can choose to rage against God or serve Him.

[Mr Rogers]

“The goal of medicine use is to heal the body. The goal of man is to be saved. The goal of human institutions therefore must be to aid the salvation of man. We were created to glorify God. That’s why we exist. We do not glorify God by going to hell. Again, I can’t believe I have to explain this to someone claiming to be a Christian. You must have a Christian worldview. You don’t have one. Get one!”

First, the NEED of man is to be saved. It is not the goal of many men at all - for wide is the gate that leads to death. Just because we were created with God’s Glory in mind - and few will serve God’s purpose there - doesn’t mean human institutions comprised primarily of sinful humans exist to serve God.

You are the one who lacks a Christian worldview - for the Christian view is that the large majority of men are in rebellion against God, and their institutions with them.

“You adulterous people! Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Therefore whoever wishes to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God.” - James 4

“Are there BAD SIDE EFFECTS to salvation?”

From the perspective of the rebellious world? You bet. “13These all died in faith, not having received the things promised, but having seen them and greeted them from afar, and having acknowledged that they were strangers and exiles on the earth. 14For people who speak thus make it clear that they are seeking a homeland. 15If they had been thinking of that land from which they had gone out, they would have had opportunity to return. 16But as it is, they desire a better country, that is, a heavenly one.” - Heb 11

We are aliens in a foreign land. We don’t belong here. We answer a different king, and all kings are jealous. From the perspective of secular government, Christians are rebels and traitors. Government will never love Christians.

“The common good allows the gospel to flourish in society.”

No, the common good of rebels is unity with and control by the rebels...and man is a rebel against God. Only if Christians are a majority will the ‘common good’ allow the gospel to flourish.

“Societies and states can choose to rage against God or serve Him.”

No society or state chooses to serve God. In the end, all are rebels against Him. States have no soul. The reflect the souls of the majority, and the majority are in rebellion against God. That is why they rage.