Today we celebrate the Declaration of Independence, America’s letter to the Brits explaining why we rebelled against KIng George and detailing what kind of nation we intended to become once out on our own.
We rebelled because, according to the Declaration, our “natural” rights were violated. And we intended to become a nation that doesn’t allow that sort of thing to happen to its citizens.
Those natural rights must be pretty important eh? Given to us by “Nature’s God,” it says, and broken into three categories: “Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”
That’s a Jefferson original. “Happiness.” Adam Smith, a philosopher and economist from Scotland who greatly influenced our founding fathers, originally wrote something similar. He used the phrase “life, liberty and the pursuit of property.” John Locke, another philosopher whose philosophizing guided our forefathers, went a step further in his writings by providing a detailed list of property rights a government should grant its citizens. “Pursuit of happiness” didn’t come from the economists and philosophers of the day. Nope, it was lifted from a novel by Samuel Johnson.
And today we celebrate those words. Here in America we (mostly) have the right to live, to be (pretty much) physically free, and buy as much stuff as we can afford (on credit), and even keep that stuff without it being taken away by G.W. That’s pretty good stuff. I’m thankful indeed.
Now, this probably isn’t all that related, but on this same day back in 1845, Henry David Thoreau, a tree hugging hippy who was pretty good with words, declared his independence from the pursuit of property happiness by moving into a 230 square foot self-built cabin and dedicating the next two years of his life to not pursuing property happiness. But, when he refused to pay poll taxes out of protest against the Mexican American War and slavery, he lost his right to physical freedom and did some jail time. Thoreau felt that the war and slavery only persisted because both provided the American people with more wealth with which to pursue property happiness and he thought that was bad or unfair or something because all this somehow kept other people created by “Nature’s God” from pursuing property happiness.
Dang ole hippies.
Like I said, obviously unrelated. Moving on.
Let’s celebrate our independence from the Brits and our right to pursue property happiness by endangering our lives and blowing up some of that property happiness available for purchase from the nice guy in the roadside stand with three fingers on his right hand.
God bless America.
.
I wonder what the (that was payed) coin in Mat 17:27 helped pay for?
Remember the good Samaritan had to have some property/happiness so he could befriend the one without.
On the same unrelated note, that’s funny you mentioned Thoreau. I’ve just been reading about him recently, and came across this: “One of Thoreau’s concerns was that the world was being dulled by the bombardment of an unending flow of news, and a fascination with trivial events. “We are in great haste to construct a magnetic telegraph from Maine to Texas” he wrote, “but Maine and Texas, it may be, have nothing important to communicate.”
No wonder people don’t like you pacifists.
Yeah, I just met the three-fingered old man and bought a butt load of ‘happiness’ from him. I must say, I had a heap of fun blowing it all up
I’m an immigrant, and I love independence day!!
Shaun, is there a balance somewhere in this? I mean can you be patriotic without swearing allegiance? Respectful without Rebellion? I’m still stumbling through this in my mind…
Ryan G, I can only speak for myself in this. Despite what it may seem like to readers – because of what I write here from time to time – I think I’m as balanced as I’ve ever been at the moment…I think.
I think I’m thankful (not patriotic – I don’t know how to define that without it having something to do with a feeling of superiority to other nations) without swearing allegiance to a nation, president and flag above God.
I think I’m respectful of the rights and needs and feelings of my fellow Americans, without putting them before the rest of the world, while at the same time rebelling against “wrong” (as defined by me I suppose) when I encounter it regardless of how that makes the supporters of wrong feel. (More diplomacy is needed on my part though.)
I’ve said before that I’m indifferent to more things now than ever before – political parties and elections and whatnot being examples. This indifference isn’t because I don’t care. I just care about other things (kingdom etc.) so much these days that my love of country, relative to the things I care about, seems almost non-existent – indifference I call it. At least, I think that’s what’s going on in my head.
It’s not indifferent to rebel. So I don’t actively seek out rebellion. I just find myself on a collision course with some of my country’s ideals and history when pursuing the things that matter most to me now. I DO NOT want America to go away or be harmed in any way. I’m not rebelling against a country, but I sometimes find that my values (which I arrogantly think are God’s values as well) conflict with a set of values that are often associated with it’s history and people and economic systems etc.
Non-violence conflicts with Hiroshima.
Simplicity conflicts with materialism.
Mercy showing as the job of the Church conflicts with politics that supports government welfare.
Taking care of orphans conflicts with our foster care system and adoption laws in some states.
Defining peace biblically defies some on the left who define it only as a lack of fighting and some on the right who define it as democracy and an open market.
Considering others before ourselves defies NRA thinking on gun control.
Doing work as if unto God and loving the least more than ourselves and not being selfishly ambitious defies teachers unions who put job security over competence and the ability of an employer to correct employees who make mistakes that adversely affect children in their charge.
And on and on. On these points I find myself in opposition to other people’s values…if that constitutes rebellion than I’m in one I suppose.
Clear as mud?
Good question. Made me think way too early this morning.
I understand the respect thing. That’s where I’m falling.
But I’m struggling with indifference. It screams of apathy to me. See there’s still that “Moral Majority” argument somewhere in my head that says “doing nothing” is not a good thing.
It sounds too idealistic to say “I’m 100% wrapped up in God’s kingdom so everything else is moot for me” (sarcasm here, feel free to respond in kind)
I need more coffee….
Not moot, just not necessarily something I need to invest time and effort into in the same way and to the same degree that someone else who feels that America is superior always forever to other nations does – or who thinks this party or rather is God’s – or who thinks we must be in power as Christians for God’s will to be done most effectively.
And the choice isn’t do nothing or do something. The choice is do this or do that.
People have made the same argument here in the past against pacifism – which is why I usually use the words “Christian non-violence” these days instead. The choice isn’t war or passivity. Pacifism isn’t passive. In fact, Christian non-violence requires I take action (non-violently) instead of sitting in my lazy boy asking someone else’s kid to go kill and idea for what I believe is right. Supporting war, for most of us in America, is a passive thing. Not for the brave soldier but for us. Non-violence is not.
Same deal with indifference – the way I’m using the word – and I don’t like the word but I don’t have a better one right now. I invest my allegiance, time, money, conversations and mind space on things besides which senator I hate or love, who to vote for, what party is good and which is bad, what law needs to be passed or defeated to make the world a better place. I just believe that while governments can and do do a lot of good, ultimately, good cannot be created with coercion from guns or laws. Laws aren’t bad but they’re skin deep. So, I care, but nowhere near as much as I care about things that bring about deeper, longer lasting, real good from the inside of people out to the ends of the earth. Non-coercive things.
I admit, I don’t understand.
The pursuit of Iphone is bad.
but,
putting a nickle in the devils pocket by attending a Hollywood (sincity) produced movie is alright?
How does one justify either, or one over the other?
I understand why indifference is viewed as apathy, but I think also understand where Shaun is coming from. By investing time and energy into a broken, flawed system, one is spending time and energy that could be spent advancing God’s kingdom.
That kingdom is what we should be 100% wrapped up in – though that doesn’t makes everything else moot. It makes everything else matter more.
Film is art. Beauty, truth, meaning and creativity come from art and are (admittedly imperfect) reflections of who God is. By partaking in a $6-$10 movie, one can experience a piece of God – depending on the movie, of course.
ok, the mud got a little thinner there.
Todd my thoughts move toward how can I be 100% wrapped up in God’s kingdom and not think about how it can affect my country of residence, or what good can I do influencing my country to help further God’s kingdom? and can that be done?
And mentally I’m not only putting the USA in my “what-if” slot, but I’m also trying to look at it from the angle of if say, Darfur was my country.
I never said pursuing iPhone was bad. Though I get how the inference was made.
I don’t think that our country (as an institution or “kingdom”) can help further God’s kingdom. I think that the values of our country contradict the values of God’s kingdom. But it’s an interesting debate to have, because our values as Americans contradict the values of God and we still get to be a part of the movement.
Admittedly, I’m not sure what you mean by “influencing” your country. Do you mean legislation? Lobbying? Promoting Christian candidates?
Voting, Promoting candidates that promote good government etc. I’m not sure on lobbying etc.
But I’m not saying that I think it helps further God’s kingdom, I’ve got the “as a responsible human being” deal in my head that says I should at least vote and such to ensure life as I want/know it.
I typed that and although I didn’t mean it selfishly, it sure reads that way.
Better yet, how can I NOT be caught up in the government of my country. How can the Kingdom of God consume me in such a way I forget about these things? It seems ideological and not practical.
If Darfur were your country I think you, being a compassionate person with resources, would help people, not your country. That would be your thinking I suspect, not “I need to help my nation.” Right?
I want to help Americans who are pregnant and afraid. So I’ve given money to purchase sonogram machines. I want to help Americans who feel judged by their skin color, so I befriend them. I want to help Americans whose dad’s ignore or abuse them, so I worked at an orphanage and I throw the ball with my neighbor’s kids while his father plays video games all day. etc etc etc. I do this because I love people, not because I love America.
“How can the Kingdom of God consume me in such a way I forget about these things? It seems ideological and not practical.”
I don’t think you forget, but you choose to focus and spend time and energy on other things. I still vote. I still stay informed on major issues, but I’m not consumed by them, nor do I spend a majority of my time convincing people to adopt my particular viewpoint on political matters.
Oh, and Darfur is a region in Sudan, not a country.
I didn’t mean that as snotty as it sounded, by the way.
That’s ok Todd, between your snot and Shaun’s mud….
Yah, it boils down to choices…
Shaun,
You just sound a little too cynical for my taste. I am a fan and frequent reader of Shlog, but come on. Can you really muster that little support for a state which does not throw you in jail for openly advocating your Christian non-violent position; one which allows the free sharing of the gospel; one which affords you the opportunity to make a living off of the greedy, capitalist kids who buy your albums? Does it ever occur to you that maybe there is something worth celebrating here that you would not be capable or willing to celebrate in another country?
Being grateful and complaining don’t really go that well together. “I’m really grateful for the meal and all that, but really, I could imagine a much better meal and frankly I can’t believe you spent so much time and energy preparing it. It’s not as great as everyone says it is, and really, I think it’s narrow-minded for anyone to say they like this meal any better than any other one.” Try saying that to your wife and seeing how grateful she thinks you are next time you sit down to eat it.
It’s not the points you’re making, it’s that it wreaks of cheap opportunism to take advantage of every opportunity to bash this nation to show how morally superior your view is to everyone else’s. I am not impressed, Shaun.
I get the feeling you don’t think the colonies had just cause to go to war. I also get the feeling that you think materialism was the primary reason this country declared independence from Britain. Lastly, I get the feeling that you think patriotism is a bad thing. Are any of those correct readings of your opinion?
Now to add to the dog pile. I think it’s good that you had this post though because the study of Christian non-violence ultimately has to lead to some sort of opinion on American Revolution. And seems by the standards of the typical non-violence writer, that it ultimately doesn’t pass the test. I’m just glad that you are essentially ‘fessing up to it.
I guess when it comes down to it, I believe that the role of government and the role of the individual are not the same. The government can not run by the WWJD motto. The government’s goal is not to simulate a single person. The government’s job is to govern. It’s an institution and role established by God. Certainly, the government can be evil institution… used to carry out the evil desires of sinful men… insert normal examples here of Hitler, etc…
We come into this world, we’re given certain gifts (and by this I don’t mean just spiritual gifts). One of the gifts you’ve been given is citizenship in this country. (Just as Paul was a Roman citizen… a citizenship that he wielded carefully and skillfully at times). And of course there are a whole host of other things (gifts) you get for living here… access to healthcare, wealth, food, education, freedom of speech… etc…
To treat those blessings so lightly and in such a nonchalant way, to neglect the sacrifice of the thousands of lives to insure you got and now keep those gifts is absolutely repulsive. Further, that if you consider any of it “good” then it ultimately has come from God and it would consider that a lack of thankfulness to him as well.
But specifically going after the whole non-violence thing. In looking at the entire scope of the Bible. Using scripture to interpret scripture… seeing the words that God has chosen to preserve through the ages. I fail to see how the Bible truly supports you position. I’ll give you props for using the Bible for your source. That’s what separates you from the nut cases in Hollywood. But ultimately, what’s proven time and time again in history and looking at the Scriptures… there is a time for war… and there is a time for violence.
You look at Bonhoeffer and his struggles over the issue of non-violence and national allegiance. Ultimately… Mr. “Christ the Center” decided that there were times when violent action needed to be taken to protect the innocent (his support of the plot kill Hitler)… and also he realized that as a German, he had a responsibility… a calling to serve his fellow countrymen for cause of Christ… and that meant returning to Germany and exerting whatever influence he managed to get to both reach individuals but also affect change as whole for his country and around the world as it related to his country.
Maybe I’ve not made a coherent comment here, but I guess I keep thinking that you’re leaning too much into the realm of government only being an invention of man and having no basis in being a God ordained entity. Whether the government chooses to acknowledge where its true authority originates is another matter…
Completely turning your back on nationality and government would be like saying marriage wasn’t that important because there’s no marriage in heaven and so while you’re thankful for your wife… you don’t want to be too into her because you just want to focused purely on being part of the “bride of Christ”.
==random thoughts: off==
ScW said:
“he government can not run by the WWJD motto. The government’s goal is not to simulate a single person. The government’s job is to govern. It’s an institution and role established by God. “
Where do you find this? When did God institute and establish government?
I, for one, am pretty fond of the idea that we’re all accorded rights by our Creator, not by the capriciousness of a king or a parliament or a dictator.
I’m also extremely happy for the first-ever document of its kind that posited this as the very basis of a nation.
I’m very happy that property rights—imagine an agrarian culture where your children are dependent on your crops and animals to survive—were thought to be part and parcel of the idea of freedom by a collection of brilliant enlightenment thinkers. They thought the government—whoever it is—has no right to take what’s yours, simply because they thought themselves divinely appointed or (more recently) simply smarter than you.
I’m actually less of a Jefferson fan than, say, Madison, but I’m very thankful for the brilliant men who articulated a coherent basis for human rights. We’re better off for it. For mercy’s sake, I hope the idea keeps spreading.
Ditto, Brant. I think the rights they intended to protect are actually very in line with biblical concepts of “justice.” Which is partly being able to keep the fruit of your labor if you want to.
Thankful for that. Hope that gratitude isn’t lost in the rest of my words.
How’s vacation going?
It’s okay. Just spending time with family. I got to spend two days solid with my awesome brother. Haven’t laughed that hard for a long time.
I don’t agree with where I think you’re going with this particular entry, but I may be misunderstanding it. To be honest, I don’t want to spend much time on it because I think we both think pretty much the exact same thing, and we’d waste time trying to pin down…whatever. You’re a terrific writer, though, and anyone who knows you knows you are a very grateful person who has a nuanced appreciation for America.
*If* you’re missing the mark here in conveyance, I’ve missed it a lot further in my own blogging and commenting, and you’re always remarkably patient with me.
To RyanG…
Of the many…
at least in part that would be Romans 13
—>
Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you. For he is God’s servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God’s servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience.
That is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God’s servants, who give their full time to governing. Give everyone what you owe him: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.
<—
But clearly also here we see an exception brewing and accounted for as Paul is clearly talking about “civil” governments… in the line “hold no terror for those who do right”. It’s obvious then that when a government terrorizes and directly violates the mandate that it has received to (as others have said) “administer justice”. Here I believe the individual’s responsibility and the responsibility of the church is to act in order to restore the government to its rightful place. And of course this ties in nicely with Bonhoeffer’s view that government should provide justice and a framework within which there was open opportunity for the Church to proclaim the gospel.
Great! Thanks for the references.