Posted on 06/20/2015 12:35:53 PM PDT by Republican Wildcat
This week the nation reels over the murder of praying Christians in an historic African-American church in Charleston, South Carolina. At the same time, one of the issues hurting many is the Confederate Battle Flag flying at full-mast from the South Carolina Capitol grounds even in the aftermath of this racist act of violence on innocent people. This raises the question of what we as Christians ought to think about the Confederate Battle Flag, given the fact that many of us are from the South.
The flag of my home state of Mississippi contains the Confederate Battle Flag as part of it, and I’m deeply conflicted about that. The flag represents home for me. I love Christ, church, and family more than Mississippi, but that’s about it. Even so, that battle flag makes me wince—even though I’m the descendant of Confederate veterans.
Some would say that the Confederate Battle Flag is simply about heritage, not about hate. Singer Brad Paisley sang that his wearing a Confederate flag on his shirt was just meant to say that he was a Lynyrd Skynyrd fan. Comedian Stephen Colbert quipped, “Little known fact: Jefferson Davis—HUGE Skynyrd fan.”
Defenders of the flag would point out that the United States flag is itself tied up with ugly questions of history. Washington and Jefferson, after all, supported chattel slavery too. The difference is, though, that the United States overcame its sinful support of this wicked system (though tragically late in the game). The Confederate States of America was not simply about limited government and local autonomy; the Confederate States of America was constitutionally committed to the continuation, with protections of law, to a great evil. The moral enormity of the slavery question is one still viscerally felt today, especially by the descendants of those who were enslaved and persecuted.
The gospel speaks to this. The idea of a human being attempting to “own” another human being is abhorrent in a Christian view of humanity. That should hardly need to be said these days, though it does, given the modern-day slavery enterprises of human trafficking all over the world. In the Scriptures, humanity is given dominion over the creation. We are not given dominion over our fellow image-bearing human beings (Gen. 1:27-30). The southern system of chattel slavery was built off of the things the Scripture condemns as wicked: “man-stealing” (1 Tim. 1:10), the theft of another’s labor (Jas. 5:1-6), the breaking up of families, and on and on.
In order to prop up this system, a system that benefited the Mammonism of wealthy planters, Southern religion had to carefully weave a counter-biblical theology that could justify it (the biblically ridiculous “curse of Ham” concept, for instance). In so doing, this form of southern folk religion was outside of the global and historic teachings of the Christian church. The abolitionists were right—and they were right not because they were on the right side of history but because they were on the right side of God.
Even beyond that, though, the Flag has taken on yet another contextual meaning in the years since. The Confederate Battle Flag was the emblem of Jim Crow defiance to the civil rights movement, of the Dixiecrat opposition to integration, and of the domestic terrorism of the Ku Klux Klan and the White Citizens’ Councils of our all too recent, all too awful history.
White Christians ought to think about what that flag says to our African-American brothers and sisters in Christ, especially in the aftermath of yet another act of white supremacist terrorism against them. The gospel frees us from scrapping for our “heritage” at the expense of others. As those in Christ, this descendant of Confederate veterans has more in common with a Nigerian Christian than I do with a non-Christian white Mississippian who knows the right use of “y’all” and how to make sweet tea.
None of us is free from a sketchy background, and none of our backgrounds is wholly evil. The blood of Jesus has ransomed us all “from the futile ways inherited from your forefathers” (1 Pet. 1:18), whether your forefathers were Yankees, rebels, Vikings, or whatever. We can give gratitude for where we’ve come from, without perpetuating symbols of pretend superiority over others.
The Apostle Paul says that we should not prize our freedom to the point of destroying those for whom Christ died. We should instead “pursue what makes for peace and for mutual upbuilding” (Rom. 14:19). The Confederate Battle Flag may mean many things, but with those things it represents a defiance against abolition and against civil rights. The symbol was used to enslave the little brothers and sisters of Jesus, to bomb little girls in church buildings, to terrorize preachers of the gospel and their families with burning crosses on front lawns by night.
That sort of symbolism is out of step with the justice of Jesus Christ. The cross and the Confederate flag cannot co-exist without one setting the other on fire. White Christians, let’s listen to our African-American brothers and sisters. Let’s care not just about our own history, but also about our shared history with them. In Christ, we were slaves in Egypt—and as part of the Body of Christ we were all slaves too in Mississippi. Let’s watch our hearts, pray for wisdom, work for justice, love our neighbors. Let’s take down that flag.
(Russell Moore is president of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, the moral and public policy agency of the nation’s largest Protestant denomination.)
So, what is your point?
And when CWII breaks out, there is no doubt in my mind which side I'll be on this time.
With Liberals, and their ever shifting goal posts, the words "Land of Opportunity" are now regarded as racist and micro-aggressive in California's Universities.
My point here is that they will not stop once they get you on the run. They will simply come up with new things that they regard as "Racist" or "Aggressive".
This argument is an appeal to force, fully formed. War => Victory = Righteousness.
The Abolitionists just said they were right, and as against their adversaries, they couldn't make their argument from exegesis, so they just said they were right, and pounded their interlocutors first with abuse and obloquy, and then with appeals to the sword.
William Wilberforce persuaded the British Parliament to pass a bill abolishing slavery, in a country where it wasn't that common. As a manufacturing practice, slavery is distinctly unhelpful to people trying to earn a wage and a move-up job; but the United States didn't abolish slavery for that reason, but because the war was the thing, not just to abolish slavery but to rewrite the Constitution and remove so many obstacles to the achievement of wealth beyond the dreams of avarice.
It's also worth noticing that many other countries followed England's example without a civil war.
I'm glad slavery is no longer current (but watch out for imports from countries that are again practicing slavery and debt bondage), since pay for work is fairer and more beneficial to the society at large; it would be hard to persuade young people in a society where slavery is common, that hard work is virtuous in and of itself and will be rewarded in the end. Slavery in the end, like "welfare", is a drag on the drive and virtuousness of young working people.
Thank you. I make that point constantly. Christianity is the philosophical foundation for ending slavery in most of the world. Muslims do not share this foundational idea. Their society is a massive pecking order where people are not equal, they are all ranked from lowest slave up to Allah.
"Equality" is anathema to Islam. It is not just wrong, it is against Allah.
Without Christianity, we would still have slavery.
Not too smart when you are only 13% of the population.
Hmmm. Well, stupidity is an attractive quality, almost always.
Do not promulgate false or misleading history.
I am of the opinion that the United States abolished slavery for no other motive than revenge. They were upset that the Confederates had put up such a hard fight, and they wanted to punish them. They tagged on all those morality noises after the fact.
Had the Confederates quit fighting earlier, they would have been allowed to keep slavery. Because they didn't, they had to be punished.
I'm glad slavery is no longer current...
You joke. We still have it, it's just "kinder, gentler" slavery, and we don't call it that. The productive still feed and clothe the unproductive, Washington DC and the well connected still parties on our money, much of it is financed by debt, and many of the slaves that are going to have to pay for it, haven't been born yet.
I think you're deeply confused. If Jesus ordered, or even taught, that slavery was to be abolished, then a) Paul of Tarsus (as shown by your quote) didn't get the message, and b) it took 1800 years for the mass of humanity to get the word. Slavery was still common (as opposed to serfdom) in the Middle Ages and persisted until the time of Wilberforce.
The early Christians often spoke metaphorically about the condition of Christians "in Christ", i.e. who were following Christ in His spirit, but I do not think anyone can infer what you seem to infer, about a mandate for emancipation of slaves and other famuli from the authority of the paterfamilias. Christians were called on to exercise kindness with all people they met, and that alone was revolutionary, not even counting the reasons behind it which were revolutionary in the extreme and starkly contrasty with the gloom that hung over ancient existence and can be seen in Roman art.
But to read into that deeper revolution a call for abolition of the peculiar institution in any or all of its forms, is simply unsupported.
If their answer is, "Yes, and Crackers must die", will you roll over for that?
Brother Obama has got 'em on the Community Organizer bus, they're just about there. What are you going to do when they get there and "take it to Mr. Charlie"? Roll over, stand aside and let them burn your house and rape your wife and daughters?
Sometimes you just have to tell people to go to hell.
People claim its heritage, but the simple fact is that these flags that show or incorporate the Confederate battle flag have only been formally accepted quite recently. Certainly post the civil war anyway. The surprising thing is that, in spite of all the talk of state sovereignty, only two States had their own flag in 1861. The others had to scramble to design flags. Some (like North Carolina) did an excellent job and issued many examples to their troops. Others (like Tennessee) didnt bother. Some (like Florida) produced totally impractical designs that were almost certainly never used; and some (like Georgia) were never able to settle on one design.
In any case, the famous saltire style Confederate battle flag was actually the battle flag of the Army of Northern Virginia. It was rarely used outside of the Eastern Theater of operations during the war.
IOW if the author has a problem with the current mississippi flag, and yet still wants to honor his heritage, I would suggest he uses the State Flag(s) that mississippi DID use during the war (which are very nice designs incidentally). Job done!
Thank you. I make that point constantly. Christianity is the philosophical foundation for ending slavery in most of the world.
Actually, rationalism was the basis for the call for abolition. Rationalism was the idea that Nature obeys Nature's God, and that it follows rational laws laid out by the First Cause, the Creator, which men may improve themselves and their lives by learning, understanding, and employing to make life itself more orderly, more fruitful, better and more productive (as we were commanded to do by the parable about the servants and the talents).
Rationalism was the engine that detected the incompatibility of slavery with a just world and an orderly society (slaves had always been either wretches or "villains" [< L. villani, "farm slaves"]). Rationalism wasn't straight Christianity, and more latterly some people have sought to bring it into conflict with belief; but in the 19th century this wasn't so, and it was widely believed that even engineering was virtuous, and the profits of rational improvements, likewise virtuous. But here endeth the story for our purposes.
Lincoln said that he disliked slavery because it was inconsistent with the claims of the Declaration of Independence (hence, "Declarationists", who someday will come to grief at the hands of orthodox Communists) and of the American Republic.
But that wasn't why we had a civil war. That is a whole other story, as H.L. Mencken once pointed out, more than 100 years ago.
Many similar have been preserved from all areas of the war, some with subtle variations (2:1 proportions, hexagonal heraldic stars vs. 5-pointed "mullets" [stars]; Cross of St. George w/ reversed colors vs. Cross of St. Andrew [Gen.Polk was an Anglican bishop], and so on.) and some of completely different design. There was even one cavalry color carried in Texas that was nothing but a Scottish saltire with unit cachets and honors added.
With 94 percent of the ballots counted late tonight in the statewide referendum, 456,113 voters, or 65 percent, favored keeping the current flag
Can you imagine even trying to find a color to paint everything so no one would be offended? And then there would be those who would be offended if you painted everything the same color...
In other words, you just can't make everyone happy.
So the flag has a lot of bad connotations because of associations with white supremacists and segregationist.
The Democrats PARTY has a lot of bad connotations because of associations with the KKK, Jim Crow laws, segregationists, etc.
The DNC still has not made amends. Robert Sheets Byrd (D-KKK) was highly regarded and celebrated at the time of his passing. He was a man who was unapologetic about using the N-word proclaiming that it was okay because there are white niggers too. He was a recruiter for the KKK, how many of his recruits engaged in hate crimes for that organization?
Yes, and your tag line is accurate, as far as it goes.
The CBF was "the Rebel flag" for at least decades. 20th century novels, movies and, finally, TV carried that definition. NASCAR bootlegger descendants and post WW2 bikers, and the Dukes of Hazard identified with rebel and not "slaveholder".
Someone else noted that the KKK (and American Nazis) favored the Stars and Stripes...along with funny salutes and costumes...well after Southern democrats had gone under official cover.
In the immediate post CW period (reconstruction) racism and regionalism were rampant and often indiscernible from one another; but not under the CBF...By someteime in the 1870s those groups had failed and crashed.
Not until sometime in the 1920s did the KKK return and by then there were far more unsettling events for them to protest. St Andrew's cross didn't lure them into mischief.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.