Follow-up on a previous post, Christian Leaders Unite on Political Issues.
Religious Leaders Call for Civil Disobedience if Laws Don’t Respect Faith
A formidable coalition of 150 Catholic, Orthodox and evangelical leaders are calling on Christians in a new manifesto to reject secular authority – and even engage in civil disobedience – if laws force them to accept abortion, same-sex marriage and other ideas that betray their religious beliefs.
“We are Orthodox, Catholic, and evangelical Christians who have united at this hour to reaffirm fundamental truths about justice and the common good, and to call upon our fellow citizens, believers and non-believers alike, to join us in defending them,” says the declaration, (source)
Disappointed but not surprised to read Albert Mohler signed this ecumenical document, (Why I Signed The Manhattan Declaration)
“Be not unequally yoked with unbelievers: for what fellowship have righteousness and iniquity? or what communion hath light with darkness?” – 2 Cor. 6:14
"If the professed convert distinctly and deliberately declares that he knows the Lord's will but does not mean to attend to it, you are not to pamper his presumption, but it is your duty to assure him that he is not saved. Do not suppose that the Gospel is magnified or God glorified by going to the worldlings and telling them that they may be saved at this moment by simply accepting Christ as their Savior, while they are wedded to their idols, and their hearts are still in love with sin. If I do so I tell them a lie, pervert the Gospel , insult Christ, and turn the grace of God into lasciviousness."
Best response i read in response to this was a comment by Rick Frueh (who runs Judahs Lion blog), posted at the Christian Post:
I love Rick Frueh’s response. It’s so well put. Indeed, we’re now complaining ahead of time, before true persecution even comes. Yes, may God give us the grace not to waste an opportunity to embrace our own cross.
By the way, PJ, if you don’t mind the question, I’m curious to know why you’re not surprised that Albert Mohler decided to sign this declaration. Has he shown a pattern of embracing ecumenism or James Dobson-type initiatives? I ask this because I’ve only recently become familiar with Albert Mohler’s ministry, and have enjoyed what I’ve seen so far. I was also impressed with his radio address where he analyzed the teachings of Joel Osteen.
I’m hoping that he’s solid, as I was planning to refer to his radio address in an upcoming Facebook post regarding Joel Osteen, but after seeing your comment I’m wondering if there is another side to his ministry that I’m not aware of. Thanks.
Adam i wasn’t surprised because its happening more and more often that those i’ve respected as Christian leaders for a long time, are joining up with whomever for what they refer to as “the common good”.
You might recall a post from some months back on strange bedfellows? This is what is occurring today–Christian leaders from all walks of life are willing to get into bed with almost anyone who will unite with them for the common good–
In this case its working to unite under one umbrella with others (and unbelievers) on the 3 issues of abortion, homosexuality and religious freedom.
I was momentarily disappointed to see Mohler involved, but it didn’t surprise me. Only because its been happening with others…
Tonight i saw Charisma’s Harry Jackson had a column on this for he signed it too. Here was my response:
Rick is right:
Jesus and the gospel is not what [who] these folks are uniting around, its those three moral issues. And as Rick pointed out, they’re huffing and puffing (publicly) about persecution when there is none. That’s grandstanding Adam, doing something only to be seen of men.
They go even further by “calling for civil disobedience if the civil laws of the land don’t respect their faith” and positions.
NOT civil disobedience if they are stopped from preaching the gospel of Jesus Christ (as was the case in acts 5: 28-29) but actively advocating rebellion and civil disobedience concerning moral issues and civil laws in the nation.
And what does that mean “civil disobedience?”
They don’t say…
I still say it–these folks and others like them will be what finally ushers in real “true” christian persecution in this nation.
sorry for the mini-rant–this type of stuff just drives me up the wall.
You know what i also didn’t see today? The regular discernment websites i check out daily,…ones which have posted message after message for years on the dangers of ecumenicism flooding the body of Christ, said nothing about this latest document, except, in one case, to applaud it.
PJ,
Thanks for your response. I understand now why you weren’t surprised. I also do remember the “Strange Bedfellows” post from a couple months ago. Good comment in response to Harry Jackson’s column.
I share your sense of alarm at all the recent calls to engage in civil disobedience regarding moral issues. This has little or nothing to do with being persecuted for the sake of Jesus and the gospel. And even if it did, like Rick said, the Biblical response would be to rejoice!
I’m tempted to post what Rick said in response to something I saw on Facebook earlier tonight. It came from the worship leader (Tim) of the church which I attended while growing up in Ohio (and where my family still attends). He made a lot of noise about Christians needing to wake up because soon the federal government will be editing church sermons, etc. (hmmm, I might welcome that in the case of TBN, GOD TV, and other ministries!). Tim also said we’re in danger of losing all that our founding fathers and present military have fought for, and that we might soon see the US flag with only 39 stars on it (???).
The only reason I’ve held my tongue so far is that Tim and I had several exchanges recently because I “dared” to post a John Piper video speaking against the prosperity gospel. The conversation on that subject became unprofitable and rather time-consuming, so I let him have the last word. I’m going to pray and think first before opening up another can of worms with him. Besides, my Mom gives a thumbs up to everything he says, so that would be two cans of worms
Anyway, back to this subject, that’s interesting about the discernment websites being silent or affirming regarding this document. It’ll be interesting to see if ecumenism continues to get a free pass where it regards this type of political activism.
http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=1123091212334
Thanks Job, excellent message, im listening to it right now.
There is also an article up by James White on the subject of the Manhattan Declaration:
The Troubling Aspects of the Manhattan Declaration
My main objection (that I’ve written about) is that the Gospel is blurred. The document seems to point to the Gospel as the motivation behind the document, yet the traditions written into the document to not agree.
iMark, i’d like to read what you posted. Could you post the link?
(glad you stopped by brother)
Sometimes we have to open the can to let the worms out and the light in. ahaha…
Adam, sorry again i went into a mini-rant in my reply to your simple question about Albert Mohler. I got carried away by my frustration concerning these type of groups…
Hi PJ,
No problem. Your “mini-rant” was fine
You had good stuff to say.
I have to admit, though. When I first saw your reply in my email inbox, the quotes weren’t visible (where you put your reply to Harry Jackson’s column in quotes). It took me a minute to realize that the second half of that quote wasn’t directed toward me. Hahaha… Maybe that’ll teach me not to stay up until 2:30am carrying on exchanges on the internet.
PJ, sure thing. My link: To sign or not to sign. Love to get more feedback.
I would like to see feedback anywhere that actually addresses the objections rather than just saying “Al Mohler said..” even as much as I love and appreciate Dr. Mohler.
Thanks, bro.