Attention: TDR Forum Junkies 
Stiff Right Jab: Public Christianity
Steve Farrell
Monday, Feb. 10, 2003
Nowadays, in order to justify each and every sin under the sun, each and every assault upon the moral fiber of a community or a nation – one approach fits all – the ne'er-do-well need only say the magic word “privacy,” then sit back, relax and smile while his or her “high and holy” foes – that is, any of us who dare to believe that “morality matters,” that “unbridled license is incompatible with liberty,” that “unalienable rights come from God” – are forced to run and hide for cover.
No forethought, no logic, no knowledge, no intelligence are required – the ne'er-do-well speaks the magic word, perhaps the only word he or she knows, and wins the debate. End of argument.
But hold on.
It just may be that the “sacred shield of privacy” is nothing more than a scam – nothing less than a false “religious” and “political” premise – a sort of catchall bit of nonsense fit for the weak-spirited, the weak-minded and the con artist.
Just what is it that is so private about privacy, or at least, what is so very private about the kind of privacy that “privacy advocates” advocate?
Privacy advocates contend that Christians and Jews have no right to express and defend their religious and moral convictions in the classroom, in the work place or at the seat of government, because faith is sacred, and thus private.
Public discussion, public debate, public teaching, pubic endorsement, therefore, are public no-no’s, being public infringements upon the inalienable rights of those with contrary religious views.
But where’s the logic?
Christianity Is by Nature Public
Prohibiting public religious speech under the guise of “protecting one’s private religious rights” ignores the very public, evangelical nature of religion – especially of Christianity.
It is oxymoronic to tell a Christian, “You’re free, but shut up!”
Such legal chicanery is reminiscent of the ‘neutral’ policy of the rulers and scribes of Peter and John’s day, who, after a notable public miracle led to the conversion of thousands, thought it politically wise not to publicly deny the miracle – “but that it spread no further among the people,” they commanded Peter and John (behind closed doors) to speak no more of the name by which the healing took place.
That is to say, “You are free to heal lame men in the name of Jesus Christ – but don’t you dare say his name in the process or we’ll throw you in prison!” Which, in fact, the rulers and scribes later did.
One has to wonder who is fooling whom? Can we really protect “private” beliefs through public silence? Christ’s charge to his apostles was to
“go ye unto all the world and preach the gospel unto every creature” (1)
“prophesy … before many peoples, and nations, and tongues, and kings” (2)
“be brought before rulers and kings for my sake, for a testimony against them” (3)
“be ready always to give an answer with meekness and fear to every man that asketh of you a reason for the hope that is in you. ” (4)
My faith’s baptismal charge includes the very public invitation to “mourn with those that mourn; yea, and comfort those that stand in need of comfort, and to stand as witnesses of God at all times and in all things, and in all places that ye may be in, even until death. ” (5)
Standing as a witness of God at all times and in all things, and in all places, does not mean to the devout Christian that he ought to share the message of Christianity only with his or her spouse and children, or only with his or her fellow church members in the security, sometimes artificiality, of a church setting. It means that he or she live the gospel and share the gospel 24/7/365.
To this writer it means that I try to be honest, that I try to stand up for fixed moral principles, and that I try to imbue my writing with moral and religious persuasion.
To this researcher, it means that I look for the hand of God in historical events, that I look for the great morals to be learned from heroes great and small, that I be not afraid to see both good and evil in the works that I evaluate, and that I boldly share my conclusions with others.
To this citizen, it means that when my government endeavors to make lawful that which looks to shred the moral fabric that holds my nation, my church and my family together, I lobby against it.
The teachings of Christianity and the promptings of my conscience become the measuring stick by which I judge all things – and I claim that my right.
Who should stay my hand or your hand in this, the defense of what our mind, our soul and our God say is right? The truth is, so long as our faith does not cross the line and physically force someone else to believe as we believe, and worship as we worship, then our right is inalienable – and Big Brother and his socialist and humanist minions had better keep his hands off.
The bottom line, standing as a witness of God at all times and in all things, and in all places, does not mean that Christians ought to be forced to hide their light under a bushel, to selfishly treasure the treasure that they have.
Christianity is not a private affair, and its foes who dwell in the high and holy Cathedral of Privacy should stop trying to pretend that it is.
Steve Farrell
Monday, Feb. 10, 2003
Nowadays, in order to justify each and every sin under the sun, each and every assault upon the moral fiber of a community or a nation – one approach fits all – the ne'er-do-well need only say the magic word “privacy,” then sit back, relax and smile while his or her “high and holy” foes – that is, any of us who dare to believe that “morality matters,” that “unbridled license is incompatible with liberty,” that “unalienable rights come from God” – are forced to run and hide for cover.
No forethought, no logic, no knowledge, no intelligence are required – the ne'er-do-well speaks the magic word, perhaps the only word he or she knows, and wins the debate. End of argument.
But hold on.
It just may be that the “sacred shield of privacy” is nothing more than a scam – nothing less than a false “religious” and “political” premise – a sort of catchall bit of nonsense fit for the weak-spirited, the weak-minded and the con artist.
Just what is it that is so private about privacy, or at least, what is so very private about the kind of privacy that “privacy advocates” advocate?
Privacy advocates contend that Christians and Jews have no right to express and defend their religious and moral convictions in the classroom, in the work place or at the seat of government, because faith is sacred, and thus private.
Public discussion, public debate, public teaching, pubic endorsement, therefore, are public no-no’s, being public infringements upon the inalienable rights of those with contrary religious views.
But where’s the logic?
Christianity Is by Nature Public
Prohibiting public religious speech under the guise of “protecting one’s private religious rights” ignores the very public, evangelical nature of religion – especially of Christianity.
It is oxymoronic to tell a Christian, “You’re free, but shut up!”
Such legal chicanery is reminiscent of the ‘neutral’ policy of the rulers and scribes of Peter and John’s day, who, after a notable public miracle led to the conversion of thousands, thought it politically wise not to publicly deny the miracle – “but that it spread no further among the people,” they commanded Peter and John (behind closed doors) to speak no more of the name by which the healing took place.
That is to say, “You are free to heal lame men in the name of Jesus Christ – but don’t you dare say his name in the process or we’ll throw you in prison!” Which, in fact, the rulers and scribes later did.
One has to wonder who is fooling whom? Can we really protect “private” beliefs through public silence? Christ’s charge to his apostles was to
“go ye unto all the world and preach the gospel unto every creature” (1)
“prophesy … before many peoples, and nations, and tongues, and kings” (2)
“be brought before rulers and kings for my sake, for a testimony against them” (3)
“be ready always to give an answer with meekness and fear to every man that asketh of you a reason for the hope that is in you. ” (4)
My faith’s baptismal charge includes the very public invitation to “mourn with those that mourn; yea, and comfort those that stand in need of comfort, and to stand as witnesses of God at all times and in all things, and in all places that ye may be in, even until death. ” (5)
Standing as a witness of God at all times and in all things, and in all places, does not mean to the devout Christian that he ought to share the message of Christianity only with his or her spouse and children, or only with his or her fellow church members in the security, sometimes artificiality, of a church setting. It means that he or she live the gospel and share the gospel 24/7/365.
To this writer it means that I try to be honest, that I try to stand up for fixed moral principles, and that I try to imbue my writing with moral and religious persuasion.
To this researcher, it means that I look for the hand of God in historical events, that I look for the great morals to be learned from heroes great and small, that I be not afraid to see both good and evil in the works that I evaluate, and that I boldly share my conclusions with others.
To this citizen, it means that when my government endeavors to make lawful that which looks to shred the moral fabric that holds my nation, my church and my family together, I lobby against it.
The teachings of Christianity and the promptings of my conscience become the measuring stick by which I judge all things – and I claim that my right.
Who should stay my hand or your hand in this, the defense of what our mind, our soul and our God say is right? The truth is, so long as our faith does not cross the line and physically force someone else to believe as we believe, and worship as we worship, then our right is inalienable – and Big Brother and his socialist and humanist minions had better keep his hands off.
The bottom line, standing as a witness of God at all times and in all things, and in all places, does not mean that Christians ought to be forced to hide their light under a bushel, to selfishly treasure the treasure that they have.
Christianity is not a private affair, and its foes who dwell in the high and holy Cathedral of Privacy should stop trying to pretend that it is.
