Sometimes we have to choose...

"One can't be a Christian and a nationalist at the same time." (Jean Lasserre, French theologian and acquaintance of Dietrich Bonhoeffer. I just finished reading an excellent biography entitled: "BONHOEFFER")

This statement appears in the context of the Nazi crisis emerging in Europe in the 1930's. However, it strikes me that it approaches a maxim of universal import.

If the love of money is the root of all evil (1 Timothy 6:10), then I'm thinking that nationalism might be a close runner-up.

Excerpting from something I wrote 22 years ago:

Since it has nothing to do with an act of volition, who has the right to be unduly proud or ashamed of his "race" or nationality? (Luke 12:25) Among us we agree, for example, that no one is morally obligated by promises made for him by sponsors when he was "baptized" as an infant. One can be responsible solely for decisions of his own making. How then am I obligated to sing the praises of my nationality to the point where it becomes exclusive and offensive to others? What I owe Caesar is cheerful submission to civil authority and taxes lawfully exacted. But my citizenship is in heaven! An exaggerated spirit of nationalism is the fruit of a narrow perspective. It is arrogant, disrespectful and divisive.

Why do Protestants -particularly of the state/church variety (including Bonhoeffer) - struggle so deeply to identify an essential Christianity, whether outside of or within their own denominational structure, all the while espousing high church doctrine and practices which run counter to what they express verbally?

Start with a State church... add infant baptism as the door of entry into said church... for good measure throw in the phenomenon of pastors licensed and salaried by the State... and then expect a strong, opportune, and unified resistance when a monster like Hitler appears on the horizon? That strikes me as naive.

A nominal Christianity interacting with a cultivated nationalism added up to a major susceptibility to a "German Christian" identity that included the espousal in the Reich church of Hitler's "Aryan paragraph" with all of the horrors that unleashed in subsequent years. It is a wonder that there was a "Confessing Church" at all that attempted to stem the tide.

I am glad and relieved... I feel such freedom... to be identified with a living testimony for Jesus Christ unshackled by denominational churchiness... a testimony that has been here since God the Son came into this world... one that is not contained by denominational structures... one that calmly enjoins all people to be a part of it... not so mysterious... not as elusive as the theologians make it out to be.

Historically, Anabaptists generally appeared to be content as the non-conformist separatists, quietly living and spreading the message of Jesus Christ. Often, they appear in history living out the Gospel's consequent life of love and peace in their spiritual communities... no coercion, no militarism.

Absent also appear to be the mental gyrations to define "church" in a larger context, having lived and breathed it so purely in their own flocks.

Why do we need to see overriding structures or identify larger trends of thought in the overall "Christian community"? When we need to view our Christianity in a national context, measuring its influence at that level, we might make a mistake in interpreting how God is working.

The Holy Spirit has been dreadfully consistent in the way that he works in people's hearts through the Gospel of Jesus Christ. The Spirit of God is not trendy, never in a new phase of revelation, not subject to nationalistic agendas, nor leaning more heavily on a new set of popular shoulders (spiritual or political). And yet, his presence in believers and their respective congregations abounds. To the disappointment of many, he goes about his work in a quieter, more prosaic manner than their tastes require.

What guarantee is there of not seeing a repeat of the grievous errors of a nominal Christianity in our own time? Politically entrenched churches and denominations have vested interests in maintaining the status quo... thus the propensity to accommodate or to postpone clear action just when resistance and withdrawal from worldly systems might be called for. Along with that, it is never hard with the right kind of symbolism and emotional verbiage to manipulate segments of the population.

Remember Frank Zappa and the Mothers of Invention? (it's ok if you don't!) One of their songs was, "It Can't Happen Here". It parodied the smugness of a well-heeled, socially insulated class in America. How do we know if our condescension, smugness and blindness will not come back to bite us and take us down a road to where we never intended to go ... a road that even recent history has warned us about?

Germany, 1930's, Hitler... not the only place and time in history when a nominal Christian community has been threatened by similar derailment and disaster. Yes... sometimes a clear choice has to be made.

To start with, maybe we should consider separating nationalism and an emotion charged patriotism from the crucified and resurrected Christ. They do not need to be tied together. Too often, history has shown the mix to be fatal.  The Gospel survives quite well without the extra baggage.

This is not about being an extremist or "anti"-anything. It is more about desiring to live and breathe Jesus Christ... unshackled, undistorted and unhindered by agendas not entirely His. I hope it is just about a pure zeal for the Lord, a striving for Him and everything that is ours in Him -nothing more, nothing less.

From a Christian standpoint, you can't get any more "centrist" than that.