And therein lies the danger – when the wrong fear compels us to embrace the wrong kind of savior. But our souls are anchored elsewhere – where our real Hope awaits within the Veil. We cannot afford to forget that, no matter how discouraged or desperate we become when we consider how to rescue our country.

Once there was a Christian community which loved its Church, its country and its God.  Its members were patriotic and loyal. Indeed, to be a Christian was to be a member of the national community. To serve God was to serve their country and vice-versa.
Flawed as it was, its constitution was one of the most advanced of any Republic in history. More than any other around it, this nation had successfully integrated a significant minority which had become an important part of its community, contributing to its wealth and progress. Compared to the oppression this minority had suffered in the past, their status since the mid-nineteenth century showed what was possible if freedom and equality was extended to everyone.
But a dark side had emerged. After a recent catastrophic war, this country’s standing at home and abroad had taken a serious downturn. The land these Christians were so proud of was no longer the respected leader it had been.  And they became fearful of the future.
Their fears would come to govern their behavior and justify their actions.  No longer were they governed by a fear of God, but by fear of “the other.”
Their government seemed incapable of governing. Factions, left and right, grew more and more hostile to each other as they battled for control. As one historian points out, The language of politics was permeated by metaphors of warfare, the other part was an enemy to be smashed, and struggle, terror and violence became widely accepted as legitimate weapons in the political structure….proceedings degenerated all too often into unseemly shouting matches with each side showing open contempt for the other, and the chair unable to keep order… Mutual fear, mutual recriminations and mutual hatred between the two parties far outweighed any potential purpose they might have had in common.
The language of many Christians became more and more violent as did their behavior.  At one point a “Fighting League” of Christian students was established at every university.  What began politically led to conflicts in the streets. Many Christians feared the growing power of socialists and communists and the implications of their influence on the morality and the churches. Their anxieties grew.
Open gay lifestyles, pornography, and bizarre entertainment alarmed Christian citizens who wanted only the best for their country and a return to the morality of an earlier era. Older Christians felt angry and betrayed by the new cultural trends that openly mocked older traditions, both religious and political.  There was also the growing belief that the new feminism and sexual openness was seriously eroding the traditional family.  Indeed, as historians note, many conservatives perceived a “crisis of masculinity” and were especially incensed at the public campaigns for gay rights.
Democracy as they understood it wasn’t working.  Serious economic problems threatened the middle classes.  In desperation, many Christians were attracted to extreme right-wing groups that promised to restore the country’s greatness, to overturn the inept system, and to respect and nurture Christianity and the traditional family.  A widely-held belief was that a left-wing conspiracy had overthrown their previous leadership to establish a socialist system.   Loyal, patriotic citizens had been stabbed in the back and betrayed.
Street violence, effective use of new media technology, and political intrigue grew.  Some media even undermined the Republic with their sensational exposures of real or imagined wrongdoings of… politicians.  One major media empire had as part of its mission the “constant harping on the iniquities of the Republic… (and) was another factor in weakening (its) legitimacy and convincing people that something else was needed in its stead.   In place of the feeble compromises of…democracy, authors…proclaimed the need for strong leadership, ruthless, uncompromising, hard, willing to strike down the enemies of the nation without compunction. 
To overturn an unjust, inept, unpatriotic, and foreign system would require actions which were extreme but necessary. We must save our country or lose it. This is what God would want. We have no other choice.
And a leader emerged – uncompromising, patriotic, moral and, above all, effective. The fact that he was a political amateur worked in his favor since he was seen as untainted by the corrupt and inept politicians of the Republic.  Here was a leader whose popularity was largely untouched by scandals that he himself generated. Even a violent attempt to overthrow the government was viewed by most of his patriotic Christian followers as unfortunate, but necessary to save the nation.  Although tried and found guilty of treason, his record only enhanced his reputation to his followers.   Christians flocked to his movement.
He was not alone. Judges routinely ruled “selfless patriotism” as mitigating factors in the extremists’ revolt against the State.  In many ways, the legal foundations of the Republic were being slowly undermined by those who did not believe that the current government was “constitutionally anchored.”
Within the national Christian community, politically liberal sentiments were suspect.  Christians associated with Christian communities in other countries were viewed as unpatriotic globalists.  These nationalist Christian leaders rejected anyone who dared to deny the greatness and destiny of their nation.  Influential media reported that more than half the candidates for ordination were followers of the extreme right.  One Christian leader attending a conference reported that there seemed to be more concern for the economy and foreign policy than there was for theological issues.  However, one clear-thinking theologian warned his fellow Christians in a broadcast that a leader like this could gradually become a “misleader,” making an idol of himself and therefore, mocking God.
Loyalty to the leader and his agenda soon became commensurate with loyalty to the nation. Anything less was branded as treason. Those with opposing political views were no longer merely friendly opponents but enemies of the people. It wasn’t long before Christians so embraced the leader and his movement that even the Scriptures were subject to bizarre interpretations based on the leader’s principles.  The racism that had always percolated below the surface soon became the law of the land. Indeed, most Christians did not object to this increasing isolation of vulnerable people.  After all, didn’t they do it to themselves? They have too much influence.  It’s not our problem.   They are “other,” politically and socially, and therefore, the enemy.  They are vermin and have poisoned the blood of the nation.
One pastor and former war veteran, remembering his fellow soldiers who had died in action wrote that, “We had to fight on so that their death should not have been in vain or forgotten.  But what had become of our country? A land of injustice and corruption, subject to the whims of liberal and conservative alike. Then the Party came into power with a program having a moral and religious basis. That’s why I became a member of the movement.” He went on to say that the leader, as opposed to his followers, possessed a deep morality and religion that could change people’s hearts so that the nation could be reconstructed.
The voices that sought to remind Christians that real power lay in suffering and in the weakness of Christ were ignored or silenced. The prophetic calls to return to the pure word of God were replaced by the word of the leader. Christians traded their birthright for the lure of naked political power. The fear of man had become a snare that failed to save their church and nation they loved. And what is saddest of all is that the leader they clung to in desperation shared neither their faith nor their morality. In private moments he despised their Christianity, their morality, and their sheep-like subservience.  Their desperation borne of fear led them to cling to a leader and system that betrayed them in the end. The actions that their fear generated swallowed them and their nation whole.   The reputation of their country never recovered.
Be careful, my dear brothers and sisters in Christ in what you place your hope. Proverbs 29:25 is just as meaningful today as it was in 1933 Germany. Snares do not advertise themselves. As Michael Horton points out in his magnificent book Recovering our Sanity: How the Fear of God Conquers the Fears that Divide Us, the fear of losing cultural, social, and political power often drives a large number of evangelicals to ‘put their trust in princes.’
And therein lies the danger – when the wrong fear compels us to embrace the wrong kind of savior. But our souls are anchored elsewhere – where our real Hope awaits within the Veil. We cannot afford to forget that, no matter how discouraged or desperate we become when we consider how to rescue our country.
Chris Bryans is a member of Northside Presbyterian Church (PCA) and is a retired professor of history from Eastern Florida State College in Melbourne FL.

*Whether one agrees with Bonhoeffer’s neo-orthodox theology is not the point here.  What is clear is that he was so very convinced that Christ’s commands were not optional.  He possessed an extraordinary command of Scripture as well as its applications. This was missing from what had increasingly become a cultural “cut-flower” Christian faith that characterized much of Germany even prior to the Weimar era. Indeed, liberal theology had so poisoned the Reformed doctrine of Scripture that it was easy to infect Christianity with extremism.  Biblical illiteracy abounded within the average church.  How else could so many believe the view that the Old Testament was a “Jewish book” that needed to be purged from Christianity?  How else could the German Christian movement reconstruct a Christ who had more in common with Norse heroic myths than the New Testament?  I remember hearing Bonhoeffer’s friend, disciple, and his greatest biographer discuss how very strange it was when Bonhoeffer had his seminary students engage in what we would call today “a quiet time” on the seminary grounds.  It wasn’t a part of their church experience.
Sources:
Eberhard Bethge Dietrich Bonhoeffer Man of Vision, Man of Courage (Harper and Rowe, 1977).
Georg Denzler & Volker Fabricius (Herausgeber) Die Kirchen im Dritten Reich Band 1 & 2 Fischer Verlag 1988.
Richard J. Evans The Coming of the Third Reich The Penguin Press, 2003.
Heinz Hürten (Herausgeber) Deutsche Geschichte in Quellen und Darstellung Band 9 Weimarer Republik und Drittes Reich 1918-1945 Reklam, 1995.
Related Posts:

Both Esau and Jacob were members of the covenant family of God, it was not as if these two men were from different parts of the world, they were literally crib brothers. Of course we have to remember that Jacob was obviously not without his own sin. The scheme drawn up by Rebekah is something else, but irrelevant to the situation. Esau is responsible for himself. In one sense it’s not Jacob’s fault that Esau takes the route of allowing the trial of the moment to change the direction of his life. That comes precisely because Esau had allowed the bitterness of his own heart to make everything be seen through that lens of rage and animosity. 

Whenever the Apostle Paul lists out the “vices” in Ephesians or in another one of his letters a particular item which always strikes me as being in some sense the most personally damaging to the soul of an individual is without a doubt: bitterness. Yet the place where it really stands out to me when I am reading God’s word can be found in Paul’s sermon in the epistle to the Hebrews.
There in chapter twelve he says:
Pursue peace with all people, and holiness, without which no one will see the Lord: looking carefully lest anyone fall short of the grace of God; lest any root of bitterness springing up cause trouble, and by this many become defiled; lest there be any fornicator or profane person like Esau, who for one morsel of food sold his birthright.
It’s instructive that when Paul is looking for an example to help the people understand what he is getting on about here he goes back almost to the beginning of the history of Israel, the brother of Israel himself. Those familiar with the story know that Esau was hungry. Ironically the great hunter had no food to eat. So, what does he do? Entreat his brother to make him some stew and the price, which in hindsight is more precious than gold, is something which he felt like he did not need at the time. Take a second and think for a moment why this would be an image a Bible writer like Paul would turn to… For it really shouldn’t take much time to see the wisdom here. What Esau did was not just silly in the moment, it was self-defeating in the long term. His hatred of God manifested itself in the way he considered Jacob, and himself.
The larger context of what the apostle is writing about here is the way the believer deals with suffering in the Christian life. His particular concern is that the lover of Jesus recognize that to be embittered towards those who are persecuting them only gives the tormentor power over them. While it is true to say that we are to rise above pettiness that is definitely one of those truths that is more easily said than done. Our minds are not necessarily drawn towards grace as people we are in conflict with are engaged in doing the kinds of things that really get our goat. Of course, no one reading this in America is really going through any kind of real persecution.
Read More
Related Posts:

One former moderator of the General Assembly characterized this year as the “Pitchfork Assembly,” because of the outrage in the pews related to some of the events of recent years in the PCA. This is both cause for prayers of thanksgiving (i.e. that people in the churches are willing to sacrifice to send their elders to the Assembly and that God has raised up elders willing to do the work of the church) and prayers for peace (i.e. that God will pour out a spirit of humility and grace even as we contend for the faith once for all delivered to the saints so we may be united in truth and love).

This document was prepared for the congregation of First Presbyterian Church in Fort Oglethorpe, Georgia.
As I prepare to attend the Assembly’s meeting in Birmingham this year, I want to apprise you of some of the matters that will be considered so you can be better prepared to pray for me and the other elders as we seek to do the work Christ has called us to do in this Assembly. From our congregation two of our elders have been elected to represent the Session.
If you’d like a quick review of the acts and deliverances of last year’s General Assembly as well as wider context, the preview and report from last year are on the church website: www.fpfo.org/gar.
I. The Year in Review
A lot has happened since last year’s PCA General Assembly in Saint Louis both in the life of the nation of our exile as well as within this small part of Christ’s Kingdom, the PCA. A few items will help set the context for this year’s Assembly and will loom large over it.
A. The Failure to Ratify Overtures 23 and 37
Overtures 23 and 37 were intended to provide further clarity on what it means for officers of the PCA to be above reproach. The amendments would have required Presbyteries and Sessions to examine officer candidates to prevent those who are harboring scandalous sins (e.g. racism, abuse, homosexuality) or maintaining an identity unbecoming of someone in union with Christ (e.g. “Gay Christian”) from being ordained in the PCA.
While a clear majority of the presbyteries voted to ratify the two overtures (63% for O23 and 55% for O37), they fell short of the 67% threshold required for ratification. I discuss more of what this means in this article and why we should be disappointed and concerned by the failure of ratification, but nonetheless I do not think it is reason to give up on the PCA.
B. The Apocalypse of the National Partnership
Last Fall someone released several files containing nine years’ worth of correspondence from a secretive society of elders (mostly teaching elders) within the PCA known as the National Partnership. The files reveal the goals of a more progressive wing of the Assembly and how they have attempted to dilute the PCA’s commitment to Presbyterian distinctives and pave the way for unordained people in leadership by allowing them on permanent committees currently limited only to elders and (in a few cases) deacons.
In November 2021 the Session produced a report examining the activity of the National Partnership; it is available here. If you’d like to read the correspondence that has been made public, you can do so here.
The files also revealed voting guides and attempts to ensure members of the National Partnership were elected to committees of Presbyteries and General Assembly. They also contained tips for newer elders and even a schedule to help their members know when to “SCHEDULE YOUR DRINKING” and when they needed to “be on the floor for those votes” during General Assembly.
The unveiling of these clandestine activities shocked and scandalized many within the denomination so much so that this year’s Assembly is anticipated to be the largest one yet as elders from small churches sacrifice to come out and contend for Christ’s bride against those who seek to weaken our commitment to the Standards.
C. The Denial and Sustaining of Complaints Against Missouri Presbytery (MoP)
As a result of public comments made by “gay pastor in the Presbyterian Church in America” TE Greg Johnson and the Session of Memorial Presbyterian Church (MPC) related to “Revoice 18,” a pair of complaints by TE Ryan Speck were filed against MoP for the way it handled the investigations of both TE Johnson and the Session of MPC. In the complaints, TE Speck argued MoP should have concluded there was a “strong presumption of guilt” regarding TE Johnson for his activities and that MoP should have concluded MPC erred seriously in hosting the Revoice conference.
The Standing Judicial Commission (SJC) denied TE Speck’s complaint (Speck 2) regarding the way MoP investigated TE Johnson’s public statements. This led TE Johnson to claim he was exonerated by the ‘supreme court’ of the PCA. However, TE Johnson was never on trial; only the procedure observed by MoP was assessed by the SJC and only his statements prior to 2020. Additionally, SJC members noted the dangerous way in which TE Johnson has been speaking and writing since that time and strongly cautioned against his “tone-deafness.”
The SJC sustained crucial aspects of TE Speck’s complaint (Speck 1) related to MoP’s investigation of the MPC Session. This will require MoP to conduct a proper investigation regarding the activities of MPC. More on this matter below.
II. Domestic Abuse & Sexual Assault (DASA) Committee
After three years and approximately $30,000, the DASA committee produced a 220-page report aimed to help PCA session and presbyteries faithfully minister to those who are victims of various forms of abuse. Additionally the report offers advice regarding procedures to prevent abuse from taking place within the churches of the PCA.
There are numerous helpful pieces of advice within the report. TE George Sayour has written a helpful analysis, which I commend to you. The report should be received and the committee dismissed at this year’s Assembly.
III. Business of the 49th General Assembly
A. Nominations Committee (NC)
The NC is comprised of a representative from each of the 88 Presbyteries in the PCA. Each year the NC presents a report of recommended elders to staff the permanent committees overseeing the agencies of the PCA as well as the SJC. In addition to candidates from the NC, floor nominees are also permitted.
Read More
Related Posts: