Tags
Related Posts
Share This
Paralyzed by toleration
There is great fear involved with professing absolute principles as truth, as it often results in public reprimand for “intolerance” or “bigotry.” These are two of the most treasonous terms in Canadian society, and one who uses them risks being malignly portrayed as “un-Canadian.” Christians are now the most frequent benefactors of these labels and, in their bid for survival, they must make a decision: are they going to silently detach from society, or risk and accept accusations of intolerance and bigotry?
Tolerance today means there should be no value that possesses greater inherent worth than another. Since modern toleration is dependent on individual freedom and equality, values can’t be denigrated under a regime where relativism reigns; however, with Christ’s life as a guide, Christians have a duty to offend this regime by offering truth.
Todd Pettigrew’s article “The end of the religious university?” in Macleans: On Campus January 25, demonstrates what could happen if Christians are apathetic; their claim to existence within the public realm can be denied. They will not be tolerated.
How to react as Christians can be governed by the path Christ set before us. Christ was a radical. When He walked the earth, He opposed cultural norms through challenging religious leaders and embracing the untouchables. He did not mould to the customs of the time, nor did he abandon culture altogether: he transformed it. Public condemnation did not inhibit Christ’s quest for justice, as he willingly laid His life down to further this pursuit.
As Christian citizens, we have a duty to both our regime and our Creator; this duty calls for the protection of justice without fear of prejudice in the name of the Father and the nation. If paralyzed by fear, Christians condemn their culture to absolute relativism — a path divergent from absolute justice. In addition, the existence of the Church is jeopardized when it cannot exercise freedom in its institutions. Therefore, citizens cannot afford to be apathetic and must be empowered through Christ’s example to rise above the muzzle of toleration and transform culture.
This article highlights exactly why so many people are losing their faith.
First of all, the way you have frames this issue is strange, and for the purpose of supporting your point. You have defined tolerance as all views being equal. Well, that is not the case; if you feel you have to tolerate someone or something obviously you already feel that your viewpoint is superior (or there would be no need to ‘tolerate’). So when you move from the abandonment of toelration, which already implies a self righteousness underlying it, you move into the territory of active discrimination and disrespect. And that is where society (which you imply is some big, bad monster “out there”) pushes back.
Let me illustrate this with an example that you could perhaps understand a bit better. An analogy…. Someone of another religion feels you are an infidel for eating pork. They truly believe it offends god and that you are going to hell for it. Any children you raise to eat pork are too. Any friends that you share a pulled pork sandwhich with… also hell bound. Now,imagine this person truly believes this, and writes a similar article. This article berrates the fact that they are feeling paralyzed by having to tolerate this pork eating behaviour without being able to actively stand up and declare all such people infidels, deny them work, housing, marriage rights… HOW UNFAIR.
Reality check- we live in a multicultural society, and EVERYONE thinks that they have the truth. They really do. Ask anyone.. the KNOW. All religions with different gods would also declare that they have an obligation to give TRUTH to society. Those truths clash, so tolerance is born as an alternative to fighting and brutality on the streets. Tolerance is a pretty good middle ground.
If you are worried about not being abot to preach openly about your beliefs without being called a bigot, why don’t you just try not being a bigot. This can be done by applying all of your beliefs ONLY to yourself and others who BELIEVE them. Just as you would not want someone telling you day in and day out that you could not work for them becuase you eat pork, you are going to hell because you eat pork, others don’t want you commenting on their status if they divorce, get gay-married, or have sex out of wedlock. They may not even believe (gasp) that these things are wrong in their own religion.
The best way to go about applying morals without offending people is to use I statements: “I don’t plan on getting gay-married because I, as a christian who favors the old testament, dont believe in it”. Or, “I don’t plan on getting divorced, no matter what, because I don’t believe that is right”. I phrases are great – and then you are free to apply you rules to yourself.
I do wonder though what is so appealing to Christians that they WANT the right to offend others by stating over and over again their perceptions of the truth to those who have very very different views. It’s easier to look out there and judge society then to take a good hard look at yourself, do a moral inventory, and start the lifelong journey and full focus required to live up to your own standards. Truly live up to them, not just speak them to others so you appear to be doing so…
Hear hear! Tolerance and acceptance are NOT the same thing, and if we as christians are going to start feeling paralysed by even being tolerant, then what? What are you advocating then?
I am not about to participate in intolerance. It’s quite simple too… pull words from the bible before and after Jesus died, but Jesus NEVER advocated for intolerance. Never. Follow his example and worry about the plank in your own eye before worrying about how your ability to point out planks in the eyes of others is being prohibited by society. It sounds like that is a good thing actually. It will eventually force you to be a better Christian.
Yes, we should remember what tolerance actually means. If you are tolerating something, you already believe your viewpoint is better. That is a good point. I think this author is improperly equating acceptance with tolerance. Or perhaps his qualm is with not feeling free to offend non-believers by espousing his views to them. People have different takes on evangelism, but I don’t think it is a good practice. Apply your beliefs to yourself- it is a full time job that should require most of your focus and energy. if we stopped focusing on others so much, I think Christianity would sound far less hyprocritical to others than it does in present society. Christians (some at least) spend disproportionate amounts of time, even class time, talking about what is wrong with “society” out there, and our obligation to fix it… we really ought to turn the focus of applying our own morals to ourselves. If we could get that done correctly and honestly, we’d make a difference by example. And, maybe the correct word should not be bigot… but if you are finger pointing and judging others, you are not following the words of Christ. None of us are God, so we should stop speaking for God. God has spoken, and has been very clear that the judging is to be left to him, and we are to love one another. Everytime you deny this rule, you overstep your bounds and are acting like God. As for evangelizing – why would a non-receptive audience want that. Most people can read, and most know where to find a bible. If they want to learn about Christianity, they will. If they want to believe it, they will, and then they too can apply those beliefs to themselves. Your faith is weak if tolerating those who do not believe what you do it a huge task. It shouldn’t bother you. You are not them, you do not control them, your fate is yours, and theirs is theirs.