In recent years, the response to monoculture has been in the form of political activism and legislation. Jonathan Edwards, in Charity and It’s Fruits, proposes a very different response. “A man of a right spirit is not a man of narrow and private views, but is greatly interested and concerned for the good of the community to which he belongs, and particularly of the city or village in which he resides, and for the true welfare of the society of which he is a member. God commanded the Jews that were carried away captive to Babylon, to seek the good of that city, though it was not their native place, but only the city of their captivity. His injunction was (Jer. 29:7), “Seek the peace of the city whither I have caused you to be carried away captives, and pray unto the Lord for it.” And a man of truly Christian spirit will be earnest for the good of his country, and of the place of his residence, and will be disposed to lay himself out for its improvement.”

He went on to say, “And those that are possessed of the spirit of Christian charity are of a more enlarged spirit still; for they are concerned, not only for the thrift of the community, but for the welfare of the Church of God, and of all the people of God individually. Of such a spirit was Moses, the man of God, and therefore he earnestly interceded for God’s visible people, and declared himself ready to die that they might be spared (Exo. 32:11, 32). And of such a spirit was Paul, who was so concerned for the welfare of all, both Jews and Gentiles, that he was willing to become as they were (1 Cor. 9:19-23), if possibly he might save some of them.”

Jonathan Edwards realized that cultural transformation is dependent upon the Gospel of Jesus Christ first transforming the lives of those within that culture. He makes the extremely important point that our concern must not merely stop at the community but must extend to the Church of God and the individual people of God. I love the phrase “true welfare.” Legislation and political protest is not “true welfare.” The true welfare of any community and every individual is Jesus Christ Himself and we must be willing to lay down our lives sacrificially for Him. The fight for Christmas is not fought within the state legislature, on storefront displays, or in roadside nativity scenes. The fight for Christmas is fought within the heart of every individual and it is fought with the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the schemes of the devil. For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places. Therefore take up the whole armor of God, that you may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand firm. Ephesians 6:11-14

The controversy surrounding Christmas is a prime example of the ecumenical monoculture at work. By removing the more blatantly “Christian” symbols surrounding Christmas the resulting, religious strife free, homogeneous culture can peacefully enjoy the holidays.

The fight for Christmas, and the backlash against all things Christian, is merely a symptom of a deeper, older, and more serious problem, the failure to reach America for Christ. This is a result of decades of the embedding of the “American Dream” into Christian culture; thus resulting in the institutionalizing of Christianity. American Christianity is no longer a movement empowered by the Holy Spirit, driven by a passion for Christ, and founded upon the inerrant Word of God.

Modern American Christianity is more like the pharisaic religion that Christ stood against. Its finance committees are driven by business strategy and more concerned with what can be done rather than what must be done. Its preaching is more akin to pop psychology and self-help books than the words of the Sovereign Universal Ruler. Its god is lacking in righteousness, limited power, and blasphemous mockery of the Infinitely Righteous, Immeasurably Beautiful, and Unfathomably Powerful God that IS. This is not true of all Christians in America, not all churches in America, it is however the prevailing norm.

Today I read an Associated Press article entitled; Group fights Wal-Mart on ‘happy holidays’. The article reported, “Controversy over the secularization of Christmas is nothing new, but this year religious groups are publicly taking on retailers who have decided to tone down the religious aspects of the holiday in their store decorations and promotional material.”

The New York Times also ran an article entitled, Good Will Took a Holiday, Whatever You Call It. The New York Times reports; “At a Christmas tree lighting ceremony recently in Manhasset, N.Y., a crowd of 200 gasped at the intemperate words uttered by a public official who was angry at a priest for an invocation the official considered too religious.” Town Supervisor Jon Kaiman is quoted as saying “This is inappropriate, I just want to make it clear that this is in no way a religious ceremony.” In addition, an elementary school in Dodgeville, Wisconsin modified the lyrics of “Silent Night” “to eliminate religious references.”

The fact remains, and will always remain, that Christmas is the celebration of the birth of Jesus Christ and to claim otherwise is simply ludicrous. The advocates of ecumenism want all the trappings of Christmas without having to acknowledge that it represents the birth of THE KING to which every knee will bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every will tongue confess that He is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Now that I have thoroughly profiled the ecumenical monoculture I plan to set forth what a Biblical response to it should be. Once I begin to lay forth a Biblical response to the ecumenical monoculture, my posts will be titled by the verses, which are exposited therein. These posts will be interrupted occasionally by cultural commentary, breaking news, and anything else that I deem of importance. Before I begin addressing a Biblical response to the ecumenical monoculture, I find it necessary to offer an introduction, albeit a lengthy one, to the topic with the following series of posts.

The Danger of the Monoculture: I Timothy 4:15-16

The Threat of the Monoculture: Acts 4:12

The Sin of the Monoculture: Romans 1:18-23

The Reality of the Monoculture: Matthew 7:15-23, II Timothy 4:3, II Peter 2:1-3, and Jude 1:3-4

The Answer to the Monoculture: II Corinthians 10:5, Jude 1:17-25

The Ecumenical Monoculture is Exclusive Part 4

Christianity

“You shall have no other gods before Me.” Exodus 20:3

“I am the LORD; that is my name; my glory I give to no other, nor my praise to carved idols.” Isaiah 42:8

Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” John 14:6

“And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.” Acts 4:12

So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ. Romans 10:17
Biblical Christianity is not, and will never be, tolerated by the ecumenical monoculture. The proponents of the ecumenical monoculture are vigorously opposing the absolute and exclusive truth claim made by Biblical Christianity.

I admit that due to the, anti-Christian, agenda, of the ecumenical monoculture, and rampant drives towards tolerance, in sects of all religions, it is unlikely that the monoculture will come to oppose any who are not conservative or fundamental in their beliefs, namely conservative evangelical Christians. The push towards inclusivism and tolerance can be seen in the following statement made by the Catholic church: “The Church’s relationship with the Muslims. ‘The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day.’” (Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph 841) I find it highly unlikely that any faithful Muslim would agree with that statement. The move towards ecumenism is not limited to Catholicism; the postmodern Sirens are even luring those who would call themselves Christian to make shipwreck of their faith.

Does that sound like tolerance? Is the ecumenical monoculture concerned with establishing or promoting unity among churches or religions? Is the ecumenical monoculture supremely tolerant, as it claims? Or is it venomously intolerant and purposed solely to promote moral relativism? The ecumenical monoculture is not tolerant of other beliefs, as shown by Shanafelt’s statement. Postmodernism is only tolerant of those who believe that truth and God are constructs of the human mind. The monoculture will not tolerate any religious belief system that makes an absolute/exclusive claim. Postmodernism and the ecumenical monoculture are only tolerant of those who compromise their beliefs to comply with the monoculture. By claiming, that universal/absolute truth does not exist Postmodernism makes an exclusive and absolute truth claim.

Postmodernism’s Intolerance of its Own Truth Claim

Self-contradiction appears inherent within the postmodern thought process (Please read “Why should you stand against the ecumenical monoculture? Part 1” for further explanation). Its view of tolerance is no exception to this. If “the limit of tolerance is intolerance (1)” and Postmodernism is intolerant (see “Why should you stand against the ecumenical monoculture? Parts 2-5”) then postmodernism cannot tolerate its own beliefs. Because of its venomous intolerance of ALL exclusive/absolute belief systems postmodernism cannot tolerate its own intolerance. This seems obvious but every day more and more people are being enticed by the sweet songs of tolerance sung by the postmodern Sirens.

(1) Shanafelt, R. (2002). Idols of Our Tribes? Relativism, Truth and Falsity in Ethnographic Fieldwork and Cross-cultural Interaction. Critique of Anthropology, Volume 22, Issue 1, 7-29.