Friday, October 9, 2009

The Cross Controversy

Here we go again. The cross is in the news because the Supreme Court is taking another look at public display of religious symbols. In case you haven't caught this appearance, it stems from a lower court case involving a WWI memorial in the Mojave desert. Back in the 1930's some veterans erected the cross on a piece of public land. Recently, a park employee sued to get it removed because, you guessed it, it violates the church/state no-contact rule. At least that is what the ACLU is claiming on behalf of their client. (How did I know the ACLU was going to come up in this?)

I understand that if a cross appears on a steeple, the building underneath is expected to be a church (though not always true.) Yet if you are driving down a country road almost anywhere in the western hemisphere and see a plot of ground populated by crosses, you don't think religion, you think graveyard. What would a child in our culture use to mark that special spot in the backyard where the dear, departed goldfish was laid to rest if not a cross?


Still, even though the cross has devolved into a purely secular symbol when it comes to graves, the ACLU wants to have it banned in public places. Shouldn't they have the same concern for rainbows? The bow in the clouds is a significant Biblical symbol. For that matter, shouldn't the secular radicals be opposed to all forms of written communication? The Bible is a written revelation from God. Writing has been used for millenia as a part of religious training and ceremony. Will the ACLU soon be taking up a case against written words?


Okay, that's silly. (Isn't it?) There is something special about the cross as a symbol. The New Testament teaches that it will be a stumbling block to those who don't believe what it stands for. It represents an unmatched turning point in history. All of human endeavor looks either forward or back to the cross of Calvary. This is true whether or not each individual human recognizes the truth of the matter. It should not surprise thoughtful believers that the enemy would take special aim at this most critical symbol.


Lest you think this only effects crosses on public land, think again. Are you aware that when candidate Barak Obama spoke at a religious school, he asked that the cross behind the podium be removed or covered? He didn't mind appearing at a religious institution, but he refused to be seen standing beneath a cross. Were I the head of that school, I would have declined to host the candidate under those conditions. (The school in question acquiesced.)


Worst of all, many of this country's most liberal churches are removing the crosses from their buildings, outside and in. It is offensive, they claim. They are right. See the words of Jesus. It is supposed to be offensive. (Sorry, any PC advocates out there.) Sadder still, many less than liberal churches stopped preaching the cross quite some time ago. The message of the cross doesn't attract the seekers like Starbucks and homey devotional talks.


Yet Jesus was clear on this issue: "Take up your cross and follow me." One does not take up a cross to attend a comfortable social event. The cross to which Jesus referred was a device of torture and death. "Die to yourself, if you would live for me," was Jesus meaning. We desperately need that message to be preached in this society. The battle over the cross in the Mojave is really the continuing cosmic combat over the cross of Calvary. Take up your cross -- do your part in the battle -- where and when you find yourself called into service.

No comments:

Post a Comment