Saint Monica of Hippo occupies a unique status in the pages of history: she is the patron saint of married women, patience, mothers and abuse victims and the mother of one of the most important figures in Western Christianity, Saint Augustine. She was born at Tagaste, what is now known as Souk Arras, Algeria in 332 and is of Berber descent. She was brought up as a Christian by devout parents but was married off at an early age to a pagan official in North Africa named Patricius, who was adulterous, dissolute, and possessed a violent temper. Her meek ways and daily prayers annoyed him but he respected her.

His mother lived with them and was equally difficult, and because of that, her life was not easy, but with daily prayers, gentleness, and patience was able to convert her husband and mother-in-law to Christianity, although it took thirty years . After the death of her husband, a year after he converted to Christianity, she decided to never marry again. She was an example to the wives and mothers of Tagaste because of her sweet disposition and strength of character and often told them to curb their tongues instead of arguing with their husbands. She bore three children, Augustine, Navigius, and Perpetua and although Navigius and Perpetua joined the religious life, Augustine proved to be more difficult.

Although Monica made sure that Augustine received rigorous religious training during his boyhood, she had to cope with the disappointment of seeing him later scorn all religion and live a life of disrepute. Once again with prayers and patience, even thought it took seventeen years, several mistresses, and much debauchery, Augustine was baptized by Saint Ambrose in 387 and because a famous figurehead in the rise of Christianity. She died that same year, at the age of fifty-six having achieved her life's desire.

An ‘ism’ – from favouritism to feminism or from agnosticism to atheism is any word that shares this ending. We use it to refer to a distinct activity, but more often to beliefs connected with the word which have a specialised content. Hence ‘Calvinism’, and as it’s still very misunderstood by Christians who think it is against the gospel of Christ, we must take a closer look.

· RICH AND WONDERFUL

This brief overview will focus on John’s Gospel. And while you may think I am a Calvinist, I came to see either similar or the same beliefs as John Calvin, not because I ever read his writings in great detail and followed them, but rather because I have read the same writings that he read – the Christian Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments and discovered there rich and wonderful truths.

But first, let’s admit some ideas thought to be Calvinism are rather topsy-turvy; such as you must not make a free offer of the gospel to all people, but only to God’s elect, or that God drags people into his kingdom against their will, and leaves others who seriously desire to enter, outside. Let’s leave these muddled ideas aside, and instead search the Scriptures.

· LIFE-GIVING

In John’s Gospel we find that all who believe in the Son of God ‘who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God’ (Jn. 1:12-13). Here we find that those who have placed their trust in God’s Son become the children of God, and that their life-giving birth into God’s family is the Father’s will.

Later Jesus teaches Nicodemus, a prominent Jewish teacher, an unsettling truth, that even though he was deeply religious, ‘he cannot enter the kingdom of God’ (3:5) without a new birth; he ‘must be born again’ (3:7). Jesus then explains how the actions and working of the Spirit of God is not at man’s whim or call; indeed ‘you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit’ (3:8). This is a vital truth – we do not know!

· BOUNDLESS LOVE

We then see the wide outpouring of the Father’s love and as long before, Moses had raised a bronze serpent in the wilderness, when all who looked to it were saved from death, ‘so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in him may have eternal life. For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life’ (33:14-16). Here is the revelation of the amazing love of God for a world fallen into dark moral rebellion, and the freeness of the ‘whosoever believes’!

One common belief held by people who mistrust what they take to be Calvinism is that God has given to everyone the ability to believe the gospel and be saved, and that God foresees all who choose to put their faith in Christ and because of their choice then predestines them to eternal life.

· FROM DEATH TO LIFE!

In chapter 5, we see how Jesus teaches about two resurrections; one is final at the last day, but the other is in the here and now. He says that ‘whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgement, but has passed from death to life. Truly, truly, I say to you, and hour is coming and is now here, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live’ (5:24-25). This is vital teaching, and it is explicit. Now is the time – it has arrived, not referring to people in their graves, but when the spiritually dead now hear and live. They have been spiritually resurrected and received eternal life when they hear the voice of the Son of God’s and believe in him. But in the condition of death that they were in, they had no natural ability to hear and believe. So those who ‘hear’ are also those who pass from death to life.

But if they do not naturally posses the ability to ‘hear’, from where does it come? Jesus explains this; ‘All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out’ (6:37), and he reinforces this by ‘No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day. It is written in the Prophets, “And they will all be taught by God.” Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me’ (6:44-45). Now we see that all who hear the voice of God the Father and learn from him come to Christ for salvation. Did you ever pray ‘Lord speak to me through your word’?

· RESPONSIBLE BUT UNABLE

Here, we begin to see a natural inability to come to Christ and believe in him, but instead, a clear effective drawing by God who enlightens our minds and teaches us, and all such who come, will never be turned away – that’s good news! Jesus then explains ‘If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free’ (8:32), and ‘Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is a slave to sin… So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed’ (8:34 & 36). So, we find this inability is part of our natural bondage to sin from which Jesus alone has the power to deliver. People are certainly responsible to God for their sinful rebellion and slavery to sin, and cannot use fatalism as an excuse even though they have no natural free-will ability to free themselves.

Close to the time of Jesus’ death, he prays to his Father, ‘I have manifested your name to the people whom you gave me out of the world. Yours they were, and you gave them to me, and they have kept your word’ (17:6). All who receive eternal life in Christ are the Father’s love gift to the Son.

· GLORIOUS GOSPEL

At times we hear people say ‘it’s not fair if God asks people to repent and believe, if they have no ability to do such things. Surely God will only ask people to do what they have the ability to do.’ But consider that God’s law requires that we love and obey him perfectly, but we all have no such natural ability, and in that very discovery we see our wretched bondage to sin and the spiritual deadness of our own hearts. And it is then that despairing of our own inability we may call upon the Lord, who alone is able to set us free and forgive our sins. And as we begin to grasp how the Lord is rich in mercy, and abundantly willing and able to save us, we find a new appreciation of the glory of Jesus’ finished work upon the cross.

And when we find such a rich and open invitation to enter life in fellowship with God, we may also see we were part of the Father’s love gift to the Son, which he purchased by his own precious blood. Oh, what a great salvation, what a great and glorious gospel that gives all the glory to God and none to our own fallen abilities!

Do you see now that salvation is all of God’s overflowing grace? So, while at times we must make clear distinctions, it’s not always necessary to call these truths ‘Calvinism’, why not just call them ‘biblical Christianity’ or ‘the gospel of the grace of God’?

Deepak Mahtani had everything he ever dreamed of in life: money, a flourishing company, class, and business degrees from Sophia University, Tokyo, Japan, and American College, Switzerland. He followed his family’s tradition of serving the Eastern gods and rested assured that he was living life to the fullest.

Born into a Sindhi Indian family, Mahtani grew up learning the Hindu scriptures, attending their services and participating in the rituals that come along with the faith. His father was a businessman from Pakistan who fled to India because of tribal persecution. He settled in Bombay with a few rupees and started a business. Not long afterward, he got on a cargo ship and relocated 6,000 miles to Indonesia.

He gave birth to his son Deepak and two other siblings in Hong Kong, and four years later, relocated to Japan. They still practiced their Hindu religion and his father always drilled into the heads of his children that “money and success is all that you need to be happy in life.”

He had no idea that hell was around the corner until an unexpected tragedy struck and changed his life for good. His sister came to visit him in Geneva for two weeks. She had an automobile accident and died instantly. It was a very traumatic experience that left him in severe depression for six months. He lost interest in his business, started smoking, was drinking excessively and suicidal until he met a fellow Sindhi Indian in Geneva who was a Christian. This new friend tried to introduce him to his Christian God but Mathani was adamant. His friend encouraged him not to reject the Christian God, but to focus on the man Jesus and His word. Bathani got a Bible and began reading the words of Jesus in red and gradually started believing in the God of the Bible.

At the age of 12, Mahtani lost his mother to kidney disease. Even though he was the baby of the family, he was determined to succeed at all costs. Upon graduation from school, he started an electronics distribution company that he took from zero to $4 million in four years. His wealth came with a luxurious lifestyle: first-class travel, five-star hotels, nice clothes and money to do whatever he wanted. He was fluent in English, French, Spanish, Japanese, and two Indian languages. His busy schedule did not accommodate anything to do with God; he was brutally aggressive about getting what he wanted to the point of pushing people out of the way without blinking an eye. For Mahtani back then, what could be sweeter than the “heaven” he was experiencing on earth?

He had no idea that hell was around the corner until an unexpected tragedy struck and changed his life for good. His sister came to visit him in Geneva for two weeks-then got in a car accident and died instantly. The trauma of her death left him in severe depression for six months. He lost interest in his business, started smoking, was drinking excessively and suicidal until he met a fellow Sindhi Indian in Geneva who was a Christian. This new friend tried to introduce him to his Christian God, but Mahtani was adamant. His friend encouraged him not to reject the Christian God but to focus on the man Jesus and His Word. Mahtani got a Bible and began reading the words of Jesus in red and gradually started believing in the God of the Bible.

After praying without success to other gods for one good night’s sleep, his request was granted by the God of the Bible. That was how he gave his life to Christ. Today, he shares the Gospel all over the world, especially with Hindus and Sikhs and business people. He is actively involved in leadership in his local church and is married to Celia. They have two grown boys–Arun and Sanjay.

When he first converted to Christianity, his family members were unhappy and extremely skeptical. Over time they saw the positive impact of his new-found faith. His act of loving and accepting his family despite their differences in belief caused his older sister and niece to turn to Christianity.

Today, Mahtani is a management training consultant specializing in understanding culture and working with different cultures, especially those of India, Japan, and China. He has coached and trained hundreds of senior managers who are involved in outsourcing to Indian companies and in remote team management around the globe. Most of his clients are FTSE100 and Fortune 500 companies, and he sits on a number of boards.

Apart from his business interests, he is actively involved in a number of charities both in the UK and South Asia that raise funds for health, development, and education in developing countries. He was included in the International Who’s Who of Professionals (2001). He recently participated in writing a book called Sindhi Journeys of Faith–20 stories of Sindhis around the world who have come to know Christ. All 2,000 copies of the book have been distributed, and another reprint is being planned.

“After 20 years of being a follower of Jesus Christ, He has answered my prayers,” Mahtani says, summing up his Christian experience. “Today, I am even more successful than I ever was, not because of money but because of the people I met through my faith as I traveled round the world.”

His message for the world is, “God is a God of love, and Jesus is his means of demonstrating that for each one of his children. He so wants a relationship with each one of us. Don’t think of it as a religion but rather as a love story. Also don’t believe and live the lies that have been spoken over you by the evil one and people who he uses to discourage us.”

Let us lift up Deepak Mahtani in prayer–that the Lord will continue to empower him to reach others with the Good News, in the name of Jesus. Pray that his efforts will not be in vain and unlimited favor will be his portion at all times, in Jesus’ name.

Look, I know I’ve asked for a resoundingly negative reply! And you are freely entitled to make it. And if you do believe that it’s out of touch, you may well have some good reasons for that – none of which, I would necessarily be able to disagree with. But what if your reply went something like this:

“Let’s face it: Christian belief is plainly backward and out of touch. It is ridiculous to believe in ‘special creation’ – and a ‘Fall’ when science has proved a ‘Big Bang’ and evolution. Your faith that rejects scientific ‘proof’ is blind to progress and shuts its eyes to reality. Modern science has disproved religion. Besides, society and lifestyles are clearly evolving for the better!”

Does this sort of direct answer put the Christian on the defensive? – Why should it, we have nothing to hide. Our beliefs are open to any careful scrutiny. But think for a moment how atheistic humanism or secular humanism base their ‘science’ on assumptions which create the impression of having disproved the Bible. And I purposely said ‘create the impression’ because, if in the first place, you accepted all of their assumptions, well, you would expect to agree with their conclusions. There’s nothing very exciting about that!

Maybe it helps to recall that science properly deals with discovering and understanding the nature and processes of the natural world: of physics, biology, time and space, but science has not proven naturalism (i.e. naturalistic philosophy), or atheism, or monism or humanism – they are belief positions, basic assumptions, the preferred choice of those who build their world views upon them.

These philosophies may be assumed by men and women of science, as their preferred starting point, but they are not empirically verifiable – open to proof or disproof by scientific method. So, what I am inviting you to consider is that without biblical theism, a belief in the rational Creator God, we lack a rational basis in the first place, for believing in the understandability of the natural universe. Biblical theism alone has given modern science a meaningful foundation for its central assumption – that objective truth and meaning exist as discoverable information, because God the Creator has so made the natural world, imbedded it with discoverable information and endowed us with the capacity to search and find what is really there! So that discoveries that correlate with the nature of objective reality, are not merely ideas thrown up by my mental chemistry.

In fact, the resurrection of Jesus provides a startling example of the foundations of rational proof. Ultimately, if it cannot be shown by compelling historical evidences, including eyewitness testimony, and the changed course of lives in history that the bodily resurrection of Jesus has taken place, it is extremely doubtful whether anything can be proved by the historical method.

Unless the validity of Christianity is presupposed as final truth – that Jesus was raised from the dead on the basis of ample evidences, we lack any foundation for the idea of proof itself. But with that truth, Christianity has given the world the supreme example of proof, not merely for a ‘natural’ event, but for natural, observable events confirming a supernatural one!

In comparison, secular thought has built its precarious, secular ‘science’ and borrowed some of its key assumptions from biblical theism, but then mixed them inconsistently with its own shaky beliefs. Many people claim to be either atheistic or secular humanists, but they are borrowing powerful assumptions from biblical theism, especially the validity of their thinking, the value of our humanity, and the quest for meaning in an understandable universe.

What about the value of our humanity? Actually, secular lifestyles, in my view, are not progressively developing. There is much to show that large numbers people’s lives are falling apart. There are so many broken relationships, of hurting, worried and deeply anxious and fearful people, who feel exploited and victimised, and who know something has gone wrong. However, all secularism can say, on its own assumptions, is that this is just an accidental sort of ‘normal’ existence, where nothing has any final meaning, including their own beliefs. Who is out of touch?

Rather than keep on the highway to increasing despair, may I appeal to you to take a fresh look at the evidences for Jesus’ resurrection. Read Mark’s or John’s Gospel in the New Testament. Then turn to Jesus as the risen and exalted Lord and trust him as your Saviour – the One created it all, and for whose glory it all exists.

MAHATMA GHANDI was a 20th Century humanitarian and political legend. Once quoted as being multi-religion-al, Gandhi was really a devout Hindu, but he had time for all people from all faiths. He had some insightful suggestions that all Christians could learn from.

E. Stanley Jones, a Christian missionary to India, once asked Gandhi the following question: “How can we make Christianity naturalized in India, not a foreign thing, identified with a foreign government and a foreign people, but a part of the national life of India and contributing its power to India’s uplift?” Fair question. Jones was genuinely trying to learn something new from the man who became a good friend to him.

Gandhi apparently responded to this question without hesitation, offering four pieces of advice; he’s quoted as saying, “First, I would suggest all of you Christians, missionaries and all, must begin to live more like Jesus Christ. Second, practice your religion without adulterating it or toning it down. Third, emphasize love and make it your working force, for love is central in Christianity. Fourth, study the non-Christian religions more sympathetically to find the good that is within them, in order to have a more sympathetic approach to the people.”[1]

This answer is an amazing thing for Christian people to reflect upon. Without being condescending to Hindu’s and other faiths, you could almost see Jesus smile with approval as Gandhi spoke these words. It’s the raw truth.

What do Christians have to offer the world if they can’t adhere to this four-pronged piece of advice? If Christians can’t live like Christ, and they tone down, dilute or disregard Jesus’ teaching, and if they can’t simply love, and show great tolerance and humility in learning about others and their philosophies, to please their God, what on earth can they offer?

There is little to be said further on this topic. Everything that Gandhi said was Biblical. It simply requires humble reflection.

© Copyright 2008, Steven John Wickham.

[1] R.L. Deats, Mahatma Gandhi: Non-violent Liberator; A Biography, (Hyde Park, New York: New City Press, 2005), p. 39.

But for the flagrant indiscretions of the insufferable Stephen, the simple faith of the sect of Nazarenes, along with the “vile superstition” of a resurrected god-man, might have died a natural death in its native Palestine, what with the proverbial stiff-neckedness of the Jews and the encumbering influence of the conservatives of the “circumcision party.”

The persecution of the “Nazarenes” after the martyrdom of Stephen, rather than the conversion of Constantine, was the chief accident of history which placed the resurrection story on a world conquering course. The martyrdom of Stephen and the persecution of the Nazarenes, which followed, forced the exportation of the message from its birthplace of Palestine to Antioch of Syria where in its naive simplicity it ran smack into the world of the Greek mind with its festering discontent with truth simply packaged and once delivered.

The invaluable record of the gentile physician, Luke, bears testimony to the fateful transition, early in the history of the movement, from the simple faith of the sect of Nazarenes to the all-conquering gentile religion of Christianity. Christianity, as we know it today, began with the founding of the first Greek-Gentile church in the great city of Antioch, capital of Syria, the third city of the Roman Empire, only after Alexandria and the city of Rome in importance.

It is not incidental, especially in the context of the politics of the Jerusalem Church, that the “gentilizing” progressives in the early Church would soon converge on Antioch under the leadership of the hellenized Cilician Jew, Paul, who may justifiably be described as the founder of the gentilized version of the religion of the Nazarenes whose adherents came, for the first time, to be known as “Christians” at Antioch of Syria.

And what became of the sect of the Nazarenes with the ascendancy of Christianity?

The initial evangelical offensive of the Nazarenes in Judea appears to have waned in vigor with the onset of the Stephenite persecution. The Jerusalem group was forced by the Antioch group to hand over the baton of Church history. And we witness the transition in the thirteenth chapter of the Book of Acts in which the preceding chapters appear to have deliberately delved on Peter’s evangelizing mission amongst proselytizing gentiles only as a means to preparing the reader for the Pauline mission which would follow.

The attitude of the core leadership of the Jerusalem sect of Nazarenes to the gentile mission could only have been ambivalent. The historic decision of the Jerusalem Council could only have been a cautious concession in the tradition of “Gamalielian” wisdom: “Lest we be found to fight against God.”

Quite apart from the failure of the Nazarenes to convert the Jewish nation to its viewpoint, one may see in the post-Pentecostal re-alignment of forces which brought James the “Lord’s brother” to prominence, the circumstances which bound the sect of Nazarenes to extinction. Why should the succession to leadership of the group have become hereditary? Tradition insists that a cousin of James took over leadership of the group after the martyrdom of James in 62 A.D. What qualified James for leadership of the church besides his blood relationship to the Messiah?

The circumstances which favored the takeover of leadership by James must have been very closely associated with the ascendancy of a conservative group made up, probably, of the Pharisee supporters of Jesus in his lifetime. The ascendancy of this group was to become a significant factor in the failure of the Nazarenes to seize the initiative in the context of the need for change forced by the circumstances of history. The evidence, from the decision of the Jerusalem Council, suggests that James was of a relatively moderate persuasion, even though his headship of the Jerusalem Church had been sponsored by the conservatives of the “circumcision party.”

One cannot but detect evidence of a potentially more effective leadership in the party of moderates led by Peter, and consisting mostly of the original twelve Apostles and their associates. And, indeed, one feels sympathy for the rightful heir to headship of the Nazarenes. Peter was thrust aside by a newly dominant conservative group (being merely an uneducated fisherman?) which sponsored James’ headship, probably only because James was the brother of the Messiah (there is no evidence that he was a better educated man than Peter). We find Peter wedged between two opposing forces in the early church, vacillating in deference to the influential “party of the circumcision” when it was obvious, from his actions, that he would have considered steering the ship of the group’s destiny into the uncharted waters of the gentile world.

The circumstances augured well for that bold and impetuous Cilician Jew, Paul. While Peter vacillated, he grabbed lustily at the opportunity:

“Am I not also an Apostle?”

“Oh, how I wish they’d not only cut off the foreskin, but that they would chop off the entire dammed thing in the process!”

It was left to Paul to assert the independence of the Gentile mission of the Jerusalem conservatives. The sympathies of the moderates gravitated in time to his side. The forces of history favored Paul of Tarsus. The destruction of Jerusalem in A.D.70 by Roman forces and Hadrian’s edict of A.D. 135, which excluded all Jews from Judea and converted Jerusalem into a Greek city (Aelia Capitolina)–complete with pagan theaters and temples–afforded Christianity the opportunity to march on unmindful of its Jewish Nazarene roots. Forsaken of Christianity; forsaken of Judaism, the Nazarenes could only have languished into obscurity and finally extinction. By A.D. 85, the sect of Nazarenes had been excommunicated by the Jewish religious authorities: May the Nazarenes be destroyed suddenly and their names removed from the book of life.

As late as the Fourth Century A.D., small groups of the sect would persist in Syria, looking up to James the “Lord’s brother” as spiritual mentor, even as the gentile church looked up to St. Paul. Christian commentators, forgetful of their roots, would class these groups amongst the heretical sects of Christianity, and there would never be lacking sincere souls in the gentile christian world who would regret that the Jewish nation, in rejecting the Messiah, missed the cart of national salvation.

Perhaps some Christians find it difficult to separate their faith from the building where they worship. For the secular community, too, faith means going to church, the two concepts are bound hand in hand. And while, yes, church as an institution is a vital organ in the life of Christ´s followers, there is such a thing as Christian life beyond church. Christians will say church is the body of Christ. It is. But it is not a physical structure that must always stay in one place. Some of you will arrive at that point where you can carry your church around with you in your heart.

It is important for me not to be misunderstood. I am not describing a scenario where society no longer needs churches with walls, but I am defining a condition of faith which is independent of church ritual. If you have completed your faith walk as described in some of my articles, you will probably have reached a point where you are not inspired to new heights by your local ministry. It is important to understand that if you are bored with your church, that does not necessarily mean there is a problem with your faith.

It may mean that you are now ready for a Christian life beyond church. Jesus life was an evolution, a series of graduations which brought him ever closer to his father. Though he began as a young man visiting the temples and listening to the rabbis preach, he soon became a teacher and a healer, even deigning to heal on the Sabbath, something thought to be quite shocking at the time. From there he became a leader of a group of men, prophesying and guiding them into the future. What use had Jesus for the temples at this point, when he was already on the doorstep of heaven?

Let us remind ourselves that our faith is spirit, it flows, and coalesces, and changes like the mist. While a church with walls, with its years of prayers sanctifying the air, its holy images, its communion and its fellowship, will always succeed in reducing you to tears of repentance and hope, still the time may come when you do not wish for the weekly ritual. If you feel stuck in a routine of pew-warming which is not taking you to the next level, perhaps it is time to take yourself.

My question might suggest that I have some uncertainty about the matter, perhaps some self-doubt and that I am setting out to reassure myself and persuade you that my Christian madness is really a most harmless, innocent sort.

So, while I am using the word ‘madness’ to cover social invective, rather than a reference to a delusional insanity requiring immediate therapeutic intervention, I also need to address the issue of whether biblical Christian beliefs are direct contributors to ill-health, such as heightened states of anxiety, obsessive fears, compulsive moral scruples, or poor interpersonal relationships.

• PERSONALITY DISORDERS

So, are Christians generally detached, morose, introspective, or withdrawn and unhealthy in their outlook and wider social relationships? I suggest there is little doubt that some people with predisposing or underlying conditions have become compulsively or excessively religious, in ways that may have prompted their family to believe they had ‘religious mania’ caused by religious pressure. I incline to the view that if their main driver in life had been racing cars (pun unintended); they would likely have developed a fanatical, obsession with that class of vehicles.

I suggest the diagnosis of ‘religious mania’ meant well, but was flawed because it didn’t get to the underlying illness, even if some vulnerable and delicate minds have been harmed by over-zealous approaches that failed to show them compassionate sensitivity.

• EXTREME

Certainly history shows instances of people claiming to be ‘prophets’ and such like, showing wild behaviour, who gathered followings of deluded fanatics, but invariably these movements remained on the periphery of social life, where they became self-destructive or petered out into resigned oblivion.

However, it is clear that Christianity does not confer immunity to serious personality disorders, some of which may be inherited. As for the word ‘madness’, it is a rather archaic, blunt instrument, but I suggest the common jibe of non-Christians to believers that they must be mad, or nuts, or off their heads, or crazy, to use a few common expressions, are intended to show that Christianity is an insult to modern intelligence, rather than advise on our fitness for the local psychiatric hospital.

• JESUS CHRIST

Christianity is built on the person of Jesus Christ, his life, claims, his death and resurrection and their significance. In other words, the central claims of Christ are God-centred. We are not dealing with social reform or philosophy, but with the living God coming into our humanity, living a perfect life, yielding himself up to death to endure the judicial condemnation due to sinners, who have all broken the divine law. That is, all of us, except Christ himself. Then in triumphant vindication of Jesus’ innocence and flawless moral integrity, God raised him from the dead, into which state he will never again enter.

These are large claims, and the issue is, do they lend themselves to calm enquiry that might vindicate their basis in real events and their reasonable explanations given by eyewitnesses appointed by Christ himself, or do such explanations merely point to Christian beliefs being intellectually absurd?

• REALITY

When I look at the history of the Christian church, and of much Christian activity today, I see the wholesome compassion of Christians and the lengths to which they went to help people. The solace and the peace and joy that were given to so many through the gospel of Christ, leads me to believe that Christians are generally psychologically healthy and well-adjusted. Mind you, such health was not the main goal, but an inevitable gain of being reconciled to God.

With their sins blotted out, they have received eternal life, and genuine purpose and a willingness to serve others. They know God, through Christ, the one Mediator. They know that God has created all of reality for his own glory, and they know the high honour of being loved with a boundless and wholly undeserved love. As God’s redeemed children, they are also honoured to share in the out-working of God’s eternal purpose.

• WRONG FOOT!

All this leads me to believe that far from being mad or even slightly crazed, either as a term of social or intellectual invective, Christians, by and large, are healthy, fair-minded, sensitive to others and neither withdrawn nor morose or socially destructive.

What is more, as to the charge of throwing away our intellects, I would say the boot is squarely on the other foot, and that such reactions are based upon spiritual blindness and false assumptions. Indeed, ‘the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God’ (1 Corinthians 1:18).

The truths about the meaning of Christ’s death have always provoked mocking ridicule from unbelievers; there is nothing new there whatsoever. So we urge all such to carefully check the Christian truth-claims. The intellectually defensible nature of these claims is open to any scrutiny, and we would not wish that anyone ever finds out their marvellous and powerful truths when it is too late.

For then there will be nothing but bleak and everlasting remorse, when they will call ‘to the mountains and rocks, “Fall on us and hide us from the face of him who is seated on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb” ‘ (Revelation 6:16).

Is Christianity, a form of madness? By no means, but the sheer folly of rejecting all that Christ has done to deal with our sin is something to recognise and repudiate. Do make sure you do not have to share in the ultimate folly!

INTRODUCTION

Events of 1789 formed the catalyst that exploded the powder keg of accumulated grievances in France. Indeed “the French Revolution began when Louis XVI called the States-General to provide money for his bankrupt government” (The World Book Encyclopedia, Vol.7, 1991, p.450). The outbreak of the French Revolution in 1789 produced intense hostility to Christianity because “the Roman church was identified by the people with the earlier government of France and suffered greatly” (Harman and Renwick, 1999, p.170). Lefebvre (1947) observed that in a total population of probably twenty three million, there were certainly not more than one hundred thousand priests, monks and nuns, and four hundred thousand nobles. The rest constituted the Third Estate. This secular event shows the contemporary Church the peril that awaits a nation that rejects God. The point of the observation is that although the French Revolution negatively affected Christianity, the attempt at deChristianization was unable to blot the ‘faith of our fathers living still’.

RELIGIOUS BACKGROUND TO THE CONFLICT

According to Noll (2000), “a number of long-festering conditions had prepared the way for this attack on Christianity” (p.247). Paradoxically, some of these were of Christian origin. Centuries earlier, Augustine had declared that man should not have dominion over man, for he is a rational creature made in the image of God. Bellarmine, the Jesuit Cardinal opined that it depended on the consent of the people whether kings, consuls or other magistrates were to be established in authority over them. He further observed that the people should change a kingdom into an aristocracy if there was legitimate cause. Latourette (1953) therefore referred to the French Revolution as “a secularized version of the heavenly city as perceived by Christians” (p.1007).

Before the outbreak of the revolution in France, bad economic, political, social and legal conditions, the successful example of the English Revolution of 1689 and the American Revolution of 1776 were fused by the development of an ideology that rationalized the right of popular revolution against Louis XVI. This ideology was the result of the teachings of the philosophes. While Rousseau and Montesquieu provided the political atmosphere for revolution, Voltaire criticized the church. Cairns (1981) admitted that there were grounds for criticism of the Roman Catholic Church in France. It owned much land and was as responsible as the secular state in the dealings with the people. The public resented various tithes imposed by the church, rigorous repression of religious dissenters, and the non-productive monkish orders. Nichols (1932) suspected that “the greatest cause of the hostility of the church was its enormous wealth and the selfish use made of it” (p.96) since the masses were ruined by cruel taxation at the expense of higher clergy who were generally lazy, luxurious and immoral.

If the 17th century was the age of orthodoxy, the eighteenth was the age of nationalism, a result of cold orthodoxy and scientific developments. The deadly result was that “revelation tended to take the back seat to reason and knowledge gained by sense perception” (Vos, 1960, p.99). When scientists investigated the form of the universe, they formed the idea of a clockwise universe – God’s world was seen as gigantic, well-ordained giant clock.

IMPLICATIONS FOR 18TH CENTURY EUROPE

The French Revolution is viewed as a turning point because it was seen as an important stage in a succession of movements that later spread across the globe to ultimately affect the life of mankind.

It is observed that the effects were especially serious for Christianity since they brought actions which struck at the privileges and status of the Roman Catholic Church. The Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen on August 26 1789 held that “the source of all sovereignty is located in the nation; no body, no individual can exercise authority which does not emanate from it expressly” (Noll, 2000, p.247). The peasants were relieved of a burden which had taken about a twentieth of their produce when tithes were abolished. Consequently, the church was deprived of one of its chief sources of revenue. Church land, which comprised about a fifth of the area of France was confiscated and became the property of the state. In July 1790, the Civil Constitution of the Clergy was enacted by the National Assembly. Among other things, bishops were to be elected by the voters who chose the civil officials and the pope was merely to be notified of their choice. Payment of the clergy by the state was no blessing in disguise since the former was to take an oath of allegiance to the latter. [It must be observed that Spener criticized caesaropapism (doctrine of state control over the church) in his significant publication way back in 1675]. The pope’s power was reduced to that of stating the dogma of the Roman Catholic Church. Indeed “churchmen felt this new act meant secularization of the church and they were violently opposed to it” (Cairns, 1981, p.390).

Unlike the situation in the United States, separation of church and state by the French Revolution and later in the Soviet Union and its sphere of influence was an attempt to totally exterminate the church and to replace it with nationalism. The Roman Catholic Church and the French state were completely separated during the reign of terror of 1793 and 1794 when so many were executed for counter revolutionary activities.

The programme of deChristianization gained momentum when the convention decreed that a commune had the right to renounce the Catholic form of worship. The calendar adopted on October 3 1793 made every tenth day rather than Sunday a day of rest. On November 7, 1793, the Archbishop of Paris appeared before the Convention and “solemnly resigned his Episcopal functions” (Encyclopaedia Britiannica, vol.15, 1989, p.498). A certain Mademoiselle Maillard, an opera dancer, wearing the three colours of the new republic on November 10, 1793 was enthroned as the goddess of Reason upon the high altar of Notre Dame, the Roman Catholic Cathedral of Paris, and there she received the homage of the revolutionists. Notre Dame was rechristened the Temple of Reason. Another step adopted by the Convention was the ordering of churches and parsonages to be used as school houses and poor houses thus effectively preventing public and official worship. The Feasts of Reason both at Paris and elsewhere soon “degenerated into mere orgies, disreputable women playing the part of goddesses and enacting bacchanals in the churches” (Martin, 1877, p.552). The precarious situation during the Reign of Terror forced many Christians to renounce their trust in God. Assessing the situation, Kuiper (1964) pointed out that “it is not possible to say how many Protestants as well as Catholics renounced their faith at this time, but the number was large” (p.310). Although the Convention passed a decree reaffirming the principle of the freedom of worship, the Directory and its regime were basically anti-Christian. The interests of Christianity and European civilization were no longer regarded as two expressions of the same reality. In other words, there was a signal of the demise of Christendom.

Kings initially viewed themselves as God’s representatives on earth and considered all disobedience and rebellion to be sinful. A dangerous feeling of infallibility, considerable serenity and moderation therefore gained control of monarchs. The French Revolution completely repudiated this divine right of kings and “asserted the doctrine that the right to rule came from the people” (The World Book Encyclopedia, vol.5, 1971, p.199). Although Napoleon eventually recognized the Roman Catholic religion as the religion of the great majority of French citizens, he did not make it the established religion. The clergy were to be paid by the state but the property taken from the Roman Church in 1790 was not to be returned to it. In fact, Latourette (1953) observed with brutal truth that Napoleon “regarded the church as an institution which must be recognized and used for his purposes” (p.1011).

The French Revolution and Napoleon brought grave embarrassment to missions. The direct result was a sharp decline of the faith in some geographic frontiers. Few missionaries were sent from Europe and it was difficult to render aid to those already in the field. The Society of Foreign Missions of Paris was compelled to seek headquarters outside of France. The Congregation of the Propagation of the Faith, the bureau through which the Papacy supervised missions abroad, was driven out of Rome. This led to a marked falling off in numbers and morale of the Roman Catholic community in India. Adverse domestic conditions coupled with the handicaps in Europe threatened the extinction of the church in China. The occupation of Spain by Napoleonic armies and the attack on Portugal greatly affected missions in Latin America. Conditions in Russia were also adverse. Parishes lost the right of electing their clergy, a privilege enjoyed since the era of Peter the Great. In a brilliant summary, Noll (2000) commented that “turmoil from the French Revolution and then the wave of national liberation movements fostered by Napoleon further diminished European concern for cross-cultural Christian expansion” (p.274). The revolution greatly affected Lutherans in the German states. War and suffering revealed that skepticism and infidelity were not sufficient to meet the needs of the human spirit and multitudes turned again to religious faith. The old Holy Roman Empire was dissolved in 1806, stimulating the strengthening of independent states like Austria and Prussia. Later in the century, this contributed to the unification of the German people under the leadership of Prussia. Calvinism in Europe also felt the shock of the French Revolution. Skepticism had already weakened this group in France, Switzerland, the German states and the Low Countries. According to Baker (1959), the “political conditions that continued through the Congress of Vienna in 1815 brought disorganization and uncertainty to continental Calvinism” (p.321).

Beyond the dark clouds were shades of silver lining, which several scholars tend to overlook. Perhaps a positive view was that “society was being directed toward the good of the whole community instead of toward the benefit of a tiny elite of kings, nobles and bishops” (Noll, 2000, p.248). Grievous as were the losses suffered by Christianity, “there was ample evidence that the faith was by no means moribund” (Latourette, 1953, p.1012). Indications of vitality (old and new) were evident. These could be found among the Roman Catholics of the eastern churches and in Protestantism. If anything, “secularization of the west was not going to blot out the faith” (Noll, 2000, p.260). Liberal, sectarian and traditionalist responses to the marginalization of European Christendom all had notable vigor though at varying degrees. European thought was skillfully sifted in a new world in order to preserve an intellectually vigorous Christian faith. Groups like the Oxford Movement applied lessons of the early church of the perils of the present. In his stimulating Church History lectures at West Africa Theological Seminary, Lagos, Nigeria, Dr. William Faupel observed that secularization is not inherently evil and argued that there must be a positive interaction, that is, taking the gospel in the mindset of the people.

RELEVANCE TO CONTEMPORARY CHRISTIANITY

Many biblical scholars agreed that the punctuation of papal power in France was a fulfillment of prophecies of Daniel 7 and Revelation 13, which they believed predicted the demise of Roman Catholicism. In this light, Faupel (1996) observed that “the French Revolution became the Rosetta Stone by which all scriptural prophecy could be correlated with the events of human history” (p.92). The lessons for contemporary Christianity are significant.

Righteousness exalts a nation but sin is indeed a reproach to any people. Even today, the Wesleys are credited with saving England from a bloody, political revolution such as befell France. While the common people were as oppressed and deprived as the French, the English people could cope with their oppression because of their faith in God and their adherence to Christian principles. The English revival caused the people to look to God for hope whereas the French had only politicians and atheistic philosophers. The lesson is that God can avert destruction in a nation that acknowledges Him as Saviour. The situation in Sierra Leone in May 2000 is a case in point. God miraculously saved the nation at a time when destruction loomed large. The nation responded to the call to shout ‘Jesus’ at 5:00 p.m. on Monday May 9 2000. God honoured this demonstration of faith and reliance on Him as the only hope. The peaceful elections in May 2002 and August/September 2007 could also be attributed to the redeeming work of God in a land where He is exalted. In like manner, Horton (1993) firmly believed that “God brought about a peaceful change in the protestant land of England, in contrast to the turmoil of the Roman Catholic France” (p.72).

Secondly, the church in any nation should not fraternize with the state to oppress masses since the latter could rebel with frenzied violence. In France, the revolutionists demonstrated that “they could break down barriers if they were driven to desperation” (Rowe, 1931, p.420). Furthermore, ideas that glorify man and sentence God to temporary or permanent exile could be dangerous to any nation. The French Revolution shocked Europe and awakened people to the power of ideas and forces that had become part of western culture. For many, “those ideas and forces connoted the disruptions and destruction that could be expected from unrestrained rationalism” (Manschreck, 1974, 298).

From the study, the researcher realizes that pagan religions and ideas could penetrate areas once dominated by Christianity as a result of the state of the church. During his lectures, Dr. Faupel lamented that an impending doom could await the church in North America because of inherent weakness including racist Christian policies. As Rodney observed (1972), “racism…[was] a set of generalizations and assumptions, which had no scientific bias, but…rationalized in every sphere from theology to biology” (p.99). Contemporary Christianity should realize that it should not be the cold impotent ash (like the church in France before the revolution) but a vibrant church fulfilling the Great Commission. Sumrall (1980) caustically dismissed refusal to spread the gospel as “reckless spiritual homicide” (p.8). The contemporary church must be willing to sacrifice like Christ and the saints of old if the earth should be filled with the glory of God as the waters cover the sea. Houghton (1980) hoped that the contemporary church would be mindful of the fact that “when the church goes astray, denying Him who had bought His people with His precious blood, the Lord [sends] trials and afflictions to correct His unfaithful children” (p.34).

CONCLUSION

The above notwithstanding, the blood of a martyr is seed for the church. After the French Revolution, Christianity, probably to the dismay of the revolutionaries, did not die. Truth (Jesus) was in the grave for three days but eventually resurrected. Persecution, in the history of Christianity, could be regarded as a stepping stone rather than a stumbling block. Fire did not beget cold and impotent ash. After the French Revolution, the church became much more involved in speaking on relevant issues of the day. Christianity was viewed from a different perspective. Evangelism was given a thoughtful consideration. In spite of all the negative effects of the French Revolution, the brand of Christianity that emerged transformed itself by positively interacting with the philosophical mindset of the day.

LIST OF REFERENCES

Baker, Robert A. 1959. A survey of Christian history. Nashville: Broadman Press.

Cairns, Earle E. 1981. Christianity through the centuries: a history of the Christian Church. 2nd ed.

Grand Rapids, Michigan: The Zondervan Corporation.

The Encyclopaedia Britannica. 1989 ed., s.v. “French Revolution”.

Faupel, William. 1996. The everlasting gospel: the significance of eschatology in the development of Pentecostal thought. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.

Harman, A.M. and A.M. Renwick. 1999. The story of the church. 3rd ed. Leicester: Varsity Press.

Horton, Beka. 1993. 1980. Sketches from church history. Pennsylvania: The Banner of Truth.

Kuiper, B.K. 1964. The church in history. Michigan: The National Union of Christian Schools.

Latourette, Kenneth S. 1953. A history of Christianity. New York: Harper and Row Publishers.

Lefebvre, George. 1947. The coming of the French Revolution. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

Lewis, C.S. 1970. God in the dock: essays on theology and ethics. Michigan: William E. Eerdmans Publishing Co.

Manschreck, Clyde L. 1974. A history of Christianity in the world: from persecution to uncertainty.

New York: Prentice Hall.

Martin, Henri. 1877. A popular history of France from the first revolution to the present time, Vol.1.

Philadelphia: The Westminster Press.

Noll, Mark A. 2000. Turning points: decisive moments in the history of Christianity. 2nd ed.

Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic.

Rodney, Walter. 1972. How Europe underdeveloped Africa. London: Bogle L’Ouverture Publications.

Rowe, Henri K. 1931. History of the Christian people. New York: The Macmillan Company.

Sumrall, Lester. 1980. Where was God when pagan religions began? Indiana: LeSEA Publishing Co.

Vos, Howard F. 1960. Highlights of church history. Nebraska: Back to the Bible Publishers.

The World Book Encyclopaedia, 1971 ed., s.v. “Divine rights of kings”.

The World Bank Encyclopaedia, 1971 e.d., s.v. “French Revolution”.

I was about 18 years old when I finally called it quits as I watched a band of militant Muslims praising someone named Allah. I had no idea who Allah was and why these people hated Americans so much at the time.

I kept focusing on the hatred and the more that I focused on the hatred coming from all of the people that they were filming from some country called Iran. All I could think about was how ignorant these people actually were. Who could have brainwashed these people into thinking that Allah was God and Jesus wasn’t?

This problem between Iran and the United States was actually starting to infuriate me. I couldn’t get the thoughts of the young men and women screaming things like,” Death to Americans or that America was the great Satan.” I kept asking myself, why anyone would believe in something that wasn’t true. I just couldn’t seem to get it out of my mind. I had been taught my whole life that Jesus and God were the only gods to believe than and now they’re talking about another God called Allah.

I couldn’t get it out of my mind, until one day it finally dawned on me, that I could be wrong. This thought had never entered my mind before and I really don’t know where it came from, but now that it was here, I needed to answer it. This one particular moment in my life, changed it forever. This one thought, made me realize that I could have also been brainwashed to believe in something that might not be true.

It’s hard to imagine that I’m not a Christian, because I was watching a bunch of Muslims screaming out obscenities against America, but that’s why I changed. If neither Christians nor Muslims can provide me with any proof that their God actually exists, why should I believe either.

We can look back hundreds of years ago and laugh at the things that people actually believed in, but we don’t seem to question the things that we believe in today. I don’t know if you realize this or not, but a hundred years from now there will be plenty of people laughing at the things that we believe and today.