“The Clone Wars” isn’t just a Star Wars sequel anymore. If Chuck Colson has his way, it will also be the title of the 21st century sequel to the 20th century “Culture Wars.”
That’s because Chuck Colson is worried. He’s worried that the intensity of the Culture Wars has begun to wane and the fronts have started to recede as he and other field marshals of the movement (Pat Robertson, James Dobson, Jerry Falwell, et al.) have begun to age, retire, or pass on. He’s worried that younger generations of Evangelical Christians are interested in a slate of issues other than the pro-inerrancy/anti-abortion/anti-homosexuality trifecta that defined Reagan-era Evangelical conservatism. He’s worried that when his generation of conservative Christians is gone, Christianity will wilt under the influence of liberalism and true faith will wither away.
In short, he’s deeply afraid for the future. And he is equally determined not to let his right-wing theological values succumb to such a bleeding-heart fate. Thus, he has spent the last four years developing a strategy to defy death. Sort of. When the end of his days arrives, he plans to ensure that the Culture Wars will continue by leaving behind spiritual “clones” of himself to hold down the trenches and fight for his brand of Evangelicalism.
I learned of Chuck Colson’s “cloning” aspirations for the first time last week in a Washington Post Lifestyle feature. Now, I am also deeply worried–though not about anything that is driving Colson’s Centurion program. I am deeply worried about the very idea behind the Centurion program. All of us who proclaim Christ would like to see more people profess Christ, and we’re all trying to figure out how “to make disciples of all nations” in a rapidly changing world. The old paradigms for ministry don’t work like they used to, and new paradigms often don’t yet work like the ought to. But whatever the answers are, Colson’s latest offering isn’t among them. It reads more like a Donald Trump take over of the Oprah Book Club than a plan to take on the serious spiritual and moral issues of our time.
Now, don’t get me wrong. I’ve got nothing against Chuck Colson. In fact, I think his work with Prison Fellowship is praiseworthy and nothing short of remarkable (even though he would probably consider me one of the bleeding-heart liberals he’s concerned about.)
But regardless of whether you agree or disagree with Colson’s assessment of the current state of Christianity in general or Evangelicalism in particular, his solution is at least four parts Colson to one part Christ. And to my mind, this sort of self-centered, self-branding approach to religion is much more detrimental to the furtherance of the gospel than any paradigm shift or doctrinal disagreement.
We in the Church should discuss, and even argue about, the meaning of Scripture and what our priorities as disciples ought to be. Rigorous, earnest debate is how we grow, how we help one another come to a fuller understanding of Christ’s teachings, and how we progress down the road of faith. But as soon as it becomes about us–as soon as we insist that our interpretation(s) and understanding(s) of the gospel should be accepted as gospel–we, like the Apostle Peter, detour suddenly and sharply away from the pursuit of heavenly things and rejoin the pack that is chasing after earthly things.
Take the very name of Colson’s would-be “clones”: centurions. Centurions were commanders in the professional Roman army. By definition, then, they are agents of Caesar, not Christ. They take orders from the rulers of this world, defend the imperial interests of this world, and accomplish their tasks with the weapons of this world. Yes, there are a handful of centurions who feature positively (if not prominently) in the New Testament: the one in Matthew 8 who asks Jesus to heal his servant and of whom Jesus says, “Truly, I tell you, in no one in Israel have I found such faith;” the one in Mark 15 who, while watching Jesus breathe His last on the cross, declares, “Truly, this man was the Son of God;” and the one in Acts 10, Cornelius, who summons Simon Peter to his home at the behest of the Holy Spirit. But these centurions are hardly representative of who centurions are historically. As such, the term fails to communicate any Christian meaning except within a specific, Scriptural context. Outside of Matthew, Mark, and Acts the centurion metaphor is not one of servant leadership or heavenly example. It is one of earthly power and conquest. Colson’s choice of words is thus tragically emblematic of his worldly ambitions eclipsing his heavenly intentions.
Even if we tie the centurion metaphor strictly to Scriptural antecedents for sake of argument, however, the very idea of creating a “clone” (regardless of title) is antithetical to the spirit of Jesus’ ministry. Christian spiritual growth is about being molded and made more fully into the image of Christ, not into the image of any saint, apostle, or inspirational leader–no matter how accomplished or admirable they may be. As the Apostle Paul himself reminds the Corinthians: For I have been informed concerning you…that there are quarrels among you. Now I mean this, that each one of you is saying, “I am of Paul,” and “I of Apollos,” and “I of Cephas,” and “I of Christ.” Has Christ been divided ? Paul was not crucified for you, was he? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul ? (1 Corinthians 1.11-13, NRSV). Wanting to be like Chuck–or like Mike for that matter– is not where our aspirations should lie.
Moreover, by seeking to become a “clone” of someone else or to make “clones” of ourselves undermines the work of the Holy Spirit in forming the Church as a dynamic, living extension of the Resurrection. Again, the Apostle Paul: For just as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though many, are one body, so it is with Christ. …17 If the whole body were an eye, where would the hearing be? If the whole body were hearing, where would the sense of smell be? 18 But as it is, God arranged the members in the body, each one of them, as he chose. 19 If all were a single member, where would the body be? 20 As it is, there are many members, yet one body. (1 Corinthians 12.12-20, NRSV).
To envision a church of “clones” is to envision The Borg of Star Trek or Sauron of The Lord of the Rings, not the multi-gifted, multi-faceted Body of Christ called to serve this world.
The saddest and most troubling part of this article, though, is that Prison Fellowship does not receive a single mention outside the reporter’s biographical introduction of Colson. It is possible that Colson’s work with Prison Fellowship was beyond the scope of the reporter’s focus for the article. Or perhaps Colson has already tapped a successor to lead that ministry and the issue is settled. However, given that this piece is about the future Colson would like to see and his desire to remain influential through his “clones” beyond the limits of his earthly life, it would seem to be a topic relevant to the discussion. And yet it is absent–an absence that leaves the glaring impression that, for Colson, the promotion of self (a la Donald Trump) and the propagation of ideological purity (a la neo-con politics) has taken precedence over the ministry needs of prisoners and their families. I sincerely hope I am wrong about that. But that’s exactly what often happens when we confuse earthly things for heavenly things–whether we happen to be a humble fisherman or a cultural titan.
As we continue to openly and actively debate how we can more effectively reach the world for Christ and continue to develop new paradigms for doing so, perhaps one question we need to ask ourselves is why we would look to the Donald Trumps of the world for inspiration to begin with. My guess is it’s because all of us, not just Chuck Colson, are afraid. We’re afraid of what Scripture and prayer–our true sources of inspiration–will tell us, which is the same thing Jesus told Peter: if any want to become My followers, let them deny themselves, and take up their cross and follow Me. For those who want to save their life will lose it, but those who lose their life for My sake and for the sake of the gospel will save it (Mark 8.34-35, NRSV). And that means that what we really need to do is learn how to surrender, when what we’d rather do is valiantly fight and win a war.

A Lesson from the Mountaintop
I wasn’t around in 1963 when Martin Luther King, Jr. told America about a dream he had had. I don’t remember Woolworth’s lunch counters much less sit-ins at those lunch counters. What I know of Dr. King and Civil Rights I have learned primarily from books, teachers, newsreels, and Irish rock stars. Even still, I feel like Dr. King has been with me most of my life. Few people have inspired me more–especially since becoming a pastor. Year after year, I continue to marvel at his ministry and his witness.
I have also long hoped to God that another Martin Luther King, Jr. would emerge from the shadows that have eclipsed the public face of American Christianity in recent years: someone to reclaim Dr. King’s rich prophetic legacy from the pawn brokers and spin doctors of consumer-driven faith; someone to once again say to America, “Be true to what you said on paper”–all of it, not just hand-picked portions of it; someone to lift our spirits while at the same time calling us to repentance. It has taken awhile, but on this weekend which marks the forty-eighth anniversary of his “I Have a Dream” speech and which was supposed to witness the dedication of his memorial on the National Mall,* I have finally realized that my unrequited hope for this second coming is a sure sign that I have failed to grasp one of Dr. King’s most important lessons: that we ourselves have custody of the distortions that exist in our world. We must decide whether to challenge or foster them.
We tend to forget that Dr. King was only 26 years old when Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat in December 1955. He had only just arrived in Montgomery from Boston University with a new wife and a child on the way. “Become conscience of America” was not on his to-do list. He had a congregation to tend, a dissertation to finish, a family to raise and support. When Ralph Abernathy and E. D. Nixon approached him about organizing a boycott, he easily could have said, “What can I possibly do?” as he ticked off the same list of excuses we all carry in our breast pocket. But he didn’t. That choice is what set him on the path to greatness.
I think we prefer Dr. King to be a haloed saint who descended to Alabama directly from heaven full of power and glory because, as long as we perceive him that way, we can justify our own lethargy in confronting the injustices of our contemporary society. We can sit back and wait for another holier-than-me messiah to make things right. In the meantime, then, we can be content to build gated communities, give our backyards an HGTV make-over, or escape to Starbucks.
As we prepare to enshrine Dr. King in the pantheon of our greatest national heroes in Washington, we would do well to remember that the revolution Dr. King led was just that: a revolution. As exceptional as he was, he did not do it alone. Without thousands of ordinary men and women making the same basic choice he did—the choice to stand up for what is right—all the speeches and all the marches would have amounted to little more than stirring words and ceremonial gestures. American apartheid wasn’t overturned because African-Americans stopped riding the bus in Montgomery for a day or two to make a point. It was overturned because they stopped riding the bus for as long as it took to change the system. Week after week after week, those who owned cars gave lifts to their neighbors and formed carpools. Taxi drivers charged reduced fares. Volunteers served as dispatchers to make sure folks had a way to get to work or to school, and everyone agreed to walk if necessary. The community pulled together and shared the sacrifices. And when they succeeded in integrating the city buses, they inspired themselves to continue challenging Jim Crow in other areas of local and national life. The Dream that Dr. King cast was literally carried from Montgomery to Selma to Atlanta to Washington to Memphis, and all points in between, arm in arm and hand in hand.
Today the air is once again thick with talk of change and the need for a new direction toward a better future. The mire that surrounds us is of a different consistency than that which Dr. King and the brave men and women of the Civil Rights movement slogged through, but the way forward remains the same: arm in arm and hand in hand. We will be the ones to make change happen…or not. We will stand up for what is right, and make the sacrifices and form the partnerships…or we won’t. And that means that, nearly half a century after Dr. King’s greatest speech, perhaps the greatest threat to the furtherance of his Dream isn’t congressional gridlock, the national debt, a sagging economy, or any of the other usual suspects. Rather, it may very well be our infatuation with convenience and our ever-growing love affair with the double, half-caff, no whip, made-to-order comfort of our own personal prosperity.
* Hurricane Irene postponed the dedication. A new date has yet to be announced.
Posted by Todd Thomason on August 29, 2011
http://viaxm.com/2011/08/29/a-lesson-from-the-mountaintop/