|
 From
Frisco's Haight — Ashbury district to Columbia U's campus,
this "hippy" generation cries out against "the
Establish- ment." There must be legitimate criticisms of
specific civil, social and domestic policies and personnel. This
is essential to democratic government. But we are appalled by
irresponsible attacks upon the very idea of orderly
law-orientated ways.
"The
Establishment" has become almost any well-defined
effort to establish and maintain our society which has existed
long enough to mature and to gain the respect of mature people.
If our "mod" counterparts or we "squares"
fit comfortably into a thing it must be a part of
"the Establishment." It may even be criticized for
being a "thing".
These
rebels become obsessed with the desire to overthrow "status
quo." True enough, institutions and practices of long
standing tend to corrode, gather moss, and otherwise need repair
or up dating. They may serve their purpose, or fail it; and need
replacement. Perhaps they should never have existed. But rabble
- rousers rarely offer workable repair or replacement. Their
work is destructive, not constructive. Malcontents, unrealistic
dreamers or "prophets", and little men who could not
qualify for a place to their liking in "the
Establishment" thrive as iconoclasts. The sincere but
misguided "flower-children" are trampled in the march
they initiate to "buck the Establishment".
In
religion there are also those who "buck the
Establishment." (Anguished protests hereby acknowledged!)
I
do not refer to responsible efforts to
|
|
correct abuses in
religious practices, or to replace erroneous doctrines with the
truth of God. Nor do I presume to be the standard of truth I
know that tradition-bound adherents to any error will hasten to
classify their critics as "bucking the Establishment"
— But there is a difference.
The
responsible reformer is energetic, even over-zealous. But he
must "cleanse the temple " and he is specific in his
denunciations. Attacking what he regards as bad, he
avoids ambiguities which run rough-shod over the good. As
a Christian, he relies upon spiritual weapons. (2 Cor. 10:3-5)
If bishops lord it over God's heritage he attacks their ungodly
practice -- not ridiculing "the establishment', of
oversight. If brethren have become "party" minded he
offers spiritual teaching and training to center their lives
upon Christ. He does not make ridiculous statements about the
church being a "non-entity". if brethren have adopted
an incorrect concept of the funds they pool, he seeks to correct
the concept. He does not play with "treasury"
or "elder" — and then cry pitifully, being
"misunderstood. it In brief, if he is mature enough to help
his brethren he is man enough to shave, bathe, and cut the
hippie act.
The
"Watchtower" and like publications are examples of
organized "protests" against ORGANIZED RELIGION !!!
(Note the profuse CAPITAL thrust at THE ESTABLISHMENT!!) Surely
sensible brethren can come up with something better than this.
We might begin by remembering, "What God hath cleansed,
that call not thou common." (Acts 10)
[Previous
Article] [Next
Article]
|
