This is NOT Independence Sunday (reprise)

A popular post from last year, repeated here in light of earlier conversations and updated just a bit for this year:

In some U.S. churches, at least some Methodist churches (and I suspect others), this Sunday’s bulletin will announce that Sunday, July 5 [4], 2009 [2010] is Independence Sunday—perhaps along with something else (like the Fifth [Sixth] Sunday after Pentecost), or perhaps not.

But it is not Independence Sunday, because that liturgical day does not exist, or at least should not exist. “Independence Sunday” is an American invention, an example of American civil religion: the inappropriate Americanizing of Christianity and Christianizing (in some vague, superficial sense) of America.

The misnaming of the Sunday nearest [or, this year, on] July 4 is a theological mistake in at least three specific ways. First, it nationalizes a calendar (the liturgical or church calendar) and a day that belong to the entire Christian church. “The Fifth [Sixth] Sunday after Pentecost” or “The 14th Sunday in Ordinary Time” or simply “The Lord’s Day, July 5 [4], 2009 [2010]” is theologically appropriate because each of these is inclusive, universal, catholic. But “Independence Sunday” is exclusive and parochial. When we come as Christians to worship God, even on the Fourth of July [itself] weekend, we come to celebrate our oneness with people from every nation, tribe, and race, and to recommit to a divine mission that includes all peoples. There may be appropriate ways for Christian individuals and churches to acknowledge their particularity as Americans or Iraquis or Koreans, but hijacking the Christian calendar and liturgy is not one of them.

Second, “Independence Sunday” robs not only the Christian church, but also, and far more importantly, the Lord of the church. It takes the focus of worship off the Triune God who liberated Israel in the Exodus and then came to rescue wayward humanity in the person of Jesus Christ, substituting—however subtly (or not!)—a national deity who is usually thought to have chosen America and poured special blessings on the American people as Americans. Sunday—every Sunday, no exceptions—is the Lord’s day, the day devoted to the adoration of Jesus as Lord and to communion with him [---and for many of us it will be our monthly communion Sunday]. Centering on anything or anyone else negates the very reason for the gathering and transforms it into something else, something alien.

Third, the language of “Independence Sunday” misleads both Christians and non-Christians into thinking that one’s true identity and freedom are given to them by one’s nation state. It will not suffice to say something like “We celebrate our freedom as Americans but also, and more importantly, our freedom from sin because of Jesus.” Why is this insufficient? Because comparing the two trivializes the latter, the one that really matters. Why do these words not make “Independence Day” language in church appropriate? Because the use of “we” in “we celebrate” erroneously suggests that there is something as significant, or almost as significant, about the assembled group’s identity as Americans as there is about its identity as Christians.

The custom of singing songs and offering prayers about peace, justice and similar topics on the Sunday nearest July 4 may be a good thing—if they are appropriately interpreted by the pastor in non-nationalistic and non-militaristic ways. In my experience this is seldom done. (But at least it’s better than blatant nationalism.) A church can do this without either misnaming the Sunday or misfocusing the worship service.

I have not said anything about the use of American flags in church, on “Independence Sunday” or any other time, but for all the reasons noted above, the position I would argue is probably obvious.

At Christmas time I posted that Christmas is not Jesus’ birthday, but this other liturgical error may be far more harmful, at least for Americans. [For 2009: So… Happy Fifth to all! Fifth Sunday after Pentecost, that is.

PS For ideas about celebrating Independence Day (the national holiday), see what Shane Claiborne and others have to say.

10 Responses to “This is NOT Independence Sunday (reprise)”

  1. Bacho says:

    Mike,

    Good post. I wonder if on that Sunday the national flag could be present but dipped in honor of the Ultimate King. It could be a powerful and evocative way of displaying the church’s true allegiance. It would acknowledge that the nation is about to engage in civil symbolic act that does not ultimately carry the same weight for the Church who is shaped by different symbolic acts like worship.

  2. [...] and Theology Michael J. Gorman has an interesting post regarding this Sunday, July 4th titled This is NOT Independence Sunday (reprise).  Take a minute to read and see what you [...]

  3. K. Rex Butts says:

    I am glad to see Christians trying to remind other Christians of this too often overlooked truth. Thanks!

  4. MJG says:

    Bacho,

    I appreciate your desire to create a symbol of true allegiance, but I suspect that using the flag in worship like that would yield so many possible interpretations—mostly bad ones—that it would further the problem.

    Rex—Thanks.

  5. [...] – There have been several discussions regarding the celebration of national holidays during worship gatherings  and the displaying of flags in church buildings. Mike Bird has some thoughts here. Nick Norelli writes a response here. Marc Cortez discusses the subject here. Michael Gorman weighs in here. [...]

  6. [...] Michael Gorman argues that churches should stop referring to this as “Independence Sunday,” as though this actually was a day on the liturgical [...]

  7. MJG says:

    Thanks to all for helping to further this conversation.

  8. Thanks for your post. I wrote something similar to this on a blog I just started with some friends (anglicanposse.com), and I was quite pleased to see someone else writing on this issue.

  9. MJG says:

    Michael,

    I read and appreciated your post. The Colossians text IS a lot like Revelation 7. At the very least it relativizes any and all citizenships. And, in my/our view, much more.

Leave a Reply


google