466 - The Age of Dissent

The Age of Dissent
By E. G. Homrighausen

THE prophetic spirit of dissent is integral to the biblical revelation and to the historic Christian faith it has inspired. Its ancestry stems from the prophets and the apostles, and Jesus Christ himself is its dynamic center.

In the course of Christian history assent and dissent have been in tension, sometimes breaking out into open conflict. Often the conflict has brought about much needed reforms and new or improved structures. Sometimes, the spirit of dissent has been domesticated by a dearth of prophetic vision, an indifferent status quo, or a coercive pressure of civil and/or ecclesiastic power. The church has many times silenced its prophetic spirits, even through the employment of secular power, for the sake of peace within the household of faith. Yet, there never has been a century in the history of the Christian faith when the spirit of dissent has not expressed itself in

467 - The Age of Dissent

individuals or groups.

The Reformation was a massive dissent, the culmination of a dozen or more minor dissents in the middle ages, against the glaring irregularities of the existing church. In the light of newly-discovered biblical truth, it exposed the astonishing difference between the Christianity of the New Testament and that of the sixteenth century. But the Reformation was more than a massive dissent against a situation that was unreal and unjust; it was also a protest for the positive aspects of biblical faith. In short, it was within the context of an order it did not intend to destroy but to reform. Some radical dissenters, for whom we have learned to have the greatest sympathy, took dissent so far as nearly to bring the essence of the Reformation to ruin and disrepute in chaos and disorder. And since the Reformation was so intimately associated with higher education, political powers, and economic conditions, its dissent was more than a religious matter; it had vast and varied effects.

However, dissent did not end with the Renaissance and the Reformation; they were only the beginning of a history of dissent which has become universal. Critical philosophy, scientific method, national independence, academic freedom, global exploration, economic expectations, and many other aspects of protest against "establishments" of every kind have increased in scope and tempo. It has been claimed by many that we live in the age of dissent, in the era of the "rebel" (Camus). Dissent takes many forms and expresses itself in various places: in the church; in the political arena; in the economic order; in the educational system; in the racial situation; in the family group; in new and old nations; and in the ethical milieu. And sometimes the conflict between assent and dissent has been bitter and costly in life, property, and social structures.

Today, the issue of dissent is world-wide. The 400 delegates from every continent attending the Conference on Church and Society recently held in Geneva, Switzerland, under the auspices of the World Council of Churches confronted it in practically all of their discussions. Everywhere there are conditions against which Christians must protest, since they are inimical to man's humanity. The question is how far dissent may go in national situations where powerful governments prevent the changes that should take place to release man into his true humanity. May dissent go beyond verbal protest,

468 - The Age of Dissent

orderly public demonstration, and political strategy to the use of violence, even to the point of overthrowing the existing order? Is such radical dissent responsible? Is it done within a context that will assure some order while reforms are being effected? And does not such dissent sometimes lead to a fruitless martyrdom?

Perhaps the most dramatic acts of dissent are today taking place in the struggle for civil rights. Dr. Martin Luther King, whose use of non-violent power in the struggle of the Negro for his rights, has issued a one-page statement in The New York Times recently, acknowledging that the introduction of the slogan "black power" has caused considerable confusion and alarm, because it has violent connotations and the words now have become "dangerous and injurious." He believes that "black power" is championed by a tiny minority of Negroes. And he writes, "We have never sought the moral goal of freedom and equality by immoral means. Black supremacy or aggressive black violence is as invested with evil as white supremacy or white violence."

But, says Dr. King, "it is not enough to condemn black power." The mood expresses an angry frustration because extravagant promises are a shattered mockery. "Many Negroes have given up faith in the white majority because 'white power' with total control has left them empty handed. They have convinced themselves that violence is the only method to shock and pressure the white majority to come to terms with an evil of staggering proportions. America will have to see that the opulent life of so many of its people cannot exist in tranquility if other millions still languish in bitter poverty and hopelessness."

The majority of Negroes, affirms Dr. King, want to work with white America to rid society of its inequality and inhumanity; they want to share power to bring about a community in which neither power nor dignity will be colored black or white; they wish to share the American dream as equals and not through the bars of a grim slum prison. The issue in securing some, even if not total, victory for Dr. King's objectives is centered in power groups in urban communities: Will they share power with the Negro quickly and adequately enough to provide the Negro with victories which will give him hope? If this is not done, it will be difficult for Dr. King to keep his method of dissent from breaking out into violence. Dr. King's dissent remains in the context of order. His non-violent passive disobedience seeks to change existing unjust laws and conditions.

469 - The Age of Dissent

The list of expressions of dissent could be lengthened to include the current dissent against the United States government in its pursuit of foreign policy towards Vietnam. Many of these critics are clergymen, professors, columnists, editors, retired military men, senators, and diplomats. They are good citizens, who love their country, and who contend that their dissent is in the best interests of the nation and the world. However, it is a question how far dissent dare go lest it affect the morale of the military forces in Vietnam, the confidence of people in the national government, the cause of freedom in the world, and the unity of the nation.

The right to dissent is inherent in the Christian faith! And it is guaranteed in the Constitution of the United States. Indeed, dissent is a duty of every citizen in a free country. He is not bound to endorse what he regards as wrong in the foreign policy of his nation. The church must stand beside its conscientious dissenters! However, in the light of the ambiguities of history, and especially in the light of the tragic situation in which the United States finds itself in Vietnam, it behooves both those who favor the government's policy and those who dissent from it to exercise some restraint, so as to keep dissent within a context of order.

This is an age of dissent, created by the spirit of freedom, the imperious claim of human rights, and the presence of unfavorable conditions in so many places in an age of rapid social change. The church must support its conscientious dissenters. The nature of its prophetic faith generates righteous protest. The church must claim the right of freedom of expression for those who are inspired by the righteousness of Christ. It must make clear the difference between a valid and a demonic dissent and seek to keep dissent from becoming blind and insane, bent only on destroying anything that may be associated with "establishments." It must urge its people to effect reforms through constituted channels with urgency and effectiveness. It must seek to reconcile tempers where eruptions of violence result in the destruction of property and even the shedding of blood.

This is an evil time in many ways. just how the freedom to dissent, to say No, may be expressed within a framework which leads to a better Yes in life is one of the key issues of our time.