Carter’s Legacy in the Digital Age
The recent passing of former President Jimmy Carter at the age of 100 offers profound lessons for the American church.
In our digital age, the funerals of U.S. leaders are staples of live broadcasts.
Social media has amplified this experience, turning various segments of these solemn occasions—the announcement of a leader’s death, memorial viewings, processions, and heartfelt tributes—into hot topics of discussion and debate online.
Carter’s death, however, has introduced a new dimension to this phenomenon: a kind of virtual judgment where people evaluate a life as if standing before a divine tribunal, contemplating its eternal implications.
Regrettably, this scrutiny has often come from certain factions within American Christianity that intertwine faith with politics.
The Nature of Judgement and Grace
While I did not see outright hostility among Christians upon Carter’s passing—behaviors like that would have been deemed disrespectful and inappropriate in my Bible Belt upbringing—it was disheartening to observe some insinuating on social media that a man who lived his faith genuinely might somehow be doomed to eternal condemnation.
For those unfamiliar with evangelical culture, there exists an unwritten code that allows believers to question another’s salvation while ostensibly adhering to Christ’s mandate against judgment.
This can be skillfully sidestepped by including phrases like “only God knows the heart,” allowing individuals to express skepticism while masking it as innocuous contemplation.
Yet, we should concern ourselves not just with the act of judgment but with the criteria guiding these assessments.
This is crucial for understanding the state of American evangelicalism, a community many felt embodied by Carter during his lifetime.
Jesus’ teachings frequently revolve around identity, most notably seen in His inquiries to followers about their beliefs regarding Him.
The apostle Paul emphasized that true salvation hinges on vocal confession and genuine belief in Christ’s resurrection, assuring that any who call upon the Lord will find salvation.
The New Testament warns against claiming the name of Christ without real belief, a concept theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer referred to as “cheap grace.” While distinguishing between authentic faith and superficial acknowledgment is essential, a more significant issue arises when the questioning of Carter’s faith suggests an underlying belief in “works righteousness.”
Political Identity and Faith
To imply that Carter might not have faithfully lived out his Christian beliefs raises profound questions about the very nature of the gospel—one fundamentally rooted in the grace that can’t be earned but simply received through faith.
Rejecting any notion of salvation rooted in works, we must recognize how the message of grace often perplexes those deeply entrenched in religious practices.
While Paul reiterated that grace doesn’t grant a license to sin, it does urge followers to manifest their faith through acts of love and service.
No credible evidence ever suggested that Carter disregarded the core principles of the Christian faith found in Scripture and historic creeds.
His understanding of the gospel was clear: he saw himself as a sinner dependent on Christ’s righteousness for salvation.
His longstanding commitment to his marriage and his humility in recognizing his flaws speak volumes about his character.
Critiques of Carter’s faith often focus more on his political affiliations and social beliefs than traditional theological disputes.
This reflects a deeper challenge within today’s American Christianity.
While I don’t always agree with Carter’s political views—and like many, hold strong convictions on topics such as abortion and capital punishment—it raises an important question: should differing opinions on social issues define one’s salvation?
Historically, many notable Christians who once endorsed practices now viewed as morally indefensible did not face the same scrutiny that Carter has experienced.
Ironically, those challenging Carter’s faith often defend individuals who reject historic creeds, provided they align politically with certain views.
What we are witnessing is a shift in Christian identity; for some, loyalty to a particular ideology has become intertwined with authentic faith.
This form of Christianity seems to prioritize conformity to political agendas over critical personal and moral responsibilities.
It’s much simpler to claim one’s Christian identity based solely on political alignment than to engage in the deeper, more nuanced call to embody the gospel, which requires acknowledging personal shortcomings and the need for grace.
For many years, some political evangelicals have pointed to Carter as evidence that personal integrity and religious devotion do not equate to effective political leadership.
But we must ask whether their ultimate aim is to create a political landscape that reflects their own standards of personal piety.
The dangerous blending of political and religious identities does little to benefit society or the deeper pursuits of faith.
If the gospel as articulated by Jesus holds any truth, we can be assured that Jimmy Carter rests peacefully, alongside countless others who may have harbored imperfect views on critical issues.
Ultimately, the final judgment rests with the one who occupies the judgment seat.
Russell Moore serves as the editor-in-chief at Christianity Today and directs its Public Theology Project.
Source: Christianitytoday
