The last several weeks, I have been doing an extensive study of what R.L. Dabney called “the damnable doctrine of Equality.”  This is the ideal that has swept America over the past 200 years, and has become the crowning virtue of our culture.  So powerful has the idea of Equality become, that it now rules, not only our governments both federal and local, but now almost all churches.  The way the culture views race, morality, sexuality, economic and business practices, and just about every other sphere of life, is the same way the churches view them.  We have come to the point with the vast majority of American churches, where, rather than digging into the Scriptures and interpreting the morality of our culture by God’s word, instead they look at the culture, and then try to twist the Scriptures to justify whatever cultural trends the church has adopted in order to stay “relevant.”

After the Jacobinism of the French Revolution penetrated America, one of the first great “equality” movements was Abolitionism.  This was a wildly successful political movement, which succeeded in fomenting the war it wanted, achieved its goal of ending chattel slavery, and destroyed forever the dogma of states’ rights as enshrined in the Constitution.  They also succeeded in convincing America  and the rest of the world, including many orthodox, biblical-minded Christians, that the institution of slavery is one of the greatest evils ever perpetrated by the human race.  Equality of the races, and political freedom, are made two of the primary virtues to which all the world must gravitate, if it would establish justice, and make itself “civilized.”

Most of the churches of our day and age agree.  To prove my point, I posit this scenario:

Two men come to attend your typical American church, and request admittance into membership.  The first man submits as his qualifications that that he has stirred up riots and chaos wherever he has gone, that he routinely consorts with prostitutes, that he often employs vulgar, blasphemous, and filthy language, that he endorses the work of Margaret Sanger, that he denies and ridicules doctrines of the deity, virgin birth, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.  Also, he is an ordained Baptist minister and renowned Civil Rights leader, who has helped push the nation into a new era of justice and equality for all.

The second man comes with a large retinue, and submits his own qualifications.  He has believed the promises of God and has been counted as righteous before God.  He left his father’s country in obedience to the command of God, sojourned in strange lands, fought a successful war in which he was greatly outnumbered, fathered a child when he was 100 years old and his wife 90, then was willing to sacrifice that one son when God commanded, only to be relieved of that tragic duty at the last second.  He has been called by various titles, including “the father of the faithful” and “the friend of God.”

“But what,” the church committee asks him, “is this large retinue with you?”

“These,” the man responds, “are my domestic slaves, some of them born in my own house, some of them bought with my money.”

The names of the men?  You have probably already guessed that the first is Martin Luther King, Jr., and the second is the patriarch Abraham.

Which of these two would a modern church admit into its fellowship?  The blaspheming, womanizing Civil Rights leader, or the slaveholding, slave trading “father of the faithful?”

How we answer this question will undoubtedly speak much about the health of our churches, and on which side of “the damnable doctrine of equality” we stand.