Cathy Grossman of USA Today has written an excellent summary of the issues involved in the Supreme Court’s peculiar ruling yesterday that the cross is not exclusively a Christian symbol.
One of the more compelling objections to the decision comes from an evangelical scholar who understands that in making the cross an icon of civil religion the Court has diminished it as a symbol of the Christian religion.
Christianity Today called on Carl Esbeck, professor of law at the University of Missouri, to analyze the decision and Esbeck suggests evangelicals hold down their cheers.
First, of course, because he, too, notes the case, while if offers many clues on where justices stand on religious symbolism in the public domain, is far from over.
But Esbeck’s real concern is that making the cross into some kind of universal war
…dilutes the real purpose of the symbol. They’ve taken a symbol of the church and turned it into civil religion. This can be bad for evangelicals because when people look at a nativity scene or a Roman cross, we want people to think of the God of the Bible. If these too become simply civil religion to Americans, it makes the task of evangelism harder for Christians.”