Politics God's Way?
So the results of the Iowa Caucus are in. As an Iowa native, they always intrigue me a little bit. When else is the entire country focused on the corn fields? I would be willing to bet that there won't be as many reporters in Iowa in the next four years combined as there were over the last few weeks.
The results of the caucus led into a discussion with my friend Ben this morning about forms of government. I post regularly on the Jesus Manifesto webzine which is a self-proclaimed hangout for thoughtful Christian anarchists. We talked about anarchism and its approach. I don't necessarily agree with all of it, but I resonate with the sentiments of distrust toward power structures. I certainly don't think that a democratic system is a God-ordained form of government. Neither is communism. Neither is anarchism. Neither is socialism.
In fact, the only God-ordained form of government that I can come up with is Theocracy. Unfortunately, even the theocratic government that God Himself instituted didn't work. My thinking is that if God couldn't set up a good government, we're probably not going to be able to either.
I tend to think of government as a wholly distinct system that God is rather ambivalent toward. The Kingdom of God crosses national and ethnic boundaries. God doesn't bless one form of government over another. He certainly doesn't take the side of America over and against other nations because our government historically has a foundation of faith. Whatever the system, there is injustice and abuse that happens. And wherever abuse and injustice happens, God stands against those who use their power to harm others.
Does that mean that it doesn't matter what forms of government we choose? It matters, but not so much in ordaining a certain form as "the Christian approach to government". I think that whatever forms of government we use, it is the role of Christians to be a prophetic voice to speak against injustice and abuse. In the end, every form is going to fail at some level because the people involved in government are broken vessels. But we ought to make the best of what we have, figure out what works in our context to limit abuse and injustice, and seek to be a nation that brings peace and hope to the world. To the extent that our democratic process is able to do that, it should be praised. To the extent that it fails, it should be spoken against.
I am personally very glad that there is, thus far, no candidate that evangelical Christians have rallied behind as "The Christian Choice" for the next president. It makes us rethink the role of government in our society and the role of the church in relation to that government. That process of continually rethinking and reevaluating can only be helpful as we seek to be faithful and prophetic witnesses within our American context.
posted by Corey @ 9:38 AM
5 comments
5 Comments:
I agree that we cannot change the world rightly until we change people's hearts by the power of God.
God's government didn't work, not because of God, but because of sinful people. We failed, not God.
Even the millenial kingdom will fail, because Satan will be able to find rebels before he is cast into the lake of fire. Again, this reflects on sinful men not Almighty God.
Question, however: In this broken system, can a Christian in good conscience vote for a candidate like Barak Obama who supports partial birth abortion, a injustice against humanity? How about Hilary Clinton? Can we justify voting for a person who supports murder, even if it is in the womb?
But they promise to stop the war, and help people get health insurance, and help balance the budget and lower the taxes on the poor....etc. so that trumps murder of babies? Just wondering.
I guess my first response is that I don't want to be a single issue voter. There is a much broader range of moral issues than just abortion. War, health insurance, poverty, etc. are important moral issues that Christians ought to be able to speak to. If a political party takes what is deemed to be an immoral stance on all other issues but the moral stance on one issue, it certainly wouldn't be unfaithful for a Christian to vote for that candidate, even if the one issue is a significant one.
As far as abortion being murder and supporting a president who supports murder, one could argue (and I wouldn't necessarily take this tack) that voting for someone like President Bush supports the murder of adults (both in our armed forces and abroad, including many innocent victims by collateral damage).
Another response as it relates to the issue of abortion is that the president does not have much say in the issue of abortion anyway. The Supreme Court is never going to overturn abortion in this country so the presidential candidate's support of abortion rights does not actually cause more abortions to occur. The pro-life candidate has no power to prevent abortions from occurring. However, the president does have power to effect a broad range of other moral issues, so I would prefer to have a candidate that matches what I deem to be a moral perspective on those issues (which, by the way, I have not personally come to any conclusions on yet as far as current election cycle goes).
Or, if you prefer, you could take the position of my Christian anarchist friends who refuse to participate in the political process at all. In some ways, maybe it's better to not vote at all than to put your support behind a candidate who is deeply flawed at best and horribly corrupt and dangerous at worst.
I think that I do not want to be a single issue voter either, but a single issue can mold an overall view or reveal an overall worldview.
I don't want to get into the war debate here; if war is justifiable or if there is really anyone who is innocent.
Politically, however, I can speak to (actually, it is my undergrad degree) and while the President cannot change the law in and of himself, he can set the standard and plot the course. If enough are elected with his views to congress, then a law can be changed. It is the Supreme Courts job to review and determine if it is constitutional.
I want to do my job as a Christian to influence the political process in a positive way, using my vote to place those in office who will best represent my values as a Christian. I believe this country will never change until individuals are changed at the heart level.
I also believe that while issues like social justice, etc. are important, these are issues that we as individuals and churches must grab back from the government. Welfare, for example, was created because churches were not doing their job in reaching out and helping the least of these. If churches would take their God-given responsibility back, we wouldn't need these government programs. Again, it is a heart change on the local level much more than it is a vote in the polls.
Pastorby, I loved what you said about welfare being having been created because churches were not doing their job in helping the least of these. The church in Acts had succeeded in ensuring that there were no needy persons among them. As individual churches, we should be able to do the same thing in our own congregations and communities.
Corey, while God may not necessarily bless one "form" of government over another, Scripture indicates that He does bless leaders and governments that obey Him and that rule in accordance with His Word. In addition, there are definite elements of representative government in the system God established through Moses, at the recommendation of Jethro, where the people were told to choose representatives from among themsleves to judge their disputes.
Also, it is clear from Scripture that God certainly doesn't bless evil governments that oppress their citizens and destroy innocent human life (see Isaiah 3:14-15, 10:2; Amos 5:11-12; Habakkuk 2:6-12; and Micah 3:9-12, among other verses dealing with this subject). Therefore, God would be much more likely to bless governments that are actively seeking to protect human life and do not oppress their citizens. The truth is that there are some forms of goverment, including communism and fascism, in which oppression is an inherent part of the system. The only God-ordained forms of government are those that operate according to the limits set forth in Romans 13, which states that government was established for the punishment of the wicked and the protection of the innocent.
As for abortion, murder was never supposed to be a federal matter (unless it involves murder of a federal official or the murder takes place on federal property). Until the extremely flawed and unconstitutional Roe v. Wade decision was imposed on the states, abortion (and virtually all laws governing murder) was a state matter.
"I also believe that while issues like social justice, etc. are important, these are issues that we as individuals and churches must grab back from the government. Welfare, for example, was created because churches were not doing their job in reaching out and helping the least of these. If churches would take their God-given responsibility back, we wouldn't need these government programs. Again, it is a heart change on the local level much more than it is a vote in the polls."
I agree with this completely. However, given your perspective that it is necessary to start with the gospel presentation and deal with social responsibility as secondary issues, aren't you perpetuating the problem? If you would only offer aid to those who have been soundly saved, who is going to help everyone else? It is that mentality that created the need for the government social safety nets to begin with.
Post a Comment
<< Home