Why a Christ-follower just might end up pursuing a career in politics
Monday, 8 November 2010
| Jim Reiher
Throughout church history there have been a number of very different views concerning Christians engaging politics. The different views can be placed on a sliding scale, something like this:
I-------------I---------------I---------------I-----------------I---------------I------------------I
1 2 3
Increasing amount of political engagement: à
Considering just three main positions on the spectrum: at one end (1) we see some reject political involvement because of all the very real problems associated with it (the very real dangers of pride, corruption, compromise, being used by others, greed, selfish ambition, self-promotion, criticising other good people publically for personal advantage, and becoming immune to lying and gossip, to name a few). The other end sees some Christians embrace wholeheartedly the idea, and they desire power to dominate and make laws for the council, or state, or country, they are in. In-between them somewhere (2) is the Christian who sees politics as a way to serve and love both God and neighbour.
The difference between (2) and (3) is that (2) enters politics to be a servant, first and foremost. The servant emphasis will not deny that there is some degree of power and authority that comes with the turf – but the priority is to serve not to dominate. Number (3), on the other hand, unashamedly sees power as something to be used well. Power and authority are not inherently evil. It is the evil use of them that is the problem. This Christian enters politics first and foremost to have an influence by using power and authority.
I belong to position number 2. I see no mandate in the New Testament to actively seek power and influence, indeed the teaching of Jesus is quite the opposite. If some of us end up in situations where we do have some degree of power and authority, then we must at that point remember that servanthood is still the greater priority and servant leadership must dominate over the other reality of using power.
My main texts for position (2) would be:
“And calling them to himself, Jesus said to them, ‘You know that those who are recognised as rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great men exercise authority over them. But it is not so among you, but whoever wishes to be great among you shall be your servant, and whoever wishes to be first among you shall be the slave of all.” (Mark: 10:42-45).
And
“When I wrote to you in my last letter not to associate with sexually immoral people, I did not mean the people of this world who are immoral or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world! But now I am writing to you that you are not to associate with any who claim to be fellow believers but who are sexually immoral or greedy idolaters or slanderers, drunkards or swindlers. With such persons do not even eat. What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? God will judge the outsider…” (I Corinthians 5:9-13).
In the first text here we see Jesus specifically tell his disciples that they are not to be like other people in the world who love to “lord it over” others. We are not to want to have authority over others. We are not meant to seek to be “first”. Indeed, we are meant to be “last”. Like a child. The servant of all. The slave of all.
There is no quote from Jesus or the New Testament to justify forcing non-Christians to live by Christian rules. In fact the opposite is found. The second passage cited above is from the apostle Paul writing to the Corinthian church.
This is a most profound passage of scripture. First, Paul says categorically that he has no interest in judging the person outside the church. It is those who claim to be Christ-followers that he is interested in telling what to do! He does not want us to cut ourselves off from non-Christ-followers. He wants us to be engaged, and friends, and stay a part of the world in that regard. But clearly he wants the individual Christian to pursue a high calling, and he expects Christ-followers living in community (the church) to pursue a corporate high calling. But that is where it stops. He has no interest in telling the outside world how to live. That is not his job. It is not his mandate. We Christ-followers would do well to take a leaf out of his book here: we should pursue a holy life personally and in the church community. We don’t try telling the non-believer to live according to our standards. They have not made that decision yet. They have not embraced Christ yet. They are not to be coerced or forced or dominated over or made to do anything.
This might make us take up position (1)… but there are other considerations that keep me in position (2). Significantly: we live in a democracy.
Democracies did not exist in the Bible days. So there are no direct New Testament instructions on how Christians should live in a democracy. The positive thing about living in a democracy is that power and authority are dispersed between the entire voting community. Power is not nearly as absolute as in other forms of government. And so a Christian (like anyone else in politics in a democracy) is in the end, answerable to the people. There is an inherent servanthood requirement built into it.
In my capacity as a Christian living in this world with people of different views and lifestyles: I won’t try making laws to regulate people’s private lives, when society as a whole accepts those things. I might try to get on quietly living a different way myself. I won’t personally embrace a lifestyle or belief system that I don’t agree with (in my understanding of what it means to be a Christ-follower). I won’t say I personally agree with some beliefs and actions. But I will not try to make people of different beliefs and lifestyles - that society does not see as worthy of jail – I wont try to make people live my way. I would prefer it if they chose to embrace what I see as a good way to live. But I wont make anyone. I prefer to live and let live.
In my capacity as a member of a free and democratic community, as a participating individual working in the democratic structure that my culture has evolved: I will support laws and legislation that do regulate things that impact the whole community, (rather than the personal lives of individuals). I will support laws that protect our fresh water supply; that protect endangered species; that save our biodiversity and old growth forests. I will support things that the majority are either coming around to accept or have accepted if they are good for the whole community. Unless it is something I believe is inherently wrong for the community as a whole (eg. accepting the activity of paedophiles, or having no censorship for children), I wont try to stop it.
Some will disagree with me on what should fall under my Christian service and what should come under my participating in a democracy. And in fact they will probably rightly point out that the two must overlap and it is not at all clear cut as to what might fall in one and not the other. There will be a blurry grey which I have to admit is there. Others disagreeing with me is fine. I am all for it: it is all part of belonging to a community based on democracy and freedom of speech. Let’s enjoy the journey as we explore how to live, together.
Why the Greens?
Okay… it is one thing to get involved in politics… but if one does get involved, which party should they join? My principles aren’t rocket science:
-
Christians should be in the party that best captures where they are at as a Christian at a point in time. That will be different for different people.
-
Christians should be in every party in a healthy democracy because then they can be light and salt in those contexts.
-
No party is truly “Christian” (whatever that means!). Not even the so-called Christian ones. They do not represent all Christians or their priorities.
-
There will be some things in every party that one might not agree with.
-
One has to decide what one’s priorities are when it comes to supporting the party of their choice. You have to ask: what are the most important things that I want to stand up for? And what is less important?
For me, the answer ends with the Greens. Because of their:
-
Concern for the diversity of life on earth (when God made every new plant and animal species he kept saying “it is good” – should we ambivalent about the destruction of so many species in the pursuit of wealth and possessions?)
-
Suspicion that materialism is the chief end of man and there is more to life than just accumulating money and possessions even at the expense of the very poor in the world
-
Willingness to redistribute some of the wealth of society to the least well off
-
Concern for the marginalised and the very poor
-
Concern for the humane treatment of refugees and asylum seekers
-
Concern that war should only be used as an instrument of last resort
-
Belief in the full equality of all human beings, no matter what their worldview or lifestyle
-
Their “filtre” question that they like to ask of all policies and decisions: “Will our children and grandchildren thank us for this decision?”
-
Desire to also ask of every policy and change: how does this affect the triple bottom line? We don’t just believe in one bottom line (how will this impact the economy?). That is just one of 3 bottom lines that have to be weighed. The other two are: How will this affect the community? And how will this affect the environment? All 3 must be considered in every decision.
I do not find the above significant issues to be somehow sacrificed for parties that want to:
-
prevent gay marriage
-
prevent gay adoption
-
prevent even very conservative euthanasia models
-
bring back the criminalization of abortion
-
bring back discriminating against gays
-
bring back hash divorce laws
-
or other personal morality rules and laws.
I put social justice considerations before personal morality issues. I stand with Paul in the quote noted above: who am I to judge outsiders? Christian personal morality principles are for me and the church. I have no mandate to use power to force non-Christians to live the same way I try to live. (And then we might not always agree anyway).