Rough Draft, Part 1 - "Theolitics"

Introduction

There are perhaps no uglier words to hear together in a single sentence than “politics” and “religion” because of their polarizing effect. Like it or not both are here to stay, despite what anarchists and Richard Dawkins might want. Any attempt to put the two together, at least here in the U.S., is often met with strong resistance. Therefore, our contemporary gurus tell us, we are to separate them entirely from one another in our lives, especially where Christianity is concerned. Problem solved.

This is only a superficial answer at best. The simple truth is that we don’t exist within all these little, entirely separated spheres throughout the day because everything we do has one common factor: that we did it. In other words, wherever we go, there we are. To deny this rule at work in our lives will lead us to living a totally hypocritical life in which we complain that people in some country are being treated like animals, and then go on to prove that people really are just animals anyway.[1] Both atheists and Christians take their religious views with them into Congressional meetings and political debates. While the spirit of the age tells us that this should not be, it nevertheless is.

Furthermore, Christians are called upon to follow God’s commands and not necessarily our modern sensibilities. At the same time we can listen to the spirit of the age and see if there is any truth in its declarations. While the Bible is the source of all truth, that doesn’t automatically lead to our practicing it perfectly. We shouldn’t feel uncomfortable or unwilling to examine what the Bible has to say concerning any contemporary issue.

As an evangelical Christian, I find it a struggle to be both political and faithful. Politics, at least how we do it here in the western world, is largely about compromise. However we cannot compromise God’s law. Where does this leave us? At first glance, it may seem to lead us absolutely nowhere. This committal to compromise turns many Christians off from the political process and we comfort ourselves in this abandonment by telling ourselves that Jesus wasn’t a politician. He didn’t pass laws but he did change hearts, and so shall we. If we do this, no matter how tempting, we give in to the world which tells us that there is one place where God does not belong – in our national concerns or identity. We also shortchange God by telling Him that he either doesn’t belong there or we give up on making Him fit. Frustrated we end up where we began, with the total separation of our political life from our Christian one.

There is also the dilemma of forcing our views upon a populace that doesn’t necessarily want to be a Christian nation. This would be a tyranny of ideas that brings about outward compliance with Biblical standards but no inner transformation. We would also be ignoring Amos’ warnings against idolatrous Israel, “I hate, I despise your religious feasts; I cannot stand your assemblies (Amos 5:21).” Outward obedience without inward repentance does nothing for someone who does not believe.

We also have to understand the dilemma clearly. This is not a battle of reclamation or anything of the sort because, despite what some of my contemporaries believe, we are not a Christian nation. The fact that the ten commandments occupies space in some of our government buildings, and the occurrence of many American revivals tells us that God has most definitely been at work in the hearts of the American people. Nor can we ignore the Christian Medievalism that eventually produced the Renaissance and the Enlightenment, and the influence of Christianity upon many Deists. Still, the founding fathers themselves were mostly Deists themselves and while they acknowledged an all-powerful God it is not necessarily the same God, no matter how much the Deists conveniently borrowed from Christian theology.

Our identity as a non-Christian nation is also not limited to the past – we can see that quite plainly with today’s culture. We love our Grey’s Anatomy and The OC, which care more about putting pretty people in front of a camera rather than speaking to God’s glory. We ogle over the poor fools that Mr. Springer parades on his show so that we can breathe a sigh of relief and say “At least I’m not like that person.” We spend much more time agonizing over what will happen on the next episode of 24, or where we can download more songs for our IPODS than in contemplating how to minister to people in our workplace. And if we do consider the Bible at all, it is mostly to quote it at someone else so that they’ll do what we want rather than quote it to ourselves in order to do what God wants.

I honestly sympathize with the Religious Right. I understand the desire to dedicate our nation to God as an act of worship. The political soapbox is not the ultimate pulpit, but a life transformed by the supernatural power of the cross most certainly is. While God is sovereign over all human projects, including political ones, that doesn’t mean that He supports any one given ruler over and against another. We may like or dislike President Bush but his election does not necessarily mean that God is a Bush-supporter or even a Republican or Conservative; it only means that God can use Bush to fulfill His purposes for the world. Before we sell our souls to any political leader we would be wise to remember that God didn’t approve of Pharaoh either, but Pharaoh was also chosen to fulfill God’s purposes.

Still, asking Christians not to be just that in their politics is like asking them to hold their breath while they vote. The dilemma we are left with is not whether or not one can be both a Christian and a politician, but rather to what extent are we Biblically, not politically, justified in bringing God into our politics and what that should look like. And that is where we will begin.

---

[1] G.K. Chesterton, “Orthodoxy,”