Where Is The Balance Between Christianity And Politics?

In a recent blogpost, David Rupert (click here for a short bio) tries to warn us on his blog about the dangers that Christians and the Church face by becoming too involved with politics (click here for the article). He cites the relationship between the Russian Orthodox Church and the Russian government as an example. Rupert mentions that both are scratching each other's back by noting how much land the Orthodox Church owns and how Russia has passed laws that make it difficult for evangelical churches to make any inroads into Russia while the Orthodox Church says nothing about how dissidents are disappeared.

Rupert then asks whether the Church in America is also too involved in politics. He correctly notes how problems emerge when the state and the Church get too friendly and how some tend to have too many expectations on the state provided the right people are elected. 

According to Rupert, Christians who get too involved in politics are vulnerable to losing their passion for God's kingdom and the eternal.  He also mentions how Jesus asked whose picture was on the Roman coin so as to say give unto Caesar what is his. Finally, he reminds us that the solutions to our problems do not rest in politics and what politicians do.

Now it's not that Rupert has not made some valid points, it is that his overall perspective of what politics is and  and the relationship Christians should have with politics seems shallow. Yes, our first passion should be for God's kingdom. But how much we can contribute to that kingdom partially depends on how we participate in the earthly kingdoms in which we find ourselves. This is especially true because when we call ourselves Christians, all that we do and say become associated with the Gospel. So if we are seen as supporting exploitation either by explicit promotion of or through silent complicity, that becomes associated with the Gospel. And the association of exploitation with the Gospel acts to inhibits people to listen and consider what the Gospel preaches.

We should also agree with Rupert in tempering our expectations of how much politicians can do to make our lives better. However, Martin Luther King Jr. understood a vital role of the state in a different way. For King saw politics as providing a partial solution to the racial and economic problems of his day. For when people's hearts are to too cold to want to treat others as being made in God's image with the respect they deserve, laws passed by politicians can significantly contribute to preventing people from exploiting others. So while politics may not be the solution, politics can significantly contribute to providing a partial solution to some of our problems.

Certainly the Church should not want to impose most of its standards on the state. For there is a certain degree to which people should have the political freedom to reject what God commands. But that doesn't mean that the Church never try to speak prophetically to the state. For when the Church is silent in the midst of the exploitation of either people or the environment, that silence in the face of evil becomes associated with the Church and the Gospel. That is partially because the silence results in the Church becoming complicit in the sins of society and the state while it harshly condemns individuals for personal sins. In addition, the same time, the Church shows itself to being poor stewards of the tools God has given those of us who live in democracies.

How much the Church should be involved in politics depends on at least two basic tenets: first, all that the Church says and does becomes associated with the Gospel and second, we should share society with unbelievers as equals. Regarding the former point, we should remember that during prerevolutionary times in France, Russia, and Spain the Church sided with those with wealth and power. So when the revolutions came, the Church and the Gospel were understandably viewed as being enemies of the people of the revolution. And being viewed as enemies caused unnecessary persecution of the Church as well as a loss in the credibility of the Church and the Gospel.

Regarding the latter point, the Church has consistently failed in treating many whom it considers others as equals in society. During a vast majority of America's history, many in the Church supported various expressions of white supremacy. And some of those expressions unfortunately live on. Today, the Church struggles with sharing society with the LGBT community as equals.  Though having resigned to themselves to fate, many worked hard to prevent the legalization same-sex marriage and thus preventing Christians from sharing society with the LGBT community as equals. This portrays the Church and the Gospel as being the enemies of equality and justice. Thus when Vladimir Lenin claimed that religion is the opiate of the people, he was basing his state on observation (click here for an example of Lenin's claim).

Because once we call ourselves Christians, all that we do and say becomes associated with the Gospel. Thus, we need to be very careful regarding what politics we adopt because we will associate our politics with the Gospel. For example, many of today's Christian Republicans have bowed down to the almighty dollar while denying how such reverence is severely wounding both the environment and many people.   Meanwhile those Christians who support elective abortion are blind to how they then associate the killing of unborn children with the Church and the Gospel. Both groups have associated horrific actions and thinking with the Gospel. And lest the rest of us become arrogant to such Christians, we should remember the parable of the 2 men praying.