World-Changing Politics
July 5, 2008 |
When mega-church pastor Rick Warren invited Senator Hillary Clinton to his AIDS conference at Saddleback Church, some Christians applauded - others branded him a liberal traitor. So goes the long-running debate on what constitutes a "proper" Evangelical public policy. As "salt and light" what role does political engagement play in our efforts to influence culture?
That is a question I have been mulling lately. Raised from the "cradle" by the "Religious Right," my views on societal transformation were initially shaped by close affiliation with the Republican Party, as well as petitions and protests against abortion and gay rights. In Bible college, I stood along Lancaster Drive in Salem, Oregon, with hundreds of other protesters holding signs that read "Abortion Kills." While I have since departed from many of my ultra-conservative roots, I still face daily decisions about how I, as a Christian, will respond to cultural concerns.
The Moral Majority, Christian Coalition, and conservative organizations like Focus on the Family and Concerned Women for America have encouraged Christians to engage in politics in hopes of restoring biblical values in our country. But, after 30 years of religious Right activism, are we seeing societal transformation? In Toward an Evangelical Public Policy, John C. Green states, ". . . the Christian Right has achieved very few of its policy goals . . . most of the Christian Right's agenda remains largely unfulfilled" (p. 28).
Concern about public policy is one reason over 70 prominent leaders, including the president of the National Association of Evangelicals, signed the "Evangelical Manifesto" on May 7, 2008. Among other things, this document urges Christians to repudiate a "religious Right" or a "religious Left," claiming such politicization corrupts the gospel and makes us "'useful idiots' for one political party or another." The Manifesto calls for "an expansion of our concern beyond single issue politics, such as abortion and marriage" and "If we protest, our protest has to begin with ourselves."
The "Evangelical Manifesto" raises an important concern: The strategies of the religious Right have resulted in a severe backlash, leaving many educated citizens and, especially, young people with a negative impression of Christianity. Research from The Barna Group published in UnChristian highlights alarming statistics. Close to half of young Christians and nearly two thirds of young non-Christians believe "the political efforts of conservative Christians to be a problem facing America" (p. 155). These leaders of the future perceive Christians as judgmental and "primarily motivated by a political agenda." Rather than transforming the next generation, conservative political efforts seem to be having the opposite effect.
So what is the solution? Do we avoid politics entirely? Not according to Os Guinness, one of the primary drafters of the Manifesto. He decries privatization of faith as equally problematic.
After all, it was not a private faith that led William Wilberforce to devote a career to public policy, instigating such important societal changes as the abolition of slavery in Britain. The challenge, then, is in knowing when, how and for what do we take action. This is where the Manifesto leaves us hanging. As conservative Al Mohler comments, "What the document never makes clear is how to hold to deep moral and political convictions, based on biblical principles, without running the danger of identification with a political agenda - at least to some extent."
Yet, is it not possible to hold to deep moral convictions and work toward societal change without selling our soul to a particular party or toting protest signs? The religious Right wrongly equates "Christian" with "Republican." It also errs in its willingness to sacrifice the heart of the outcast in its zeal for righteousness. By the same token, the religious Left can be just as partisan, and errs by compromising on important moral issues. To maintain our "saltiness" we must forge a public policy that implements, on a practical level, both grace and truth. This requires cooperation and dialogue among the diverse segments of the Church.
As women leaders, we cannot afford to sit on the sidelines in this integral discussion. Of the 74 charter signatories of the "Evangelical Manifesto," only 7 were women. It is time to speak up. What do you think about the Christian role in public policy? How would you promote societal transformation?
| Share this: |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Posted by Caryn Rivadeneira on July 5, 2008
Comments
Jesus laid down His life for us.He was never a man pleaser.He did what the Father did,see and speak and never politicaly correct, as most Christians. As Eccl says there is a time for everything under heaven No more no less.People need the wisdom of God, which is the word of God and discernment in knowing when to speak. Jesus said follow me. Thats why we have the Holy Spirit to help us in our time of need.
Concerning political parties.We have had good and evil from the very beginning.It is not about them, but it is making responsible godly choices that will please God and bless all people of this nation. The bible says when the righteous rules the people rejoice,but sin is a reproach to any people Prov 29. God rest His case!!!
Posted by: Leila on July 6, 2008
The Religious Right failed because they stopped preaching the Gospel and began preaching their own agenda. Now, I don't doubt the good intentions of many in the movement, but there were, and are, many who are also in it for the power. Ultimately, if you want to positively affect society, then preach the Gospel (of Jesus Christ, and not the gospel of Mohler, Dobson, Robertson, etc.).
Posted by: Kathy on July 7, 2008
To me it is not a question of Republican or Democrat; not a question of conservative or liberal. There are however some hard core "Values" that I vote by. If, for instance, any one of our names of identification (Rep., Dem., conser. or lib.) said they would raise my taxes as high as the heaven but would take away abortion, I would vote for that person even if the other candidate was for lower taxes but for abortion.
Yes, I feel this is a righteous way to decide. I also oppose the legalization of homosexual marriages, etc, also based on God's Word. We cannot stop people from doing what they do but we do not have to make things offensive to God a "legal right." Just let people do what they decide to do. Don't put them in jail for things like cheating on your spouse and homosexual involvement, etc.
What I think I am called to do in the public arena is to stand as a force FOR God's ways. He has told us to be forces for our communities and the economic wealth of them is to be a concern to us but as a Nation, the informed know that you cannot thumb your nose at God's laws and righteous ways and succeed.
According to Scripture, the success of us as a Nation and as Women of this Nation, is to be involved in the works of justice, in our homes, communities and the Nation. The details of how each one does that and what each one gets involved in to bring that into being, is as divesified as our God given gifts. The gifting will determine what we do and the effectiveness by which it is accompolished.
The summation of my thought is that we need to keep our eyes focused on the moral issues as God has made His Mind known to us. His Word is not to be taken as a suggestion that we are allowed to vote upon deciding how we think about it. His Word is estabished forever. If we dare to think to violate His Word, we have bargained for great troubles; that is because He is God! He is not a voted in leader that we can vote out.
My idea is to GO into the community with the banner of the Love of Jesus which feeds the poor, clothes the naked, breaks the bondages of whatever, that cares for and nurtures the sick and my own family and tells of His love and salvation for them.
Posted by: Ramona on July 8, 2008
The issue is not Republican or Democrat, conservative or liberal. The issue is RIGHTEOUSNESS BEFORE GOD AND MAN. Wilberforce lasted and eventually won the day because his cause was right AND righteous. Standing up for the impoverished, the unborn, the AIDS victim, those caught up in sexual slavery and so on are RIGHTEOUS causes that must be addressed by everyone who claims Christ. The Conservative Republicans have lost their influence because they revealed they were more interested in power and in only stopping abortion than in the cause of righteousness. The liberal left has no moral foundation to speak to the religious center and right because they dismiss whole sections of Scripture and dismiss the life of the unborn. We need people who are more concerned about righteousness than they are about politics and power.
Posted by: Allison on July 11, 2008
I am a young Christian who is very careful to let people know that I'm not one of "those" Christians--you know, the ones on from the Religious Right like Jerry Falwell. I cringe sometimes to even identify myself as a Christian in a political discussion because of the assumptions that will be made about me. One can neither assume nor proscribe certain political positions on someone because that person is a Christian. I consider myself to be politically liberal, but have been told that it is impossible to be both a Christian and a Democrat. (No doubt that woman was a card-carrying member of the Ralph Reed fan club.) I do believe that the Religious Right has harmed the spread of the gospel by its methods, which appear intolerant, inflexible, and irrational to non-believers, and also to some believers as well. In being salt and light, we should be neither rigid and legalistic, nor weak and wishy-washy, but instead firm, loving, and willing to engage in productive dialogue with those from all points on the supposed political spectrum.
Posted by: Robyn on July 11, 2008
A great post. I sat next to a man at a large publishing event. I was asked to sit there for a possible radio interview later (he was one of several hosts in the room). He belaboured his political views, tying them with godliness and "what is right". I'm a Christian. I love Jesus. But my brother in Christ turned me off of faith, if this was the crux of what people believed. You see, I knew differently, but those who don't know assume this is what Christianity is about. Again, the heart of it was motivated by good, but the result has not been good if it turns the word "republican" into the same terminology as "holy". It just doesn't work that way, scripturally or in real life.
A republican married to a godly democrat man, but simply a follower of Christ. : )
Posted by: Suzanne Eller on July 15, 2008