As the political season comes to both fruition and conclusion, many well-meaning Christians around the country are going to be disappointed if their preferred candidate doesn't win. For the Right, it will be a disappointment if Obama wins, because it means the further destruction of family values, increased abortions, and... (and... and...). For the Left, it will be a disappointment if McCain wins, because he only cares about the rich, is hawkish on Iran, and... (and... and...). All of this distresses me, and has for a long time now, because I plan on being disappointed in the election regardless of which candidate wins.
Please don't misunderstand me; I know that as a Christian, I should be (and vigorously am) interested in the forces at work in this world. I can't be ignorant to large social structures, including government. After all, Paul tells us that government is established as an authority in this world by God, and we should submit to that authority. Also, as minister and poet John Donne wrote, "no man is an island, entire of itself". (He precedes this by saying, among other things, that we are all "one volume" of "one author" ...wow, that's great imagery :-) ). So, because we should submit to a governing authority which encourages participation and are all interconnected with the lives of our neighbors, we should vote.
And so I will. But what distresses me about the "right" fighting the "left" is that they're both going to lose. They should be disappointed. I'm not the first person to talk about why this is, and I probably won't be the last, but I hope you take a few minutes to think about it.
I'm going to be disappointed because I don't want one or more particular agenda items to be happily checked off as they're brought to both Houses, voted on, and signed by the President. What I want, more than anything, is the Kingdom of God to be right here, right now. I want all of it - both "left" issues like environmental protection and "right" issues like the elimination of abortion. But, I know that as a Christian, my power within this space is very limited. Why? Well, though C.S. Lewis wrote about the topic about sixty years ago, his words are just as true today as they were back then.
"Meditation on the Third Commandment" shows how, as Christians, our different views of faith lead us to different conclusions on both ends and means: those that are concerned primarily with the promotion of Christian values will always be drawn toward the authoritative power of fascism, those that are more mindful of The Fall and the corruption of power will see democracy as the only hope, and those concerned by the lack of social activism and the righting of worldly wrongs will see communism as the answer. (I confess that at different times in my life I have held each of those views.)
Because we view the world through different lenses, any involvement of Christians in politics will result in either a) a Christian party in which only a minority of Christian views are represented, or b) Christians working within different parties, and compromising on both ends and means in those parties. However, Lewis writes that there is another way: to abstain from working within political parties, and to instead be a nonconformist voice of change to our representatives in government. Christians shouldn't shy away from interest in politics, but should continually work to pester their "M.P.'s" (Members of Parliament). This, according to Lewis, combines the best of both the dove and the serpent.
C.S. Lewis isn't alone in his thoughts. Two key players from the Moral Majority (formed in 1980; the forerunner to the Christian Coalition) wrote a book several years ago about their experiences working to change society through politics, and what they learned from the process. It's a great book, and I recommend it to, well, everyone... but I'll just mention a few things here.
In a chapter entitled, "Let the Church be the Church", Ed Dobson writes that there are three basic human institutions established by God - the family, government, and the church. Each of these has different responsibilities - the care and nurturing of children, providing an ordered society, and the spiritual transformation of individuals, respectively. Understandably, one of Dobson's concerns is:
...that [Christians] are in danger of substituting our spiritual authority (the power to change lives and culture) for political authority (a lesser power that cannot change a single life). Have we not spent millions of dollars and immeasurable time to bring about political change? Even if we had been completely successful in bringing about that change, we would still not have changed a single life. Only the power of the church can transform within. Political authority, seductive as it is, is the lesser authority. [emphasis added]
He goes on:
Should we then ignore these issues? Absolutely not! These battles must be fought - but they must be fought by individual Christians, not the church or a group self-identified as Christian... I still believe in the basic political views of the Religious Right... I am pro-life and pro-family. I am troubled by... I am concerned about... The list could go on. However, I do not believe that politics is capable of solving any of these problems. The transformation of our culture will come through the power of the gospel - one person at a time. I fear that in the Religious Right we have opted for a shortcut to cultural change - namely, legislation. But laws do not change people's lives. The church possesses the power to transform America and the world, but it is in danger of trading it for Republican or Democratic influence. In the process, we are distracting people from the ultimate solution: Jesus Christ. [emphasis added]
What I really enjoy about these quotes is how Dobson approaches the subject with a good dose of humility: he (and others) thought they could change the world if only they could elect the "right" people, or pass the "right" legislation. (By the way, Christians on the other side of the fence are no better: "If only we'd have Democrats in power", "If only we'd tax the oil companies more", "If only...") But Dobson, after a decade of trying to make it happen, realized that they had been seduced by the appeal of power and the illusion of influence. What I find most interesting, though, is... we already know that! We know that the real power to change lives doesn't come from top-down enforcement but from bottom-up encouragement; we know that positional leadership is the basest form of leadership! We know that to truly change lives, you must first invest in people's lives and help them to live better than they had been - we know that already. We just often fall to the seduction of the legislative tempter.
Aside from the fact that we maybe we "shouldn't" use political power to achieve personal spiritual ends, there's also the simple truth that legislating hasn't worked. Dobson and Thomas say time and again throughout Blinded By Might that though they spend millions and millions of dollars, what did they have to show for it in the end? Roe vs. Wade is still in effect, pornography is even more rampant now than it was then, etc. If we look back further, we see even more evidence that legislating Christian morals and ethics hasn't really led to change. Have you ever heard of the 18th Amendment? I wouldn't be surprised if you hadn't. It states that the "manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors within... the United States... is hereby prohibited." Now, can you believe that? It was effectively repealed by the 21st Amendment, of course, but keep in mind: there was enough popular opinion in the country at the time for this to to be ratified as an Amendment to our Constitution, and it still failed! Alcohol consumption allegedly increased, as did violent crime. Temperance had more support than a lot of current causes, and it still failed to really change any lives.
On the other hand, where has real change occurred? Well, look to the abolition movement, or women's suffrage movement, or the civil rights movement. All of those sought to change people's hearts and minds first, before they enacted legislation. The Voting Rights Act of 1964 wouldn't have done anything unless people's minds were already changing. Don't doubt the power of nonconformity.
So, as I go to vote in a few weeks and fulfill my civic and spiritual responsibility, I'm not foolish enough to think that one candidate or the other will do "God's will" more than the other - it would be heresy to suggest that what concerns God can be boiled down to a set of political talking points. I want the Kingdom of God, and no amount of politics can accomplish that. Only the church can.
Since it just seems right, I'll leave you with a quote from a man who believed in working towards God's goals: skirting all around the political framework, but not getting entangled in it.
I have a dream that one day every valley shall be exalted, and every hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough places will be made plain, and the crooked places will be made straight; 'and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed and all flesh shall see it together.'
Me too - I can't wait.
0 comments:
Post a Comment