Thursday, March 29, 2007

Critique and Embrace- Thoughts on Gospel and Government

This blog is the product of a muddled lunch conversation…hopefully it stimulates some thinking and fresh dialogue:

All this political conversation, which as of late we have not been engaging with nearly as much as we have in the past, caused us to consider the notion of politics and the gospel. How might the gospel inform the people of God’s response to the geopolitical situation of our world today?

The modern political situation is complicated, complex, and messy. The war in Iraq, the 15 British sailors being held by the Iranian government, the genocide in Darfur, domestic issues of gang violence, homelessness and poverty, these are but a minute sampling of socio-political issues facing our world today. To navigate politics is difficult enough to do as it is, but then add into the mix Christian convictions in light of the gospel, and things become even more complicated. These issues are much too large to address in the time and space we have. Therefore we still want to narrow our discussion even more and simply suggest a few thoughts on the topic of Christian response to government in America.
One discouraging thing about this whole issue is the fact that government never will be “pure” or “the best.” There is much talk, especially in America, about how democracy is the best form of government, or the Republic is the right way to govern.

Within this discussion, ignorant comments arise such as “communism, in theory, is the purest form of government,” (comments aside as to what this actually means). In spite of all of this, we as Christians know and understand that no system of secular government will ultimately help to solve the real problems in this world, nor is any of them “right.” These systems are simply inventions of man throughout history as we are still trying to figure out the “best” and “most effective” way to govern ourselves. The bottom line is that these systems will ultimately fail. At the end of the day, the peace and security promised to us by all of these secular forms of government can and will only be realized in the final consummation of the Kingdom of God.

And it is within this that we find the tension: how much should we critique our government, and how much should we embrace? Christians have to live in this delicate balance of “giving to Caesar’s what is Caesar’s” but also recognizing that any current form of government will eventually pass away to give rise to a new “better” way. So how do we do this? We don’t really know. Some have suggested that we completely move out of politics (Anabaptists), while others seek to actively be involved in the issues (reformed). And maybe the answer lies somewhere in between, but ultimately, it’s important for us to be navigating our way through these kinds of thoughts.

-BP and KFizz

3 comments:

John A. Dunne said...

Your proposed purpose for this blog was to briefly discuss Christian responses, but it didn't seem like you gave any. Besides mentioning that some are against government interactions like anabaptists, and others are for those types of interactions like members of Reformed denominations, what specifically do you advocate? Clearly we are to submit to whatever authority has been placed over us as Romans 13:1-2 tells us, but what exactly do you propose in light of the fact that we are anticipating the election of a new president amidst these circumstances going on in our world?

Trey Allen, Ben Camp, Kyle Fox said...

It was not our intent to propose or give the correct or right Christian response to government, only to highlight some of the issues involved in forging forward on the issue. I believe we need to be in healthy, open dialogue on the subject. In regards to your comment concerning Romans 13:1-2, I think that that passage as well as 1 Peter 2 only tell part of the story concerning the biblical teaching on the Christian communities posture towards government. These texts need to always be held in tension with the subversive anti-Imperial rhetoric, which pervades the NT. As far as the upcoming election I am opposed to the church attaching itself to one party affiliation or another. Whether Christians should even vote must not be ruled out of the dialogue either. Hopefully this helps to clarify some of my thoughts. Thanks for contributing to the conversation.

-Ben

Ryan said...

Saying that Anabaptists avoid politics or don't get meddled in political things is only accurate when "politics" is the same thing as "America's form of government". On the contrary, Anabaptists are very political...they just happen to believe in a politic very different from the dominant one. This is an important distinction to make, because it influences how we choose to be "political". I think that stuff like voting in the presidential election is hardly the most pressing political question for the church. The most pressing political questions for the church is whether or not she will be a faithful witness to Jesus who is Lord. Whether she will be truthful in a culture of half-truths and deception. Whether she will be peacemaking in a world of war. Whether she will be content in a world of rampant consumerism. Etc.

With regards to John's comment, I would disagree that "clearly we are to submit to whatever authority has been placed over us..." Or at least I hope this view is more nuanced then it sounds. As was already commented, the anti-imperial rhetoric in the NT (particularly in Revelation) must be taken into account. I think it also makes sense to take into account history (i.e. Nazi Germany) at least in our application, if not interpretation of the text.