In just a few days, the citizens (citoyens, comrades) of the United States will decide (rubberstamp) a Dear Leader for the next four years, which selection will have enormous implications for, not only the country itself, but the world at large. Whoever is “elected” will shape American policy, both domestic and foreign, for years to come and will largely determine what happens within the next decade.
The choice is yours. Choose well. Or refuse to participate in the process at all.
Should Christians be involved in politics? This is the burning question which I have tried to answer recently in two blog posts, see here and here. Even though my answer has been a resounding “No!”, I think that I have explained my position badly and fallen short of the real reason why I believe as I do. This is an attempt to clear the air a little, although, it is certain that this will not be sufficient for the task. It is an ongoing “enlightenment” and it will continue until I pass through the gate to an eternal home where I can see clearly through the fog that I experience now.
I have described politics as far more than just government-oriented. Politics, the practice of manipulating and the use of others to benefit oneself at their expense, is widespread throughout society. Unfortunately, this description does not resonate with the general public at all and is completely ignored by virtually everyone. I am, indeed, a voice crying in the wilderness.
So, let’s abandon “politics” for a little while and contemplate what it means to be Christian. Of course, first and foremost, is the belief that Man (both male and female) is flawed and sinful, which renders us unable to meet, know, and understand God on our own. This defect was resolved forever by the appearance of Jesus the Christ into history, Who showed by His life, death, and resurrection from death into life, that it is entirely possible for flawed, sinful Man to become like God, under certain, clearly spelled-out rules:
- You shall love the LORD, your God, with all your heart, soul, and mind, AND,
- You shall love your neighbor in the same manner that you love yourself.
End of argument. Except that we are not willing to accept this as truth, preferring instead to substitute ritual, emotion, and irrationality as our own version of the truth, which we practice faithfully, certain that this will procure a ticket into the very presence of God Himself.
We are pretty good at “loving” the LORD, our God, with all our heart, soul, and mind, but what does it really mean to love our neighbor as we love ourselves? This is the existential question and it must be clearly understood if we are ever to understand what it means to love God. These two demands go hand in hand, they cannot be separated. It is impossible to love God fully and completely UNLESS we love our neighbor fully and completely.
“If someone says, “I love God,” and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who does not love his brother whom he has seen, how can he love God whom he has not seen?” –1 John 4:20, emphasis mine.
Well, all right, you might say, but WTF does this have to do with politics, government, and voting to influence the direction America (or any other nation) travels? After all, if Christians do not influence the government in a positive direction, the direction we deem to be true, right, and holy, then we are all “doomed” to live under a regime with which we do not agree, one in which we find ourselves in opposition against. Hell on earth, in other words, AND we MUST oppose that by voting for the “lesser of two evils”. Which, of course, does nothing to eliminate the evil, but actually exacerbates it since evil, to one extent of another, always wins.
The main problem with this is that it is easy to love government which solves all our problems with our neighbor by brute force and violence, but it is not so easy to love our neighbor through the application of self-sacrifice, good will, and service. Jesus did not say, “Love your neighbor by passing a law which he must obey, whether he wants to or not, and which you must pay for through taxation and regulation, even if you don’t like the extent to which you are taxed or regulated.” Instead, He said quite simply that we are to live with our neighbors, as if they (and their needs) were as important as our own, whether we like them or not.
Here is the dividing line, the distinction. Love for neighbors is voluntary. It comes out of the depths of our hearts. It does not care what it costs us personally. In our own personal relationship with our neighbors, we look out for their good. It does not matter what it costs, even if it costs everything we have, what we consider to be ours and which we are determined to hold onto at all costs, even if we have to pinch our noses as we enter the voting booth and pull the lever, signifying our belief in the “pot of message” which our favored candidate professes.
Love for neighbor cannot be achieved through a political process. It cannot be forced or violent. It must be voluntary. It is personally costly. It is self-sacrificial. We must die to ourselves so that our neighbor can live. This is the message of Christ and the Gospels and it is also that which we resist so strenuously that we have created a different, better way to “love” our neighbor: government, the application of law, and forceful action to back it up. As an example of this, it is quite easy to find a Christian church which steers a young, single mother to a government agency for “help” rather than taking her in and supporting her directly. After all, the government has plenty of money while we are struggling to pay the mortgage on our building, which is really owned by The Bank. Let’s be realistic about this.
Why? Is it not because we are afraid of our neighbor? Do we not fear what he might do to us? If this is the case, then it is better to do to him BEFORE he does to us, which principle is directly opposed to the teachings of Christ, Whom we profess to follow? Does this not create cognitive dissonance in our own minds, causing us to make excuses for all our behaviors, in spite of the irregularities and inconsistencies of our own philosophical and religious arguments? Do we create government, that is, legislation and the giving of “authority” to others, so that we can be secure and safe in our own environment? Do we accept government so that we do not have to be afraid? Yet, Jesus, in His capacity as God, asks us to completely trust Him and to accept no other as a safe haven in the storm. To be unafraid.
“And it makes me wonder.” — Led Zeppelin, “Stairway to Heaven”
In eternity, which I live in presently and will enter permanently within the next twenty years or so, the only question I have to answer is this: How do I love my neighbor? Do I love him from the depths of my heart, wishing, hoping, and working for his best even if that means I have to suffer loss, or do I try to control him through the office known as government, so that I can feel safe, even if that means that both he and I will suffer loss? Is my love for him real and lasting or is it just a face put on so that I can remain secure in my own world? Should I love my neighbor for his benefit or should I seek to control him so that I can benefit?
Politics!
Voting, whether you want to admit it or not, is just a mechanism of control. Nothing more. It is something which we use to indirectly affect how our neighbor will live or die if they refuse to behave the way we want them to. (If you click the link, notice the reference to Matthew 19:19) We can say that we love our neighbor, but if we advocate for a policy which degrades him, hobbles his ability to prosper, or restricts his behavior so that we can feel good about ourselves, then where is the consistency?
Where is the love, indeed?
There is only one reason for resorting to government as opposed to trusting God: we are afraid. We are fearful. We think about what MIGHT happen in the future and we take steps to make sure that doesn’t occur, because it might cause us harm. The actions we take are defensive in nature, yet God calls us to trust Him completely, which compels us to abandon any defensive measures and tactics, even those political in nature. Voting is such a defensive measure and, while it may serve as a feel-good, self-congratulatory action at the moment, it does nothing at all to solve the problem, which is spiritual in nature and which cannot be solved or corrected by pulling a lever in a voting booth.