Christians and Politics

One basic question is, Should  Christians be involved  in secular politics, and how are they to be involved?

          Among Christians, the dominant and influential Roman Catholic Church, has always been in the forefront of moral advocacy, delicately treading the thin line that separates the secular State and the Church, entrenched in the non-establishment of religion clause in the Constitution. The Christian Catholic hierarchy has often been outspoken in speaking out its mind on political, and social issues, which might be viewed as subtle interference by the religious on matters of State. Despite this outspokenness the Catholic Clergy shuns involvement in any partisan political activity and avoids endorsing any particular candidate. On the other hand, the Evangelical Christian denominations hardly speak as one, to the point of temerity, on political and social issues, where such issues do not  relate to matters of faith or Christian morality. 

          A more novel phenomenon has surfaced lately along this line. The entry of priests, pastors and religious leaders in politics. A priest was elected to public office. This poses some very interesting questions. A charismatic preacher is taking a shot at the highest position of the land. In this development where do Christians stand?   

          There are three perspectives which I believe should be considered in relation to this question.

          First, the Transformational Model. This view espouses that the role of the church is to transform and ultimately control politics. Since God is the  Lord of everything, Christians should seek to participate in everything as precursors of this Lordship,  including politics. They should therefore use any righteous means possible to sanctify the political system, seek to pass legislation that reflect God’s will, or perhaps shape the  governing policy by applying Scripture. This would warrant unrestrained involvement in the electoral or parliamentary process.

          The  Second position is the  Oppositional View. This  view  proposes that  Christians should not be involved in all matters  secular, particularly politics. This is  the traditional view held among the  Baptists.  In the Baptist Church where I worship there are church leaders running for public office,  an indication that hard-line theological thinking on this issue hardly holds sway or matters at all. But to go back to this view, it finds support in the declaration of Christ that His  Kingdom is not of this world, and He did not allow himself to be drawn in the political debates of his day (John 18:36). Christians are called to be loyal to Christ’s Kingdom alone and to see themselves as citizens of the Kingdom of God living in a “foreign” land (Phil. 3:20).

          The Third position is the Two Kingdoms Model, of church and state. In contrast with the Oppositional School of Thought, this view holds that “secular” politics are under God’s authority. Unlike the transformational model, however, it does not hold that the politics of the world should be or can be transformed into a Christian system. Rather, secular government and the church are two ways that God works in the world, and they accomplish different purposes. 

          I am partial to the Two Kingdoms Model. The Jewish people were governed by the satellite kings enthroned by the Emperors. The Jews did not like their political masters, who were often corrupt and oppressive. In order to trap Jesus by testing His loyalty, on one occasion the Pharisees  asked Him a question: "Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar or not" (Matthew 22:15-22)? If Jesus had said it was wrong to pay taxes, He would get in trouble with the Roman rulers. If He had answered it was right to pay taxes, He would be in trouble  with the Jews. They expected Jesus to be drawn into this trap. The Lord knew their duplicity.  Jesus asked them to bring a Roman coin to Him. He asked them whose picture and name were on the coin. They replied, "Caesar's." Then Jesus replied: "Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's" (Matthew 22:21).

          There is Biblical support to the proposition that Christians live in two kingdoms. One kingdom is spiritual. The other kingdom is temporal. We are not of this world but we are in this world. We are citizens of the kingdom of Christ. (Matthew 16:18,19; Colossians 1:13). At the same time, we are citizens of our earthly country.  We must be good citizens to both. Our Lord instructs us to render what is due to the governing earthly authorities which rule over us, even as we obey God and  await His great Kingdom to come. St. Paul, the apostle, the Roman citizen and expert in Jewish law, declared: "Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. ( Romans 13:1-7). 

          I believe Christians should be involved in shaping government policy to advance God's Kingdom. Having said this, I am led, to carefully consider the dichotomy of the Office which a priest, bishop,  minister or evangelist holds, as Shepherd of the flock. My religious conviction tells me that an ordained priest, or  minister, who preaches and lives by the Word, has been set apart and anointed by God to  a far more higher calling, that immersing himself in a political struggle for power is unthinkable. His true calling is not  politics, and he should eschew any political ambition no matter how noble or pure are his intentions for he is called to labor in God’s vineyard, and not in the temporal realm. If he ventures into politics then I suppose he should resign his calling as a man of the cloth and strive to be a good  Christian politician. This position I admit  is theologically debatable.