Recognizing the need to maintain their unique role in society and the limitations of earthly governments to change hearts, Christians still have compelling reasons to advocate political causes. Unlike the Israelites in the Old Testament or Christians in past centuries, many Christians today live in secular democracies where they have the privilege of electing representatives in government. For example, citizens of the United States aspire to have a government that is “of the people, by the people, and for the people.” As such, every citizen has a civic responsibility to educate themselves, engage in public discourse, and to vote according to their best judgment. On this basis, Christians advocate a “Christian position” for the social good. Although many secular critics may accuse Christians of wanting to impose theocracy, or religious government, most politically active Christians do not advocate the enforcement of religious legal code—there is no Christian equivalent for Muslim Sharia law. Rather, they advocate policies and platforms that they believe are just and right based on God’s standard of justice and righteousness depicted in the Bible.
Not only Christians but all people who vote in a representative democracy do so according to their conscience, or what they think is just and moral. Whether they acknowledge it or not, all voters decide issues based on moral beliefs or principles. That able-bodied people should work to earn the food they eat, for example, is a moral belief that may influence how a citizen votes. Every political philosophy is predicated on some fundamental moral principles. For some, legal precedent lends moral legitimacy to their position. The fathers of the American Revolution saw the Magna Carta in 1215 A.D. as the forerunner of the Constitution of the United States, for example. For Karl Marx, history legitimized his moral positions. In his Communist Manifesto, Marx pointed to a long and repeated history of class antagonism as the justification for communist revolution. The Communist regime currently in power in China increasingly relies on the pragmatism and moral tenets of Confucianism to justify its undemocratic rule, its Marxist idealism tempered by the failures of the Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution. The philosopher Ayn Rand claimed to have based her extremely individualistic, amoral brand of politics on reason alone, but even her reasoning led her to moral beliefs—namely, that selfishness is good and state coercion is evil.
What differentiates the Christian moralist from the non-religious moralist is that the former claims revelation from God through the Bible whereas the latter appeals to other authorities. For the Christian, the Bible reflects the character of God who is Himself the standard of justice and righteousness. The principles of justice and righteousness found in the Bible are not simply a “Judeo-Christian heritage” equal in status to other cultural heritages. They are not legal precedent, historical norms, or philosophy. Instead, these principles are collectively a divinely revealed standard of right and wrong. The Christians’ task is to search out God’s standard of justice in the Bible and to give it preference over political ideology, popular sentiment, and personal benefit. Certainly, both the Christian and non-religious voter naturally tend toward self-interested political positions. But for the Christian, God’s principles found in the Bible serve as a bulwark against greed and selfishness. Their attitude should be the same as the Psalmist, who wrote, “Turn my heart toward your statutes and not toward selfish gain.”[1] Ideally, the Christian voter can be counted on to vote and advocate for what is right according to God’s standard and not just for what benefits them personally.
[This post is an excerpt of my work-in-progress book on social justice in the Old Testament. Feedback is welcome! More on Learning to Do Right.]
No comments:
Post a Comment