It finally happened, I'm interested enough in politics to write on the topic. Well, sort of. I'm not going to discuss a bunch of specific policy positions or candidates, but instead would like to examine the Christian theological basis for political thought. Even though there's an expected cultural identity for Christians to be a part of the 'religious right', I'm going to argue that this is a betrayal of core Christian values, and that libertarianism is the political philosophy that fits best with Christianity.
So, I begin with a fundamentally important assertion: all law is backed by violence. If you don't believe me, go pick a law and break it. Even if it's a minor offense punished by a fine, you will eventually encounter force if you refuse to pay. So let's be really clear about this. When you make a law about something, you're saying "I think we should use violence to enforce this".
Now, although the Bible doesn't really say anything about the particulars of government (no, the US is not Israel), it sure does set some rules when it comes to violence. In fact, peace is one of the fruits of the Spirit. To commit an act of violence against a non-aggressor is decidedly anti-Christian behavior. Our m.o. should be "If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peacably with all men." (Rom. 12:18).
There are plenty of behaviors that justify a forceful response. Murderers should be stopped and punished. Drunk drivers should be forcibly removed from the road to keep the public safe. What about moral issues? Christians generally do a good job at asking the most basic question, "Is this behavior right?", but when it comes to politics there's a second question that rarely gets asked, "Should we use violence to enforce/discourage this behavior?"
Let me emphasize that this is not an issue of moral relativism. I do believe in absolute truth and morality, but I also recognize that it's not Biblical to try to force someone into Christian behavior. How do we see Jesus and the apostles respond to immorality in the culture? They preach the gospel, sharply rebuke sin, and call people to repentance. Jesus spent a lot of time calling out religious hypocrisy, rebuking those who were only outwardly religious, but dirty on the inside (Matt. 23:25-28). So why should we use the government to force others into hypocrisy? Jesus tells us instead to clean the inside first (v.26).
We can also learn from history to see the disaster that comes when governments try to regulate morality. I won't even discuss the Catholic church because that's too easy. Even after the reformation, many of the reformers went on to establish their own state churches which bred corruption and often persecuted anabaptist Christians. This even carried over into the early American colonies and states, where taxes were used to fund the state church and refusal to attend church was a punishable offense. Calvin's Geneva is possibly the best example of this corruption. Personal morality was heavily regulated by the state, but in practice, the people of Geneva remained corrupt and only added hypocrisy to their sins. T.H. Dyer quotes Gallife, a Genevese writer, who gave the following account:
To those who imagine Calvin did nothing but good, I could produce our registers, covered with records of illegitimate children, which were exposed in all parts of the town and country; hideous trials for obscenity...I could instance multitudes of forced marriages, in which the delinquents were conducted from the prison to the church; mothers who abandoned their children to the hospital, whilst they themselves lived in abundance with a second husband; bundles of lawsuits between brothers; heaps of secret negotiations; men and women burned for witchcraft; sentences of death, in frightful numbers; and all these things among the generation nourished by the mystic manna of Calvin. (The Life of Calvin, p.153)
These accounts of the personal morality at Geneva are not uncommon. I wouldn't argue that the government caused this immorality, but it certainly did little to nothing to stop it, despite the strict intervention. If Geneva was the greatest example of a society attempting to legislate morality, it was an abysmal failure. The conclusion is obvious: you can not use government to force people into moral behavior, they must be changed from the inside out.
Let's use the gay rights issue as a recent example. Now, I don't believe in gay marriage, because marriage is first and foremost a Christian religious institution, which is defined by the Bible, not governments. With that said, should we deny homosexuals the equal protection of their civil liberties? Yes, homosexuality is sin, but since when is it our responsibility to stop others from sinning through the use of force? Do you really think that making their lives harder will stop them from sinning? Also, do we really want the government to have the ability to forcibly invade our lives for almost any reason? If you want our government to have that kind of power, what are you going to do in ten years when someone is elected who thinks that Christians are undesirables?
I also want to touch on the issue of war, which is another area where libertarians take a different position than typical conservatives. I don't want to get into a complete theology of war, but we should all be able to agree that aggressive war is completely anti-Christian and that every effort should be made to prevent civilian casualties if we do find ourselves in a war. Do we not believe in the sanctity of life? Then how can a Christian vote for a politician who is recklessly aggressive overseas? Or one who is willing to kill civilians through carpet bombing? Our overseas aggression has been justified as a 'war on terror', but I think we all need to be reminded that it has been almost 15 years since the US has been attacked and we're now mostly fighting in countries that had nothing to do it. How does this mesh with Christian principles?
So other than politics, what does this matter? First, if we're going to give account for every idle word, I think it's obvious that our voting record will be a part of that. I've given sufficient reasons to not vote republican, and there are even more reasons to not vote democrat. Some refuse to vote third party because they 'have no chance of winning', but do you really want to have to explain to the Lord why you supported someone who promoted violence? I'd rather use my vote as a message, and give it to the right person with a clean conscience. Second, I've seen several instances where the policies of the 'religious right' hinder the spread of the gospel. Ever try to share the gospel with a gay person? When I do, I usually have to spend the first few minutes breaking down walls that they have put up against Christians...sometimes it doesn't work. If they were offended by the gospel or our stance for righteousness, that would be fine, but many are offended by government interference in their lives.
In conclusion, typical conservative policies stand in contrast to Biblical principles. Libertarianism stands as the best alternative. Christians must abandon their undeserved loyalty to the republican party. We should be the first to stand against any policy of unnecessary violence, both domestic and foreign. Our efforts should be focused on converting sinners through preaching the gospel, not moderating their behavior through politics. Finally, we should conduct ourselves in a way that honors the Savior regardless of whether we can affect political change or not.
No comments:
Post a Comment