Habits are tough to break, and a bad habit is a tough problem to overcome. And problem solving is great when problems are solved, otherwise problem solving can be fatiguing, if not depressing. And it’s easy for tired problem solvers to quit and say there is no solution. But quitting is not proof there is no solution to a problem.
Following the election my pastor made a couple of comments, to encourage a proper perspective and keep our eyes focused on Jesus. And indeed, we need to keep a proper perspective, and doing so is difficult when wrapped up in the passions of party politics.
Dealing with “church and state” seems to be an ongoing problem, or, rather, a recurring point of discussion–as though there were a problem every two or four years. But the regularity of the discussion may be evidence of the lack of a real problem, and so evidence there is a solution, a proper perspective.
As a People we’re never directly involved in our national government, in actual governing. We don’t make laws, or vote to approve laws, or vote to approve or disapprove Roe or even Supreme Court Justices; we only choose representatives. And we’ve been doing that with great regularity, in times of peace and war since the beginning of the nation.
Still, there’s a suggestion that there’s a problem. And sometimes the suggestion, like my pastor’s, is that the problem is secondary. In a way, that’s fine. We shouldn’t fret about politics, particularly if it’s working. But if the suggestion is that we shouldn’t fret about politics, not because the problem is minor, but because politics is unimportant, then I’m skeptical. Perhaps I, the political philosophy junkie, like the pastor, am overtaken by bias but I’m skeptical about discounting the work of politics.
It’s quite true that no politician is going to usher in the kingdom of God and no politician is going to usher it out. But were I more like the skeptical Lincoln, I might respond by saying that no preacher is going to usher in the kingdom, and no preacher is going to usher it out.
God will have his glory. God will save his people. But, as with Esther, it’s better for us to do the job we’re given. Like Mordecai said to Esther:
Do not think to yourself that in the king’s palace you will escape any more than all the other Jews. 14For if you keep silent at this time, relief and deliverance will rise for the Jews from another place, but you and your father’s house will perish. And who knows whether you have not come to the kingdom for such a time as this?
It seems to me that, like Esther, we each have a job to do, even if it’s not in a palace. Of course, voting in a little booth is a lot less scary than Esther’s approaching the king to speak the truth. But although our involvement in politics is limited, can our involvement be anymore unrelated to God’s plan than Esther’s? Can speaking the truth be secondary to “kingdom” work? Can the administration and execution of justice be secondary? If faith without works is dead, what is faith without a concern for justice?
Some have taken up justice as a mission. “IJM’s work is founded on the Christian call to justice articulated in the Bible (Isaiah 1:17): Seek justice, protect the oppressed, defend the orphan, plead for the widow.”
At times, however, I wonder about the commitment of churches. This past election, a number of pastors have said that the Bible applies to politics and have refused to speak in generalities. They’re breaking with a habit that’s formed since the 1960’s when tax exemptions were threatened. At times, I wonder about the habits of churches and the influence of laws and “secular” ways of thinking.
You see, sometimes I wonder if moral relativism doesn’t creep into the church. It seems that preaching against sin, necessary for preaching the gospel, is acceptable, as long as it doesn’t mean being serious about applying it and confronting public life….
Consider Prop 8 in California. Preaching against sodomy was okay, or um, preaching against “sexual sin” was okay, until it meant something real. Now even the moral relativism of “personal” religious beliefs comes in for criticism for donating money to support “traditional” marriage. A theater director gave money to the “wrong” side and has now been forced to resign. See LA Times story here including this:
he basically gave me that thing we’re just sick of hearing — ‘these are my religious beliefs, but it’s nothing personal’ ” against gay people. “I don’t want to hear that anymore. I just told him I’m disgusted at that use of money that came in some way from a show I created.
And see the director’s blog and his resignation letter here.
Here’s the LAtest:
Yes on 8 forces plan a Friday news conference to decry the “outrageous campaign of blacklisting, harassment, and intimidation against supporters of the Yes on 8 Campaign. Churches have been defaced. Employers of donors and volunteers for Yes on 8 have been intimidated into firings, and forced resignation of employees who simply exercised their constitutional right to participate in the political process.”
Some poor woman made the mistake of opposing some protesters in Palm Springs.
And even the “N-word” came out of the closet in some instances because blacks supported Prop 8. Can the church take the heat? Can it do so as a matter of course? Can it stay out of the closet?
Moral relativism isn’t creepING into the church, it has crept in and become embedded. We have become conditioned – we have allowed ourselves to become conditioned – to say “this is what I believe, but I refuse to stand in judgment over what you believe because who am I to say you’re wrong” and in so doing, we have lost our saltiness.
Consider what it means to be salty. Go beyond the idea of preservation of meat – but consider the taste of pure salt on your tongue. It’s not pleasant. It’s not something that morphs into what you think it should taste like based on what you believe. It’s salt. It tingles. And it’s undeniably exactly what it is. Yet how many of us are willing to look a friend in the eye and say, “What you believe is wrong based on the truth of God and His word, the Bible.” Sure, it’s easier with bigger things like needing Christ for salvation, but even in this we hedge, lest we offend those who follow Islam or Budda. But it’s harder – yet necessary – to look someone in the eye and ask how they justify placing economic or foreign policy, things not important to the Kingdom, over something as basic as the sanctity of life. And yet, that’s exactly what so many people who claim Christ just did…with the “justification” that we “can’t afford to be single issue voters.”
We’re so worried about offending our brothers and possibly turning them away from God, that we would rather offend God and risk bringing His wrath upon our heads.
Hey Beth, perhaps you’re right.
Maybe it would be better to say that moral relativism “has crept” instead of creeping. After all, the creeping has been done since the 1950s. (Yes, I have discovered my error; the law goes back beyond the 1960s to 1954.) So the moral relativism has been done for more than half a century.
Still, it can get worse…. we can cave completely and no longer speak at all, not even of “personal” beliefs. We can praise immorality. We can lie to ourselves.
Oh absolutely there’s more we can and should be doing – but I believe we’ve reached a point where before we can really start making a difference in the culture (as a body of believers) we need to first clean house and get the church back on track.
Yes, as believers we need to “clean house”; we need to get the lie out of our own souls. Then speaking the truth can make a difference wherever we are, in the “church” or in public or at home….
As with the kings of Israel, leaders make can mislead, and make the people to sin. (I Kings 16) The way back, however, seems to be another question.
Successful reform is a blessing. Like Homer said, “tis man’s to fight, but heaven’s to give success.” We can do our best, we can fight the lie, but God must give the blessing of reform.
So like Paul says, pray for our leaders; pray for bold preaching.
I can understand every word you “penned” and maybe it’s the fact that it’s close to my bed time but you seem to be operating on another plain than me most of the time — especially here. I do like reading your arguments even if I don’t always agree with them. That’s why this country is great. You’re a political science major and know this stuff inside out and my vote counts equally to yours.
Hey Denis, I just CAN’T BELIEVE you don’t agree with me!
Well, I suppose I could be clearer…. :sigh:
I just sometimes wonder whether moral relativism doesn’t infect our thinking, however much we may be against it. The culture influences us.
Even the practice of voting influences us. Each vote counts equally. I say that’s because no one among us has a right to rule our lives without consent–though God has a right to rule as he pleases.
But just as I think the practice of “separation of church and state” can be infected with moral relativism so too I might wonder about the practice of voting can be infected with moral relativism. So I might wonder whether equal votes doesn’t get twisted to give some support to the idea that every idea is equally valid.
But you seem to understand this perfectly well–that some opinions may be better than another, and God’s approval is best of all. So you seem to understand my point well enough and maybe I wasnt’ too confusing….. ?
If we’re serious that God’s law is paramount, we’re being political; we’re engaging the popular deliberation about the public good. But if we somehow think that preaching God’s Word is not political, is separate from the state, then we’ve been infected with the moral relativism that says beliefs about “values” aren’t factual and true or false.