May 3rd is election day for the Holyrood Parliament. This year Christians (indeed all) voters have the added option of voting for an explicitly Christian political party. This has added significance because our proportional representation system means that there is a good chance of Christian parties actually picking up a few seats if church-going folks do cross their box. Further the potential impact of a Christian Party is increased by the likelihood that in a Parliament where no party has an overall majority even having two or three seats can give substantial power and influence.
So, why on earth, in such circumstances would Christians have any reservations about voting for a Christian party? Well here is one reason to at least think carefully:
Christian Parties tend not surprisingly to centre around a number of moral issues. So the leaflets I’ve seen for the ‘Scottish Christian Party’ highlight their policies on Abortion, Section 28, Capital Punishment, promoting Chastity before marriage, opposing Casinos etc. Along with these are the usual all-party policies on helping small business, being energy efficient, promoting public transport etc.
So what is the problem? For myself it is the concern that a small minority Christian party uses the political expediency of large non-Christian parties to enforce a morality on a society that has no desire for it. For example, the Christians use their three votes to make Alex Salmond First minister in return for concessions on Sex Education. Such a scenario while potentially opening up Christians to charges of manipulation also starts to project Christianity as essentially concerned with legalistic moralism. You see when a society rejects God and moves away from the Gospel it will inevitably want bad laws – laws that are self-serving and give license to sinfulness. That is part of the inbuilt judgement that comes on a godless people. The job of the church is not to impose a morality (from the top downwards) upon people who don’t want it - but to preach the gospel so that as individuals are changed by God’s power they will naturally live better lives and want better laws. Israel had a perfect legal code (one that literally came from heaven itself) but it ended-up morally bankrupt because internally they were a people incapable of meeting external righteous demands.
Imposing an external morality on a nation that has by and large rejected God will not transform that nation and is likely to cause great resentment against those imposing it. The Church’s call is to preach the gospel and live good lives among unbelievers. That is not to say that individual Christians can’t be good politicians or represent godly values in the political world - but we should be very cautious about banding the church under a political banner that feels qualified to both impose morality and run our bus services.
2 comments:
Andy,
While I wholeheartedly agree that Christians must rely on God's power to change hearts rather than trusting in political or legal change, several of your arguments baffle me:
You express concern "that a small minority Christian party uses the political expediency of large non-Christian parties to enforce a morality on a society that has no desire for it ." Yet is it ever any government's duty to wait for society to "desire" morality? Scripture tells us that it is because of the waywardness of society that good laws and leaders are needed:
"We know that the law is good if one uses it properly. We also know that law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious; for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, for adulterers and perverts, for slave traders and liars and perjurers - and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine." 1 Timothy 1:8-10
In fact, Paul tells us that authorities are God's servants regardless of their religious or political stance:
"Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God." Romans 13:1
"For he is God's servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience." Romans 13:4-5
You also question whether the decisions of these elected Christian leaders will start "to project Christianity as essentially concerned with legalistic moralism." Are these leaders not being elected to frame laws, which by definition are "legalistic"? I would think Christians, who know both the law and the Master lawgiver, would be the best people to craft those laws.
And while I agree that "Israel had a perfect legal code (one that literally came from heaven itself) but it ended-up morally bankrupt because internally they were a people incapable of meeting external righteous demands," scripture clearly states that the law is not the problem (Joshua 1:8, Psalm 19:7-11, Psalm 119, Matthew 5:17-20, Romans 7:12). Galations 3:24 tells us that "the law was put in charge to lead us to Christ." And certainly you aren't suggesting the removal of all laws just because people break them?
In response to your worry about "great resentment" being caused, I'd assent, "Possibly, . . . but what about the possibility of clear, clean conviction? The life-changing kind? Shouldn't that, and pleasing God, matter more to us? As many a parent has learned, resentment is often momentary, but a few good laws - faithfully followed and diligently enforced - can bring peace and protection for years.
Your concern "about banding the church under a political banner that feels qualified to both impose morality and run our bus services" has me confused as well. I thought this was about voting for Christian candidates to represent me, a Christian, and to craft laws and govern on my behalf. And finally, is there some reason why a Christian leader cannot take a moral stand as well as "run our bus services"? Which cancels out the other? Which would you discard? Or put another way, do you think the bus service would be better run by an avowedly immoral and uncaring individual?
These are my questions.
And here is my yearning: Faithful believers who know God's will and do it no matter the cost. (Think: Noah, Abraham, Samuel, King Asa, Elisha, Job, Stephen, Martin Luther.)
Men and women of vision, able to lead others even in dark and difficult circumstances. (Think: Joseph, Moses, Joshua, King Josiah, Ezra, Nehemiah, Daniel, Paul, John Knox.)
Men and women of courage willing to oppose wickedness in their world. (Think: Elijah, Nathan, Esther, John the Baptist, Wilberforce.) These are brief, incomplete lists. But they remind us that God does care, and He does use people to accomplish His will on earth.
"You are the salt of the earth. But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled by men. You are the light of the world. A city on a hill cannot be hidden. Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house. In the same way, let your light shine before men, that they may see your good deeds and praise your Father in heaven." Matthew 5:13-15
Hey Andy it is Rich here. Reading what you said made me think about why I did not vote for the Christian party, and I think that how many Christians can agree on their doctrines, and how many can agree on their policies. Then to take these into the public Political arena may be more divisive than anything else. I would say that the churches role is to be the moral Conscience for the state.
Another possible problem would be the formation of other parties based on their faith. Which could be very problematic.
Hope all is well with you
Rich
Post a Comment