May 6, 2008
John Ortberg on Religion AND Politics
Why the human race needs an administration of another kind.
Anybody but me notice that this is an election year? I have loved politics since I was a kid; one of my first and favorite books was a little Cold War classic called Being an American Can Be Fun.
But it’s an odd thing. The church—where we’re supposed to be fearless; where we’re supposed to challenge people on sin, and be prophetic, and face martyrdom—the church is also the place where we’re told, “Don’t talk about politics!” Or at least we’re told that in the kind of churches where I grew up. Other traditions are different. In the African-American church, for instance, for decades church was the one place where politics could be safely talked about; leaving a legacy that is reverberating pretty loudly this year.
Here’s the problem: politics is an important sphere of human activity, and as such God is keenly interested in it. It was the Dutch theologian and politician (why don’t we have more of those?) Abraham Kuyper who famously said, “There is not one inch of creation about which Jesus Christ does not say: ‘This is mine!’”
However, as soon as human beings (including church leaders) start assuming they are in a position to pronounce God’s political leanings, things get a little dicey.
In Abraham Lincoln’s Second Inaugural Address, which remains the high water mark in presidential theological reflection, he notes that “Both (the North and the South) read the same Bible, and pray to the same God; and each invokes His aid against the other.” So maybe a way to place politics in its proper context is with a little thought experiment.
Imagine that we elected all the right people to all the right offices. President, Congress, governors, right down to the school board, city council members, and dog catcher (which, by the way, does anyone still get to vote for?) Let’s imagine that all of these ideal office holders instituted all the right policies. Every piece of legislation—from zoning laws, to tax codes, to immigration policy, to crime bills—is just exactly the way you know it ought to be.
Would that usher in perfection?
Would the hearts of the parents be turned toward their children?
Would all marriages be models of faithful love?
Would greed and pride be legislated out of existence?
Would assistant pastors find senior pastors to be models of harmony and delight?
Would human beings now at last be able to master our impulses around sexuality, and anger, and narcissism?
Would you finally become the woman or man you know you ought to be?
In the words of theologian Macaulay Culkin: “I don’t think so.” Because no human system has the ability to change the human heart. Not even democracy, or capitalism, or post-modern-emergent-ancient-future-missionalism. T.S. Elliot summed up our quandary brilliantly: “We want a system of order so perfect that we do not have to be good.”
Systems are important but they’re also complicated. Historian Mark Noll notes that evangelicals often fail to add value in politics because we like simplicity: good vs. evil; right vs. wrong. Political and economic arrangements are full of complexity and nuance. Well-intended legislation may lead to poor results. When we condition people to think that every bill is a battle between the forces of righteousness versus the minions of darkness, we do not serve the process well. But we specialize in polarizing. No parachurch organization with a political agenda ever sent out a fund-raising letter noting that an upcoming bill was “likely to do 40 percent more good than harm.”
We ought to be engaged in the political process. We ought to vote, be educated, be involved. We should do it in a way that is civil and respectful and redemptive. (I saw a cartoon recently where a guy showed up at the pearly gates to hear St. Peter say: “You were a believer, yes. But you skipped the not-being-a-jerk-about-it part.”) But we should also remember that the church is not called to be one more political interest group.
The human race needs an administration of another kind. There is one possibility. Someone needs to be in a position to say: “The kingdom of God is at hand. Repent, and believe the Good News.” Scholars like N.T. Wright remind us that these words were politically loaded. They deliberately echo or parody the claims of Rome—that Caesar was Savior, that his kingdom was Good News.
The Gospel of the early church was, among other things, a deliberate in-your-face to the empire. Pretty cheeky when you think that the church had a few thousand ragged cohorts and the Empire ruled sixty-five million hearts. It was pretty clear which horse to bet on. But here we are, two thousand years later, and we give our children names like Peter, Paul, and Mary; and we call our dogs Caesar and Nero.
These gospel words of the early church were deliberately politically loaded. But they were not to be co-opted. They are to stand above every human party and candidate and political platform. The church historically has not done well when it gets too closely associated with empires. The gospel words must transcend higher to go deeper.
My daughter got a CD for me recently from an old Broadway show called Camelot.
Richard Burton is singing at the end ad the dream of Camelot is about to perish in a great battle. He sings/speaks in a tone of unbearable wistfulness:
‘Don’t let it be forgot,
That once there was a spot,
For one brief shining moment…’
I wondered why that was so evocative. Until I remembered—there is a longing. But it is not really about Camelot, or King Arthur, or Shangri-la, or Constantine, or whoever your favorite candidate is. It’s for a carpenter-turned-rabbi, who once ran for Messiah, and got crucified.
| Share this: |  |  |  |  |  |  |
John Ortberg is editor at large of Leadership journal and the pastor of Menlo Park Presbyterian Church in Menlo Park, California.
Posted by UrL on May 6, 2008
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://blog.christianitytoday.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1160
Comments
When I was growing up most people referred to the USA as a 'Christian Nation'. I remember one man telling my father, "Of course I'm a Christian, isn't this a Christian nation?" My dad gently explained the difference to him. I also recall the time mentioned above when politics was considered 'dirty' and a Christian should not get involved. Having read the overtly Christian comments of many of our founding fathers it is unclear to me when Christian folk decided to uninvolve themselves.
The great point that I think John is making here is that utopia cannot exist in this present world even with the best of Christians in control because "...there is none righteous, no, not one; there is none who understands, there is none who seeks for God; all have turned aside, together they have become useless; there is none who does good,, there is not even one." This is from the Psalms of the OT and is reiterated again in the NT in Romans. The only thing I would add to John's comments is that that rabbi who "ran for Messiah" and was crucified; still won. This is the only hope that any of us have and what a wonderful hope - is Jesus.
Posted by: Melody at May 5, 2008
The first thing any and every human being will discover when they recreate their own little garden of eden here on earth is that they are now the snake.
Posted by: sheerahkahn at May 5, 2008
our allegiance to Christ transcends politics, but it also necessarily informs politics. We can't help but get our hands dirty with advocacy at some level.
Posted by: John at May 5, 2008
That Messiah not only got crucified, but God raised him from the dead; and that's really revolutionary!
Posted by: Pastor M at May 6, 2008
good piece, with good thoughts. but i had a little trouble with this taken-out-of-context-so-shoot-me couplet:
The Gospel of the early church was, among other things, a deliberate in-your-face to the empire.
and,
“You were a believer, yes. But you skipped the not-being-a-jerk-about-it part.”
a lot of evangelicals like to line up behind rush limbaugh, laura ingraham, sean hannity, glenn beck, etc. etc., but i have felt for awhile now that they have done more harm than good to our society here in America. they have worked to polarize our people, and have consistently tried to paint each issue as having one right answer. they go further - they demonize any opposition.
the church, too, can make this same mistake. we can be so heavenly minded that we're no earthly good. sticking to principles does not mean you never look for a best solution. and it certainly needs to be done with humility that understands hey, you know, i just might be wrong on this. the early church attracted people because of the good it did; the gospel may have been an "in-your-face" message, but they attracted the bees because they had honey.
i've talked before about the inverted bell-curve we have here now, with everyone staking out a position at the ends and no one meeting in the middle. i think the middle is the place for the church right now, building bridges, helping find solutions, trying to unite again a deeply divided country.
still waiting for a viable presidential ticket. i already wrote your speech for you to declare your candidacy if you want to use it. of course, i might just have to do it myself. anyone interested in veep?
mike rucker
fairburn, georgia, usa
Posted by: mike rucker at May 6, 2008
Good piece John. It reminds me of one of my favorite books, "The Politics of God and the Politics of Man" by the famous sociologist Jacques Ellul.
Posted by: Jonathan Stone at May 6, 2008
I appreciate your thoughts and can agree on some of your points John. Thank you for the well-written article. I suppose that I should apologize in advance for the length of this post, because I have a few thoughts/questions on the subject and would love to engage in some discussion on these points.
As a young adult and a relatively new comer to the political process I seem to find a real disconnect from what I read in the scriptures regarding Jesus and what I see unfolding in both American and Canadian politics. I am very open to the possibility that I am wrong on these following points but didn’t the Jews want Jesus to come as a political leader? Isn’t that what they were looking for? Didn’t they desire to be freed from the Empire through the way of power, might and authority? Didn’t Jesus come and turn that thinking on it’s head?
It seems to me that He came and modeled a life very contrary to a political figure. He may have used very political language, words dripping with innuendo and sarcasm directed toward the Empire, but does that suggest He was engaging with the political powers of His day? Or does it perhaps mean He was poking holes in the way of power and authority, pointing to a new kingdom, a new way, a new Messiah?
For years I believed that Jesus was very interested in our man made political ways. Since, He is God He must be interested I reasoned. And now with closer examination I am not so sure. Since we evangelicals talk so much about placing the “right person” in power don’t you think that Jesus would have actually been the “perfect person” to be in power. So why didn’t He sign up for the job? Why didn’t Jesus model for us a life in politics? Why does it seem, that actually the He may have taught against it?
Posted by: Elle at May 6, 2008
The worst thing you can say about this article is that it is too short.
Ortberg addresses our longing for perfection in winsome fashion. He also gives the subtle backhand to those in our community who, if given the choice between the "Conservative" and something less/more than that, will simply not vote at all. That is poor citizenship.
Posted by: Joseph Edward Brand at May 6, 2008
Believers speak out against all kinds of obscenity, but I haven't heard anyone speak out against the amount of money that has been spent on these endless political campaigns—that is truly obscene.
That money could be better used to address some of the social ills that run riot in the US. Jesus would certainly be more concerned about the poor and ill than He would be about posters, ads, buying favor and empty rhetoric.
Posted by: Lynda Schultz at May 6, 2008
Jesus never 'ran' for Messiah. He was the Messiah that had been prophesied about for hundreds of years in the Old Testament to fulfill God's plan from before time began. The rhetoric of politics shouldn't become the semantics of the cross.
Posted by: Phil Garwood at May 6, 2008
"Faith loses its independence when Christians become 'useful idiots' for one political party or another, and Christian faith becomes an ideology."
--source unknown
Posted by: Sara at May 6, 2008
excellent post. thanks
peace.
Posted by: britt at May 6, 2008
John Ortberg hits the mark AGAIN. I live in South Africa so the political wranglings in the US are just a 2 minute evening news item to me. However our neighbours to the north (Zimbabwe) have very real POLITICAL WRANGLINGS at the moment, but in the midst of that, God's church is marching on in that country. Once again we see the scriptural pattern - God's primary mission in this world (the redemption of souls) is not subject to politics and I for one am grateful for that.
Posted by: Rob at May 7, 2008
Can ANYBODY be prophetic and not be seen as a jerk? (at least by those in the cross-hairs of the prophetic message)
I doubt it.
Posted by: Jarrod at May 7, 2008
Great article, John, and great comments above, too. The problem with the church today is that it lets politics define its kingdom agenda. It has thus become selective in its issues. The Conservative Right wing of evangelicalism has also allowed itself become deeply partisan (same goes with some in the left) thus tainting the message of Christ. Abortion and gay marriage so riled up the church as if these are the only issues that define the kingdom. I think, divorce has destroyed the Christian family value more than gay people have. But we demonize homosexuality because it is a sin that most of us don't commit. Divorce is not spoken about because the church looks exactly as the world does on this front. Jesus spoke more about greed than anything else but I have never heard any Christian leader speak against the abuses of the sub-prime lending in Wall Street. WE have placed the markets above the message of Christ. Politics must be placed within the ambit of the kingdom. Instead of the other way around.
Posted by: Jojo Lacanilao at May 7, 2008
John,
I am writing from Panama (Central America).
I just want to say "thanks" for always daring to write about the hard subjects that we, Christians, must face in this world of ours.
Posted by: Orlando at May 10, 2008