For decades pastors have been timid about
preaching politics from the pulpit. The Old Testament prophets would have been
stunned by such timidity. A good many modern-day churches believe that they have some
very good biblical reasons for not touching on the subject of politics from the
pulpit. Many believe they are prohibited from doing so because it will
jeopardize their tax-exempt status. It won’t, but even if it did, so what?
Faithfulness to the Bible is every Christian’s calling regardless of the financial
consequences, including the loss of your church’s tax-exemption. Such a
development might clear out the “almost Christians.” Then there are the
typical arguments for non-involvement that I deal with in my book Myth’s,
Lies, and Half-Truths:
· Jesus
didn’t get mixed up in politics. (He didn’t own a house, get married, or have
children).
· Politics
is dirty. (What isn’t?).
· Our
citizenship is in heaven. (True, but it didn’t stop Paul from demanding justice
from the Roman Athorities [Acts 16] and using his Roman citizenship [Acts 22]).
· You
can’t legislate morality. (Every law is the legislation of someone’s view of
morality).
· Christians
should remain neutral. (Impossible. Not to be involved only gives more power to
those who are involved).
· We’re
living in the last days. (How long have we been hearing this excuse?)
Ministers
of another era saw it their biblical duty to preach about politics from the
pulpit because the Bible addressed every sphere of life, civil government
included. Harry Stout opens a window into the colonial era by pointing out
the effect preaching had on the young nation:
Over
the span of the colonial era, American ministers delivered approximately 8
million sermons, each last one to one-and-a-half hours. The average 70-year old
colonial churchgoer would have listened to some 7,000 sermons in his or her
lifetime, totaling nearly 10,000 hours of concentrated listening. This is the
number of classroom hours it would take to receive ten separate undergraduate
degrees in a modern university, without ever repeating the same course! The
pulpits were Congregational and Baptist in New England; Presbyterian, Lutheran,
and German Reformed in Pennsylvania and New Jersey; and Anglican and Methodist
in the South. But no matter the denomination, colonial congregations heard
sermons more than any other form of oratory. The colonial sermon was prophet,
newspaper, video, Internet, community college, and social therapist all wrapped
in one. Such was the range of its influence on all aspects of life that even
contemporary television and personal computers pale in comparison.1.
These
colonial pastors were well aware of the politics of the day, both in America
and in their country of origin. Many of them made the trek to the New World
because of politics. It was Old World preaching on the nature and limits of
civil government that led the Pilgrims to embark on an effort to create “a city
on a hill.” These early founders brought their worldview preaching to an
unknown but promising new land. “They hoped—and this was the point of the New
World mission—that England would take note of this decentralized but sill
coherent ‘nation’ and imitate it. In the meantime, New Englanders would keep
the covenant alive in their own corner of the New World and signify that fact
on election day.”2 It is no less true today.
All discussion of the duties of the
citizenry and those called to minister in the civil sphere must begin with the
Sovereign God of Scripture. Any opinion that civil government is an autonomous
work of nature cannot be supported by a faithful reading of the Bible. There is
no neutral “social contract” whereby men and nations agree to legitimize civil
government. The “social contract” theory of the origin of civil government is
the religion of Babel (Gen. 11).
Family,
church, and civil governments are not contractual. For example, marriage is a
divine government, instituted by God at creation (Gen. 2:22-25). The covenant that men and women
make in marriage is modeled after the divine model of relationships, the duties
of which are set forth in Scripture. The husband, therefore, is to model the
love for his wife after the love Jesus has for the church in giving Himself up
for her (Eph. 5:25).
Ecclesiastical
government (church government) results from Christ’s institution. Jesus
declares that it is His church that is to be built (Matt.16:18).
When Christians establish local churches, the divine blueprint must be
followed. There are earthly rulers in the church (Acts 20:28; Heb. 13:17), but Jesus is the head (Eph. 5:23). There are many locales where
churches operate, but the living Christ is their authority (Matt. 28:18; Rev. 2:12-17).
As in
family and ecclesiastical governments, civil government is an extension of God’s
rule over nations: “For the kingdom is the Lord’s, and He rules over the
nations” (Psalm 22:28). Man, on the other hand, copies
or images the government of God in the civil sphere: “Thou dost make him to
rule over the works of Thy hands; Thou hast put all things under his feet” (Psalm 8:6); “Let every person be in subjection
to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from
God, and those which exist are established by God” (Rom. 13:1). The specifics of civil government,
like those of marriage and ecclesiastical governments, are set forth in
Scripture. Governmental principles do not flow “naturally”; they, too, are
ordained by God.
Four primary duties proceed from the
biblical model established for civil government:
First, the
people must understand their obligations as citizens. Because governmental
power is God-ordained, certain obligations are part of the governmental
process. There can be no autonomy among the citizenry. Anarchy—power invested
in the individual to do what he or she feels or believes is right—is not
tolerated by God. The Zealots of the New Testament sought the overthrow of
tyrannical civil government through the power of the sword placed in the hands
of the “chosen” few. Gamaliel recounts the history of such attempts: “For some
time ago Theudas rose up, claiming to be somebody; and a group of about four
hundred men joined up with him. And he was slain; and all who followed him were
dispersed and came to nothing. After this man Judas of Galilee rose up in the
days of the census, and drew away some people after him, he too perished, and
all those who followed him were scattered” (Acts 5:36-37).
Second, those
who minister in the civil arena must understand that they derive their
authority from God Himself. Civil government is not an independent government
outside the jurisdiction of God’s sovereign rule. But rulers are not directly
chosen by God as were Moses and Joshua (Num. 12:1-8; Deut. 34:9-12). God made provision for the
ratification of leaders through a godly citizenry.
Third, in a
Christian society, the people endorse those who rule by voting them into office
and they confirm the laws they enact by keeping them in office. This is why
Jethro instructed Moses to “teach [the people] the statutes and the laws, and
make known to them the way in which they are to walk, and the work they are to
do” (Ex. 18:20).
Fourth, there
is no legitimate claim to a “divine right” whereby rulers can enact any law.
All rule must be in terms of God’s revealed law. It is important to note that
citizens, especially Christian citizens, have an obligation to question
unbridled and autonomous political power. This is why at the death of Solomon
“Jeroboam and all the assembly of Israel came and spoke to Reheboam” about the
tyrannical rule of the king (1 Kings 12:3). A Christian society, as a
“holy” and “royal priesthood” (1 Peter 2:5, 9; cf. Ex. 19:6), has a duty to confront the
unrighteous in civil government.
One of
the problems with respect to obedience is that too many commentators are still
under the influence of a medieval and reformation perspective which at this
point is very faulty. This influence is the divine right
doctrine, which assumes that divinely ordained authority is beyond
questioning. The divine right of kings gave way, for many, to the divine right
of husbands, an equally pernicious idea. Indeed, all legitimate authority is
established by God, but this does not entitle authorities to the unquestioning
obedience God alone is entitled to. All human authorities are
to be obeyed in the Lord, i.e., in terms of a questioning and
devout attention to the word of God as superior to man.3
Christians are obligated to obey those
in authority, leaders are required to rule in terms of God’s Word, but no
earthly authority must be obeyed in all cases. There are times
when “we must obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29). Again, the Bible is our guide. Human
government, therefore, resides under the control of God. Justice reflects the
righteousness of God, while the need for retribution reflects the sinfulness of
man. The temporal powers, when exercising authority as a ministry of justice,
must know and enforce the parameters of justice. This makes for the working of
a just society (not a perfect society). There is to be no bias judgment; no
favorable treatment under the law; no partiality in judgment. Righteousness is
the standard.
Just as
God, the supreme Judge, is no respecter of persons (Acts 10:34; Rom. 2:11; Eph. 6:9; Col. 3:25) and is Himself absolutely
righteous, so too those who exercise governmental authority on earth are
required to display impartiality towards all without exception—otherwise they
show themselves to be betrayers of the power entrusted to them and despisers
of the law they administer. Thus the judges of Moses’ time were solemnly
charged, “You shall not be partial in judgment; you shall hear the small and
the great alike; you shall not be afraid of the face of man, for the
judgment is God’s” (Deut. 1: 7).4
In this
way citizens and civil representatives know the extent of jurisdiction.
Freedom and security prevail under such a system when the people realize
rulers “do not judge for man but for the Lord” (2 Chron. 19:6). The fear of the Lord should
guide the heart of all who rule. Citizens have a duty to remind rulers that
“the Lord our God will have no part in unrighteousness, or partiality, or the
taking of a bribe” (v. 7).
The Bible gives many examples of
Christians involving themselves in the political process. Many Christians
consider politics a dirty business, an area where Christ has no business. If
politics is “dirty,” it becomes necessary for Christians to involve
themselves. Here are a few examples of political involvement from the Bible. Noah,
as an agent of the civil magistrate, is given authority to execute murderers (Gen. 9:1-7); Joseph is made ruler in Egypt
(41:38ff.); Israel is kept in bondage by a political ruler who sets himself up
in opposition to the kingdom of God (Ex. 1:8; 5:1-21); God gives instructions to both
priests and kings (Deut. 17:14-20); the
book of Judges shows the interrelationship between religion and rule; First
Samuel 8 shows how the rejection of God as Israel’s true King leads the
people to choose an earthly king as a substitute (an attempt to equate the
State with the kingdom of God); the books of Samuel, Kings, and Chronicles tell
the story of the rise and fall of kings and kingdoms; and individual kings are
singled out for special counsel (Jer. 38:17-28). The list could go on.
That
God is vitally concerned with political affairs is quite easy to demonstrate:
it is God who ordained governments in the first place (Rom. 13:1; Rom. 2:21). He is the One who establishes
particular kings (Prov. 16:12; Psa. 119:46, 47; 82:1, 2). Therefore, He commands our obedience to
rulers (Rom. 13:1-3). Rulers are commanded to rule on
His terms (Psa. 2:10ff. ). Even in the New Testament
activity of political import is discoverable. Jesus urged payment of taxes
to de facto governments (Matt. 22:15-22). In response to reminders of
King Herod’s political threats against Him, Jesus publicly rebuked the king by
calling him a vixen (Luke 12:32). He taught
that a judge is unjust if he does not fear God (Luke 18:2, 6). John the Baptist openly criticized King
Herod (Luke 3:19, 20). Peter refused to obey authorities who
commanded him to cease preaching (Acts 5:29). The Apostle John referred to the
Roman Empire as “the beast” (Rev. 13).5
The denial of political involvement is
the denial of most of the Bible. Christians are responsible to act righteously
as citizens and, if God so calls, to participate in politics in a ministerial
capacity. Every regenerate man is a priest, a minister of God (Isa. 61:6; 66:21; 1 Peter 2:5, 9; Rev. 1:6). Citizenship is closely tied to
righteousness. Jesus Christ is King of the church and “Lord of
lords and King of kings” (Rev. 17:14).
1.
Harry S. Stout, “How Preachers Incited Revolution,” Christian
History, Issue 50 (Spring 1996), 3 [↩]
2.
Harry S. Stout, The New England Soul: Preaching and Religious
Culture in Colonial New England (New York: Oxford University Press,
1986), 29. [↩]
3.
Rousas J. Rushdoony, Salvation and Godly Rule (Vallecito,
CA: Ross House Books, 1983), 390-391. [↩]
4.
Philip Edgcumbe Hughes, Christian Ethics in Secular
Society (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1983), 185. [↩]
5.
Kenneth Gentry, “The Greatness of the Great Commission,”
in The Journal of Christian Reconstruction, Symposium on
Evangelism, ed. Gary North, 7:2 (Winter, 1981), 45. [↩]
