POLL: Relating to Power: The Christian and Politics

[KingdomBuilder]

I agree. And sometimes it's helpful to adopt the language of the Scriptures if you want to think along the same lines.

If you can't think about right versus wrong without using the terms "leftist", "right-wing", "conservative", and "liberal", then you have adopted a modern political world view as your primary way of thinking about right and wrong. If you can't distinguish truth from falsehood without using the terms "leftist", "right-wing", "conservative", and "liberal", then you have adopted a modern political world view as your primary way of thinking about truth.

I agree. I've honestly been surprised at the prevelance of such language on MN since the election.

[Dan Z]

Before I dive in to my defense of “speaking prophetically,” (choice #2) it would probably be good to define what I mean (& don’t mean) by the term.

To me, a prophet is simply a messenger who proclaims the message of God to those who need to hear it. Often in the Biblical account (both Old & New Testament), prophets would speak out against immorality and injustice, particularly on behalf of the oppressed – sometimes to the people of God, sometimes on their behalf. As I mentioned in my post to Josh, “the goal [of the prophet] is not to usurp or claim political power, nor is it necessarily to "tell the government how to govern." A prophet who does this is trying to be a “governor” rather than a “messenger.”

Quoting myself again from an earlier post:

It seems to me that there are times when an egregious systematic injustice would compel us, as Christians, to express our individual and collective concern to political powers - especially in cases where the injustice is perpetrated against the voiceless. Abortion, genocide, war crimes against civilians, exploitation or violence against the poor or strangers [or children or women] in our midst are some cases that come to mind.

[Dan Z]

Dan: Using the most recent election as an example, what do you think the prophetic voice should have been (or should be) saying?

Not much.

In fact, the midst of an election, with all the threats, promises, misinformation, and mud-slinging, might be the worst time for a Christian to "speak prophetically" to power. Adding words of rebuke to that milieu would seem like the prophetic equivalent to spitting into the wind - and seems awful close to trying to influencing the outcome - in which case, why not vote?

Plus, how does one "speak prophetically" to rhetoric and threats that have no basis in reality yet.

However, I'll admit that, for me, some of the rhetoric from this particular election raises the possibility that a "prophetic voice" may be needed in the future.

[Dan Z]

OK…finally...here is my advertised defense of “speaking prophetically” to those in power (the main difference between choice #2 & choice #1). Offhand, I can think of a number of reasons – here’s the first:

1) It has to do with the example of Jesus, and the way he related to the poor, the oppressed, the powerless, and the voiceless – reaching out to them, gathering them to himself, going so far as to place them at the center of His Kingdom, and extending a special welcome in their direction. His heart for the oppressed was obvious in his actions. In fact, at the beginning of his ministry, he claimed this prophesy as his calling:

• Luje 4: 18 “The Spirit of the Lord is on me,
  because he has anointed me
  to proclaim good news to the poor.
  He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners
  and recovery of sight for the blind,
  to set the oppressed free,
  19 to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.”

Furthermore, he was unequivocal in commanding his followers to do likewise in their regard for “the least of these.” While our calling as individuals and communities of faith should challenge us to lives of simplicity and generosity in response to Christ’s teachings, I believe we would be remiss if we failed to respond publicly to systematic exploitation and even abuse that at times is perpetrated upon the weak and defenseless.

Abortion, for example, is a grave systemic injustice perpetrated against the voiceless. How can we be "the quiet in the land" in the face of it?

...more to come.

[ken_sylvania]

While our calling as individuals and communities of faith should challenge us to lives of simplicity and generosity in response to Christ’s teachings, I believe we would be remiss if we failed to respond publicly to systematic exploitation and even abuse that at times is perpetrated upon the weak and defenseless.

I appreciate the thoughts you've shared so far. Maybe you'll be getting to this, but did Jesus "speak prophetically to those in power" as a response to the systematic exploitation and abuse of the weak and defenseless in his day. Maybe at some point you could share what you mean by "those in power." Are you thinking of the political establishment, or would you also include big business and wealthy individuals who are not politically involved?

[joshuabgood]

I can get behind speaking to those in power in the way which you mentioned if it is a call for them to join the Kingdom of God and become followers of Jesus.

If it becomes us using political power (voting, political demonstrations, etc) to attempt to coerce them to create a more "godly state" with "better" policies then I think we are misguided and will do damage to God's kingdom. What we may forget is that the state is founded on an ethic of power and violence. The state can't exist without the use of violence. Every mandate and law is predicated on violence and coercion. And if we embrace the"power" of the state in anyway, we are embracing the guns and violence at its foundation, which I reject, and which I think Jesus rejected. The state can't exist without oppression and coercion. In my view, there is no such thing as a "godly" state and a there is no such thing as a "godly" or "good" war. The use of violence and coercion are all that the state is based on.

Therefore, in a real way, it doesn't make any sense to lecture the kingdoms of this world on the death penalty or abortion or war...because violence is the only means of their power. And as an empirical and historical reality there are always people groups on the wrong side of the guns and violence of the state. This seems historically obvious, to me, for any political state you choose. Sure the groups that are oppressed and killed shift around depending on who holds the most power...but with a little looking, right there they are. This is also true for the entirety of the USA's existence, not withstanding that we were founded on Christian principles (jk=). There has never been a time, and there will never be a time, when we weren't/aren't morally bankrupt.

Therefore, in my view, we speak amiss if we seek to inform the state regarding what its policies should or should not be. The whole structure represents structural violence. We should speak against structural violence by rejecting the whole system. Peace and equity cannot exist in a system based on violence and oppression. In a sense they are all illegitimate and outside of God's plan and reign, or his kingdom. They are run by, and exist for, people outside of the kingdom of God. Those in power protect their power at all costs against any who would seek to deviate from their coercive mandates. They are the kingdoms of this world. In my view they are the antithesis of the Kingdom of God and their rule is categorically opposed to the rule of Jesus and reign of God which is built on a law of love and a gospel of peace.

So as for our prophetic voice, in my view, yes we should protest structural violence, but the truth is, the entire state is built on what you call structural violence. It always is...and always will be. In fact it can't exist in any other way. And there are always people groups that are on the wrong side of that. Rather than seek to moralize or reform a structure that we know is opposed to the reign of God, and that in fact, cannot exist as a political entity, without embracing coercion and oppression, why not, instead call people to join the Kingdom of God where violence and coercion are repudiated. And call them to leave the violence based structures of the kingdoms of this world?

In the end Jesus is President, which means Trump and Obama, are not. And in the country where Jesus is president, Abortion is already illegal. Racism already is not accepted. Classism and economic elitism is already rejected. And immigration is legal.

*jumps off soap box.

[temporal1]

http://biblehub.com/isaiah/64-6.htm
Isaiah 64:6

Prayer for Illustration of God's Power
…5You meet him who rejoices in doing righteousness, Who remembers You in Your ways.
Behold, You were angry, for we sinned, We continued in them a long time; And shall we be saved?

6For all of us have become like one who is unclean, And all our righteous deeds are like a filthy garment; And all of us wither like a leaf, And our iniquities, like the wind, take us away.

7There is no one who calls on Your name, Who arouses himself to take hold of You;
For You have hidden Your face from us And have delivered us into the power of our iniquities.…

[Bootstrap]

Rather than seek to moralize or reform a structure that we know is opposed to the reign of God, and that in fact, cannot exist as a political entity, without embracing coercion and oppression, why not, instead call people to join the Kingdom of God where violence and coercion are repudiated. And call them to leave the violence based structures of the kingdoms of this world?

The Old Testament prophets often used dramatic acts to make their point. What if we used dramatic acts that make precisely the point we want to convey?

For instance: To oppose abortion, can we tell America that there is no such thing as an unwanted child, and we promise, as the church, to find a good home for every child? That would require sacrifice and getting out of our comfort zone. Or if we don't know if that's possible, could each church advertise a realistic number of children it can raise? A conference might have a web site with a list of churches and the number of formerly unwanted children it is now raising, and the number it can still raise. Please, no restrictions on the race of the children, that would not be a good witness. We would have to think about what it takes to raise severely handicapped children - but that's exactly what the original parents would have to do, too, and they may not have a supportive church environment.

The early church was famous for rescuing infants left to die by parents who did not want them. We aren't.

If we want to protest public schools, can we provide an alternative - even on a small scale - for the neighborhoods who most need a good school?

We cannot be a prophetic voice by retreating into our own safe world and griping about the outside.

[mike]

OK…finally...here is my advertised defense of “speaking prophetically” to those in power (the main difference between choice #2 & choice #1). Offhand, I can think of a number of reasons – here’s the first:

1) It has to do with the example of Jesus, and the way he related to the poor, the oppressed, the powerless, and the voiceless – reaching out to them, gathering them to himself, going so far as to place them at the center of His Kingdom, and extending a special welcome in their direction. His heart for the oppressed was obvious in his actions. In fact, at the beginning of his ministry, he claimed this prophesy as his calling:

• Luje 4: 18 “The Spirit of the Lord is on me,
  because he has anointed me
  to proclaim good news to the poor.
  He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners
  and recovery of sight for the blind,
  to set the oppressed free,
  19 to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.”

Furthermore, he was unequivocal in commanding his followers to do likewise in their regard for “the least of these.” While our calling as individuals and communities of faith should challenge us to lives of simplicity and generosity in response to Christ’s teachings, I believe we would be remiss if we failed to respond publicly to systematic exploitation and even abuse that at times is perpetrated upon the weak and defenseless.

Abortion, for example, is a grave systemic injustice perpetrated against the voiceless. How can we be "the quiet in the land" in the face of it?

...more to come.

So do you define speaking "prophetically to power" simply as speaking publicly? If so, well then of course, I think we should speak truth publicly.

[Bootstrap]

So do you define speaking "prophetically to power" simply as speaking publicly? If so, well then of course, I think we should speak truth publicly.

But how?

I think MC-USA's long list of press releases on political topics is completely meaningless, and producing them has been a distraction from actually doing things. The government doesn't care about the opinions of a small denomination with few voters.

Is there a better way?