More political thoughts. Or, probably more accurately, a barely edited spew of political train of thought. Well, political which then morphs into a sermon, maybe. So, if you’re not Christian, you may not be interested in this whole post. But, anyway, here it is. You can sort out whether your interested or I’m a kook.
I really hope that the brains behind the Republican party are thinking about these things. But, frankly, I doubt it, since I think they are more concerned with power than values. I find myself hoping for the death of the GOP so that the issues are forced. Anyway, more random thoughts:
The thought that captured my mind yesterday was just how much messianism pervaded the election on both sides. I’m going to focus on the Republicans, though, specifically my fellow “social conservatives.” I know I was buying into messianic thought during the primaries. My own “not McCain” sort of thinking has its roots in this. I was viewing Mr. Huckabee as the solution to the abortion problem. (Don’t debate abortion here, please. That’s not my point. Well, I guess if you want to, feel free to. Just keep in mind that it isn’t what I’m talking about here so I won’t respond unless what you say is particularly provocative.) While it’s true that we have a unique opportunity to directly choose our chief executive in the US and therefore need to use this ability well, in a manner which reflects our values, this sort of messianic thinking is dangerous and wrong from two perspectives which I claim to hold.
First, the simple case. My primary perspective is that of a Christian. Well, from that perspective, messianism belongs only the Messiah – Jesus Christ (which, of course, is redundant). Viewing political leaders in any sort of messianic light is, quite simply, idolatry. (I’m not going to bother mincing words here.) I’m not saying that all of my Christian brothers and sisters were being idolatrous during this election cycle, but I do challenge everyone to examine themselves. Where we have been guilty of idolatry we need to confess it and move on, taking a more sane approach to our interactions with this democratic republic in which we live. (I call everybody to this.)
Second, the less simple case. This is where we can learn something from our libertarian conservative friends, and where think conservatives have, in general, lost touch with their values. If I recall correctly, it was Jefferson who said, “The government which governs best is the government which governs least.” From this, we conservatives draw the principle that the government is not the source of solutions. Instead, it is the people who solve problems if the government stays out of the way. So, why is the election of someone who is decidedly from a different political perspective an issue? Granted, it will make it harder to keep the government out of the way, but why were we looking to the government to solve our problems? I understand the issue of the appointment of judges, and I am thankful for the changes that have taken place in SCOTUS over the last eight years. However, I’m suggesting that there is a better, less ephemeral, solution.
The problems that face this country (abortion, poverty, education, and energy reliance, to name a few) are all based in greed. The real solution to greed is not legislation, and this is where my first perspective, that of a Christian, is going to come back in. We can patch over these problems and constrain sin through the law. We do this with things that I think everyone can agree on – murder, theft, assault, battery, rape. I would contend that the other problems are really no different. The real issue with abortion is that of the value of people – if an unborn child is a person, then that child must be protected. (This is something on which I disagree with 75% of the state of Colorado according to our most recent election.) If a person is created in the image of God, then we must intervene in cases of poverty (read your New Testament, Christians, if you don’t agree). It is through education that the mind of a human is developed, and is therefore a moral issue. The real problem with dependence on foreign sources for energy is not so much interdependence around the globe, but that it forces the US, as a democratic republic, to compromise its principles to continue the flow of energy.
The problem is this – we as a society agree with the legislation of moral issues. Yes, we do. Refer again to murder, theft, assault, battery, rape. However, we don’t collectively see the other issues as moral ones. One “side” sees a subset of them as moral issues while the other “side” sees a different subset of them as moral issues. (In reality, individuals see a different subset than either “side” does.) So, why does that difference exist? Why is that we see some things as moral issues but others as issues of “choice” or “natural consequences” or completely amoral issues (like energy dependence) that only require pragmatic solutions?
I’d contend that the problem is the heart. And there is only one lasting solution to issues of the heart, and that is Jesus.
Application? Christians, step up. Stop waiting on government and elections to solve problems. Get involved. Pray, speak out about abortion, fight poverty, HELP WITH YOUR OWN HANDS. But, here’s the thing. We’re not trying to take away anything, but that’s how it is perceived. So, we must demonstrate that we have a loving relationship with our Creator and that we are trying to bring people into that relationship. That is what we’re concerned about, right? Not just avoiding judgement because of the murder of 50M babies? Not just avoiding judgement because the US might not continue to protect Israel? What are our motives? Are they fulfilling the Great Commission or maintaining our lifestyle?
Anyway, it’s time for lunch. Discuss!
Recent Comments