If in the political struggle I am more committed to gaining political power and advantage than I am to my Lord, I will betray both my neighbor and my Lord. I must always be wary of political power. Being faithful to God and loving my neighbor does not mean that I do not advocate for certain political philosophies, policies, or moral principles. I never lose sight of the eternal in the midst of the temporal, never equate God’s honor with my efforts on His behalf. 

It’s a false choice, you know, this “Pietism vs. Activism” dichotomy. It splits the Christian mind and duty in ways God never intended. Pietism would tell us to be separate from the world and its ways because we’re in a spiritual battle, which is somehow construed to be other-worldly.  Activism would tell us to take up the world’s ways, supposedly to fight a spiritual battle, losing sight of what is transcendent in the process.  Both tendencies miss the mark…and the point.

Instead, Scripture teaches an alternative: Faithfulness to God in all things, in submission to the sovereign Lord Jesus, the Christ of God. His truth (which is whole and indivisible), His word, transcend and confront all idols of this life, both private and public. No human endeavor fully captures His truth but must constantly be re-formed according to it. No sphere of human endeavor is outside His truth and must therefore be challenged by His truth.

Since humans are by nature idol-making factories, we will be constantly challenged by His truth in all our arenas. Yet each arena must operate within its providentially-ordered bounds, in conversation with all others, while respecting their responsibilities.

Hence, for example, the Church is not the State, nor the State the Church; but each must speak God’s truth to the other with integrity and courage, challenging the other to greater faithfulness to God – whether well received or not. And if either one departs mortally (yes, mortally, as in “dead”) from God’s truth, the other is obligated to stand against it for the sake of God’s truth.

Ultimately, that truth resolves to this: We must repent of our self-centeredness and submit to our sovereign Lord Jesus, the Christ of God, who is our Redeemer, our Savior, our Joy and Hope. He has a plan and purpose to make all things new; we, who have been rescued by Him from our own corruption and unbelief, participate with Him in His aims, by His power, as He unfolds that plan and purpose to reach His promised end.

For the Christian, that vision is attractive, even compelling.  Yet we live in a secular, pluralistic society. And so it should be, for principled-pluralism is the most consistent Christian view of how human society should be ordered, this side of glory.  Yet, not only will those who do not share our faith not appreciate that vision, they may actually fear it – or fear how we might seek to implement it.  Self-styled “theocracies” are not only historical, they are current, albeit in a Muslim form.  Nevertheless, we should rightly fear any human attempt to bring in the Kingdom of God.  The Crusades should always be a warning to us about the outcome of such attempts.

So then, how does the vision articulated above, which is clearly built on Christian assumptions, work out in actual practice, since not everyone in this nation is a Christian? Here’s how: Ironically, the gospel itself. “Jesus saves me, a sinner.”  My non-Christian neighbor should want nothing less than my total commitment to that gospel, because the direct consequence of that gospel will be, among other things, my commitment to protect and enhance my neighbor’s dignity and worth – even if I must oppose him in the culture in the process.

For instance on issues like abortion or the definition of marriage, I must recognize my neighbors’ yearning for dignity.  They may be pursuing that dignity from a source that will, in the end, deny them what they seek.  But as I oppose them, I need, in the first instance, to acknowledge their legitimate yearning.  Then, and only then, do I have any right to expect that the Lord will use me to turn them from their dead end path toward the one that leads them to the Source of their dignity in Christ.  The Lord Himself, in drawing me to the gospel, did as much for me.

Hence, in my response to the gospel, I must love my fellow citizens, my neighbors, the ones who may not believe that Jesus Christ is Lord. C.S. Lewis rightly noted that my neighbor, next to the blessed sacrament itself, is the holiest object presented to my senses. How I treat my neighbor, even when he is wrong or hateful — indeed, especially  when he is wrong or hateful – becomes a measure, not merely of my politics, but of my faith.

However, if in the political struggle I am more committed to gaining political power and advantage than I am to my Lord, I will betray both my neighbor and my Lord. The consequences of such betrayal can’t be good.  I must always be wary of political power; it is a temptation like the first one in the garden. Being faithful to God and loving my neighbor does not mean that I do not advocate for certain political philosophies, policies, or moral principles.  It simply means that in the process, I never lose sight of the eternal in the midst of the temporal, never equate God’s honor with my efforts on His behalf.

Moreover, the Lord’s resurrection, not earthly advantage, is my watershed hope and motivation for any activity on earth, since all of us who trust Him are promised to be so raised ourselves.

In light of the resurrection, then, we realize that any earthly achievements consistent with the gospel are, at best, provisional and temporary, until He makes all things new.  This is why there is a constant need to re-form our efforts in accordance with His truth.  In the process of such re-formation, we challenge each other and those around us, to greater faithfulness, not out of a lust for power, but as a response of faith and hope and love, looking always to what will yet be because of God’s grace.

The call of God to repentance is itself a call born of His love and holiness. If we are faithful to His truth, we will mourn the brokenness produced by humanity’s common sin, and seek with equal parts courage and compassion to call each other and those around us to believe the truth regarding God’s character and will and promise. The impact of this stance may or may not be seen in any given election, but over the course of time, its moral force will, like water penetrating granite, eventually shape conditions according to the persistence and commitment of those who adhere to it.

In an age overwhelmed by claims that “all is relative,” such adherence to moral and spiritual absolutes (i.e., remaining personally and unswervingly loyal to Christ) in the manner described above, will be decried as irrelevant at best and dangerous at worst – by both sides of the political debate. And to the extent that anyone aggressively protects what he views as his “rights,” to that extent he will oppose anything or anyone that he views as a threat to those rights.

Nevertheless, sustained by the reality of the resurrection, Christians will enter the political fray committed to God’s perspective.  In doing so, they may be drawn to different points along the political spectrum.  And as a result, they may find themselves having sympathy with one political party over another because it promotes that aspect of God’s justice better, in their opinion, than another party.

There are places all along that political spectrum where God has laid down His expectations for how humanity should order its lives within and among tribes and nations.  Justice has many components, but applies equally across the board among all peoples, everywhere, and for all time.  Justice will also require, then, that when lies and corruption are found, they be exposed, without regard to person or station in life.  Further, because of their commitment to God’s perspective, when Christians do affiliate with a political party, they bear special responsibility to be prophets to that party, not merely the lapdogs of that party’s demagogues in promoting unjust and misleading caricatures of their opponents in order to obtain political advantage.

For example, a Christian in the Republican Party should be a voice for the poor and the weak, pointing out the responsibility that the strong have to care for the weak.  Alternatively, a Christian in the Democratic Party should be a voice for protecting the unborn and for promoting the need for personal accountability in all matters, public and private.

Implied in the previous paragraph is the notion that Christians may legitimately differ among themselves regarding how best to organize the State as we pursue a common, godly, moral vision for the nation. Philosophically, there are many valid alternatives. Historically, the United States has committed itself to one: a Constitutional Republic. If that structure is to change, such change should occur legitimately, within the bounds outlined by that Constitution, not in spite of it, and not in a manner that undermines it. The consent of the governed still applies – all the governed. Integrity demands it. And Christians especially should be people of integrity. And if they maintain their integrity, Christians will necessarily find themselves in controversy and conflict when they are confronted with evil.  They will be required to take a stand for their faith or based on their faith.

Christians should take such stands peaceably, “so far as it depends on us.”  However, if those opposing Christians insist on provoking conflict further, Christians should not be intimidated and back away from their convictions.  They should continue to take their stand for the sake of truth, come what may.  Because of the resurrection, we can be reassured that no matter the circumstances of the day, truth will prevail, which is our best hope for peace.

In light of all the foregoing reflections, the responsibility we Christians bear in being witnesses to this present evil age is great.  Whenever we flag in our loyalty to Christ as Lord (both to His position and in response to His commands to love our neighbor), and resort instead to seeking our own personal well-being, pursuing political advantage to obtain it, we condemn the nation as a whole to all our worst instincts as human beings. We Christians abandon our responsibility to be ambassadors from another Kingdom.

Whenever we capitulate to corruption, we, who are to be “lights on the rim of the darkness, giving hope is a storm sea of night,”…let things go dark.  Catastrophe can only follow.  Shipwrecks of every size and description are inevitable.  No, we must take Martin Luther’s famous declaration as our watchword: “Here I stand. God help me. I can do no other.”

That said, it must be added quickly: How we take that stand is as important as that we take a stand.  Taking a stand for truth, with compassion and courage, is the only opportunity society as a whole has for achieving something approaching justice.  Though we may bear the brunt of the rage of the wicked and corrupt, we stand as a shield for others who would wither under that evil but for us taking our stand.  Whether the issue be abortion or exploitation of the poor; be it blowing a whistle on fraud in a corporation’s executive suite, or challenging fellow unionized wage-earners to give an honest day’s work for an honest day’s wage – Christians should be the first to cry out, the first to advocate for integrity and justice.  That cry is neither liberal nor conservative; blue-collar nor white-collar; rich nor poor; male nor female; red, white, yellow or black.  It is simply right.  And so it must be done; or, in the words of Richard Baxter, “we are all dead men.”

These positions are born of my conviction that Jesus is Lord; offered as my prayer for His mercy on us all; broadcast as my plea to my neighbors to refrain from bitterness and demeaning caricatures; remain my aspiration for our nation and culture; and reassure me of my destiny no matter what the outcomes may be in this life.

This perspective is not and will never be fully Republican or Democrat; and it will never yield to distortions, lies, and manipulations put forward by either one in the pursuit of power. Instead, as the prophets and apostles stood opposed to corrupt kings, so we should stand against corrupt leaders today, wherever and whoever they are; always remembering that it is not we who are righteous, in and of ourselves; instead, we represent the One Who is, and we do so in the manner which He commands.

Now….Will we, the Church, so stand?

Ironically, I fear our willful ignorance, cowardice, and compromise more than any Republican or Democrat.

David Wallover is a Teaching Elder in the Presbyterian Church in America and is pastor of Harvest Presbyterian Church in Medina, Ohio.