This Sunday, September 28, Christian pastors in no fewer than 22 states plan to use the bully pulpit of their congregation to endorse a presidential candidate or preach a political sermon. They do so knowing that this action can jeopardize the tax-exempt status of the church. That threat will not stop them. Some perhaps welcome this as a test.
Why are they so vehement about pursuing this action? They are convinced, as an LA Times article elaborates, that they are being prevented from preaching biblical truth, “what the Bible says.” They believe they need to speak out for or against a particular candidate because the Bible has one position and they know what it is.
So if they endorse McCain and condemn Obama because the latter’s position is “unbiblical” (or vice versa, though this stance is rarer), and if you worship in their congregation and have the opposite political stance, what is your place in that assembly? This is tough. You are more than of a different opinion, you are “unbiblical” – and that’s unacceptable. You probably will be called upon to see the error of your ways and repent. You may even be unwelcome in that community of faith if you hold to that position.
I am not arguing here about the serious threat to the church’s tax exempt status by this position – though that surely should not be minimized – but I am even more concerned that the radical inclusiveness of the Gospel of Jesus Christ is jeopardized. The church is in danger of being a community of same-thinkers who have identified their position as the only one tolerated by the Bible. The wide scope of baptism is narrowed to “people like us” in politics.
The fact is the Bible is not of one political stance. It is a complex book of books, the product of individuals and communities over hundreds of years. Yes, it is inspired, but it is inspired for faith – to create faith, to nourish faith, to challenge faith. Its politics are always up for debate. Early on, Christian thinking on slavery wasn’t clear; it was debated and argued – far too long, of course. No less today than in Paul’s ministry, the issue of obedience to civil authorities gets varied responses – often in the same community of faith. The complex issues around life itself are not settled directly by the Bible as if there is one biblical position that is obvious without thought and debate. Think hunger, war, or capital punishment, for example.
These issues and many others are open for debate because the Bible doesn’t answer them directly. Some were not issues then. The answers take shape in believers and communities of faith as Christ is formed in us. When we were baptized, we were not given an immediate political position, but we were given Christ, an identity that is more radical than our politics. Our political positions may be deeply held and fiercely argued, but they are not so radical (rooted) as our being “in Christ” given to us in baptism.
When Christians or Christian pastors try to make one political stance the only acceptable one, they are shaping a community more in their own image than that of Christ’s. Instead of endorsing candidates and making the faith community a particular political party at worship, let our congregations talk about the issues and debate our responses. Let us argue what is biblical, yes, but also recognize the answers may not always be clearly one sided. Let us trust that Christian voters can be formed by the mind of Christ – even those who support the other candidate.
One of my personal thrills is to see the liberal and conservative opening their hands and hearts to receive the bread of communion together – or the Republican and Democrat, or the two friends who just finished a raised-voiced argument where neither convinced the other. Communing side by side. Receiving Christ who, so far as I know is neither a Democrat nor a Republican. Being more than a partisan voice. Captive to Christ and not a political stance. Baptism is the grounding for that deep reality.
Tags: Alliance Defense Fund, baptism, Barack Obama, endorsements, John McCain
