The Distraction of Political Entanglement: Part II

In this post, we’re continuing the discussion on the entanglement of faith and politics.

In the Part I, we started off by defining entanglement. I explained that human government is one of many world systems and described how it was distinct from God’s government embodied in the Kingdom. I concluded with the bold suggestion that believers strive to detach themselves from the world’s systems while striving to live in the present reality of the Kingdom.

If you haven’t read Part I, I suggest you go back and read that post before reading this one.

Let’s continue by understanding how a believer’s faith can become entangled with politics.

The Mechanics of Entanglement

So, how do you know if your faith and politics have become entangled? Here are a few clues:

You spend more time setting your mind on the things of politics than you do on the things of the Lord
You tend to view your faith through the lens of politics (rather than the other way around)
You feel it necessary to qualify your faith by referring to yourself as a conservative Christian or a progressive Christian
You’ll be quick to argue with those with whom you disagree politically (particularly on the internet)
Your Christian fellowship is consciously restricted to only those with whom you can politically agree
You spend more time arguing with other Christians about your political ideology than you do encouraging one another with your shared hope
You’re quick to point out the character flaws and moral failings of officials of the opposition party but ignore or downplay those of officials in your own party
You spend more time on partisan websites and news channels than you do fixing your thoughts on what’s true, honorable, right, pure, lovely, and admirable
You belittle, vilify, and make passively aggressive comments about prominent members of the political opposition
You speak of “resistance” toward your God-appointed earthly authorities with whom you disagree
You view law and government programs as the primary means of shaping culture
You look to government to provide large-scale solutions to most every type of problem

Does any of this sound familiar? Maybe we see it in others, but do we see it in ourselves?

How does this happen? How does our faith and our politics become entangled?

I haven’t done a formal study and I’m by no means a social scientist. But based on my own experience and observations, I think it can start with a believer who places significant value in their national identity or has an affinity with the political process. It can also start with someone who believes that every social problem requires a political solution.

Identifying with one’s country isn’t necessarily bad, and there are social benefits to the political process. But we do need to be very careful that our loyalties, interests, and allegiances don’t come into conflict with our identity in Christ. We need to be sure that the political process doesn’t become a distraction to the deeper work of Christ in the world through the Kingdom.

The apostle Paul was well aware of the inclination for believers to be drawn to worldly ideas that seek to displace the Lord and His Kingdom. This is why he warned the believers in Colossae,

See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.
Colossians 2:8 (ESV)

How is it that a believer is so easily captivated by something as relatively weak as politics? I’ve observed at least three reasons.

First, there are people who sincerely love God and also love their country. When you love both, there’s a tendency to try to unify them. They will try to shape the nation after God’s character with the hope that God will continue to bless the nation. Since politics is the means by which we influence the nation, they become overly preoccupied with political engagement which draws their attention from Christ.

Second, some recognize that politics as a powerful force for positive social change. While there was once a time when the church turned the world upside down, we’re now a disjointed collection of independent islands who might recognize one another, but don’t really wish to work together to further the Kingdom. An divided church is far less influential than one that’s unified. Because politics has the potential to produce real change and lasting results by offering a unified front on a variety of issues, it draws the bandwidth of those who seek to do good in the world.

Third, since the glory of the present Kingdom has been lost and forgotten, many Christians see little purpose in their church life aside from showing up on Sunday morning to “get fed”. But politics offers a mission that allows direct involvement. By listening to our media outlets, attending political rallies, and watching political debates, we get to support our “team” in an exciting struggle with real-world implications. Politics has a way of energizing and unifying believers in a way that today’s church doesn’t.

In some cases, believers identify so closely with their political ideology that it can displace their identity in Christ. But much more common is for Christians to view faith and politics as mutually supporting interests. They will try to integrate their faith with their preferred political ideology. But while that are some parts our political ideology might fit into an orthodox Christian worldview, there are other parts that run directly counter to it. This is where things get tricky.

I’ll explain with a little ditty about Jack and Diane.

Jack considers himself a conservative Christian. He holds firmly to the things that both Jesus and the Republican Party might agree on*, such as:

an awareness of sin and evil
the sanctity of life
a responsibility to God
freedom
the importance of family
respect for authority
human dignity
personal accountability
order
justice for the victim
fiscal sustainability

But as a card-carrying member of the Republican Party, Jack is expected to align with several other ideas that Jesus (in many cases) could take issue with. These things might include*:

nationalism above all
“Might makes right”
seeing others as a burden
inherent value in status and contribution
rugged individualism
veneration of the powerful and self-made
vengeance
dehumanization of others
projection of military power
independence
capitalistic solutions (derived from the free market)

Diane considers herself a progressive Christian. She holds firmly to the things that both Jesus and the Democratic Party might broadly agree on* such as:

unconditional love
supporting the poor
equality
social justice
grace and mercy
consideration of others
understanding and empathy
stewardship

But as a proud member of her political party, Diane is expected to align with several other ideas that Jesus might be at odds with. These might include*:

globalism
reproductive rights
forced re-distribution of property
relativism
unnatural lifestyles and identity
“you were made that way”
dehumanization of others
veneration of the intelligentsia
acceptance of sin
humanistic solutions (derived from the human collective)

Of course, neither the Republican nor the Democratic parties are willing for Jack or Diane to follow Christ into things like*:

humility
personal holiness
death to self
exclusive allegiance to Jesus Christ
understanding the value of suffering
love of enemies
utter dependence on God’s sufficiency
rejection of the world
loyalty to the Kingdom over human government
speaking against their own parties in the areas that don’t conform to Christ

* I recognize I’m generalizing on the attributes of each political party. Also, Jack and Diane are fictional characters who may not represent you. If a particular shoe fits for neither you nor your particular ideology, then don’t wear it.

False Dichotomies

So, given the gap between their politics and their faith, what do Jack and Diane do?

Of course, less mature believers will have no problem ignoring large chunks of historical orthodoxy to allow a better fit between their faith and ideology. This can include re-interpreting scripture to better align with their preconceptions. But among sincere, intellectually honest believers, the most common coping mechanism is to downplay or soften the disparities in either their faith or their ideology.

As an example, some conservative Christians are quick to point out the evils of abortion but often spend less airtime on empathy and support for unmarried mothers who find themselves in a difficult position. On the other hand, some progressive Christians will tend to focus on the imperative to love and empathize with the mother while seemingly ignoring the evils and exploitation inherent in the abortion industry. It begs the question, why can’t we abhor evil and affirm the sanctity of life while offering an equal measure of unconditional love and support to mothers who find themselves in difficult circumstances?

Of course, many good Christians do. But the pull of political ideology is strong. Many will be drawn to the confirmation, camaraderie, and excitement that comes with being politically partisan. Unless we guard our hearts, many believers will adopt the mainline perspectives of their preferred political ideology, to include their party’s emphasis (or indifference) on any given issue.

Often, the result is Christians who are divided by political ideology more than they’re unified in Christ.

Because Jack has been conditioned to see everything through a political lens, he will argue that his ideology is more Jesus-like than Diane’s ideology. He will do this by pointing out the parts of her ideology that don’t align with Jesus’ character. Because Diane has been conditioned to see everything through a political lens, she will continue to post thinly-veiled, passively aggressive memes on social media pointing out how Jack’s ideology aligns poorly with Jesus’ character. The world watches while these two declare their “version” of Jesus from within their respective political camps. Rather than witnessing a demonstration love, unity, and forgiveness among the Body, this spectacle only fans the flame of confusion and skepticism among those desperate to behold the true Christ among His people.

Brothers and sisters, we have not so learned Christ.

Jesus Christ is neither progressive nor conservative. (Sorry, He just isn’t.) His allegiance and motivations lie on an entirely different axis. As the Son is the perfect image of the Father, His timeless character is the standard through which all worldviews are compared. If He appears to have a political leaning, it’s probably because bits and pieces of a political ideology just so happens to align with Christ’s character (not the other way around).

Friends, family, politicians, and talking heads will tell us one that either conservatism or progressivism is more “Christian” than the other. They will tell us that we must pick a side to advance Christ’s true mission in the world. But this is a false dichotomy. Rather, Christ is our life (Col. 3:4).

Rather than trying to twist, contort, or sever Jesus Christ into something that better fits our political worldview, maybe we should instead seek to fully embrace all of who He is while rejecting all that He isn’t. For unless we’re willing to accept Him in fullness and reject those parts that don’t reflect His nature, we’ll become a caricature of Christ—a Christian whose reflection is immature, lopsided, and woefully incomplete.

Of course, when we reject those parts of our political ideology that don’t align with Christ, and we emphasize those parts of Christ that our ideology has been suppressing, all that’s left is Christ.

But maybe that’s all we really need after all.

In the next post, we’ll discuss how entanglement has historically effected the church and point out how an environment of distraction creates fertile soil for entanglement. We’ll answer some common objections for trying to separate faith and politics. We’ll also end the series with some best practices of how we as believers can safely engage politics while maintaining our integrity as Kingdom-citizens.

First Things