Has Your Church Been Hijacked by Crazy Politics

Divine Impartiality

God is not a respecter of political parties. A popular slogan of a few years back claimed: God is not a Democrat or Republican. In Hijacked, authors Slaughter, Gutenson and Jones add: or a member of the Tea Party or the Green Party or…. They note: “It is true that individual Christians are members of virtually every one of those parties and more. Each of us strives to live lives faithful to Jesus, and we frequently come to different conclusions about how living faithful to Jesus should be worked out in relation to our participation in political parties. No one party has it ‘all figured out’ when it comes to how God intends us to live, and none has it entirely wrong either. So, we would do well to remember, when we are tempted to think that ‘our side’ has it all correct and when ‘our side’ tries to assure us God is on ‘our’ side, God is not a respecter of political parties.”

Don’t disengage!

Resisting divisive partisanship does not mean political disengagement. “There is a small, but respected part of the Christian tradition that argues that Christians should not be engaged in politics,” write Slaughter, Gutenson and Jones. “According to this way of thinking, the political process is hopelessly flawed and too worldly – so, better to disengage than to participate. We are not suggesting this. Political disengagement is not the only way to resist the destructive partisanship we see rampant today. Christians have an important perspective to bring, one enlightened by their understanding of how God intends us to live together. Too much would be given up if that voice was suddenly withdrawn from political discourse. Resist partisanship? For sure. Disengage? No!”

Is Discussion Divisive?

What do we mean by divisive partisanship? My party, right or wrong! “ Our claim,” write Slaughter, Gutenson and Jones, “is that there is a divisive and corrosive partisanship in our culture, and increasingly in our churches. It is destroying our ability to work together and have civil conversation. When we use the term ‘partisanship,’ we mean the ‘my party, right or wrong’ mentality. We expect that Christians who participate in the political process will vote for members of particular parties, according to how that candidate lives out the issues we find important. However, we have crossed from supporting a party’s candidate (or candidates) to partisanship when we defend our party regardless. For example, if running up public debt is a problem when ‘they’ do it, but not when ‘we’ do it. Another example: If we opposed ‘that’ war when ‘they’ were in power, but favor it when ‘we’ are in power, we have crossed the line. That kind of partisanship is destructive to the much-needed public dialogue.”

Essentials and non-essentials

At least as far back as the early saint Augustine the saying has been popular: “In essentials: unity; in non-essentials: liberty; in all things: charity.” However, today, write Slaughter, Gutenson and Jones in Hijacked, “it seems that we treat far too many of the political commitments we hold as ‘essential,’ not just to our party, but to our Christian faith. Do you disagree with another over the role of government in alleviating the suffering of the poor? If so, that should not be surprising. Historically, Christians have had a diversity of opinions on this question. Do you start to doubt the faith of another Christian because he or she disagrees with you over the role of government? If so, you have confused ‘non-essential’ (our belief in the role government plays in our societies) and treated it as if it were an essential part of the Christian faith. Once again, partisanship rears its ugly head and divides those who should celebrate the deeper unity they enjoy as followers of Jesus.”

Increasing partisanship

The seeming collapse of civil discourse in our culture has led several groups to call publicly for a return to less partisan bickering and to more by way of civil debate. “When asked,” write Slaughter, Gutenson and Jones , “we overwhelmingly indicate that we are tired of the partisan rancor and we claim to hate those ‘negative, attack ads’ that has increasingly become the staple of political campaigns. Yet, we see little by way of improvement in civility and we are seeing the most negative presidential campaign yet. Why the disconnect? In short, because it works! While we say we hate the rancor and despise the negative campaign ads, they change how we vote, by far most often favoring the ones making the negative ads. A destructive, uncivil partisanship has caused some to withdraw (resisting a run for office to avoid the damage and embarrassment almost certainly to follow for their family) and has made ‘working across the aisle’ increasingly difficult. How can civility and mutual respect be restored?”

The same is impacting the church

“Your preaching has become too political!” Those were the words from a recent parishioner after the Sunday morning service. There had been no overt appeal to politics or to political parties – so, why the perception that the sermon had been too political? “As I thought about it,” writes one of the authors of Hijacked, “I was saying nothing different today that I had 30 years ago. A call to follow Jesus, and then a call to care for those Scripture called ‘the least of these’ have consistently been the touchstones of my preaching. Today, though, the partisan arguments over care for the poor have spilled over into our churches, with negative consequences. Glenn Beck recently told his listeners to flee from churches that raised ‘social justice’ issues. In that way, what has been a consistent touchstone of the Gospel in my preaching has been hijacked in service to partisan politics. I had not become more ‘political’ in my preaching. Instead, many in the church were now hearing my sermon through political, rather than theological, lenses.”

You will know them by their love?

“In the reflections Jesus shared with his disciples prior to going to the cross,” write Slaughter, Gutenson and Jones, “he envisioned an ideal future for them. In that future, his followers would be known by their love for each other. If he walked among us today, though, he would have to rephrase that to say, ‘You will know them by their political party.’ Those on both sides try to claim Jesus for themselves. In our current political climate, those surveyed responded that Christians most often tried to claim that ‘real’ Christians were members of the political right, generally Republican. For too long, this was a consequence of reducing the broad moral agenda of the Gospel to a couple so-called ‘hot button’ issues. Be a part of the movement to recapture that broader agenda and to make true of Christians what Jesus envisioned: may it be true that we are known, first and foremost, by our love!”

The ideological bubble

“Like no other time in our long history, we can live our lives safe and secure within the confines of an ideological bubble,” write the authors. “With the advent of the internet and social media age, I can carefully and intentionally surround myself with news content that consistently reinforces my own perspective. I can filter out all those perspectives that challenge my own and focus instead on those that make me feel good, that make me feel smarter than those on the other side, and that draw me more deeply into commitment to my side. Am I libertarian? Tea Party member? Democrat? Republican? It doesn’t matter. With the near infinite number of ‘news’ sources, I can always find ones that affirm rather than challenge me. In time, I can even start my own ‘news’ source and become an active participant in my ideological bubble. Socrates noted long ago that the unexamined life is not worth living. Can life in the ideological bubble, in the final analysis, really be a good thing?”

Is bipartisanship still possible?

Have we become so comfortable in our partisan cliques that we no longer really want it to be any different? Examination and critique of our cherished beliefs is hard, time consuming, and often scary. Are we willing genuinely to hear the other side? “ It’s so much easier to stake out our territory in a comfortable ideological bubble,” write Slaughter, Gutenson and Jones. “But, if we do that, the degree to which partisanship will infect the church will only grow over time. We will continue to see declines in attendance and in commitment to the life of faith. At the end of the day, as comfortable as life in the bubble might be, it’s not worth it. Our project is committed to the belief there are ways forward, ways to reduce partisanship in the church, and ultimately in the culture. But, it will require hard work and intentionality.”

Passionate debate

“Does it seem we are suggesting that we give up our beliefs and commitments in order to forge an artificial sense of unity that avoids the corrosive effects of partisanship?” ask the authors. “If so, let us correct that impression. One of the steps away from destructive levels of partisan behavior is not to give up our beliefs, but rather to become able to discuss them, even debate them, even debate them passionately with each other. The step forward is not to pretend our disagreements do not exist, but rather to refuse to allow our disagreements to drive a wedge between us. As followers of Jesus, we will always have a great base of shared, common beliefs, a base that makes our disagreements small by comparison. Step one to overcome partisan division: Let us have our debates over our areas of disagreement, and when done, let us remember our obligation to express mutual respect and love to all, whether they agree with us or not.”

Leaving the Ideological Bubble

As comfortable as it might be in our ideological bubbles, we will have to come out if we want to move away from destructive partisanship, say Slaughter, Gutenson and Jones. “Rather than hearing only voices that agree with our perspective, we will have to take time genuinely to hear those who disagree with us. Hardly anyone would claim that his or her perspective is right at all points. We realize our own fallibility. Yet, when we live within our bubbles, our fallibility becomes obscured by the cacophony of voices that echo our views back to us. Why do those on the ‘other’ side believe what they do? Who are the best advocates for positions that challenge my own? Am I willing to hear their best arguments and consider them as possible correctives to my own? Moving forward will require that, and to move outside the bubble will require an intentionality to hearing those with whom we most disagree.”

Common cause

“So, what if we have emerged from our bubble, listened to the best arguments from the best advocates on ‘their’ side, but still disagree passionately?” ask Slaughter, Gutenson and Jones. “Well, we accept that this will sometimes, perhaps often, be the case. It just may not be possible to overcome our disagreement on the issue at hand. Yet, to move beyond destructive partisanship, we must look for opportunities to make common cause in those places where we can. Perhaps Christians with opposing perspectives on whether or not abortion should be criminalized will never be able to resolve the differences. But, perhaps we can agree that we should do everything we can to remove factors that lead to choosing abortion. On factors known to impact the decision to have an abortion, those on both sides should be able to join in common cause efforts to alleviate those factors.”

What do you think?

Is rancorous and divisive partisanship all too common in our culture? “While it is affecting the church in a divisive and destructive fashion,” write Slaughter, Gutenson and Jones, “ we believe the ship can yet be turned. It will not be easy, because our natural tendency to see ourselves as always right has been propped up by the ease with which we can surround ourselves with like-minded voices. But, faithfulness to the one we call Lord calls us to turn from our divisiveness and to embrace his vision for us—one in which Christians are known for their love and unity. While Christians may come to different conclusions on a whole range of political questions, it should never be the case that political commitments trump our unity in Christ. We can turn back, and we should!”