The Problem of Political Faith

Jesus is repetitive, and his Judean hearers do not get the message because of the power of the dominant myth to exclude other possible truths.  -- Wes Howard-Brook in Becoming Children of God

Today, I read an article where an author was making an attempt to define conservative and progressive Christians.  In his eagerness to define the two groups, he used theological terms to try and describe political realities. The purpose of the article was to analyze how different Christian identities impact political and faith practices.  I would disagree with the author in understanding that both self-identified conservative and self-progressive Christians can agree on the Inerrancy of Scripture and the centrality and exclusivity of Jesus in salvation (those are the two criteria he used).  I share this only to emphasize the politicization of Christian identity formation.  In fact, there is often such a fierce affinity towards political realities, that it is often fused into the culture of many faith communities.  Without their identity being defined, church members will readily tell you that there church is "conservative" or a "progressive" church and often can give examples of demonization of the other political identities, often from the pulpit itself.

As most people who know me would tell you:  I strongly dislike the terms "conservative", "liberal", "progressive",  The terms are most often used as political terms of inclusion or exclusion, depending on who is using the term.  Each term has connotations that are well beyond a single ideological framework and evoke an instant antagonism and objectification of others.  The truth of the matter is that whatever criteria is used for a given political identity, it typically is applicable to a single aspect of that person or group.  For example, someone can be conservative in their economic practices (relatively risk-adverse) but very progressive socially (seeking to change social systems).  

Numerous commentators have documented that Christians often identify with their politics above their religious affiliations.  So people who identify as "conservative" will gravitate toward churches that are informed by the ever changing conservative political agenda and likewise those who identify as progressive with today's version of what it means to be progressive.  The opposite is not often true.  Rarely do we find people who allow their political participation to be informed by their faith convictions.  This is not only an American phenomena but we see this all over the world. 

Speaking to the political and tribal identities that informed and fueled the horrific genocide of nearly one million fellow Rwandans, who were overwhelmingly Christian, Theologian Emmanuel Kotangole said the following:

"If Christian-identity has any chance of subverting or at least resisting the tribal loyalties of our time, Christians will have to recognize the ways in which politics not only shapes our view of the world and ourselves, but also the tribal patterns we so easily overlook." (Excerpt from Mirror to the Church)

From a Christian perspective, it is important to understand Jesus in his context and his unwillingness to allow the political movements of his day to inform his worldview, but sought to invite incredibly contrasting people into what would be a completely new movement.  Those seeking to conserve social structures (Pharisees) were invited into community with violent revolutionaries who sought to overturn their social order.  The polarization did not prevent participation in Jesus' movement and we do not get the indication that those who participated were guided away from their basic political orientations.  In fact, the radical nature of Jesus' movement was that it was proclaiming and demonstrating an alternative, that included elements of existing ideologies, but much more complete and missional.  

The early church made it clear that its mission was to develop Jesus-centered communities that obliterated the dominant (in first century Palestine, the Roman imperial culture) political philosophies on ethnicity, gender, and social classes.  

for in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith.  As many of you as were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ.  There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus.  And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's offspring, heirs according to the promise.

Galatians 3:26-29 NRSV

This scripture does not mean that once a person becomes a child of God that they lose their cultural and social identities.  A Jewish member of the Galatian community did not lose their Jewish heritage or its cultural influence on their personhood.  A male did not become genderless as a member of the community and a slave did not become a landowner by faith.  All of these people and their collective identities were seen in light of who they were in Jesus.  In the Jesus movement, no ethnicity, gender, or social class was "chosen" and privileged.  Alternatively, no ethnicity, gender, or social class were also diminished or disregarded.

The American church is dying.  There have been volumes written on this decline and hundreds of different reasons for this.  I believe that the single greatest reason for our decline:

We have stopped participating in Jesus movement but have been seeking to develop politically informed institutions that are based more on power and protection of self, than love of neighbor.

This is not saying that God's Spirit is not active and moving in the world, but that God's Spirit is leading but we often prefer our own paths with people who look and think like us.  These politically and culturally informed paths often insulate us from the sacrificial missional work that blesses others and promotes community involvement that insists on love driven empathy, intimacy, and advocacy.

One of the ways that the political identity influences our faith expression is how we interpret scripture.  We often interpret scripture through political lenses that are often invisible and assumed.   South African Pastor Allan Boesak states "The Scriptures will not be ideologized, manipulated or managed to suit our political endeavors, processes or desires. The demands of the Scriptures will always lay a greater claim than these processes are willing to concede (Radical Reconciliation, 2012).  

For example, historian and theologian Dr. Beth Allison Barr documented that women were pastoral and ecclesiastical leaders in the early church until the time of the reformation (The Making of Biblical Womanhood, 2019).  Yet, most evangelical Christians would interpret Scripture to read as prohibiting women from leadership.  Twentieth century Christians frequently interpreted scripture to argue that racial segregation is commanded of God (J. Hawkins, The Bible Told Them So, 2021).  Both of these examples are interpreting Scripture according to political frameworks that are not only contrary to the history and experience  of the Church, but also the Scriptures themselves.  Often, buried under the cloak of  Scriptural inerrancy is an unwillingness to interrogate the political assumptions and biases.  Political lenses make it possible to read Romans 13 and determine that the priority regarding the immigration crisis is obedience to existing laws, while the same lens darkens and blurs hundreds of references to care for immigrants.  

So Jesus tells his disciples not only to be careful what they hear, but more importantly, be careful how your are hearing.  In our Scripture reading, we honor its authority by taking special care to identify cultural and political assumptions that seek to distort its meaning and disrupt its mission.  

It does not mean that we will all agree on the best approach to complex problems but when we allow Scripture to inform our identity, and we understand the invitation to participate in the Jesus movement, the political realities of our times are seen for what they are: incomplete and impotent.  

Our invitation to the Jesus movement, according to Bishop Michael Curry (Following the Way of Jesus, 2018) is an invitation to follow "Jesus into loving, liberating, life-giving relationship with God, each other, and with creation."

If your reading of Scripture leads you to do anything else, interrogate your assumptions.

Just be careful "how you hear".