Why Should Christians Care about Politics?

It seems that the political environment we find ourselves in today is about as volatile as anything we have seen in recent times. Typically, when we think about the cause of the volatility, the things that rise to the top relate to particular policy issues. In today’s culture war, topics such as abortion, gay marriage, transgender rights, religion in the public square, gun rights, and others, are all trigger points in our political fights.

As Christians, we should not be passive bystanders in the political process. We need to be interested in the laws our politicians pass. But we should never be mindless about how we engage. In fact, we need to be informed to a much higher degree than we typically consider. Of course, we need to stand for the moral principles which are consistent with what has been revealed in the Bible, and promote public policy which is consistent with that. But there is more at stake than individual policies. The laws politicians pass create the environment we all must live in.

Particular laws have outcomes that go well beyond the laws themselves. Those based on Christian beliefs protect individuals and society by promoting life and freedom. Those based on a naturalistic worldview platform – the other worldview system that is prominent in American society – promote an atmosphere which is ultimately hostile to these. As we dive more deeply into this, let’s take a brief look at the two levels of effect with which we are dealing – the policy and the worldview level.

Policy Level
Policy pronouncements are expressions of conscious desires. Thus, those who place their emphasis here end up promoting policies without much thought about the underlying beliefs they are built upon. The policies, thus, become an end in themselves. People simply believe their position is correct, and they fight for their preferences. Unless a person has made the effort to understand their beliefs at the worldview level, this is almost unavoidable. That is why you rarely hear individual politicians, or the talking heads on TV, talking about “why” their position is correct. They generally just assume they are right and try shout down their opponents. For these people, the policy is primary rather than the reason the policy is good or right.

For those who make policy the primary focus, the policy itself is the goal. There is no thought of the larger consequences regarding how it affects society. In these cases, politicians are thought of merely as policy makers.

Worldview Level
The worldview level goes much deeper and is the foundation policy rests upon. Everyone begins with a set of underlying worldview beliefs which, for them, are the basis for their understanding of morality, and the reason they promote particular policies. The problem is, very few people are consciously aware of those underlying beliefs. Worldview level beliefs are simply assumed to be correct. Then, based on their assumptions, individuals fight for policies that will promote the outcomes they deem to be right based on their beliefs.
The Larger Environment
But in truth, politicians are much more than policy makers – they are environment makers; even if they don’t realize it. Every law that is passed not only creates some kind of regulation, it has a wider effect on the societal environment as a whole. Focusing on the larger environment is actually much more difficult than focusing on policy – because to do that a person must be able to see past the individual policy to its effect.

In modern society, there are two effects that are being promoted which are in conflict with one another. One is an attempt to create a utopian society which is managed by government managers. The other seeks to create a society in which individuals are free to make their own way. These two approaches are diametrically opposed to one another. As it turns out, the two major political parties in America have each aligned themselves with one of these two positions – which is why they are in such conflict with each other. As we consider this idea, let’s look for a moment at the underlying worldview beliefs which inform these environmental possibilities.

Naturalistic Environment
The first potential outcome we will look at is that of a man-made utopia. The worldview system which seeks this kind of outcome is Naturalism. Naturalism is the belief that the natural universe is all that exists. Based on this belief, there is no God, thus there are no moral beliefs that can be considered objectively true. Man must create his own as he tries and establish a society which best promotes the survival of the species.

Public policy from this perspective is not based on ideas that try to promote objective right and wrong, since that is not believed to exist. Rather, it seeks to promote stability based on the personal beliefs of those who hold power. Thus, public order and stability are not established based on what is in the hearts of individual citizens, but upon the enforced rules and regulations created by those who hold political power. There is recognized to be no objective basis upon which decisions for society can be made. Everything is determined based on the beliefs and preferences of those who hold the levers of power. Individual freedom is set aside to accommodate the “greater good” as understood by those leaders.

Theistic Environment
The second possible outcome is based upon the rights of individual citizens who all believe in an objective right and wrong, and are willing to follow what is right based on their own personal desires and decisions. These are people who believe that ultimately order in society emerges from a higher law that applies to everyone. This kind of environment is based upon a worldview system that is theistic, and believes God has revealed to mankind what is right and wrong. Politicians are charged with creating laws which correspond with what is right. Individuals follow the law, not because they are coerced by government authorities, but because they believe they ought to live by what is right.

The Environmental Battle
These two different possible environments are battling each other in modern American society. If the environment based on naturalistic philosophy wins out, personal liberty will be shut down as those in power create rules and restrictions which cause that to happen. If the environment based on Christian theistic beliefs wins out, order will be maintained in society, but will be based on the willing assent of the citizenry.

An approach to governing based on the Christian theistic approach, though, does not guarantee laws and policies which reflect Christian morality. What it does guarantee is that people will be free to choose their own way rather than be dictated to by government authorities.

For example, if the citizens choose to codify laws that do not correspond with a Christian understanding of morality, those laws will be upheld – not because they are morally right, but because the citizens have chosen them. At the same time, this approach does not allow political leaders to make laws which force those who believe in Christian morality to violate their conscience. People must be free to choose to follow God if they so desire, and laws must not be established which inhibit that.

By the same token, if Christian morality is codified, that becomes the law of the land. But this does not permit the “winners” to create a situation where the other side must violate their consciences either. In big picture terms, an environment based on Christian Theism must allow people the freedom to choose to go to hell if that is what they are determined to do. They just can’t break civil and criminal law as they take that path.

As should be evident at this point, the larger environment based on Christian Theism is not merely a policy driven process. The environment is bigger than individual policies, and policies must respect the environment. From my perspective, I would desire that politicians create public policy that is consistent with Christian morality. But the more important outcome is to provide an environment of genuine freedom where people’s consciences cannot be violated.

The willingness to allow other people to have this kind of freedom does not mean we agree with them, or that we should not make great efforts to create a moral environment by promoting policies that are consistent with Christian morality. What it does mean is that we respect other people as individuals, and try to persuade in ways that still allow freedom.

An environment does not, in itself, create success and failure. Individuals have to accomplish that on their own. That said, it does set people up for success or failure – not just in this life, but for eternity as well. As Christians, we care about the political and moral environment because we care about the people around us. We want people to live in an environment that gives them the best chance to succeed in this life, and to make a decision that connects them with God in eternity. For this reason, if nothing else, Christians ought to care about politics.

© 2016 Freddy Davis