Tag: Politics

Political, Not Partisan – Matthew 5:14

THE TEXT:

The text for the sermon today is Matthew 5:14. These are the Words of God:

14 “You are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hidden.

INTRODUCTION

During the Colonial era of American history, it was customary for pastors to preach sermons just prior to public elections instructing the church in their civic responsibilities. They were called artillery sermons because the custom began with pastors preaching to groups of artillery soldiers who were preparing to elect new officers. The sermon today stands in the same line.

Two days from now, our nation, our states, and even our local municipalities will hold various elections and we all need to go into this election day Biblically, intentionally, and prayerfully. But first, the text.

SUMMARY OF THE TEXT

In Matthew’s gospel account, Jesus is presented as the new Moses; the God-sent deliverer who rescues his people from the bondage of sin. Just as Moses delivered a people who were governed by the law of God, Christ is delivering a people, the church, who are governed by the ethical commands of his kingdom.

In Matthew 4:17 Jesus preached, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.” And in chapters 5-7 Jesus teaches us what his kingdom is like, who is permitted to enter, and how life in the kingdom operates. We call this the Sermon on the Mount.

As Jesus, the new Moses, delivers his people, they now live in obedience to his commands which draws the attention of the world. They’re like a city on a hill. You can’t miss it.

When Jesus says, “You are the light of the world,” it’s important to know who he’s referring to: his disciples, the church. Not a nation like Israel or America. Not Calvin’s Geneva or Winthrop’s Massachusetts Bay Colony. The church is the light of the World.

What does it mean to be light? Throughout the Old Testament, “light” refers to both righteousness (Psalm 37:6; Isaiah 5:20) as well as revelation (Psalm 43:3; Psalm 119:105; Isaiah 9:2)

Light as Righteousness

Psalm 37:6 – He will bring forth your righteousness as the light, and your justice as the noonday.

Isaiah 5:20 – Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness.

Light as Revelation

Psalm 43:3 – Send out your light and your truth; let them lead me.

Psalm 119:105 – Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path.

Isaiah 9:2 – The people who walked in darkness have seen a great light.

We should also note that throughout the Scriptures, “light” has both attractive (Isaiah 6:1-30) as well as repulsive power (John 1:5).

Attractive Power

60 Arise, shine, for your light has come,
and the glory of the Lord has risen upon you.
2 For behold, darkness shall cover the earth,
and thick darkness the peoples;
but the Lord will arise upon you,
and his glory will be seen upon you.
3And nations shall come to your light,
and kings to the brightness of your rising.
(Isaiah 60:1-3)

Repulsive Power

5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not. (John 1:5)

Notice where the church is the light: the light of the world. Christ said that as long as he was in the world he was the light of the world (John 9:5), and because the church is indwelt by the Spirit of Christ, we are the light of the world.

Finally, notice that the light of the world, which reveals and shows God’s righteousness, which attracts and repels cannot be hidden. He does not say it “must not” but that it “cannot” be hidden.

THE CHURCH IS POLITICAL

As we apply the text specifically to our civic duties, we see that the church can’t not be political. Every week we gather and proclaim that “Jesus Christ is Lord.” That statement has political ramifications. If Christ is Lord, the President cannot be Lord. City Councils cannot be Lord. Christians need to stop saying that churches aren’t political. Of course, they are.

We are to preach Christ to every creature, we are to baptize people of all nations, and we are to teach them to obey all that Christ has commanded. That is the charter of our church—so how can that not involve political candidates, laws, and local referendums?

A city set on a hill, calling people out of the kingdoms of this world and into the kingdom of Christ, under the Lordship of Christ—that political reality cannot be hidden.

There is a reason that the Christian church is not allowed to worship freely in totalitarian states. It’s because Christians will not bow to “Dear Leader.” Totalitarian leaders know better than anyone that the church is political.

It’s important to note here that coming under the authority of Christ and his kingdom does not mean we’re working for the dissolution of nations here and now. Augustine taught us that we live with dual citizenship in the city of man and the city of God. Christ has called us to give Caesar submission—it just can’t be ultimate submission.

THE CHURCH SHOULD NOT BE PARTISAN

It’s not the job of the church, as the church, to stump for candidates. We don’t have an American flag on our stage. We don’t put red, white, and blue bunting on the pulpit on July 4th. That’s because the church speaks for and represents a King and Kingdom which transcends all others. We are the light of Christ’s kingdom.

We love our nation because this is where the Lord has providentially placed us. But we never want to conflate the church and our nation. The church calls every tribe tongue and nation to bow the knee to Christ. And we must be careful to protect our ability to speak prophetically to every politician and platform. We are not the errand boy for any political party.

YOU CAN’T SIT THIS OUT

If you don’t like the way the town is being run, or the nation is being led, or the laws being enacted, the taxes being levied, or the wars being started, you can’t sit this out.

This Summer, the Supreme Court struck down Roe. V. Wade. We celebrated that decision at the time as all Christians ought to celebrate it. But this now means that the protection of the unborn has been sent back to congress and duly elected officials.

So, if elected officials write laws that protect the unborn, and you choose not to vote simply because it would take a lot of time out of your Tuesday, you’re going to have a hard time praying with us for the lives of the unborn. You can’t be the answer to a prayer, choose not to answer it, and then pray that God would answer it.

SO, HOW OUGHT YOU TO VOTE?

When you wake up Tuesday morning, you need to prepare your heart to vote for a candidate without worshiping that candidate. The line between supporting a candidate and staking your hope on a candidate is thin. Do not put your trust in princes. (Psalm 146:3)

Your vote needs to be made on strategic, rather than emotional terms. If the candidate you vote for wins, count it as a strategic victory, not as synonymous with bringing in the kingdom of Christ.

Our hope is built on nothing less than Jesus’ blood and righteousness. I dare not trust the sweetest frame but wholly rest in Jesus’ name. On Christ the solid rock I stand, all other ground is sinking sand.

(The ideas and teachings of this sermon have been shaped from sources as wide as Albert Mohler, Doug Wilson, Francis Schaeffer, St. Augustine, Chesterton, and even John Locke.)

As We Approach Midterm Elections

A famous quote has been (falsely?) attributed to Leon Trotsky: “You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you.” I’m not here to debate the attribution of the quote. Instead, I want to put a spin on it. You may not be interested in politics, but politics is interested in you. If you are like me, you wish that everything wasn’t so politicized. Why must everything be dragged into politics and politics dragged into everything? It’s infuriating, I know. It’s exhausting! Yes, it is. But we cannot walk away from it. Politics is interested in us.

Our nation is running from Christ in high-handed rebellion. We have denied the existence of the Creator. We have denied his authority over his creation. And, as a consequence, we are now denying creation as well. I repeat, our nation is a rebellious nation, and those who are hungry for power are trying their best to coerce all of us to deny what is plain and clear. You cannot run from this. You cannot turn it off. Every Christian in every city of America will be faced with choosing Christ or rebellion. Every church in every town will be forced to obey Christ or man. There is no middle ground. That being said, I want to share several principles I believe help us navigate these times of inescapable politics. I will briefly sketch out the principles here and hope to elaborate on them more in the future. Also, these are in no particular order of significance.

1. The Church is Political.

Every week we gather and proclaim that “Jesus Christ is Lord.” That statement has political ramifications. If Christ is Lord, the President cannot be Lord. City Councils cannot be Lord. Christians need to stop saying that churches aren’t political. Of course, they are. There is a reason that the Christian church is not allowed to worship freely in totalitarian states. It’s because they will not bow to “Dear Leader.” Totalitarian leaders know better than anyone that the church is political.

2. The Church Should Not Be Partisan.

It’s not the job of the church, as the church, to stump for candidates. We don’t have an American flag on our stage. We don’t put red, white, and blue bunting on the pulpit on July 4th. That’s because the church speaks for and represents a King and Kingdom which transcends all others. We love our nation because this is where the Lord has providentially placed us. But we never want to conflate the church and our nation. The church calls every tribe tongue and nation to bow the knee to Christ. And we must be careful to protect our ability to speak prophetically to every politician and platform. We are not the errand boy for any political party. I do not publicly endorse candidates in my official role as Pastor. If you want my opinions on who to vote for, I’ll be glad to tell you as a concerned citizen.

3. The Real Political Power of the Church is Spirit-Empowered Word and Ordinance, Not Voting.

The Church doesn’t expand through raw political force. Big Pharma may rely on lobbyists, but we rely on the Word of God. Our power, as Christians, is a “thus sayeth the Lord,” kind of power and against that weapon, there is no defense. We proclaim that Christ is King. We proclaim that abortion is evil. We proclaim that inflation is theft. We proclaim that marriage is between only a man and a woman. And, we ground all of that in the Word of the eternal God. The true power of the church is in the weapons of the Word, Baptism, and the Lord’s Table.

4. Voting Matters.

If we don’t like the way our town is being run, we have no one to blame but ourselves. In God’s kind providence, we live in a nation that calls upon citizens to elect representatives. Who you vote for matters. Not voting matters. You have been entrusted with an opportunity to make your will as a citizen known. Do you want Drag Queens telling stories to little children at the library? I don’t. God hates it. So, vote.

5. Voting Ought to be Strategic, Not Emotional.

It’s not my job to tell you who to vote for. It is my job to tell you not to worship candidates. Your vote needs to be made on strategic, rather than emotional terms. If the candidate you vote for wins, count it as a strategic victory, not an emotional one. It goes without saying that no candidate is perfect. And there may truly be elections in which you cannot in good conscience vote for either candidate. Obey your conscience. But make sure that you aren’t attaching too much emotional weight to your vote. Is one candidate a more Christ-honoring choice? Pick that one, pray and ask the Lord to bless your vote.

6. Read the Word.

You may not be able to draw a straight line from a Bible verse to a tax structure. But you can certainly draw a straight line from the Scripture to a pro-life stance. Where the Word is clear, our political stances ought to be crystal.

7. Prioritize Local Elections.

When kings overreach and become tyrants, it is the responsibility of lesser magistrates to oppose tyranny. Governors, Mayors, and City Councils are all intermediary officials who can stand up to federal overreach. Too many people wrongly believe the only elections that matter are the national elections. In fact, the election of Godly lesser magistrates matters more. Do not ignore local elections. For more info on this subject read The Doctrine of the Lesser Magistrates by Matthew Trewhella. If you want, you may borrow my copy.

8. Politics is a Battle of Competing Worldviews.

There’s no neutral ground in politics. There’s no such thing as private religion. Everyone’s fundamental beliefs shape the way they live which in turn shapes cultures and nations. It’s not “whether” religious beliefs will shape our governance, it’s “which” ones will shape it. Someone’s view of human beings will shape our laws. Someone’s views of marriage will shape our culture.

Conclusion

Even as I write these principles, I realize that I am summarizing, generalizing, and omitting various thoughts, applications, etc. I haven’t sought to address every concern or question these principles raise. As I said, I plan to continue explaining these ideas to our church in the days ahead. If you have questions, feel free to ask. We need more healthy dialogue about politics in our congregation. We need Christians who take these matters seriously. And, as we dialogue we must seek to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. (Eph. 4) Ultimately, our unity is in the risen Christ, not a political platform. Many will stand beside us in the coming age who politically opposed us at points in this age. Christ will sort us all out on that day. Until then, we are duty-bound to represent his kingship to our nation.

In Christ,

Pastor Jonathan

 

 

Which, Not Whether

Last week, I wrote about the purpose of freedom. Freedom, I argued, is given by God so that we will pursue righteousness. Freedom is not an ultimate or final goal; obedience is. This week, I want to shift our focus towards religious freedom, or religious liberty. What is religious liberty? Are there any limits to religious liberty? Why is religious liberty, which our nation has historically celebrated, under threat today?

UNDERSTANDING RELIGIOUS LIBERTY

Our church’s statement of faith contains a section entitled “Religious Liberty”. It reads:

“God alone is Lord of the conscience, and He has left it free from the doctrines and commandments of men which are contrary to His Word or not contained in it. Church and state should be separate. The state owes to every church protection and full freedom in the pursuit of its spiritual ends. In providing for such freedom no ecclesiastical group or denomination should be favored by the state more than others. Civil government being ordained of God, it is the duty of Christians to render loyal obedience thereto in all things not contrary to the revealed will of God. The church should not resort to the civil power to carry on its work. The gospel of Christ contemplates spiritual means alone for the pursuit of its ends. The state has no right to impose penalties for religious opinions of any kind. The state has no right to impose taxes for the support of any form of religion. A free church in a free state is the Christian ideal, and this implies the right of free and unhindered access to God on the part of all men, and the right to form and propagate opinions in the sphere of religion without interference by the civil power.” (Baptist Faith & Message 2000)

We believe the first freedom the government must recognize is the freedom of the individual to worship without coercion. God alone, indeed, is Lord of the conscience, not parents, not the government. Religious liberty, in order to be legitimate, requires freedom for individuals to practice their religion both privately and publicly. Religion isn’t less than private beliefs, but true religion is far more than thoughts in our heads. True religion dictates how we think and act in the world, with our families, as well as with other nations.

NECESSARY LIMITS to LIBERTY

Here is the challenge: a government that recognizes and defends religious liberty must also make decisions about how citizens with vastly different worldviews ought to interact. In other words, while the government has no right to coerce beliefs, every government must coerce some behaviors. Every government must decide which actions are permissible and which will be prosecuted as criminal. This reality inevitably means religious liberty is not an unlimited liberty.

If you asked your neighbor why he was stacking firewood in the front lawn and he replied, “I’m just preparing to offer my child as a blood sacrifice,” you wouldn’t yell back to him, “Way to go! Man, I love religious liberty!” No, you would immediately call the Police and get the garden hose to soak the coals, and you would be right in doing so. The Police would also be in the right if they arrested the neighbor for attempted murder. They would limit the neighbor’s freedom of expressing his religious beliefs and they would be justified in their actions. Why? They would be justified because religious liberty cannot be an unlimited freedom. If one religion prohibits human sacrifice while another requires it, the government must out of necessity limit the freedom to express one religion or the other. To support one practice is to act against the religious views of the other. This is why the abortionist argument that “those who don’t like abortion don’t have to have abortions,” doesn’t pass muster. The same is true for those who wish to redefine marriage to include same-sex relationships. If the government sponsors a false definition of healthcare (abortion) or a false definition of marriage (sodomy) it has taken a stand against all who disagree and therefore limited their ability to practice their own views.

WHICH, NOT WHETHER

Religious liberty faces threats from multiple directions today, but I want to highlight one. Robert Benne, a professor at Roanoke College, writing about religious liberty, says:

“The first freedom that all peoples should enjoy is religious freedom, not only the freedom to worship as they choose but also the freedom to exercise their religion privately and publicly. There are limits, of course, to religiously based behavior when it clashes with the settled moral convictions of a country and its laws, but the latitude for such freedom ought to be wide indeed.” (Benne, Good & Bad Ways to Think About Religion And Politics, 78)

I want to draw your attention to three crucial words in that quote: “settled moral convictions.” Religious liberty works smoothly to the degree that the citizenry shares settled moral convictions. The reason for so much turmoil in American life today is precise because we have lost settled moral convictions. Put bluntly, we are in the middle of a moral crisis. Americans no longer agree on the most basic and foundational questions of existence, identity, the family, education, or ethics. Within our nation are competing understandings of the good, true, and the beautiful.

Just this week, a federal appeals court ruled that the Fellowship of Christian Athletes must be recognized as an official student group. Their official status had previously been revoked by the school district because the group required members to affirm a historically Biblical understanding of gender and sexuality. This requirement, of course, ran afoul of the moral views of the school district. In this instance, thankfully, the government sided with the FCA group and the federal court upheld their right to define their own members on religious and moral grounds. However, this case demonstrates the final point I want to leave you with in my letter: it’s not whether it’s which. We do not have a choice of whether we will affirm or prohibit certain expressions of moral beliefs. The only choice we have is which expressions will be permitted. The question is not whether there will be religious liberty. The question is which religious expressions will be permitted and which will be prohibited.

I haven’t spent much time in this letter giving pastoral counsel or advice but let me end with this exhortation: the church has a moral responsibility to every nation. We are to proclaim the Truth of all Truths: Christ risen and reigning. We are not to coerce belief with the power of the sword. However, any nation in which genuine spiritual renewal takes place will inevitably adopt the settled moral convictions of the citizenry. For that reason, we ought to preach and teach the Truth in our churches and homes so that our communities and nation can hear, repent, believe, and eventually obey.

Beastly Governments

INTRODUCTION

Which matters more: planting churches or electing politicians? There is a sense, of course, in which church planting connects with eternity in ways that 21st-century American politics does not. But this is not a zero-sum game whereby political effort equals less church planting. On the contrary, it may be that all the unopposed church planting we’re able to pursue today is the result of a lot of political effort in the past. And, if our current political trajectory holds, the political failings of today will produce an environment far more hostile to church planting in the future. Jonathan Leeman makes this exact point in his 2018 book How the Nations Rage:

No governments are all good or all bad. Even the worst help the traffic lights to work, and the best spend money they shouldn’t. God, furthermore, employs both the best and the worst for his sovereign purposes. Think of the death of Christ at the hands of Pilate. Pilate served God in spite of himself (Acts 4:27–28). All governments are God’s servants in that sense. Still, beastly governments ordinarily make the work of God’s people much harder and sometimes impossible. Christians should study what makes the difference and put their hands to building one kind rather than the other. 1 (Emphasis mine)

Leeman cites examples such as the persecution of the early church in the Roman Empire, the deportation of Israel by the Assyrians and Babylonians, the 17th-century Japanese shoguns who nearly destroyed Christianity as a religion in that nation, as well as the armies of Tamerlane who slaughtered nearly 5% of the global population. In each of these circumstances, the government made the work of the Great Commission more difficult and dangerous to pursue. The same dangers and difficulties are increasing today.

THE SHIFT TOWARDS SECULARISM

In 1831, while Alexis de Tocqueville was touring America, he cited that a judge in New York refused to allow the testimony of a witness who denied the existence of God because, in the estimation of the judge, the potential witness had “destroyed in advance all the faith that one could have put in his words.” 2 Compare the moral and religious posture of the 19th-century judge with that of the 21st century Senator, Dianne Feinstein, when she said that Barrett’s belief in Biblical teaching was concerning. In other words, Barrett’s view of life in the womb stood at odds with Feinstein’s political goals.  And, just last week, the House of Representatives passed, with the support of 47 squishy Republicans, the falsely-named Respect for Marriage Act which is an attempt to codify a redefinition of marriage to include same-sex unions. If such legislation were to pass the Senate it would instantly be signed into law by the current President. In other words, over the last century, we’ve watched the rise of the new religion of secularism. Belief in God, once seen as a prerequisite to honest testimony, is now understood as a barrier to social progress. These cultural & political shifts will not make it easier for churches to plant churches, hire staff, discipline members, and staff their nurseries.

THE BABY AND THE BATHWATER

I have no intentions in this post to outline strategy. Of course, there are ways for pastors and Christians to throw the Great Commission baby out with the political bathwater. We can all see the implicit dangers of draping the pulpit with red, white, and blue bunting. We don’t want to conflate the church and the state. We want our political efforts to serve our ecclesial efforts. I hope to produce more on that in future posts. But if pastors do not teach Christians theologically robust forms of political thought and engagement we soon won’t be able to lead them to support new church plants. For us, Great Commission faithfulness and political engagement is not a zero-sum game. But, for the secularist it is. Their political focus is aimed squarely at the Great Commission, and if secularists have their way, we’ll plant fewer churches.

26 And he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place, 27 that they should seek God, and perhaps feel their way toward him and find him. (Acts 17:26-27a)

Governments are established under God’s sovereign power. Good governments ensure safe cities, states, and nations that allow the progress of the church to advance. Evil governments restrict and limit the ministry of the church. We ought to leverage the political opportunities we have while we still have them. Future church plants depend on it.

[1] Leeman, Jonathan. How the Nations Rage (p. 101). Thomas Nelson. Kindle Edition.
[2] Tocqueville, Alexis. Democracy in America (p. 103). Hackett

A Competition of Ideas, Not People

I’ve been expecting a reply to an email I sent a few days ago. Suspecting the reply may have fallen into the black-hole of my “junk” inbox, I went searching. While I didn’t find the reply I was looking for, what I did find gave me the spark for writing this post.

My junk box was full of political newsletters. Over the years as I’ve contributed to candidates or filled out surveys I’ve been added to more than a few subscription lists, and most of them end up being relegated to my “junk” box. Today, I randomly clicked on two or three of the newsletters out of pure curiosity and they all shared one glaring similarity: ridicule of political or television personalities. They all read like an America’s Most Wanted list. In fact, one of the newsletters was entitled “The 5 Worst Liars in the Media,” and went on to list the names of talking-heads one might see on cable news. Without a doubt, there are bad actors in American politics and the media and most Americans are sick of being lied to by self-aggrandizing experts, elites and all the rest.

But Americans have become obsessed with personalities on the political Left and the Right. And, sadly, Americans have become uninterested with ideas. Give us a face and a name and tell us they are destroying our nation and we’ll watch cable news denigrate that person for hours (as if that actually solved anything). But, how many Americans have read the Declaration or the Constitution within the last 3 years, or read a book of American History since leaving High School? Why is representative government a good idea? Why are there 3 branches in our federal government? Why should government have limited authority? What is the Christian principle of subsidiarity? None of these newsletters, all which claimed to be defenders of our nation, helped explain or defend these ideas: they only sought to attack personalities. Hear me out: there are bad actors in American politics and the media (I know I don’t have to convince you of that). But behind bad actors lies the real threat: bad ideas.

More important than the names of Jefferson and Madison are the ideas they inscribed into the founding documents of our nation. They were personalities, no doubt, but they were thinkers. They weren’t inventing our system of government out of thin-air. They were the most well-read political historians and philosophers in history, and they weighed ideas against one another.

I love our founding documents. I believe them to contain some of the finest ideas human beings have ever produced. I doubt we’ll ever find a system of government better suited for human flourishing and the curtailing of injustice in a post-Genesis 3 world. And, if we’re going to perpetuate the blessing that America has been to the world and even work to improve our nation, we’ll need to familiarize ourselves with those ideas. We’ll need to know where they originated, and why they’ve stood the test of time.

Christian, begin to limit the amount of mental and emotional energy you invest in media which only seeks to “own the libs,” and invest that energy in reading our founding documents. Or, read a book of American History. Or listen to a podcast that deals primarily in ideas. Here are a few recommendations that I have enjoyed:

APPLEWOOD DOCUMENTS OF FREEDOM BOXED SET

LAND OF HOPE by WILFRED McCLAY

THE BRIEFING with DR. ALBERT MOHLER

Sermon Notes: “Christ & Caesar” Mark 12:13-17

Below you’ll find links both to the sermon audio and manuscript I wrote for this sermon. I pray they will encourage you in your walk with Christ and spur you on to godliness.

Sermon Manuscript: “Christ & Caesar” Mark 12:13-17Download

The Naked Public Square?

No one comes to the political table as a blank slate. Everyone comes to the political table with a set of precommitments. This is what the Lutheran, then Catholic, minister, Richard John Neuhaus told us in 1984 in his book, The Naked Public Square. The central proposition of Neuhaus’ book, now close to 40 years old, was that the Founders of the United States, in drafting the First Amendment, were seeking to prevent the government from coercing religious belief, but many modern Americans had reinterpreted that amendment to mean that the square of public life ought to be devoid of religious belief. In other words, many modern American’s have come to think of the public/political square as non-religious, or “naked.” We’ve all heard statements like, “Believe what you want in the privacy of your own home, but you can’t bring private beliefs into discussions on public policy.” The shortened version is, “You can’t legislate morality.”

While the debate over the separation of church and state in the U.S. dates back Jefferson, it was the presidential candidate, John F. Kennedy who relaunched the conversation in the middle of the 20th century. Kennedy was the first Catholic candidate who was likely to win the office, and many were concerned that the Church of Rome might exercise outsized influence in the decision making of the most powerful man in the world. In an effort to assuage the worries of many, Kennedy, through a series of interviews and speeches, began to make strong distinctions and divisions between what he might privately believe as a Catholic, and what his responsibility would be as President. Take, for example, this quote from a Look magazine interview in 1959

“Whatever one’s religion in private life may be, for the office-holder, nothing takes precedence over his oath to uphold the Constitution and all its parts — including the First Amendment and the strict separation of church and state.” 1

Look Magazine1

Notice the words, “strict separation.” Kennedy was not making the same argument the Founders intended to make. He was not saying, “The government has no right to coerce religious beliefs.” Instead, he was saying, “Privately held religious beliefs have no place in the public square.” The problem with this view, as Neuhaus rightly saw, was that it’s perfectly impossible to have any kind of political debate in which everyone checks their presuppositions at the door.

Another way I like to put it is, “It’s not whether, it’s which.” It’s not “whether” privately held beliefs will influence public policy, it’s “which privately held beliefs will we codify into law.” No one comes to the political table with a blank slate. Everyone comes to the political table with a set of precommitments. As Christians, we might argue over which of our beliefs we ought to codify in to law and policy. For example, while we agree that lustful sexual fantasies are sinful, we may find it difficult (impossible) to adequately criminalize such thoughts. But what we must reject, whole-heartedly, is the idea that public policy can be conducted a part from the worldview presuppositions of those creating and enforcing the policies. It’s just not possible. Worldview matters.

In the coming days and months I plan to write a series of posts on the importance and components of a fully-developed Christian worldview. If you have questions or comments, I’d love to engage.

1https://www.jfklibrary.org/asset-viewer/archives/JFKCAMP1960/1000/JFKCAMP1960-1000-002

The Glittering Tinsel of Rationalism

Hardly a century after the once glittering tinsel of rationalism, now that materialism is sounding its retreat in the ranks of science, a kind of hollow piety is again exercising its enticing charms and every day it is becoming more fashionable to take the plunge into the warm stream of mysticism.

Abraham Kuyper, Lectures on Calvinism (1898)

Book Thoughts: Christ and Culture Revisited- D.A. Carson

A new series for this blog in 2017 will be Book Thoughts. A while back a friend and I began sharing the best quotes and thoughts we had from our personal reading. The idea was to give one another greater access to books without having to read as many. If I read a book, my friend could benefit from reading the quotes I pulled out and any thoughts I shared. For 2017, when ever I read a book I’ll share quotes I like, as well as any major thoughts I have about the book.

The first book is Christ and Culture Revisited by D.A. Carson. In 1951 Richard Niebuhr wrote what has become a Christian classic, Christ and Culture. The book plotted 5 different viewpoints on how Christianity relates to the world (culture). Carson gives Niebuhr an update and advances Niebuhr’s original thought, slightly.

The greatest contribution I took from this book was Carson’s admonition to balance my view of the relationship of Christ and Culture across the great turning points of salvation history (Creation, the Fall, Call of Abraham, the Exile, the Incarnation, Crucifixion, Resurrection, Church Age, Second Coming and Restoration/Consummation). For example, a view that focuses too heavily on the Fall without also focusing on the Resurrection will tend to hate the world as an evil/irredeemable annoyance. This results in isolationist Christians.

Two other insights I found helpful are these:

  • The church can be so involved in the political process that it ceases to be a prophetic voice challenging the process.
  • Pastors must work hard to distinguish between the mission of the church and the individual commands given to Christians who are citizens of human cities/nations.

Here are some of my favorite quotes:

Niebuhr is not so much talking about the relationship between Christ and culture, as between two sources of authority as they compete within culture.
First, an evaluation of a culture depends on a set of values— even as that set of values is in turn shaped by the culture that informs the evaluation… Second, from a Christian perspective, everything that is detached from the sheer centrality of God is an evil… But third, equally from a Christian perspective, God in his “common grace” pours out countless good things on all people everywhere… Fourth, as Christian revelation certainly insists that there are degrees of punishment meted out by a good God, we must assume that some cultural stances are more reprehensible than others.
The worst abuses of Christians against the broader culture have taken place when Christians have enjoyed too much power.
that stance is most likely to be deeply Christian which attempts to integrate all the major biblically determined turning points in the history of redemption.
Romans 13 does not so much tell believers how to govern well as how to be governed.
As for democracy, if we promote it, we do so not because we take it to be an absolute good, still less as the solution to all political problems, and not even because it is an ideal form of government, but because, granted that the world is fallen and all of us are prone to the most grotesque evils, it appears to be the least objectionable option.
It would be more realistic to acknowledge that the founding of the nation was borne along by adherence to some Christian principles and not others. 
Let me know if you’ve read the book, or Niebuhr’s original. I’d love to discuss the topic in the comments.