Christianity is Not a Political Party

 "The Founders wrote the constitution, not the apostles.  They added the Bill of Rights; not the Ten Commandments.  Their intent was Freedom of Religion, not control by religion.  They created a democracy, not a theocracy.  Christianity is not a political party.--retweet from Christian Democrats of America, JustMe@SueZieCue

If Jesus were alive today, would he:  Feed the poor or give tax breaks to the super rich?  Comfort the old and infirm or cut Social Security?  Build bridges that unite or build walls that divide?  Make peace or make war?--Linda Seger, Jesus Rode a Donkey:  Why Millions of Christians are Democrats

While The Signal Press is a social media presence and has what I think is a somewhat unique approach to political and religious discussion--yes, the two subjects my generation always considered taboo at the table--it is also a personal journal.  With everything that has happened in the political world over the past couple of weeks, and writing being a means by which I organize my thoughts and express myself, this is a personal journal piece.  

Christianity is Not a Political Party

The best example of how a politician who is an Evangelical Christian handles his faith and politics is the one set by former President Jimmy Carter.  He didn't change his Christian beliefs or practices when he ran for public office, but he never used his faith as a weapon or as a political campaign tactic to get votes.  His positions on social and economic justice, racial equality, women's rights, his foreign policy ambition to broker a peace agreement between Israel, Egypt and Syria, his quest for freedom from oppression for the West Bank Palestinians, were all consistent with his Christian faith.  There's nothing in the way Jimmy Carter approached politics that is inconsistent with any Christian doctrine and theology, nor is there anything he did that attempted to impose his Christian perspective on anyone else. 

Opinions on Carter's presidency from a political perspective are widely varied.  There are those who claim that his failures resulted from a lack of understanding of the "worldliness" and the secular nature of government business.  He trusted people who didn't have the same motives and character as he did.  On the other hand, looking at what transpired in the twelve years after he left office, and subsequently under all of his Republican successors, Carter doesn't look so bad.  But the way Carter managed his faith and politics was a demonstration of the fact that being Christian is not defined by partisan politics. He also understood that genuine, valid, true Christian faith, in order to be sincere, had to be free from imposition and coercion and must be a free will choice, not a government mandate.  

He also understood that in order for Christianity to be free, it had to be separated from the state and that religious freedom guaranteed by the constitution included the right not to practice any religion.  There's no doubt that his Presidency was influenced by his Christian faith as much as anything else in his life.  He was not ashamed of his testimony.  And that enhanced his compassion and concern for the well-being of people, and his consideration and respect for their constitutional rights.  

The day after my 18th birthday, I registered to vote in order to meet the deadline for the November election in order to cast my ballot for Jimmy Carter.  I was a freshman in college, and my Republican friends, to try and discourage me from supporting him, pointed out that "Christianity isn't a political party," intimating that I was voting for Carter just because he was a Christian.  And when Reagan ran against Carter in 1980, and the religious right was in full swing, I got to remind some of them, when the issue came up in discussion, that "Christianity isn't a political party."  

Social Issues Alone do not Define Politics 

I was raised in a Southern Baptist church, belonged to churches affiliated with that denomination until I was 52 years of age and when I changed, joined a church affiliated with another denomination that is considered "Evangelical."  My political convictions are influenced by my Christian faith which is defined by Christ.  It is not a system where points are given and a list of good works is checked off to make sure there are more good points than bad points.  The core belief is that Jesus is the Christ, the savior, sent by God to restore humanity to its creator, through his direct sacrifice of himself, and through what he taught and lived by example.  

In Matthew's account of the gospel, during an exchange with Jewish religious leaders, Jesus was asked the question, "What is the greatest commandment?"  It was intended to be provocative.  Jesus replied, 

"You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind." This is the greatest and first commandment.  And the second is like it: "You shall love your neighbor as yourself."  On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.  Matthew 22:37b-40, NRSV

Following Jimmy Carter's example, I take it from there. 

The constitution's guarantee of individual rights applies to all Americans, regardless of their religious beliefs, or their lack of any.  As a Christian, I have the right to practice my faith, which includes acting in a manner that is consistent with it, and also includes expressing it publicly if the opportunity permits.  The constitution prevents the government from passing laws which restrict my free exercise of my faith.  Extending rights to individuals who do not hold the same religious beliefs, or who do not have any religious beliefs, does not violate my freedom in any way.  

The government, in our representative democracy, is ours, and I believe the perspective it takes should recognize this fact.  The resources it has, collected from us, should be used to collectively benefit us.  It took our society and culture, under this Republic, a long time to make progress toward the equality and the sense of national identity and community that were articulated in the ideals of the Founding Fathers, and we are still not at the point where everyone around us is free and equal. But I believe that, under the leadership of most Democrats, much more progress is made in that direction than it is under the manner in which Republicans handle this. 

Christian Theology and Doctrine Does Influence My Political Perspective

The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to bring good news to the poor.  He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to let the oppressed go free, to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor...Today this scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing.  Luke's Gospel Chapter 4:18, 19 and 24.  

The gospel narrative which records the ministry and teaching of Jesus is the very center of Christian faith.  Belief in Jesus as the Christ, the Messiah, the savior of humanity from sin by his example, his instruction, his inspiration, his crucifixion and his resurrection is the defining doctrine of Christianity.  Every Christian denomination has an acknowledgement of this core belief in their confession or statement of faith.  The gospel message of Jesus is the lens through which all of the rest of the Bible, including the prophets of the Old Testament and the Apostles of the early church in the New Testament are interpreted.  

The three year long ministry of Jesus is characterized by those words from Luke 4.  That is the essence of what he taught and what he did.  In this particular passage, he is noting for the congregation gathered in the synagogue in his hometown of Nazareth the nature of his message.  In Matthew 11, he sends a message to John the Baptist who is in prison, who asks him if he is the Messiah, or if they should look for someone else.  He responds to John by telling him, "the blind receive their sight, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised and the poor have good news brought to them.  And blessed is anyone who takes no offense at me."  

The whole gospel narrative is packed with this message.  At the beginning of the Sermon on the Mount is a passage known as "The Beatitudes," character that Jesus describes as flowing from those who would become his followers and disciples as a testimony aimed at motivating and inspiring people to give glory to God.  There's not a prerequisite of some kind of righteousness or bank account of good deeds which must be accumulated in order for a person to receive forgiveness of sin and become a Christian.  The "good deeds" and righteousness, which includes everything I cited here, and a whole long list of values like integrity and honesty, equality, a sense of community, stewardship of the physical world as a gift from God, living peacefully and being peacemakers, meekness, kindness, and several narratives on the nature of and expression of genuine love, flow out as a result of Christian faith. They are spiritual qualities which lose their character when they are required, enforced by law or when people are coerced into claiming their acceptance in exchange for something else.   

It is difficult to be offended by any of these values.  A Christian is a positive influence on others around them, and the Christian church is a positive influence on society and culture when it lives by, and exhibits these characteristics in the absence of arrogance and attempts to impose them.  The broad diversity of the Democratic party, and its support for achieving true equality of liberty and for justice where equality has not always been the standard, shows evidence of the positive influence of the Christians within its ranks.  

I Believe That Separation of Church and State Benefits Both Church and State

Though many Christians in the political far right use all kinds of rhetoric to deny that the concept of "separation of church and state" exists in the constitution, it is most definitely the clear, constitutional purpose of the Establishment Clause of the first amendment.  The evidence for the use of that specific phrase comes directly from Thomas Jefferson himself, who cites the establishment clause as it was written, and defines it as "building a wall of separation between church and state."  

I find it ironic that a group of Evangelical Christians, specifically Baptists, were the most concerned about how an established and endorsed state church would affect the practice of their faith.  Baptists were persecuted in America, by others who came here for their own religious liberty, including the Puritans in Massachusetts, and the Church of England which was the "established church" of the colonial government of Virginia.  They saw the corrupting effect of European state churches which were controlled and used as political pawns by monarchies.  So they understood, as did Jefferson, Madison and Franklin, among other founders, that the government could not enforce "ideas" by law.  

A Christian Worldview is not a political perspective, nor does it require the use of the political power of the state.  

The Democratic Party, with its vast diversity and its recognition of individual rights, along with its philosophy of using the influence and resources of government, which all belong to the people, for the benefit of the people, is the best political option for the continued protection of the religious liberty of all Americans.  That is a common interest.  

The fact of the matter is that in spite of the language of the constitution, which is inclusive of all religious beliefs and convictions, and also protects the convictions of those who choose not to identify with any religion, Caucasian Protestant Christians are still the most preferred group in American society.  In spite of their rhetoric, the Christian political far right benefits from the separation of church and state.  Their tax exempt status is part of Jefferson's "wall of separation."  They experience no tyranny of any kind.  The Supreme Court is eroding the wall, in favor of Caucasian, Protestant Christianity and its institutions. 

Take a look around the world and see what real religious persecution looks like and it will be very easy to conclude that mask mandates, vaccination mandates by employers and other pandemic health measures, all of which state constitutions and the federal constitution authorize for government officials to implement, are not tyranny of any kind.  In fact, that kind of resistance by some among the Christian right has damaged their credibility and their Christian testimony.  Where is that found in the gospel of Christ, or in the Bible, exactly?  

The Democratic party is more likely to protect church-state separation which, in the long run, is far more beneficial to American Christians of all kinds, than the GOP.  And while there may be some specific issues, supported by Democrats, that are not influenced or supported by Christian theology or principle, those issues do not pose any threat or imposition on the practice of any faith.  And where, in the GOP, will you find politicians like President Jimmy Carter, who sees the big picture and is willing to risk the consequences of standing up for the rights of those who are marginalized, or who might not share the same religious convictions.  

Then There are Some Political Perspectives

Every member of Congress, the President, every federal judge and Supreme Court justice, swears an oath of loyalty to the Constitution of the United States.  I can't cast a ballot for anyone who does not stand against what happened on January 6th.  Those who stand up and speak out are true Patriots.  Those who don't are traitors.  It's as simple as that.  But it's not just that. 

The obstructionism that now characterizes the GOP, as opposed to the Democrats still willing to negotiate and compromise, is resistance to democratic government.  Trying to preserve their own power and influence, by appointing political idealogues instead of qualified jurists to the Supreme Court, gerrymandering congressional districts in spite of past precedent, tax policy that creates massive inequities and favors the rich, all of that tells me, in no uncertain terms, that Republican values are different from my Christian values and that Democrats will be better protectors of my religious freedom.

Is that simple enough?   

Note on Comments Regarding the Overturning of Roe v. Wade and Abortion Rights

Personally, I am opposed to the practice of abortion and that opposition is rooted in my Christian theology.  The references from biblical texts that are used as support for the belief that life begins at conception don't actually make that declaration, but they do support the idea that human identity begins prior to physical birth.  There are practical, informed choices that can be made before a child is conceived that make its use strictly for birth control a poor choice.  Unfortunately, the resources for the kind of information and education necessary to help people make better choices in this regard are often cut by governments run by Republicans who don't believe in equal taxation. 

Regardless of what I believe about abortion, I do not believe that a politician who supports abortion rights is a "baby killer."  There are multiple reasons why politicians support abortion rights, most of them do so because they recognize that the circumstances, in most cases rape or incest, which lead to a woman making that decision, are very complicated, involving a whole range of extreme emotions and that the danger of attempting an abortion, outside the presence of qualified medical personnel, warrants making it legal to avoid worse circumstances.  Conservative Christians are big on personal responsibility and accountability; so only the individual who is making the decision bears any responsibility for it, regardless of what the law says.  If the politicians who allow the unlimited access to guns are not responsible for mass shootings and the murders that happen in school classrooms and church sanctuaries, then neither are politicians who favor abortion rights "baby killers." 

Both the Clinton and Obama administrations saw a significant reduction in the number of abortions performed during their time in office.  This was directly due to their getting Congress to fund programs providing information and education directed toward communities with high rates of pregnancies among unmarried women and high abortion numbers.  Most crisis pregnancy centers operated by churches and church groups fall short when it comes to providing for needs beyond an ultra-sound, some counseling support and maybe a couple of bags of groceries.  But when Republicans control the budget, that money goes back into tax breaks for the wealthy.  

Abortion is a social issue, and while I have strong personal convictions about it, I realize that it is not the only issue to take into consideration when casting a ballot. And I'd prefer to cast my ballot, especially for someone going into the Congress or running for President, who is strong on the major issues, like foreign policy, education, the economy, national security, commitment to our constitutional representative democracy, and who understands and is willing to support, without caveat, the whole constitution of the United States.  

That's why I almost always vote for Democrats.