and concern for the poor, the needy, widows and orphans, and the “least of these” than Trump. They might decide not to vote, thereby not adding their voice to the democratic process. They might decide to vote for other candidates on the ballot and leave the Presidential candidate blank or add a write-in candidate. They might decide to vote for him, but if he truly is dangerous, immoral, and a hateful force in American politics, they would be colluding with evil. Perhaps as more Christian voices express their concern during the primaries, there will be a profound turn in the direction of the 2016 campaign. But I have my doubts.
The Struggle for Unity
If we move beyond party to people, a Christian Democrat and a Christian Republican might agree on many issues. Sometimes they vote according to whom they feel they can best trust to keep promises. They vote for the person who seems to have the same priorities as they do, or the one they think can best exemplify these values in our government. Many vote for the issues, while trying to assess the character of the candidate.
Both democracy and Christianity are challenging. They challenge us to go against our seemingly natural human behaviors of hatred, intolerance, greed, and self-righteousness, or what the Apostle Paul lists as the problems when the Holy Spirit is not at work: “antagonisms, rivalry, … bad temper and quarrels, disagreements, factions and malice”9—all the traits we see daily on our television sets, read about almost daily in our newspapers, and often see manifested in election campaigns.
On the surface, there seem to be issues that are not easily resolved, because there seems to be an inner contradiction between Christianity and democracy. Churches often ask us to be homogeneous in our beliefs and actions. Churches have creeds, and dogmas, and statements of belief, and the members are asked to, at least verbally, agree with them. But our country is not homogeneous. From the beginning, settlers of our country came to America to find freedom, and soon found that there was a diverse group of others, all of whom wanted the same freedom for themselves. Early on, many of the settlers respected these differences in order to create a democratic system.
We are often in a struggle between the desire to be inclusive and the desire to be exclusive. We often feel a struggle between our natural suspicion of each other and the command to love our neighbor.
I have heard time and again that we are a Christian nation. But we are not a Christian nation—neither in many of our actions nor in the makeup of our citizens. No matter how much we might like to be homogeneous in religion, we are not. We are a diverse nation, made up of Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Muslims, Hindus, Wiccans, Hare Krishnas, Sikhs, New Agers, atheists, agnostics, Zoroaster followers, and followers of Native American spirituality, among others.
There are many people other than Christians who have values. Many of those values are similar to ours—among them, the values of freedom, equality, honesty, justice, mercy, compassion, and the Golden Rule. Many people besides Christians see America as the land of opportunity, the land where they can achieve their dreams. Although there may be more of “us” than “them,” and although our democracy may have been founded mainly (but not entirely) by Christians, our country has strived from the very beginning to give freedom and justice to all. As Christians living in a democratic nation, what we desire for ourselves must be available for all. Suppressing another’s freedom is not the answer.
Was Jesus Political?
Christians look to God to lead and guide them in their decisions. They look to the example of Jesus, but some wonder if Jesus is relevant to our political choices.
On the surface, it might seem as if Jesus was not a political person but was someone who focused, instead, on individuals and individual relationships. He certainly did not live up to the Jewish hopes for a political Messiah. The Jews in Jesus’ day imagined a militant Messiah who would lead an army, overthrow the oppressive rule of Rome, and establish a religious kingdom.
We can, however, see some of the political viewpoints of Jesus through the actions he took and those he didn’t take. Jesus didn’t identify with any of the political structures of the day. He rejected the Sadducees, the conservatives who were willing to go along with foreign domination provided it didn’t compromise their position. He confronted the Pharisees, who observed religious practices in great detail, made hundreds of oppressive religious laws, and also supported the established powers of the day. He never joined the Essenes, who rejected political involvement and took no part in any of the religious ceremonies they considered impure. Essenes formed a separate sect, and moved to Qumran by the Dead Sea. He was not part of the Zealots, one of the most politically active groups. They were nationalists, who wanted a radical transformation of existing political institutions through violent revolution.
Many of Jesus’ followers were from different political parties with different political and religious beliefs. Simon, called the Zealot, would have either been a revolutionary or a sympathizer with the group that desired to overthrow the Roman government. Matthew, the tax collector, worked for the oppressive government Simon wanted to overthrow. Yet there’s no evidence that Jesus tried to change their political parties, or even their religion. He wanted to change their hearts and their actions.10
Was Jesus Conservative or Liberal?
The labels of conservative and liberal can paint individuals into a corner. Liberals often hold conservative values, and those considered to be conservative often hold certain liberal values.
The word “conservative” comes from the word “conserve,” which means to preserve. Generally, conservatives want to preserve the status quo. They prefer to maintain existing habits and views and institutions. A true conservative usually wants government to have a limited role in social and economic affairs. At their best, conservatives ground our country by recognizing the ideals of the past and giving us a solid foundation on which to stand.
At their worst, conservatives can be inflexible, rigid, legalistic, and immovable, with no vision of a future and little thought to how our actions today might affect the world of tomorrow. They are sometimes fearful of risks and distrustful of change. Because they are often unable to imagine other possibilities or to believe that change can lead us to a better society, conservatives are less apt to envision new ways to solve social problems.
“Liberal” is a word coming from the Latin liberare—to set free or to liberate. The word often means generous and bounteous and open-handed, as used when someone gives liberally to charity. Liberals tend to advocate reforms that would achieve greater freedom for citizens. To achieve that, they are more apt to criticize the status quo, imagine new possibilities, and ask how it can be done better. They are willing to be unconventional and untraditional in order to solve a problem. At their most extreme, liberals can become so freedom-minded that their actions lead to excess, anarchy, and a lack of restraint that can become destructive.
We sometimes hear the term “progressive,” and sometimes politicians such as Hillary Clinton refer to themselves as progressives rather than liberals. They tend to be tolerant of others and want to remove restraints to the freedom of all citizens, not just for themselves. They want to improve the world and improve the social welfare of others. “Progressive Christianity,” a relatively new term, refers to Christians who work toward a more just and compassionate world and struggle against racism, sexism, homophobia, and other human oppressions. They recognize that there is truth in other traditions as well, and they strive to overcome dogmatism.
All of these positions need to be balanced. Lacking balance, any position can lead to the vicious extremism we see in almost all political parties and religions—ranging from the fundamentalists who will kill in the name of their party or their religion, to the radicals who destroy property and create anarchy in the name of freedom.
Like most of us, Jesus exemplified both conservative and liberal values. There were certain values he wanted to conserve; there
