People claim Jesus for many reasons. You know that, of course, and that their faith in Him can mean so many different things. And He may or may not change the way they consider and live their lives. But if they claim Him, or a faith related to Him, shouldn't it change them?
There are many who attend church—regularly, perhaps, on particular religious holidays, or just unpredictably. Regardless, they know the language and rituals of their Christian church community; they know the culture and the teaching. And yet I have not seen much change in so many of them—in what they do or say, in who they are. At the very least, shouldn’t they reflect some of His love and forgiveness, some of His humility and compassion toward others, both within and without their faith community?
Rather, too often, their faith and church appear a convenient front, and their Jesus claimed more a cloaking justification, an excuse, for culturally-biased, sometimes bigoted views and actions. Too often they claim this ersatz, reinterpreted Jesus—their distorted biblical teaching and Christian history, too—to support their public judgements and intolerance, their lack of public compassion and concern for the poor, their aggressive political agendas to legislate their cultural values on others. I recognize none of this in the Jesus I find in the Bible, the Jesus that abides also in my heart.
So, the first question that has to be asked is this: does God need or want us to aggressively pursue or support these “faith-based” political and legislative agendas?
Shall we start in the Gospels? Isn’t it clear that Jesus is engaged in an “in-house” discussion and corrective within the religious community of the Jews of the time, Roman-occupied Israel? He was addressing “the lost sheep of Israel.” But there is no biblical evidence He had anything to do with the Zealots and other activists and intriguers. He was not the expected Davidic, warrior Messiah, the restorer of Israel's sovereignty and culture. He was a different, misunderstood Messiah, a purely spiritual Messiah, a restorer of His people’s relationship with God.
He taught, admonished and challenged the faith community, but his righteous anger and condemnation were reserved for the dead, dry faith, the vain self-interest and self-serving practices of the Jewish religious leaders—but not the occupying Romans. He had nothing to say nor in any way judged the Romans or other secular authorities—with two exceptions:
o First, he said we are to render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s--the required taxes, legal compliance, and respect of secular government—and unto God the things that are God’s.
o Then, in the Sermon on the Mount, He also made clear that we should respond to any authorities or others who would oppress us only by giving them more than they demanded: turning the other cheek, carrying an unwelcome load farther, or giving them the shirt or coat off our backs. We are to respond not with anger or opposition, but with love, forgiveness and humility. We are to love and help even our enemies. This is the teaching and example of Jesus—a radical, spiritual Messiah—and this is the challenging and humble way He would have us share with others an understanding of God’s heart.
Other than to claim the rights and legal process afforded a citizen of Rome when persecuted, the Apostle Paul conducted himself in much the same way toward secular authorities, whether in the many towns he visited or before the authorities of Rome. In all cases, his example was to present himself as loving, compassionate and humble, reflecting the nature of God’s leading Spirit and Jesus’ example. Then, yes, he would always be prepared to tell his story and the story of his Lord, and give the reasons why. But as important as his story was, it was equally important that the example of Jesus’ spirit of love and humility be reflected in him. That is, the Great Commandment of loving God and all others, as God loves you, must be well and authentically in place before you can expect to credibly, humbly, share your story or His.
We can only follow His example and trust in the work of His Spirit and love. And in His work, there is no place or basis for cultural, political or legislative coercion. If Christians or their churches need political activism and legislation to force themselves or others to live the life God calls them to, then they do not understand the call of Jesus at all. Where in the biblical accounts of Jesus or the Apostles are there any such examples? God’s faithful people have always humbly served Him by trusting that the presence and work of His Spirit is all the authority and power needed to transform hearts and move opinions. It's not about imposing interpretations of faith or faith culture on others; it's about living a transparent life as a medium for God's love.
And throughout Christian history, whenever the organized church gained sufficient power to impose legally—or by physical force—a profession of faith and compliance with their legalistic requirements for thought, speech and behavior, what has happened? Political, theocratic nightmares: brittle, brutally enforced religious compliance, reflecting nothing of the character of Jesus and nothing of the Spirit of God. And then there were the wars—“holy” wars, "just" wars, of course.
It is worth noting that the Apostle Paul made clear in His first letter to the Corinthians that he had no place or interest in judging those outside the faith community. And Jesus admonished us against judging all others. He made clear that only after challenging and being affirmed in our own maturity, humility, and Spirit-led behavior, should we consider counseling or guiding others even within the faith community. If this is something well understood—and likely it is—why isn’t it more often reflected in Christian attitudes and behavior toward others?
Just to be clear, I am not suggesting for a moment that Christians should decline to exercise their franchise or refuse to support political candidates that best represent their views. But only that they should not presume to represent Jesus or Christianity while doing it. Nor am I suggesting that as faithful Christians they should fail to live their lives by the tenets, disciplines, and values of their faith as they best understand them. But only that they should not presume to force them on others outside their faith community in the name of Jesus.
The second question that must be asked is this: when Christian political advocacy rails against groups of people outside their community of faith—often those most shunned by many in the religious community and, possibly, the secular community, as well—do those people, or anyone seeing and hearing, recognize in this "Christian mission" the example of Jesus, or sense God’s Spirit of love, forgiveness, compassion and humility? And as a result, are they drawn to be closer to Christians and know more about our faith and who we are? Can God in any way use these "Christian soldiers" to help those lost or hurting when they purport to represent Him like that? How can we be surprised that many of those people think we hate them, and so fear or hate us, too?
What answers do you think increasingly led Billy Graham’s ministry as he was welcomed as pastor by presidents and politicians of all parties, as he was looked upon as pastor and healer by the lost and broken of a nation for two generations? And now, looking back, he believes he was still too political, that the walk of faith—and anything resembling thoughtful, obedient evangelism—is about God’s love, mercy and compassion for all. If we consider at all the examples of Jesus, I think we’d know what Billy Graham clearly knows: those people we've alienated are the very ones who Jesus would be sitting at the table with today. They would be first in His healer’s heart and first offered the promises of new life through Him.
And I have a third question, one that revisits ground we’ve already walked, but bears revisiting. Why, among many who claim Jesus, His teachings and example, does the selfishness of their politics—like their fear of cultural change—still trump their faith and relationship with Him?
They oppose social programs that certainly help those people about whom God cares most, and they oppose the taxes necessary to fund them. If it’s all about distrust of government accountability, then by all means they should advocate and vote for more efficiency and accountability. But why would they have difficulty with Jesus’ clear admonition to render unto Caesar, especially when it is serving the Lord’s people and purposes? Isn’t that also part of their giving? If they would study the history of the different Old Testament tithes and their purposes, they would see clearly the commonalities with today’s system of taxes and uses for the public good, and especially the support of the poor. And if they believe that the best answers are all about private philanthropy and church missions, they must also recognize that, as important as these generous efforts are, they alone barely begin to provide the required support of people in need or solve their problems.
So, where do we go from here? If we would follow after Him, should we be surprised that Jesus calls us first to seek and experience the consuming love of God, and to learn to love Him in the same consuming way? Should we be surprised that in that process, Jesus calls us to move beyond our more limited sense of worldly identity, it’s addictive attachments and selfish strivings, and invite more of His Spirit and nature to abide in us. And, second, He calls us to allow that love to overflow in an expression of love and caring for all others.
Jesus, by His teaching and example, then makes clear his first priorities for our life of love and service. In the context and with the gravity of final judgment, He calls us to feed and clothe the poor; to visit and care for the ill, infirm and unable; to invite in the stranger, and visit the prisoner. He wants you and me to attend them, care for them, feed them. That is where we go from here. Those are the things that should fill and direct my life of faith and yours.
If you hear or sense anything of truth or right in what I say, then why not explore it all a little further? Why not test what I’ve said against the accounts of Jesus and Paul? Why not let His Spirit speak to your heart? Why not seek a more intimate, prayerful relationship with God through Jesus? Then, why not let it spill over to heart-felt concern and support for all God’s people, especially those at risk?
First written: June 2006
© Gregory E. Hudson 2007
