Thoughts from Dr. Matt O'Reilly

Dear Friends,

As I look online, I see a lot of posts by Christians voicing their sentiments on politics and the coming election. Some do it in a civil and engaging fashion, while others seem to be, “agree with me or exit the conversation.” Some paint their candidate as a flawless savior and the opposing candidate as the devil in the flesh, while others admit that both candidates (being human) are sinners, and therefore have flaws and blind spots – straying in differing areas from a well-rounded biblical or gospel-like perspective. The Gospel is too radical to be captive to any flawed and lacking human political party’s agenda.

I try to stay out of politics, and have always kept it out of the pulpit, despite advice to the contrary. But since it is a reality we must deal with I prefer to simply offer guidance. The first section (in purple) is wise counsel on Christian involvement in politics in general, not from me, but from a man named Dr. Matt O’Reilly. Obviously, I agree with his perspective or I would not pass it along! The last four points that follow (in black) are some I add. I know some of you will disagree. That’s fine. We all have differing views. Hopefully we can still be friends! It’s probably the most you will ever hear me say about politics! Enjoy.

“To state the obvious, American politics are polarized. That polarization has cultivated a lack of civility. That lack of civility has resulted in both sides demonizing the other and, at times, engaging in acts of violence. When citizens begin engaging in violence against political opponents, their society is in danger. A republic cannot be maintained without debate marked by civility and charity.

How to Vote
The temptation to speak evil of those with whom we disagree politically is not new. John Wesley was concerned about it during his ministry in the late 1700’s. And he had some wisdom for the people called ‘Methodists’ as they considered the candidates for whom they would vote. As we head into the midterm elections next week, we would do well to follow his advice. Wesley had three points to keep in mind, which he recorded in his journal from October 6, 1774. He wrote: “I met those of our society who had votes in the ensuing election, and advised them:

1. To vote, without fee or reward, for the person they judged most worthy.
2. To speak no evil of the person they voted against.
3. To take care their spirits were not sharpened against those that voted on the other side.

Don’t sell your vote. Don’t speak evil of your opponents. Keep a generous spirit toward those who disagree with you. Three essential elements of healthy and constructive political engagement.

Can the Church lead?
What is perhaps most tragic is that the demonization of political opponents has been perpetuated by many in the Church. And this is true on both sides of the aisle. Christians on the left and Christians on the right have both participated in less than charitable tactics and speech in the effort to advance their political views and agendas. Rather than leading the way in robust political discourse, the Church has sadly participated in the degradation of healthy debate.

Love your (political) enemies
Wesley’s three points are only an application of Jesus’ command to “love your enemies.” (Matthew 5:44). It is absolutely impossible to obey our Lord’s command to love your enemies and, at the same time, speak evil and sharpen your spirit against political opponents. That is not to suggest we avoid political debate. Rather, it is to avoid unhealthy shouting matches in order to make space for rigorous, yet charitable, political debate. Detest is not synonymous with debate. To the contrary, it’s actually quite difficult to debate with people we detest. What we need is political discourse that is thoughtful, clear, and charitable, all the while taking the points on which we diverge with the utmost seriousness.

My prayer is that we have not gone too far down the path of incivility. Perhaps we can repent and return to political debate that honors God and one another. Perhaps the people of God can even lead the way.”

I will add some thoughts of my own…

1. It helps to read or listen to multiple news sources in order to get a fuller picture of things. Every news outlet gives a certain slant on the news they print or report, which is somewhat unavoidable when viewers=sponsors=profit. Remember it’s not just the things news outlets cover, but the things they purposely refuse to cover, that can warp our perspective. Since most (I would say all) news sources slant or leave out what they do report to appeal to the preferences of their particular listening audience, watching multiple sources gives one a fuller picture of what’s really happening. Yet, as Christians, we should be truth seekers. We might live in a postmodern culture, but we are very unwise when we choose to believe one side of the story simply because it fits the narrative we prefer. God’s people should want to know as much as possible of the whole story, so we can make decisions based on what’s true, not what we’d prefer to wish is the truth. In a court case many witnesses are called, because by the testimony of many witnesses a better picture of what really happened can be gained (Deuteronomy 19:15, Numbers 35:30, Matthew 18:16).

2. When we vote for the leaders of our country, it is also helpful to consider that God will hold us (who voted them into power) responsible for the things they do once they are in office.

3. Admit (as any honest believer must) both the good and bad, virtues and vices, about their own candidate. It is the honest and humble thing to do. It does not demean someone to admit they have flaws. “I do not like this or that about him/her, but…” or “I wish they didn’t support this or that, but…” It’s a much better approach than making our preferred candidate a flawless saint, and the other a complete devil – not to mention it fits with the Gospel’s declarations: “There is NONE righteous, no not one…” “ALL have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Rom. 3:9-20). Not just the other party’s candidates.

4. As Christians we should be very cautious to suggest any candidate is “the Christian candidate,” for the reality is most are a mixed bag. Plus, the unbeliever will judge Christianity, Jesus’s Church, or worse yet Jesus Himself, by any unchristian things that candidate does, says, or endorses, once in office. It would be better to suggest our candidate is simply the one we choose – because of our own political, economic, or moral views - than to tarnish the name of Jesus, and the Gospel’s witness, by endorsing as “the Christian candidate” one who will inevitably go on to do unchristian things – since every candidate is never more than a flawed and imperfect human being.

With You in the Struggle to be Honest, Fair, Civil, Well-informed, and Responsible Voters, Pastor Jeff