A Church Divided by Politics

[Dr. Shane]

In Galatians 3:28 Paul wrote, "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus."  Could it be that he did not see a time when the church would be divided between Democrat and Republican?  Below is a Facebook Note I published in April of 2016.  It was an election year and the rhetoric on social media between church members was disturbing.  Many church members "defriended" other church members because of political differences.  I was approached by a group of church members at a potluck and taken to task for political views I expressed online.  Shortly after that, I used privacy settings to limit the people that could see my political opinions so that I would not cause undue grief.  I continue to see a divided church.  I am convinced this is not what the Apostle Paul envisioned.

April 2016

Too often I have seen one group of Christians questioning the Christianity of another group of Christians because they disagree on political issues. First, I must make the point that Jesus never called anyone to a political cause. He, in fact, told Pilate, that His kingdom is not of this world. Now, as citizens of a democratic republic, we certainly have the right - and perhaps the civic obligation - to vote in civil elections. However I see no religious obligation to do this. Any obligation that exists is a civil one - not religious.

My second point is that Christians can disagree on political issues and still be Christians. Take a hot topic like abortion for an example. Most Christians will agree that abortion (in most cases) is sinful. However just because it is sinful doesn’t mean that all Christians agree that it should be ban by the civil government. Some Christians do not think the civil government needs to ban sin in every form. These Christians seek to win hearts and minds through the power of the Holy Spirit and are very hesitant to try and use the civil government to force their religious beliefs on others. While most of them agree the unborn child deserves protection, some simply do not think that banning abortion is the best way to prevent them. They point to other nations with abortion bans where a black market exists which provides just as many abortions as nations with legalized abortion. So the two groups disagree on the how the civil government should handle abortion even though they agree that abortion is sinful.

Another hot issue that Christians disagree on is using the public treasury to help the poor. Many Christians believe the Christian obligation to help the poor extends to the civil government in a democratic republic where Christians can actively participate. Other Christians disagree and believe that using the civil government to help the poor amounts to stealing from the rich to give to the poor. Those who do not believe in using the civil government, stress that believers and organized churches should do this work. So both sides agree about the Christian obligation to help the poor but simply disagree on the civil government’s role.

The irony is this. The Christians that want the civil government enforcing the ban on abortion do not want the civil government helping the poor. Those wanting the civil government enforcing the Christian obligation to help the poor do not want the civil government protecting the life of an unborn child. Both groups seems to be holding inconsistent views of the civil government’s role. That said, I would not call into question their faith over their political views.

My final point is this: Christians should be able to disagree on political issues without drawing into question their religious commitment. Christ did not call His followers to fight political battles in the world. This world is temporary and will pass away. Politics is like shoveling snow or mowing the lawn. It is something we have to do but will not have long-lasting effects when viewed from an eternal perspective.