The Church & Politics - Christian Democracy

If you're still reading this blog, that means you've trudged with me through 2,000 years of church history (in 500-year increments) and have already done the math and figured out that, if we count 500 years since the last great upheaval in the Western Church (known as the Protestant Reformation), we land squarely today, at the beginning of the 21 Century. And, of course, we don't need the pattern of history to tell us that this current cultural, political, economic, religious moment is a tumultuous one. However, when we view the now with the perspective provided by previous upheavals, we can better understand both the challenge and the opportunity before us. Remember where we started this journey: we've been here before. In other words, the times in which we are now living, while certainly unique, are not at all unprecedented, and if we learn from those who have gone before us, we will be able to live more faithfully and effectively in this moment that God had given us.

So, with the insight that only a knowledge of history can provide, we now turn to today's world and Church with two objectives. First, we want to cultivate a greater awareness of the forces and factors that tend to lead to upheaval so we can identify them as we see them in the world and in the Church. And second, for those who so desire, we want to move beyond awareness into action. We want to be a part of the vibrant Church that Jesus is even now building. If the Spirit of God is moving, we want to move with him. We don't want to stay camped around an empty tent when the pillar of fire is on the move.

With these goals in mind, the next several posts will focus on discerning and investigating some of the contributing factors of upheaval that have been stacking up for the past several decades (or more) and are now teetering precariously, waiting the one small push that will both upend and reform the Church as we have come to know it. We all sense these forces swirling around us every time we scroll on social media, watch the news, talk politics, culture, or religion with family and friends, or even go to church. They have been the cause of great anxiety and consternation among an increasing number of Christians. And our instinctual, self-protective impulse is to pretend we don't see them and hope they'll go away so everything can return to the way it was. But that is not what God is doing. The way it was is not the way it needs to be if we want to see the Church vibrant and thriving for the next 500 years and beyond (should the Lord Jesus tarry). These forces and factors, disorienting and uncomfortable as they can be, are the forerunners of global revival. They are the cracks through with the life of the Spirit is even now growing. And for those who have eyes to see and courage to respond, they provide opportunities to drink new wine from new wineskins and to work alongside Jesus as he continues to build his Church.

So, what are these forces and factors that contribute to upheaval? The first we'll be discussing is the relationship between politics and the Church (fair warning: this topic alone may warrant several posts). 

Church history has shown us that some of the most influential factors that contribute to both the turmoil and the opportunity of upheavals are political. Whether the complex political tapestry of First Century Palestine, the internal corruption that led to the fall of the Western Roman Empire, the scheming and posturing of patriarchs and emperors in the times leading up to the Great Schism, or the political superpower that was the Catholic church in medieval Europe, the politics of the day, always find their way into an exert their influence upon the Church. The same is true today. Like the Church of ages past, the modern Church is both a product of and factor in the political environment around it.

Now, I am neither a politician nor a historian, so I will not attempt an in-depth discussion of the political history of the Western world. Instead, I would like to focus on what I, and many others, consider to be the most important political development of the last 500 years, the "advent" of democracy. I use the term "advent" somewhat loosely here because democracy was neither invented in nor first practiced in the modern West. The word itself comes from two Greek word, demos, "(common) people," and kratos, "force/might," and examples of early democracies can be found across both the ancient (Greece, Rome, India, etc.) and medieval world (Scandinavia, Eastern Europe). However, it wasn't until the Renaissance that democracy would evolve beyond sporadic regional experiments to become a substantial force that would challenge and eventually overthrow the monarchical power centers of the Western world. The British Parliament, the American Experiment, the French Revolution, and more established democracy as the dominant political force of the modern Western world, and we have been defined by and grappling with democracy ever since.

You may remember from the last blog post that the Renaissance began with a philosophical shift, inspired by the Ancient Greek philosopher, Protagoras, that has come to be known as humanism. For millennia prior, the moral center of society had always resided in authority figures (patriarchs, kings, popes, priests, etc.) and was enforced in and through community. In other words, prior to the Renaissance, it wasn’t up to an individual to determine right and wrong for themselves. Instead, they looked to authorities (figures and structures) to define standards of right and wrong, and then, in community, they enforced these standards (formally and informally). Incidentally, this type of system still exists in many parts of the world, generally eastern/southern world; we call these honor/shame cultures. But with the advent and widespread acceptance of humanism across the western world during the Renaissance, the moral center began to shift inward. The fundamental premise of humanism is that "man is the measure of all things." In other words, the answers to the great questions of existence, including but not limited to moral questions, would not be found in the usual places, religion, tradition, authority, but would be discovered as individual human beings challenged the preconceptions of these power structures and expanded their own horizons, and those of humanity as a whole in the process. 

Initially, this shift expressed itself most obviously through the arts and sciences, but eventually, it would have political and religious ramifications as well. In the previous blog post, we discussed the religious impact of humanist philosophy as individual priests and leaders (Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, Knox, Wycliffe, and many others) challenged the moral and spiritual authority of the entire Catholic Church. Of course, at this time, the Catholic Church was much more than a religious institution but also exerted significant political power over Europe’s monarchies. Consequently, the religious shake-up initiated by the Reformers didn’t stay religious, but also affected the political realities of the day because in the same way that the traditional religious systems of authority had become corrupt, so too had the political systems grown increasingly elitist and self-serving and had, by and large, only succeeded in leading their people into centuries of poverty and stagnation, now affectionately known as the Dark Ages. This was, of course, nothing new as, for most of the history of the world, aristocratic power structures have tended to benefit only the aristocracy. But the growth of humanism, sparked progress and began to generate wealth and opportunity outside the aristocracy, by dignifying the existence and potential of the "common man" and affirming, for the first time in centuries the worth of individual human beings.

Now, it is crucial for this conversation to note that, while today humanism is considered to be a secular, even anti-religious philosophy, it did not begin that way. Though it has always involved a shaking off and challenging of traditional power structures, including religious power structures, many of its pioneers were deeply religious (that is to say, Christian). In fact, it was their faith that fueled their belief in the intrinsic worth of every person, and this, in turn, inspired and motivated their philosophical, artistic, scientific, and eventually political breakthroughs. They did not reject the authority of God or Scripture but rather the authority of king, pope, and priests as the intermediaries between humans and the Divine. For them, the notion of human dignity, or "human rights," as we would come to call it, was not a novelty but was the rediscovery of the truth affirmed by Scripture from the very beginning:

So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them. (Genesis 1:27)

In fact, the very word, "rights," comes from the King James Bible's (the first authorized English translation of the Bible) translation of the Hebrew word, tsidakah, which means "justice." It wouldn't be until much later that humanism would reject all spiritual authority, including Scripture and God himself, and become a purely secular movement.

However, it was initially religious humanists, whose affirmation of individual value and dignity would eventually give rise to a political philosophy that would transform the world forever. We call it democracy. In fact, throughout the history of modern democracy, much of the language and imagery employed in democratic movements is inherently Christian, either borrowed directly from or relying heavily on the Bible. Whether the British, French, or American Revolutions, the abolition movements, Latin American liberation theologians, or the modern civil rights movement, the language of Scripture has always been a vital part of democratic rhetoric. 

But the overlap of the Christian faith and the democratic movement went much deeper than just borrowed language and imagery. It was the theology of these Christian humanists that led to their new political positions. They saw in the Scriptures a God who was uniquely and persistently involved in his creation, especially the human part of his creation. They saw a God who spoke to, listened to, worked for, and worked with people. They saw a God who dignified human beings, even the ones other humans tended to overlook (impoverished, immigrants, widows, orphans, etc.). When it came to the Gospels, especially, they saw a God who so valued people that he became one of us, taking on humanity to save humanity. And, they saw world through the eyes of this incarnate God, who shunned the company the politically powerful in order to focus his time and attention on the one, the diseased, downtrodden, and destitute. And, though they would (and still do) fall well short of his example, it was their fascination with this Jesus and his way of life that, perhaps more than anything else, influenced and informed their political philosophies. 

I say all this to say that democracy as we know it was born out of the Church, and by and large, has flourished most in places with a strong Christian presence. And while it would be an overstatement to claim that democracy is a Christian idea or that it can only exist in a Christian setting, the tenets and aims of modern democratic movements often align with those of the Christian faith. 

That said, in the next few blog posts, I don’t to focus on the places where the Christian and democratic movements align but rather where they don’t. In other words, in the weeks ahead, I would like to continue this discussion by looking at some of the unintended consequences of the marriage between democracy and the Church. Stay tuned.