Am reading Clark Pinnock on political theology... Some of you will know that I'm not a big fan of his. To improve on Confucius, every person is my teacher in something...
Although evangelicals have been criticized for their ‘hands-off’ approach to politics, there has been a resurgence of interest among the younger generation. Even among “hyper-spiritual” circles, the concept of God’s rule in the here-and-now probably recovered some lost ground.
The question is not whether God’s will be done on earth or not? But what is God’s will?
As Kia Meng put it, “We’d be political whether we like it or not, but will we do politics like Jesus?”
Based on some online/offline discussions/Clark Pinnock writings, let’s see two possible ways we can engage in politics… evangelicalism is big enough for both.
The Anabaptist approach:
All earthly systems are oppressive, unjust and evil, including democracy, and so doomed to be overthrown by Christ. (Hallelujah Chorus!) Logically, communism is also evil but at least one friend was quick to wistfully defend Cuba as a workable model of socialist ideals
The church should be counterculture, not ‘culture-reclaiming’. A redeemed community that give up their middle class ‘relative luxury’, share possessions and embody Christian faith besides the poor - Simple lifestyle, nonviolence, equality are signs of authentic church. Nonviolence includes ‘NO capital punishment and self-defense by use of force’
In hermeneutics, the NT (Sermon on the Mount) is the lens with which OT is evaluated and ‘pit against’. Otherwise, what’s ‘new’ is New Testament?
Sometimes, there’s a strict separation of church and state… i.e. “don’t legislate Christian morality on others”. Churches should never ally with Babylonian political powers as Constantine did
Another friend has an interesting take: “In Malaysian context, you can take part in the political process from the Opposition because you’d never win! But if it’s possible to win, you shouldn’t be involved in politics at all”
The neo-Puritan approach:
The Kingdom will be partially realized within history and society BEFORE Christ’s Second Coming as the church obeys Jesus’ call to disciple all nations.
Reformed hermeneutics recovers OT as framework for ethics, taking OT seriously on its own terms. This casts a different light on forceful self-defense, ‘just war’ and capital punishment
Legitimacy of earthly powers and the Christian’s responsibility to exercise political influence in a godly manner are affirmed. Ambition to impact the world through the political process for those suitably gifted is encouraged.
The church is not only a new community. She should also bring society under God’s law. Human societies need not be left to Satan’s domain.
“You can legislate nothing BUT morality. The question is whose morality?”
The Church is not always counterculture, especially in cultures where the Christian faith has taken deep roots. There’s a place to recover a Christian heritage within culture
Two visions of political engagement… How does it relate to our Malaysian context?
PS: If I remember rightly, Karim Raslan in a post-911 comment, said that North America, for all its faults, remains a beacon of liberation and light for the rest of the world in so many ways. Interesting, isn’t it?
Although evangelicals have been criticized for their ‘hands-off’ approach to politics, there has been a resurgence of interest among the younger generation. Even among “hyper-spiritual” circles, the concept of God’s rule in the here-and-now probably recovered some lost ground.
The question is not whether God’s will be done on earth or not? But what is God’s will?
As Kia Meng put it, “We’d be political whether we like it or not, but will we do politics like Jesus?”
Based on some online/offline discussions/Clark Pinnock writings, let’s see two possible ways we can engage in politics… evangelicalism is big enough for both.
The Anabaptist approach:
All earthly systems are oppressive, unjust and evil, including democracy, and so doomed to be overthrown by Christ. (Hallelujah Chorus!) Logically, communism is also evil but at least one friend was quick to wistfully defend Cuba as a workable model of socialist ideals
The church should be counterculture, not ‘culture-reclaiming’. A redeemed community that give up their middle class ‘relative luxury’, share possessions and embody Christian faith besides the poor - Simple lifestyle, nonviolence, equality are signs of authentic church. Nonviolence includes ‘NO capital punishment and self-defense by use of force’
In hermeneutics, the NT (Sermon on the Mount) is the lens with which OT is evaluated and ‘pit against’. Otherwise, what’s ‘new’ is New Testament?
Sometimes, there’s a strict separation of church and state… i.e. “don’t legislate Christian morality on others”. Churches should never ally with Babylonian political powers as Constantine did
Another friend has an interesting take: “In Malaysian context, you can take part in the political process from the Opposition because you’d never win! But if it’s possible to win, you shouldn’t be involved in politics at all”
The neo-Puritan approach:
The Kingdom will be partially realized within history and society BEFORE Christ’s Second Coming as the church obeys Jesus’ call to disciple all nations.
Reformed hermeneutics recovers OT as framework for ethics, taking OT seriously on its own terms. This casts a different light on forceful self-defense, ‘just war’ and capital punishment
Legitimacy of earthly powers and the Christian’s responsibility to exercise political influence in a godly manner are affirmed. Ambition to impact the world through the political process for those suitably gifted is encouraged.
The church is not only a new community. She should also bring society under God’s law. Human societies need not be left to Satan’s domain.
“You can legislate nothing BUT morality. The question is whose morality?”
The Church is not always counterculture, especially in cultures where the Christian faith has taken deep roots. There’s a place to recover a Christian heritage within culture
Two visions of political engagement… How does it relate to our Malaysian context?
PS: If I remember rightly, Karim Raslan in a post-911 comment, said that North America, for all its faults, remains a beacon of liberation and light for the rest of the world in so many ways. Interesting, isn’t it?
Comments