Election Day and The Lesser of Two Weevils

Four years ago, when many Christians were first considering whether or how they could justify voting for Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton, I wrote an article at The Federalist addressing the vote: “9 Reasons Christians Don’t Need to Vote for the Lesser of Evils.” I revisited that article this week, given the considerable back and forth over John Piper’s recent article on the 2020 election: “Policies, Persons, and Paths to Ruin.”

What obligations do Christians have in the voting booth?

A common assumption behind all of these arguments is that Christians have a duty to vote, and that the failure to exercise this duty makes one responsible for the results. Not voting, or voting for a third-party candidate, is morally equivalent to positively voting for the other team. (Footnote: Christians in Germany could have stopped Hitler’s rise if they weren’t so submissive.)

This argument fails to grasp that the morality of a Christian’s vote is upstream of “Clinton versus Trump.” While the New Testament doesn’t directly address the question of how a Christian should vote, it does nonetheless present a uniquely Christian approach to civic engagement. Over the coming weeks, as we make our long, slow march to the polls, Christians should take this opportunity to reflect upon their unique callings in this world, and the deeper meaning and morality of the act of voting.

To wit, here are a few theological reflections on Christian duty at the ballot box, and why we need not vote for the lesser of evils.

This article isn’t a rejoinder to Piper, nor is it an affirmation of his views. But I do think it is interesting to see two different approaches to Christians and the state and our engagement in politics.

One key difference is perhaps a different view of Christian Liberty:

As a pastor, I often emphasize this “Christian liberty” in matters where God’s word is silent, such as voting. Christians are free to wrestle with their consciences in this matter, yet as a minister of God’s word, I have no authority to bind their conscience, other than to urge them to walk in love, which “does no wrong.”

Christian liberty keeps us humble. It reminds us there isn’t necessarily a proper “Christian way” to do everything. Our duties as followers of Christ are specific, limited, and mostly local. Very often, the way of love is the way of not doing harm.

Christian leaders should recapture the humility and wisdom of Christian liberty before they give counsel on how to vote.

God calls us to faithfulness as citizens, but our primary duty is submitting to those rulers God puts in charge. All authority is from him. This should be a great comfort as we face the great unknowns of the coming days (and weeks?):

The Bible tells us God used revolutions, poisonous mushrooms, and loyal secretaries to get his man (or woman) in office. The Apostle Paul wrote to Christians living in the eternal city during Nero’s reign, telling them that “there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.”

God is in charge. Today in America, he uses votes. It might seem more civilized to us, but it is no different. The king’s heart is a stream of water in the hand of the Lord; he turns it wherever he will.

God is in charge. Praise God.

(You can read the entire article at The Federalist.)

On a lighter note, the “lesser of two evils” always reminds me of one of my favorite scenes in one of my favorite literary works, Patrick O’Brian Aubrey-Maturin series of novels (which was well-captured on screen in the movie, Master and Commander):

“Two weevils crept from the crumbs. 'You see those weevils, Stephen?' said Jack solemnly.
I do.'
Which would you choose?'
There is not a scrap of difference. Arcades ambo. They are the same species of curculio, and there is nothing to choose between them.'
But suppose you had to choose?'
Then I should choose the right-hand weevil; it has a perceptible advantage in both length and breadth.'
There I have you,' cried Jack. 'You are bit - you are completely dished. Don't you know that in the Navy you must always choose the lesser of two weevils? Oh ha, ha, ha, ha!”

Whether in the British Navy, or in the voting booth, remember that you need not always choose the lesser of two weevils.

Celebrating Reformation Day: The Affair of the Sausages

Reformation Day is traditionally celebrated on October 31st, marking the date in 1517 when Martin Luther nailed the “95 Theses” on the door of the church in Wittenburg, sparking a theological debate that continues to this day.

Luther was most influential due to the way that his ideas spurred many diverse reform movements across Europe, including that of Huldrych Zwingli in Zurich. A number of years ago I wrote about Zwingli’s initial reforms as it related to the observation of Lent:

Ironically, it was the preaching of Martin Luther that inspired one of the most famous incidents of Lenten non-observance, almost 500 years ago. In 1522, the “Affair of the Sausages” launched the Protestant Reformation in Switzerland. Huldrych Zwingli, Pastor in Zurich, attended and later defended, even blessed, a Lenten feast of meaty sausages, verboten vittles during the obligatory fast.

Zwingli’s concern was twofold: Christian liberty, and Christian sanctification. Regarding liberty, since the Scriptures did not command fasting, Zwingli felt a Christian was free to fast, or free to not fast.

Jesus himself had declared all foods to be clean: “There is nothing outside a person that by going into him can defile him” (Mark 7:18). For a church to forbid the eating of foods without biblical warrant was to play the Pharisee, to lay a burden upon a man’s conscience that God himself had not commanded. This would be in direct violation of Paul’s injunction to “let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath” (Colossians 2:16).

Through the rediscovery of the Gospel, Luther and company reminded the church of the great blessings of Christian Liberty. Freed from obedience to the Law as a source of righteousness, believers are no longer bound to observe the regulations of man to attain righteousness before God. Christ alone is the true source of our righteousness before the divine throne, his obedience alone — credited to our account by faith alone — passes muster before the divine bar. As a result, our only comfort in life and death is based upon the fact that Jesus has paid for all our sins with his precious blood.

Christian liberty doesn’t mean we are free to live as libertines. It means that because Christ has satisfied God’s justice for us, we are now free to love others as he has loved us:

Christians are called to suffer as Christ suffered, that is, with the same purpose. We are called to suffer not for ourselves, but for others. When we engage in fasting in his image, but for the purpose of purifying ourselves, we invert that image. Such penitence is ultimately focused on self, not on the other.

Jesus’s passion was an act of love for us: “We love, because he first loved us.” We needn’t invent any obligation not laid upon us by the Lord, who summarized all the Law and Prophets (and ceremonies and fasts) of the Old Testament with this simple command: “A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another: just as I have loved you, you also are to love one another.” The most powerful reminders and signs and seals of that love, are the ones Jesus gave us: The preaching of Christ crucified, and the water and bread and wine of his holy sacraments.

Reformation Day is a day to remember these gospel truths with the Protestant Reformation clarified and called forth again to the forefront of the church’s consciousness.

Happy Reformation Day!

(You can read the full article at The Federalist, where it originally appeared: “Repent of Lent: How Spiritual Disciplines Can Be Bad for Your Soul.”)

Christianity is Neither Conservative Nor Socialist

In 2011 I was asked to write an article for @DailyCaller addressing the question, “Is Christianity Conservative or Socialist?” It was a part of a series of articles, with different authors writing on each viewpoint.

I wrote that “Christianity is Neither Conservative Nor Socialist”:

Both the Christian Right and the Christian Left get the question of Christianity and politics wrong.

Christianity is not politically conservative or politically liberal — though Christians may be either. Christianity is not political at all. It is in a sense politically agnostic. But in another sense it calls into question the basis of every earthly power, including politics.

Those looking to dig into the Bible and find a political platform are going to be sorely disappointed. It’s not there. That is for the simple reason that it is not a book about politics, but about God, and how He is saving His people through Jesus Christ. This distinguishes Christianity from Old Testament Judaism and modern day Islam, both of which contain detailed political agendas. Well-meaning Christians that want to outline a detailed “Christian” agenda of their own, however, will simply not find one.

You can read the full article at Daily Caller, “Christianity is Neither Conservative Nor Socialist.”