abstract: By Christ all things spiritual, philosophical, and political consist; there simply is no neutral turf over which His reign does not extend. Christians should do political theory, not because political theory is great in itself, but because Christ is Lord.

Skip Navigation

by Christopher Alexion

During the time Christ walked the earth, His disciples were in constant danger of turning the Gospel into a political platform. There was a certain part of "My kingdom is not of this world," they didn't understand; one suspects that in those early years the question foremost in their minds was something like this, "That's great, Lord. Wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?" (cf. Acts 1:6).

Today, however, we have to deal with the contrary error. We have to contend with those who, under the slogan of "My kingdom is not of this world," insist that Christianity has nothing to do with politics. "Christians shouldn't politicize," these often well-intentioned believers say. "They should simply preach the Gospel."

In a sense, an important sense, these people are right. We should concentrate on preaching the Gospel. The Gospel, says Paul, is primarily about delivering to others what we have received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, was buried, and was raised again on the third day (1 Cor. 15:3-4). The Gospel of Christ isn't a social program or a geopolitical entity built by violence and coercion. Christ came, first of all, to save His people from their sins, not from their lack of health insurance. The church, further, has suffered dreadful damage from those who claimed the name of Christ (Innocent III, Frederick William I, Richelieu) in order to cover their abominable power plays. We must insist, against such a spin on the Gospel, that Christ's kingdom does not originate from or operate through the preferred methods of this world.1

But this doesn't mean that His kingdom has nothing to do with this world.2 Political theory is not "worldly" or unimportant. We should ask our friends, in the first place, what it is we're supposed to do after we preach the Gospel. After the Holy Spirit has done the work of converting His people from among our audience, what do we tell the converts?

As William Cunningham pointed out, those of us who oppose neutrality in politics are allowed for the sake of argument to assume whatever cultural conditions we wish, since our opponents hold that it is wrong to "Christianize" politics under any circumstances. So let's suppose that Gospel preaching is so successful in a certain country that the majority of citizens are born again. Suppose, further, that the president or prime minister, every cabinet member, and almost every representative and bureaucrat is also regenerate. Should these people now strive to be "neutral" or "pragmatic" or "multicultural" in their administration of civil government? Does their conversion have no effect on their conduct and opinions? Should they operate their administration as if they were unbelievers? Never mind for now that neutrality in the civil realm is impossible to attain3--the question still remains as to why Christians would want to seek it.

In the second place, our friends should note that a cursory glance at Scripture demonstrates that the Christian Gospel has clear political implications--such as private property rights (1 Kings 21:1ff; Prov. 13:22; Matt. 20:15); the limitation of human government (Ps. 22:28; Dan. 4:25; Rom. 11:36, 13:4); and the establishment of three distinct, legitimate governments (familial, ecclesiastical, and civil: see Eph. 6:1, 4; Deut. 6:7; Matt. 7:9-10; 1 Tim. 5:4; Titus 2:1ff; 1 Cor. 5:12-13; Acts 6:1; and 1 Tim. 5:16). Can Christians be prohibited from speaking where Scripture itself speaks?

In the third place, the sharp dichotomy between Christianity and politics is that the dichotomy, though set up to prevent Christianity from being downgraded, ironically creates that very result. If modernism trivialized the faith by wrenching it into just another self-help program, the anti-political view does the same thing by relegating the rule of God's Word to some nebulous "spiritual realm." The effect is to deny Christ's lordship over the world--the here and now.

But Scripture doesn't make such a denial. It doesn't assert that Christ is merely Lord on Sunday; it insists that Christ is Lord of all, and thus His lordship encompasses the intellectual realm. In Him are hid "all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge" (Col. 2:3). The Father has given our Lord all authority in heaven and earth (Matt. 28:18), that in all things He might have the preeminence (Col. 1:18), for whom all things were created, including thrones, dominions, and powers (Col. 1:16). Christians are called, not to ignore certain spheres of thought, but to bring "every thought," including every political thought, under the "obedience of Christ" (2 Cor. 10:5). Gordon Clark was right to say that "Christianity...has, or, one may even say, Christianity is a comprehensive view of all things: It takes the world, both material and spiritual, to be an ordered system."4

By Christ all things spiritual, philosophical, and political consist; there simply is no neutral turf over which His reign does not extend. Christians should do political theory, not because political theory is great in itself, but because Christ is Lord.

Christopher Alexion is a homeschool graduate living in New Castle, Delaware. He can be contacted at cmalexion@netzero.net.

Endnotes

1. "Ye know that they which are accounted to rule over the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and their great ones exercise authority upon them. But so shall it not be among you: but whosoever will be great among you, shall be your minister: and whosoever of you will be the chiefest, shall be servant of all' (Mark 10:42-44).

2. Think of Christ's miracles. While His primary concern was to teach the people (or, more accurately, to die for them), His healing wonders were genuine acts of compassion for the blind, lame, demon-possessed, and dead. Following His example of mercy, Christians must take care of the poor and sick. But our primary goal (which is also an act of mercy) should be to see that "to the poor the gospel is preached" (Luke 7:22). What profits it a man if he gains prescription drug coverage and loses his own soul?

3. The very claim to neutrality, in fact, makes neutrality impossible since it condemns as false those worldviews that deny that neutrality is desirable (or possible).

4. Gordon H. Clark, A Christian View of Men and Things (Hobbs, NM: The Trinity Foundation, 3rd ed., 1998), p. 9

back to top