Presidential hopeful Mitt Romney’s Mormon faith is an awkward issue for some evangelicals who are uncomfortable with the thought of a Mormon candidate. In response to questions about his involvement in the Mormon Church, Romney famously stated, “I’m not a spokesman for my church.” No doubt the Democrats have been puzzled as the Christian Right offers Romney their full support, despite the evangelical belief that Mormonism is heretical at best, and at worst a religious cult. It has seemed like a savvy political move for Romney to do his best Charles Barkley “I am not a role model” routine, but is it realistic? More importantly, is it desirable? If this were a multiple choice question it might read something like this:
What role should religion play in politics?
A) No role, religion and politics must not be mixed
B) Minor role, I just want to know politicians have some moral structure
C) Major role, you need to be a serious Christian to get my vote
D) Total role, I’m voting for a theocracy
What’s the right answer? The traditional American answer would be: A) religion and politics must not be mixed. If I were grading the test, however, I’d mark that answer wrong. Although Christians must begin any conversation about politics by saying we do not trust in governments to keep us safe and happy, we have to acknowledge government plays a role. Yet the one thing the Christian can never agree with is the notion that religion should simply be about privately held beliefs. To make religion simply a private matter which should not influence the way we organize our communities is to rob the Christian faith of its social nature. Yet this is exactly the move many evangelicals make which allows them to justify their support of Mitt Romney while they vehemently disapprove of his Mormon faith and church. For them, religion is private; government is public. Never the twain shall meet.
The problem with this approach is that is impossible.
Religion and politics are constantly intermingled in our society. If they were not so mingled, nobody would be asking questions about Romney’s religion; nor would we still be reading poll data which says that 17% of the U.S. population still believes that President Obama is secretly a Muslim, despite the fact that he’s shared over and over about his conversion to Christianity. The question is not whether or not religion should play a role in politics – it most certainly will play a role. The question is what should that role be? The end result of choosing any of the four multiple choice options above places the Christian in one of two unworkable contradictions: In answers A. & B. faith is kept personal and private, thus Christianity is robbed of its deeply political nature. In answers C. & D. faith becomes the substantiating civil religion for the empire, and is effectively co-0pted in support of imperial power.
If I had my way, I’d advocate for another option: E) none of the above.
The church cannot become the state, but the church has an obligation to bear witness to the state. In order to fulfill this role, evangelicals must remain stubbornly independent of government or party. Christians must learn once again how to rise above the typical left-right debate and learn to speak with a voice that is truly Christian – not Republican, not Democrat, but Christian. We should never become beholden to a political party. As citizens of the kingdom of heaven, we should not even be that concerned with national identity. Christians need to learn to speak with a voice which seriously contends against evil and injustice without pandering to partisan politics or worshiping the flag.
The Christian faith, with its call to organize our common life in such a way that we image God to all creation, can never be co-opted by a political party, nor can it become conflated with any other ideology be it political, economic, or otherwise. This is especially true of American politics, where the end in mind is no longer to govern well but to win at all costs. Christians must never succumb to that kind of cynicism. Our voice must have the sound of hope, and our tone the tenor of peace, neither of which can materialize with a prior political party attachment. As an evangelical, I have obvious disagreements with liberalism, but I have just as many fundamental disagreements with conservatism. It is a chilling thing to watch evangelical Christians worship the American dream and baptize it with religious language and Christian symbolism.
Evangelical Christians need to work on finding new ways to engage in political debate which transcend the traditional left-right split. If we are deeply committed to Republican, or Democratic Party politics, over and against the gospel as an organizing principle, then we have allowed our faith to be co-opted by a group which does not share Christ’s vision for the world. The Christian faith cannot be conflated with a political ideology, but it must never devolve into something which is merely private. We can never forget that our role in society is to be a different kind of community in the midst of the world and to allow that way of being to find a hopeful and peaceful voice.
Content Director’s Note: This post is a part of our Election Month at Patheos feature. Patheos was designed to present the world’s most compelling conversations on life’s most important questions. Please join the Facebook following for our new News and Politics Channel — and check back throughout the month for more commentary on Election 2012. Please use hashtag #PatheosElection on Twitter.