Political Action and the Kingdom of God政治行动和上帝的王国
Written by Mark Van Steenwyk : December 27, 2007写的马克范steenwyk ： 2007年12月27日
The election has already dominated the news for months…but soon we’ll be into primary season.选举已经占主导地位的消息，几个月… …但很快，我们将纳入初级季节。 We’ll only hear more and more about the candidates until the elections in November.我们将只听到更多的关于候选人，直至11月的选举。 Meanwhile Christians will struggle over which candidate to vote for–if they intend to vote at all.同时基督徒的斗争将超过哪位候选人投票，如果他们打算投票。 And in the midst of it all, they’ll wonder how they–and they’re church–can best bring about the sorts of societal changes for which they long.并在中都，他们将不知道如何和他们教会最能带来各种社会变化，而他们长期的。 Some radically embrace a candidate in hopes that he or she will bring real and lasting change.一些从根本上树立的候选人，希望他或她将带来真正的和持久的变化。 Others carefully and skeptically get involved in the political system, knowing that it is a messy, unclean system–but one they cannot ignore.其他审慎和skeptically介入，在政治制度，知道这是一个乱七八糟的，不洁的系统之一，但他们不能忽视。
Others (like me I suppose), wash their hands of the whole mess.其他（如我，我假设） ，勤洗手的整个一塌糊涂。 Folks like us affirm the sentiment of Dorothy Day when she said: “Don’t vote–it will just encourage them!”乡亲跟我们一样，肯定的情绪，阮德徽天，当她说： “不投票-它只是鼓励他们” ！
Some folks advocate a strong counter-cultural ethic of direct action to address issues like poverty, racism, etc. Others suggest being active in the American political system.一些乡亲主张一个强大的反文化伦理的直接行动来解决问题一样，贫穷，种族主义，等其他建议正在积极参与美国政治制度。 Still others strive for a balance between those two poles.还有一些争取两者之间取得平衡这两个极点。 How should we go about “doing” the politics of Jesus?我们应如何去“做”政治耶稣？
Exposing Some Political Assumptions 揭露了一些政治的假设
There are at several common assumptions that American Christians make when engaging in politics:有几个共同的假设，美国的基督徒时作出的，从事政治：
1) Legislation should enforce Christian ethical standards. This assumption is made by people from both sides of the aisle (and among people in the middle). 1 ） 立法应该执行基督教的道德标准。这个假设是由人从两边的走道（和人民之间在中东的） 。 We assume that our ethical standards should be the basis for legislation.我们假定我们的道德标准，应该是立法的基础。 In other words, liberals try to pass laws forcing people to care for the poor and conservatives try to pass laws keeping gays from getting married.在其他换言之，民主派试图通过法律，强迫别人照顾穷人和保守派试图通过法律，从保持同性恋结婚。 Liberals attempt to take the high road on this by basing their legislation of morality on humanism or universally beneficial standards.民主派人士企图采取高道在此依据其立法的道德的人文或普遍有利的标准。 Nevertheless, both liberals and conservatives begin with the assumption that the legislative system is a worthwhile tool in advancing an ethical agenda.不过，无论是自由派和保守派开始与假设，即立法制度是一项有意义的工具，在推进道德议程。 Libertarianism is an obvious exception.自由主义是一个明显的例外。
2) Words like “freedom” and “liberty” and “justice” mean the same thing in the Kingdom of God as they do in the Declaration of Independence. Many Christians don’t ponder the conflicting meanings of important key-words like “freedom” and “liberty” and “justice” and “peace” and “power.” Because of this, they often pour the Americanized meaning into their reading of the Bible. 2 ） 的话一样， “自由”和“自由”和“正义”的意思是同样的事情在上帝的王国之中，因为他们做的独立宣言。许多基督徒不思考冲突的意义，重要的关键的话一样， “自由“和”自由“和”正义“和”和平“和”权力“ 。正因为如此，他们往往倒入美国化的意义纳入其读的圣经。 For example, someone with this assumption may believe that the sort of liberty that Jesus wants for us is precisely the sort of liberty we have in the USA.举例来说，有人与这个假设可能认为的那种自由，耶稣要为我们正是那种自由，我们在美国。 Or, on the liberal end of things, this assumption manifests as the belief that we cannot really have Christian liberty until poverty is obliterated in America.或者，对自由年底的事情，这个假设表现为信念，我们不能真的有基督教的自由，直到贫困是湮没在美国。
3) Words like “freedom” and “liberty” and “justice” mean different things in the Kingdom of God and the Declaration of Independence, because America and the Kingdom of God are two separate realities–one real and one spiritual. The previous assumption lumps Americanism and Christianity into the same sort of civic religion. 3 ） 的话一样， “自由”和“自由”和“正义” ，是指不同的东西在上帝的王国和独立宣言，因为美国和上帝的王国是两个独立的现实-一和一真正的精神。先前的假设肿块主义和基督教到相同排序的公民宗教。 This assumption is right to make a distinction between the Kingdom of God and the American Empire.这个假设是正确的加以区分上帝的王国和美利坚帝国。 But, unlike the previous assumption, it fails to recognize the temporal reality of the Kingdom of God.但是，不像以前的假设，但却没有认识到颞现实的上帝的王国。 Someone with this assumption may believe that Jesus only cares about our souls.有人与这个假设可能认为耶稣只关心我们的灵魂。
Some Background on Christian Social Ethics in America 一些背景对基督教社会伦理在美国
The subject of Christian social ethics in America has always been America.主题基督教社会伦理在美国一直是美国。 Instead of asking “how can we truly embody the Gospel in America” the question has more often been “how can we make America conform to our values?” The more that America became the democratic society that the social gospelers so desired, the more difficult it became to do ethics in a theologically candid manner.而不是问： “我们如何能真正体现福音在美国”的问题已更经常被“我们如何能够使美国更加符合我们的价值观？ ”更美，成为民主社会的社会gospelers ，所以想要的，更困难它成为做道德在一个theologically坦诚地。 Chastened by the thinking of theologians like Niebuhr, those trained in ethics no longer sought to “Christianize” the social order. chastened由思想的神学家尼布尔一样，在那些训练有素的伦理不再寻求“ christianize ”社会秩序。 Instead they pursued, in the name of love, a more nearly just political arrangement.相反，他们追求的，在名称的爱，更接近公正的政治安排。
In this mode, Christian social ethics continues, but it is difficult to say what makes it “Christian.”在此模式下，基督教社会伦理继续，但它是很难说是什么使“基督教” 。
Many conservatives avoided politics, until after WW2, when fundamentalists increasingly embraced the progressive Christian strategy of political engagement.许多保守派避免政治，之后才ww2 ，当原教旨主义日益拥抱逐步基督教战略的政治参与。 Regardless of theological persuastion, the assumption for both the right and the left tends to be that the American political system is the primary way to bring about large-scale change.无论神学persuastion ，假设双方的权利和左边的往往是说，美国的政治制度的主要方式，使大规模的改变。 No one really questions the system.没有人真正的问题，该系统。 American politics is for the big stuff.美国的政治是大的东西。 Christianity is for the personal stuff.基督教是个人的东西。
The Yoderian Shift 该yoderian转移
John Howard Yoder has left his mark on American Christianity.霍华德厂家优化留下了他的印记，美国基督教。 Perhaps best known for his influence on thinkers like Stanley Hauwerwas, Yoder came into the argument from the Anabaptist tradition–a group that traditionally withdrew from society.或许最出名的，他的影响力的思想家一样，赤柱hauwerwas ，厂家优化生效的论点，从再洗礼派传统的一组传统退出社会。
Yoder asserted that the most powerful force in human affairs is God, working in and through the Church–that nonviolent community of disciples.厂家优化断言，最强大的力量在人类的事务是上帝，在工作，并通过教会认为，非暴力社会的弟子。 If the Christian church in the past made alliances with political rulers, it was because it had lost confidence in this truth.如果基督教教堂，在过去取得了联盟的政治统治者，那是因为它已失去信心，在这个真理。
He named this unholy alliance between Church and State “Constantinianism,” regarding it as a dangerous and constant temptation.他命名此非神圣同盟教会与国家之间的“ constantinianism ， ”把它作为一个危险和不断的诱惑。 Yoder argued that Jesus himself rejected this temptation, even to the point of dying a horrible and cruel death.厂家优化争辩说，耶稣自己拒绝了这种诱惑，甚至到了一点，死亡的可怕和残忍的死亡。 Resurrecting Jesus from the dead was, in this view, God’s way of vindicating Christ’s obedience.重新耶稣从死里复活的是，这种观点认为，上帝的方式，维护基督的服从。
Yoder argued that the primary aim of the Church is not to promote our values through governmental systems, but to “be the church.” We are called to be an embodied alternative to a society based on violence by centering our shared faith on the life, death, resurrection and teachings of Jesus.厂家优化辩称的主要目的，教会是不会促进我们的价值观，通过政府制度，但要“教会”我们正所谓是一个体现了替代对一个社会的基础上的暴力，围绕我们的共同信念，对生命，死亡，复活和教诲，耶稣的。
Christianity isn’t, separate, however, from politics.基督教是不是分开，不过，从政治。 Yoder argued that Christianity is already a political standpoint.厂家优化争辩说，基督教已经是一个政治立场。 Before we can imaginatively explore ways of integrating our Christianity into the American political system, we must first embrace our calling to be the church.我们才可以发挥想象力，探讨如何整合我们的基督教成为美国政治制度的，我们首先必须树立我们的要求要教会。
According to William Cavanaugh, “Too often the modern Christian theological imagination has got lost in the stories that sustain modern politics.根据威廉cavanaugh ， “太往往是现代基督教神学的想象力了迷失在故事维持现代政治。 The Christendom model assumed the legitimacy of the nation state and tried to preserve the established position of the Church in guiding it.” In other words, we have let our thinking be shaped by Americanism and let that Americanism form our understanding of what it means to be the Church.”该模型假设基督教的合法性，民族国家，并试图维护既有的立场，教会的指导。 “在其他换言之，我们必须让我们的思想，形成由美和让这种美的形式，我们的认识，意味着什么被教会“ 。
There is a tendency here for “extraction” from culture.有一种倾向，在这里为“提取”从文化。 The issue isn’t that we should opt out of the system, but engage it in a different way—much the same way the ancient Hebrew prophets engaged the Babylonians and the Persians—prophetically speaking the words of God.问题不在于我们应该选择退出制度，但从事它在以不同的方式-很多相同的方式古代希伯来先知从事巴比伦人和波斯人- prophetically发言的话，上帝。
QUESTIONS: 问题：
1) How should the church bring about addressing issues like poverty? 1 ）应如何教会带来解决问题一样，贫穷？ Abortion?堕胎？
2) How should we engage in challenging those in powers to care about those things that Jesus cares about? 2 ）我们应如何进行，在具有挑战性的那些在权力，以关心这些东西，耶稣关心？
3) When is (or isn’t it) ok to make use of the American political system? 3 ）当是（或不是）确定要利用美国的政治制度？
for further reading .为进一步读。 . 。 . 。
- None Found无发现
I haven’t yet read Yoder, but would like to…我还没有看过厂家优化，但想…
Can you suggest a place to start?你能建议一个地方开始？
Wilsonian wilsonian
Yoder is most well known for The Politics of Jesus but that can be a very dense read.厂家优化是最有名的为政治耶稣的 ，但可以是一个非常密集的阅读。 I suggest starting with his smaller books, which are far easier to work through, as a way to ease into his theology.我建议开始与他的小书，这是容易得多，通过工作，作为一个途径，以纾缓进他的神学。
Perhaps one of my favorite books by Yoder is He Came Preaching Peace , but there are numerous others published by Herald Press that are good places to start.也许之一，我最喜爱的书籍是由厂家优化，是他来鼓吹和平 ，但也有其他许多出版的先驱新闻界表示，是良好的地方开始。
You really should work up to reading Politics of Jesus, in my opinion.你真的要工作到读政治的耶稣，在我的意见。
The first question: How should the church bring about addressing issues like poverty?第一个问题： 应该如何教会带来解决问题一样，贫穷？ Abortion? is perhaps the very one that has gotten the church off track in this country. 堕胎？也许是非常一个得到了教会偏离轨道在这个国家。 Most Christians think that the solution to these social and moral issues is found in government.大多数的基督徒认为，解决这些社会和道德问题是，发现在政府。 However, it is my view that the church is far better equipped to handle these issues at the grassroots level, where the rubber meets the road, for the main reason that the church can find real workable solutions in a given social context without becoming bogged down in bureaucracy that characterizes a large unwieldy central government.不过，这是我认为教会是远远更好的装备，处理这些问题在基层，那里的橡胶会见的道路，最主要的原因认为，教会可以找到真正可行的解决办法，在一个特定的社会背景，没有成为陷入在官僚机构的特点，一个大笨重，中央政府。
If you look at history, the church recognized the social problem of children with no family and so orphanages were begun.如果你看看历史，教会承认的社会问题的儿童与没有家庭和孤儿院，所以开始的。 The church saw illness and disease in society and so it began hospitals.教会看到疾病在社会上，所以开始的医院。 The church saw uneducated children working six days a week in factories and so it began Sunday school to educate those children.教会看到，未受过教育的儿童工作六天一个星期在工厂，所以周日开始，学校教育这些儿童。 When churches have the right focus, then they are capable of finding viable ministries that can address these social issues within their own community, rather than viewing the government as a parental figure who can give us all that we need and solve our problems for us.当教会有权利为重点，然后他们能够找到可行的部委，可以解决这些社会问题与自己的社区，而不是看政府作为父母的数字，谁可以给我们所有我们需要和解决我们的问题我们。
[…] · No Comments Mark Van Steenwyk has written another great article on the debate between Christians and politics. Van Steenwyk argues that many Christians equate “words like ‘freedom’ and […] [ … … ]没有评论马克范steenwyk写了又一次伟大的文章之间的辩论基督徒和政治。范steenwyk认为，很多基督徒等同于“字一样， '自由'和[ … … ]
Mark - nice post.马克-尼斯后。 It’s good to look at this stuff, particularly at the start of the big presidential race.它的好，看这个东西，尤其是在开始的大总统竞选。 I like how you have laid out the options and assumptions, though I am continually confused by anabaptist approaches to political engagement.我喜欢你如何奠定了选择和假设，虽然我不断混淆，再洗礼派的办法，以政治参与。 It just seems like in so many ways disengaging from a country’s political system ends up being just like a person sticking his or her head in the sand - no matter how much one talks about prophetic engagement.它只是好像在许多方面脱离接触，从一个国家的政治制度，结束了正在就像一个人坚持他或她的头部在沙子里-不管有多大一谈的预言接触。 Maybe you can lay out how you see that prophetic engagement occurring in a way that can actually lead to large scale change (or whatever else might be the goal).也许你可以铺陈你如何看到先知的接触发生在一个方式，其实可以导致大规模的改变（或任何其他可能的目标） 。 Much like pacifism can look like sticking your head in the sand if it is not accompanied by some sort of strong, direct action that works for peace.很像和平可以样子坚持在你的头上，在砂，如果不是伴随着某种强烈的，直接的行动，工程和平。
I think it is worth noting that if we choose to locate ourselves within the Kingdom of God story, as opposed to the American/ Western empire story, we will view politics differently.我认为这是值得注意的是，如果我们选择中找到自己与上帝的王国的故事，作为反对美国/西方帝国的故事，我们将不同的政治观点。 We will see God as the primary agent in social change, putting down “the mighty from their seat and and exalting the humble and meek.” Thus it is the church’s relation to him that determines our involvement in his political agenda.我们将看到上帝的作为首要剂在社会变革，放下“ ，浩浩荡荡从自己的座位上，并和提升该谦虚和温柔。 ”因此，这是教会的关系，他决定我们参与在他的政治议程。 We are told we are “seated with Christ in heavenly places”, we enter the heavenly courtroom when we gather as the “ekklesia”.告诉我们，我们是“坐下与基督同在天堂的地方” ，在我们进入天堂的审判室，当我们搜集“ ekklesia ” 。 In other words, we, as the church, are that political body with the greatest capacity to enact justice and subdue evil.在其他的话，我们作为教会，是政治团体，与最大的能力，制定正义和邪恶的制服。 First, by our petitioning status (as kings and priests) with the “guy on top”, and second, by our Spirit empowered commission to call all creation into reconciliation with him.首先，我们的请愿地位（作为国王和司铎）与“家伙就顶” ，和第二，我们的精神，授权委员会呼吁所有的创造变成和解与他。 That’s the warfare part.这就是战争的一部分。 The welfare part is taken care of when we see God as the only benefactor, and not the state, trusting him with our needs, and sharing out of the abundance with which we are provided with those in need around us.福利的一部分，是照顾当我们看到上帝作为唯一的恩人，而不是国家，信任他与我们的需要，并分享出来的丰度与我们所提供的与有需要的人士在我们身边。 Therefore we must insist, if we are to regain our identity as the Church, that Jesus alone is King, and his Father our Provider and Protector- The American political empire is not, and we must plunder it of all its claims.因此，我们必须坚持，如果我们要恢复我们的身份，教会，耶稣，单是国王，和他的父亲我们的供应商和保护者-美国政治帝国，是不是，我们必须掠夺，它的所有债权。
Is there a condensed version of Politics of Jesus?是否有一个浓缩版的政治耶稣？ Anyone interested in collaborating on one?有兴趣的人士合作，对一呢？ ndsnow@gmail.com
1. 1 。 Poverty / abortion: The church must assume full and exclusive responsibility.贫困/流产：教会必须承担全部的和排他的责任。 If we fail to help the poor, then the state has opportunity to create a program to help them.如果我们不帮助穷人，那么，国家的机会，创造一个计划，以帮助他们。 (Remember, the state does not raise taxes to pay for programs, it creates programs as an excuse to raise taxes.) Unless the church is willing to assist pregnant women and adopt their children it has no voice in the abortion debate. （请记住，国家不加税，以支付程序，它会产生程序为借口，要增加税收。 ） ，除非是教会愿意协助怀孕妇女，并采取他们的子女有没有发言权，在堕胎的辩论。
2. 2 。 Power cannot care about the things Jesus cares about.权力不能关心的事情，耶稣的关心。 Power exists for three reasons: 1.权力的存在，原因有三： 1 。 To keep the power it has.把它的权力。 2. 2 。 To use its power on someone else.利用其权力，对别人。 3. 3 。 To get more power.以获得更多的权力。 We should work to limit the influence of power by eliminating as many privileges as possible.我们应该努力限制的影响，电力，消除许多特权。
3. 3 。 Christians should vote, if there is someone running for office who wants to limit the scope of the state.基督徒应该表决，如果有某人竞选办公室谁想要的范围限制在国家。 This limits our choices to Libertarians for the most part.这限制了我们的选择，以libertarians为最部分。 Christians should run for office, for the purposes of hampering corruption or working to limit the scope of the state from the inside.基督徒要竞选公职，为施行阻碍贪污或工作范围限制在该国从内。
We have to recognize that the state harms people, whether or not they are Christians.我们必须认识到，国家的危害，人民，不论他们是基督徒。 It is merciful to work to reduce the scope of the state.它是仁慈的工作，以减少范围的国家。
Nathanael Snow拿雪
ndsnow@gmail.com
[…] January 1, 2008 at 11:57 pm (Raleigh) I recently Posted this on a friend’s message board:Voting is a very difficult issue for me. [ … … ] 2008年1月1日在下午11时57分（罗利）最近，我张贴，这对一个朋友的留言板：投票是一个非常棘手的问题，对我来说。 It is something that is frequently on my mind.这是这是经常在我心目中。 I think the whole idea that people need to vote to bring about change is a load of BS.我觉得整个概念，人们需要表决带来的变化是一个负荷第BS 。 I am looking for reasons to justify voting, or abstinence from voting.I wanted to open this up for discussion, hopefully these questions will generate something.1) Does voting (within our current voting system especially) really help bring about change?2) If a person does not vote?我期待的原因，理由投票，或禁欲从voting.i要打开此作讨论，希望这些问题会产生something.1 ）投票（我们目前的投票制度，特别是）真的可以帮助带来的改变？ 2 ）如果一个人不投票？ Do they have the right to complain?3) Should non-voters be looked down upon?4) Should a follower of Jesus vote?let me know what you think.———————————————————————–I just read a great article (about voting) on a popular blog that i read almost daily.you can check it out here: […]这样做，他们有权利抱怨？ 3 ）应非选民被看不起后？ 4 ）应跟随耶稣的投票？让我知道您的想法.--------------- ---------我刚才读一个伟大的文章（约投票）对流行的博客我看了几乎daily.you可以检查出在这里： [ … … ]
[…] 08. [ … … ] 08 。 Mark Van Steenwyk is asking questions about political action and the kingdom of God: read here.马克范steenwyk是提出关于政治行动和上帝的王国：读这里。 […] [ … … ]
Ok Mark, time to talk about voting.确定马克，时间谈论投票。
Would Jesus vote?将耶稣投票？
Should we vote?我们应该投票？
I’m particularly interested in the idea that a libertarian type candidate would be a possible good vote for the Christian community, in as much as he/she lets the “State be the state, and the Church be the Church.”我特别感兴趣的想法，一个自由派类型的候选人将是一个尽可能良好的投给基督教社区，在多达他/她，让“国家的国家，和教会成为教会” 。
Thoughts?思考？