No too long ago, a leader from a large, suburban faith community – one for which I have great respect – told me that they don’t discuss politics in his church. Its not allowed in the pulpit, he said, and the people who plan worship are very purposeful to avoid anything that might sound “political.”

On the surface, this sort-of policy makes sense. Church members likely come from a variety of political perspectives, and allowing politics to seep into the Church’s internal dialog might be divisive. However, in the end, I believe the idea that a community can be both Christian and politically neutral is a myth.

Lying behind our modern sensibilities about the relationship between politics and religion is the concept of “separation of Church and State.” This phrase originated in an 1801 letter written by Thomas Jefferson shortly after he became President, invokes the image of a wall. Each “side” of the wall, according to this philosophy, can and should function separately and independently from the other. On one side of the wall – the side involving the “physical” – is the world of politics. Here, resources, money, and power are acquired and distributed (or not) according to a democratic system of governance. On the other side of the wall – the side involving the “spiritual” – people are free to seek abstract ideals such as enlightenment and forgiveness for personal sins. Society can thus be neatly compartmentalized, with the secular and the sacred inhabiting their own distinct realms.

“Separation of Church and State,” however, is not a particularly good way to describe our system of government. The Establishment Clause in the Constitution does, in fact, prevent lawmakers from establishing a State religion. It also prevents lawmakers from “prohibiting the free exercise” of religion. However, while the ability of lawmakers to influence religion is strictly limited, there is no corresponding limitation on the ability of religion to influence lawmakers. Indeed, if anything, the Establishment Clause implies that – if someone wants to exercise one’s religious freedom by engaging in political discourse – one is perfectly free to do so. The “wall,” if that is the best term, should be thought of as a semi-permeable membrane, which prohibits influence to flow in one direction, but not the other.

More importantly, however, I find it impossible to think of the physical/political and the spiritual/religious as existing in distinct categories which can be easily compartmentalized. This is true, I would imagine, for any religion. However, it is uniquely true for Christianity.

At the heart of Christianity is the pursuit – the process of seeking out – the Kingdom of God. In the prayer that is common to every Christian denomination, we pray for that Kingdom to come, so that God’s will is accomplished “on Earth as it is in Heaven.” Our most fundamental proclamation is that “Jesus is Lord.” This statement leaves no room for anyone or anything else – including the State – to take priority over the rule of God.

At the heart of the rule of God is the concept of justice. The Bible speaks unrelentingly of the importance of caring for the poor, the widows, and orphans, and of welcoming the foreigner in our land. Jesus himself taught us to love our neighbors as we love ourselves, to show compassion for the poor and hungry, and to expose acts of injustice to public scrutiny. There is simply no way that one can live in the way of Jesus without becoming involved in politics – the systems by which the State determines how wealth and resources are acquired and allocated.

Even the failure to act is itself a political act. “[T]he social inaction of the church implies – whether consciously or not – a political stance,” writes Jorge Tasin in The Justice Project, a recent compilation of essays on the subject of justice, “By remaining silent and uninvolved, the church tacitly supports the status quo and the powers of the moment.”

If Tasin is right, then even the “wall of separation” must be seen as an impediment to God’s rule, and bringing down the wall won’t be easy. Some, for example, fed by a steady diet of radio talk shows and cable news punditry that promote a self-interested worldview, no doubt find much comfort in a faith that is safely compartmentalized from the political. Yet I believe it is important to begin to engage the imaginations of our faith communities with new visions – ideas that are not motivated by the politics of Left or Right – but by a prophetic vision of what our communities, our nation and our world might look like as it is transformed by the in-breaking of Heaven.

About mattritchie

I am a practicing civil litigator from Texas. I have also been been speaking, teaching, blogging, and reading about Christian spirituality in the emerging culture for over five years. Aside from my passion for all things Dallas Cowboys, my interests are of a decidedly geek-ish bent: they include technology, quantum physics, PC gaming, and board games.