When Christians and Politics Collide

Simquily: To begin, please explain what “separation of church and state” really means. Do you think we as a society have misconstrued this concept? 

Dr. Schurb: The term “wall of separation between church and state” does not appear in the U. S. Constitution. In 1802, then-President Thomas Jefferson coined the phrase in a letter to a group of Baptists. Over the 200+ years since then, the phrase has been taken to betoken a complete separation of religion from political life or of God from public discourse. Yet, a couple of days after Jefferson wrote his famous letter, he himself attended a Baptist service that was held in the House of Representatives chamber! Moreover, Jefferson’s infamous Bible version, from which he removed certain contents such as references to the miraculous, was printed by none other than the U.S. government printing house. Clearly, for Jefferson the “wall of separation” was not as high or as impenetrable as people today consider it to be.

About 20 years later, Jefferson’s friend and colleague James Madison commented that the experience of the U. S. up to that point had shown that “a legal incorporation of religious and civil polity” is neither desirable nor needed. In so writing, Madison paid tribute to Martin Luther. Luther had maintained that God, Whose address to human beings in His Word consists basically of Law and Gospel, governs mankind in a twofold manner: 1) His “left-hand” rule where one finds governments, laws, morality, and compulsion; and 2) His “right-hand” rule, which features the church, forgiveness in Christ, freedom from sin, and freedom to serve God and one’s neighbor in love. Therefore, Luther held that it would not do for the government to run the church or for the church to run the government. There is no New Testament theocracy. In that the American “separation of church and state” has recognized this, it has been good for both church and state. Yet, the state cannot evade its responsibility to God the Creator.

Simquily: In general, what does the Bible teach us about a Christian’s role in politics? 

Dr. Schurb: Christians live under both aspects of God’s rule. While we should distinguish between them—no less than we distinguish between Law and Gospel—we cannot separate them. That is, the Christian wears what might be called “two hats” at the same time: forgiven child of God in Christ and responsible member of the political order.

In the U. S., people play a larger part in government than in many other places. In our country, citizens are in effect rulers as well as ruled. We have opportunity to influence public policy in a variety of ways. We can make our views known to government officials, and vote for many of them. Christian citizens will want to do their homework on such matters, approaching them with integrity, humility, and compassion. We vote for our neighbors—that is, we cast our ballots for the benefit of others.

Here, we, too, are responsible to God. If the ancient Roman orator Cicero, who was not a Christian, knew that you could not make robbery or adultery right just by getting a lot of people to support them, how much more should we know so when we have the Scriptures!

Simquily: On some issues, the Bible seems to be very clear. On other issues, though, the Bible is less clear. To whom or what can Christians turn when the Bible seems to be less clear on various issues? 

Dr. Schurb: Scripture does not speak specifically to most “political” questions. The church certainly should keep this in mind, lest it meddle in matters that lie not only beside its mission but also beyond its competence.

When dealing with subjects that the Bible does not treat head-on, Christian citizens will want to gather as much biblical input as possible. For example, with respect to care for the poor, Scripture teaches that no one can remain unconcerned and, as it were, just walk by. “Thou shalt not steal” (Exodus 20:15) not only prohibits theft but also encourages giving. There should be generosity toward those who need it, the Bible says, and fair wages should be paid.

However, Scripture does not indicate the particular ways in which generosity should be shown. Nor does it specify what constitutes a fair wage. Human reason will be needed to get down to the level of such specifics, including the wisdom and examples—both positive and negative—of people in the past. And when reason enters in, disagreements will occur even between sincere and committed Christians.

Simquily: In our pluralistic world, how can Bible-believing Christians respond to other Christians who turn the Jesus of the Bible into their own personal Jesuses for the sake of personal political beliefs or agendas? 

Dr. Schurb: This is not basically a political question, but a theological one. In general, there is only one answer for false Christs: the true Christ. The remedy to bad biblical interpretation and application is interpretation and application that stays faithful to God’s Word. Point people to the text. There is no Christ except the biblical Christ.

Bad interpretation can be especially prone to occur with respect to political matters in large part because these things do require an application of reason. Reason might pull one’s theology off base, in one direction or another. Then it can seem important to stick with aberrant theology because it serves some political agenda so well.

The challenge here is to keep reason subservient to God and His Word.

Simquily: In today’s volatile political arena, what are your thoughts on whether a faithful, Bible-believing Christian can make an impact? How can Christians stand up for what they believe—and be heard—without compromising their Christian principles? 

Dr. Schurb: It takes courage and a willingness to engage. My friend Tim Goeglein of Focus on the Family says that he would not find very many people to have lunch with in Washington D. C. if he refused to speak with those who disagree with him about political, moral, and theological questions. So he has lunch with many different people, and he talks with them.

A rather unique American avenue for citizen involvement has been the voluntary association, whether overtly political organizations or general civic associations. Often these are devoted to a single cause or issue, like National Right to Life or Lutherans for Life. Banding together with others, there is the opportunity for you to do a great deal of good.

Of course, you can also join voter education efforts. Or join a political party. Contribute money and/or time to the campaigns of political candidates.

Simquily: What are your thoughts on Christians running for office? What are some ways we as Christians can engage in the political process without running? 

Dr. Schurb: Certainly Christians can run for office, and I am glad to see that there are Christians who do just that out of a desire to serve the Lord and those around them. This kind of service is not for everyone, of course. Instead of starting out by assuming that it is not for you, though, why not give it some prayerful thought? I know Christians who took stock of various needs and ended up running for office in local or even national government. (As to engaging in the process without running for office, I guess I jumped the gun in the answer above.)

In any case, we Christians bring an important and needed perspective whenever we participate in the political process, in whatever capacity. We know that government is to act as God’s servant for the good of people and the punishment of evildoers. We do not expect it to be God. God is God, and His moral truth abides. We understand that there is more at stake than life in this world. It is as strangers and exiles that we can dare to think long-term. Therefore, we can deal with disappointments, setbacks, sins, and even sufferings of the present. We have the comfort of God’s promises to hear and answer our prayers as well as His forgiveness for all the sins and shortcomings that mark our own political involvement.

Simquily: As Christians, how do we approach voting when none of the candidates on the ballot seem to embody Christian values? 

Dr. Schurb: In a sinful world, we do not encounter perfect candidates. Every one of them is a sinner like me. Given that all candidates are evil sinners, selecting one amounts to a choice between two or more evils. Don’t let that simple fact paralyze you. We face choices between bad alternatives more often than we may be aware of—every day, really—but we go ahead and make such choices anyway.

A candidate need not be a Christian in order to take proper moral stands. For example, there is a group called “Atheists for Life.” Look for candidates who oppose what the Lord calls evil, even if they do not oppose it for the same reasons you do. Look for candidates who show moral understanding. One earmark of such candidates is that they will not surround themselves with lying and wicked people.

If you can find no one on the ballot for whom you can in good conscience vote, do some checking in advance so you might be able to write in the name of a better candidate—even one who seems to stand no chance of winning. Or consider running yourself next time or supporting someone else who is not running this time.

One more thing: just as there are “down sides” to voting for any candidate, there are also “down sides” to voting for no candidate, i.e., abstaining from voting in a particular race. I do not say: never abstain. But I do point out that it is never as easy as pronouncing a pox on all houses and withholding our own votes. My “non-vote” will benefit someone. So, every time you go into a voting booth, enter with prayer!

Simquily: How can Christians respond to family members or friends who openly support issues contrary to Christian principles? 

Dr. Schurb: The source and standard of Christian teaching should always be the Bible.

In addition, please remember that there are, for example, “Atheists for Life” who affirm the importance of life on the basis of natural law and reason, apart from their own confessing faith in God. In the political realm, we can use all the arguments from reason that we can get, so long as they are consonant with God’s Word. You can give non-biblical reasons to oppose even wrongs that God’s Word directly addresses, such as abortion or same-sex marriage. A big key here is to do your homework. Know what you are talking about, and know when to make a biblical case or a non-biblical one.

Simquily: Your Bible study Called to Vote was published in 2016, prior to the US presidential election. Why did you write this study and what do you hope people come away with after completing Called to Vote? 

Dr. Schurb: As a parish pastor at the time, I had begun thinking about producing something for my own people along these lines. While I found the 2016 election particularly challenging due to the dearth of good candidates, I also thought the people I served could use refreshment on basic distinctions that sometimes get lost: distinguishing God’s Word from human thinking, distinguishing between God’s two modes of ruling (refer back to the first question), and, for Christians in America, distinguishing ourselves as “ruled” from ourselves as “rulers” (refer back to the second question). 

Simquily: To end, what words of encouragement do you have for Christians as they head to the polls this November? 

Dr. Schurb: Just as there are no perfect candidates in this world, you are not a perfect voter in this world either. Yet, you are covered with the righteousness of Christ, and so you have a heavenly perspective that should be brought to bear on the often-messy realities of life in this sinful world. As a new creation in Christ, you have an opportunity to serve the Lord and your neighbor as you prepare and vote. Seize it!