The opening line of Mark Noll’s well-read book The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind reads, “The scandal . . . is that there is not much of an evangelical mind.” Noll’s book goes on to explain the detriment of this and also what should be done about it. One might suppose the same opening line and concept to follow in the newly released book written by evangelical activist, Dr. Ronald Sider. In The Scandal of Evangelical Politics, however, the problem is not an absence of evangelicals in politics; it is the nature of evangelical political engagement which Sider faults.
Characterized by the unscrupulous plan of “ready, fire, aim,” this method of evangelical involvement has all too often hindered the proclamation of the Gospel and “disgraced” the Lord. Clearly conveying that he is not advocating a massive withdrawal from the political arena, Sider challenges contemporary Christians to adopt a more sound methodology before entering into the political fray; a methodology that seriously contemplates the teaching and Christ and the example of Bible. Sider believes that only with this approach will help Christians more accurately reflect Christ and fulfill their “enormous opportunity to use politics to shape a better world.” The prescription is encouraging—especially considering the book’s provocative title and opening chapter where Sider outlines the many ways in which Christians have, and are handling, involvement in politics poorly.
Having established the background of the “scandal”, Sider develops the methodology he espouses as necessary for sound biblical political involvement. Every political decision must be made in light of four components: a normative framework, a study of society and the world, a political philosophy, and a detailed social analysis of the specific issue. Only with these four components will contemporary Christians gain a greater consensus and therefore be more likely to use political influence for good.
First in Sider’s method is a normative framework, or as others have called it, a worldview. For Christians the foundation of thought must come from the Bible in which the full canon, with Christ at the center, is the base. Christians must then turn to study of the world, both past and present, in order to properly understand a specific issue. That must then be coupled with an informed political philosophy which places the specific topic in a proper context in the political realm. When these three components are well-developed, Christians are then able to move forward with a practical social analysis on solving or eradicating the problem. Sider believes that when these four steps are thoughtfully and humbly accomplished, evangelicals are able to make positive changes for Christ in the political arena.
In further exploring a biblical normative framework, Sider spends considerable time exploring important aspects of life and how a proper biblical understanding applies to politics. Sider examines issues like the goodness of creation, the nature of mankind, the scope of history, the value of work, and the future to come; issues in which a proper biblical perspective are imperative for shaping political methodology. Take for example a proper knowledge of the nature of man. In light of the biblical truths about the dignity of every human and the sin nature and selfishness, a normative framework helps believers shape policies that take this into account. It focuses on policies that support life and freedom for all people, and yet also helps to deter policies that give one leader or institution absolute power. A biblical framework in each of these topics is foundational to Christians engagement of the political world in a way that represents the truth of the Bible and the God who scripted it.
Building on this framework, Sider spends the majority of the book developing what he considers to be a thoughtful and sound evangelical approach to politics. Looking at issues of life the sanctity of human life, the state, justice, marriage and family, religious freedom, peace, environmentalism, and foreign affairs, Sider exhibits a practical working out of the process outlined in previous chapters.
Take the topic of marriage and the family, for example. Beginning with statistics about the dismal state of marriage and family in Western culture, Sider immediately finds his normative framework from the earliest pages of the Bible when God created Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. God’s design for marriage between a man and woman is defined here and supported throughout biblical text.
From this foundation, Sider then explains historically how this definition of marriage and family became a bedrock of Western culture, but was gradually weakened when the romantic movement of the nineteenth century and rampant individualism of the twentieth century became the standard. Arriving at what he describes as the current political landscape, Sider then begins a complex analysis of the issue as currently debated in the political realm. While he believes that restoring strong marriages and families is first and foremost “a task for the church, not government,” he simultaneously does not think the state should remain neutral. On a practical level he understands that while it would be nearly impossible to outlaw divorce or sexual promiscuity, the state should support and uphold laws that encourage wise behavior in these matters, such as abstinence and monogamy. He also believes that the state should make it more difficult for couples to obtain a divorce, especially when children are involved. While the complexity of marriage, law, and current political issues are varied and deep, this example provides only a highlight of how Sider puts his methodology in practice.
Sider makes careful mention that the state should not legislate on issues that “interfere with the unique responsibilities” of other institutions, namely the family and the church. He recognizes that the first societal institutions to appear in the created world were marriage and family, and only after much time did the concept of “state” arrive. Sider agrees with some political scientists that a primary purpose of the state is to foster just relations between other societal institutions, but cautions against the abuses stemming from an all-powerful state. The power of the state is derived from God and it functions best in society when it recognizes this limitation. Other societal institutions were created for specific purposes and only when the state is “appropriately limited” can the other institutions flourish as God designed. The key in Sider’s argument is a careful analysis of what institutions are best suited to solve social problems. If the state steps in to solve a problem that is best solved at the familial level it is a violation of the biblical framework and ought not to be done.
Sider concludes the book with both a reminder and challenge that the most powerful way to make a difference is for the Church to be the Church and to engage in prayer. Historically the Church has been a place where the sick, poor, and hurting come to receive the love of Christ, and according to Sider evangelical Christians would do well to restore this purpose. The church must pray passionately for political leaders, especially those who support biblical principles; and church leaders should seek to educate their congregants to “think biblically and wisely about politics.” These suggestions, however, must be done with a proper balance between confidence and humility.
Sider should be complimented on achieving the exact stated purpose of the book—“to integrate a thoroughly biblical normative vision with a careful study of society . . . that can guide Christians into more thoughtful and effective political activity.” The book offers a well-explored background for Sider’s methodology, but—as Sider himself writes—the book does not take the final step of reaching “specific, concrete political conclusions.”
Sider deserves praise for exploring political engagement with humility and thoughtfulness. If other Christians would join with him and enter into this type of thoughtful and well-tempered engagement of politics as well, they might have the chance of eradicating the “scandal.”
No comments yet
Leave a Reply