Voices From the Past - Christians and Politics Introduction (Ong Meng Chai)

This introduces a series of posts which I hope will help address a contemporary situation in the Malaysian Church today. Since my return from the UK two and a half years ago, I have noticed that the Church is more socially and politically engaged. Indeed, not a week passes by for me personally when I am not reminded in one way or another of how the Church should be more actively involved in both the social and political arenas. While such a call is to be applauded to an extent, I am increasingly alarmed by the rising crescendo of political rhetoric not just among Christians in general but also from our pulpits. I am reminded week-in and week-out that there is a political sea-change coming and that Christians must not only not be “left-behind” but must be involved in bringing about that very change. Even more alarming is the suggestion by some “pulpiteers” (who see themselves as modern-day “prophets”) as to who and which party Christians ought to elect into government! In all my living memory, I have never encountered such feverish endeavours to coerce (I mean that seriously) into “party politics”. It has reached a stage where if you are not aligned to these folks, you will be seen as their opponents and, even worse, as opponents of God and goodness.

What precipitated it for me were three recent sermons in a week I heard which contained precisely the kind of rhetoric I mentioned above. I returned home telling myself that I must seek to address the situation. Far too many Christians in Malaysia are being swayed by such rhetoric. Furthermore, if the so-called self-appointed prophets should happen to be leaders of the Malaysian Church (or at least perceived to be leaders by ordinary Christians), which incidentally they are, surely there must be some truth to what they are suggesting as the way forward? My own take is that Christians in Malaysia need to realise that our Christian forbears have been down this same road before. More recently, this same road has been travelled by our brothers and sisters in some hot-spots around the world and, unfortunately, the outcome is not what they had expected.

What I hope to do is to provide three different voices from the past which I hope will inform us of an alternative perspective and caution us to a road less travelled by Christians in countries like ours which are still grappling with how, as Christians, we ought to be socially and politically engaged. Rather than re-inventing the wheel by expressing in a halting way what I believe is the alternative perspective, I felt that it would be far more cogent if it came from them directly.

Just so you get a feel of what is forthcoming, let me briefly express what are some of my concerns regarding our present fixation as Christians with politics in Malaysia. In much of what I have heard thus far – in personal conversations, at meetings, and from the pulpits – I have noted a number of matters which have not been addressed by these folks who advocate a more active political engagement by Christians.

For example, the reality of the Fall of man into sin is, unfortunately, a much neglected and (I suspect) a much maligned doctrine among Christian political activists. That is not at all surprising. Browsing through some modern Christian books on the Bible and politics, I couldn’t help noticing how very glaringly silent they are on the subject of the Fall. Genesis, chapters 1 and 2 are their regular fodder, in addition to a sprinkling of Old Testament historical and prophetic texts. Seldom do they address how the Fall actually affects our understanding of how we should engage in social and political concerns. I also get the impression that most authors are committed to an underlying conviction regarding the “goodness” and general morality of mankind. Can Christians understand the reason for their presence in the world without understanding the significance of the doctrine of sin? One of the voices from the past will address this issue.

Again, these modern books give the impression that times have changed so much from the past, we need to re-think what the Church should be doing today. In fact, more often than not, the Church in the past is castigated for their lack of engagement in politics and social concerns, or else, for their ineptitude with such engagement. I think it very sad that somehow Christians today think we know better, and that we need to get rid of the shackles of the past without actually understanding the past. A second voice from the past has been chosen to bring some clarity to this critique from an unexpected angle. That voice’s take will be supported by a modern voice who affirms the former.

Again, these modern authors do not seem to have a clear understanding of biblical theology and of the discontinuity between the New Testament and the Old Testament. They not only see a unity between the two; they often amalgamate the two as if they are one and the same. They don’t seem to recognise that while Israel is “the Church” in a profound sense, yet it is not the same as the New Testament Church. Thus, their often confusing God’s injunctions in the Old Testament as having a direct application for the Church today!

Again, these modern authors give little attention to the devil and his role in the world of politics. In saying this, I do not deny the providential ordering of God over politics. I dare not as there is umpteen evidence in Scripture for just such a providential ordering! God raises up governments just as He also razes them down. Indeed, God is sovereign over all nations and governments and He orders them according to His supreme will and purpose. But the Scripture also acknowledges the reality of the great enemy of God’s purpose and will, namely, the devil. The devil is called the “ruler of this world” and the “prince of the power of the air” not for nothing. At times, he is depicted as raising up rebellions against God and His people. But modern treatments of Christians and politics have little patience with such a “superstitious” belief in the person of the devil. They are merely interested in the politics of man and of God.

Again, these modern authors have little patience with a biblical eschatology that distinguishes the “already” and the “not yet”. It is true that since the end of the 2nd World War there has been a heightened awareness among Christians of the political significance of eschatology (re: Jurgen Moltmann, George Weigel, Oliver O’Donovan and Whittaker Chambers, among others). In fact, it could be said that much of the Church’s engagement in politics and social action today have been engendered by this emphasis. But often, their eschatological vision is short on the providence of God as described above and leaves no place for how God works through nation states to achieve His purpose and will. At times, that vision is obscured by mistaking what has been promised for the “then” as if it is for the “now”, thus raising false hopes of a “utopia” right here and now.

Again, these modern authors do not seem to wish to engage much of the New Testament teaching on the Christian’s relationship with the state. Passing comments are made about the clear injunctions of Paul to Christians to submit to the authorities and his corresponding silence on the issue of slavery. But there is no wish on their part to ask the uncomfortable question as to why Paul took an almost indifferent attitude to the latter, for instance. What about Jesus’ constant resistance to be crowned a human king, and His outright rejection of the setting up of an earthly kingdom, and His clear disclaimer to be an earthly king? While I happen upon one book which dealt with the politics of Jesus, I noted that the gospels were given a “political” interpretation with no real understanding of the intention of the gospel writers themselves. Obviously, there is this modern trend that you can’t know anything about an author’s intention by simply reading his writings. I suppose these same critics would say the same about what I am writing here – that none of you reading this post will know my intention for writing it! I leave that for you to judge. That said, I have chosen a third voice to address some of the issues mentioned above.

I have no doubts that many will disagree with me, as already there are in recent discussion with certain folks. My plea is that in the heat and fire of all our rhetoric, let us keep a cool head and read the Scriptures again, understand what is being said or "not said" therein, take a leaf from our forbears, and pray that the Lord will give us understanding. I don’t pretend to be the only viable voice and I am very conscious that the subject has been debated for more than two millennia with no clear conclusion. But precisely because there are so many perspectives, I offer this as one possible perspective which warrants our careful attention and serious consideration.

With this brief introduction, I will let you move on to read those voices from the past (or "a blast from the past", as I was tempted at first to entitle these posts though subsequently I felt it might prove too provocative) beginning with my next post in the near future. And if you do happen to find the forthcoming posts helpful, please pass them on and pray that the Lord will grant us all discernment at a time like this.