The Motive for Christian Political Advocacy

Recognizing the need to maintain their unique role in society and the limitations of earthly governments to
change hearts, Christians still have compelling reasons to advocate political causes. Unlike the Israelites
in the Old Testament or Christians in past centuries, many Christians today live in secular democracies
where they have the privilege of electing representatives in government. For example, citizens of the
United States aspire to have a government that is “of the people, by the people, and for the people.” As
such, every citizen has a civic responsibility to educate themselves, engage in public discourse, and to
vote according to their best judgment. On this basis, Christians advocate a “Christian position” for the
social good. Although many secular critics may accuse Christians of wanting to impose theocracy, or
religious government, most politically active Christians do not advocate the enforcement of religious legal
code—there is no Christian equivalent for Muslim Sharia law. Rather, they advocate policies and
platforms that they believe are just and right based on God’s standard of justice and righteousness
depicted in the Bible.

An Objective Basis for Justice

Not only Christians but all people who vote in a representative democracy do so according to their
conscience, or what they think is just and moral. Whether they acknowledge it or not, all voters decide
issues based on moral beliefs or principles. That able-bodied people should work to earn the food they
eat, for example, is a moral belief that may influence how a citizen votes. Every political philosophy is
predicated on some fundamental moral principles. For some, legal precedent lends moral legitimacy to
their position. The fathers of the American Revolution saw the Magna Carta in 1215 A.D. as the
forerunner of the Constitution of the United States, for example. For Karl Marx, history legitimized his
moral positions. In his Communist Manifesto, Marx pointed to a long and repeated history of class
antagonism as the justification for communist revolution. The Communist regime currently in power in
China increasingly relies on the pragmatism and moral tenets of Confucianism to justify its undemocratic
rule, its Marxist idealism tempered by the failures of the Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution. The
philosopher Ayn Rand claimed to have based her extremely individualistic, amoral brand of politics on
reason alone, but even her reasoning led her to moral beliefs—namely, that selfishness is good and state
coercion is evil.

What differentiates the Christian moralist from the non-religious moralist is that the former claims
revelation from God through the Bible whereas the latter appeals to other authorities. For the Christian,
the Bible reflects the character of God who is Himself the standard of justice and righteousness. The
principles of justice and righteousness found in the Bible are not simply a “Judeo-Christian heritage” equal
in status to other cultural heritages. They are not legal precedent, historical norms, or philosophy. Instead,
these principles are collectively a divinely revealed standard of right and wrong. The Christians’ task is to
search out God’s standard of justice in the Bible and to give it preference over political ideology, popular
sentiment, and personal benefit. Certainly, both the Christian and non-religious voter naturally tend
toward self-interested political positions. But for the Christian, God’s principles found in the Bible serve as
a bulwark against greed and selfishness. Their attitude should be the same as the Psalmist, who wrote,
“Turn my heart toward your statutes and not toward selfish gain.” 1 Ideally, the Christian voter can be
counted on to vote and advocate for what is right according to God’s standard and not just for what
benefits them personally.

1
Psalm 119:36

Copyright 2011
Christians as Prophetic Mediators
Not only do Christians advocate biblical positions out of principle, but they also do so because they
believe that society will prosper and have peace when adhering to God’s standard of justice and fairness.
Christians believe that God promises blessing for societies that follow His principles and punishment for
those that reject those principles. A primary motive of Christian political advocacy, therefore, is a genuine
concern for the general welfare of society. This concern is what led Charles Finney, a 19 th century
American revivalist, to exhort his church congregants to join in an effort to repeal the Fugitive Slave Bill,
which required citizens of Northern U.S. States to aid in the capture of fugitive slaves:

Have not all Christian men political duties to perform? Ought they not to search out these duties,
and settle in the fear of God all the great questions they involve, and then meet their political
responsibilities in the fear of God and for the welfare of the nation? 2

According to Finney, Christians under democratic systems must not only attempt to understand political
questions, but dispassionately and reverently measure the laws and policies of their government against
the biblical standard of justice and righteousness and then advocate for the appropriate political change.
The motive of this advocacy is twofold: the reverence of God as the true arbiter of right and wrong (“the
fear of God,” as Finney writes), and also the peace and prosperity of society (“the welfare of the nation”).

In this sense, Christians in modern democracies have a responsibility similar to Old Testament prophets
as prophetic mediators between God and society.3 God sent these prophets to warn the Israelites—and
sometimes, other nations, such as in the case of Jonah and the Ninevites—against immorality and
injustice. Nearly every prophetic book in the Old Testament included some warning to society
accompanied by a call to repentance and reformation. In one memorable example, in Ezekiel 22:23-29,
God speaks through the prophet condemning the violence and injustice that permeated Israelite society at
that time. Then, in verses 29-30, God says:

I looked for a man among them who would build up the wall and stand before me in the gap on
behalf of the land so I would not have to destroy it, but I found none. So I will pour out my wrath
on them and consume them with my fiery anger, bringing down on their own heads all they have
done, declares the Sovereign LORD.

God says He looked for someone to stand up against immorality and corruption, and against the injustice
perpetrated by leaders and common people alike against the most vulnerable elements of society—in this
case, the poor and needy and foreign immigrants. God sought a mediator between Himself and society
would work to right these wrongs by warning the Israelites and reminding them of the law given to Moses
and principles of justice laid out therein. This mediator’s purpose was to avert the retributive justice of
God on the nation. Jonah plays this mediator role to the Ninevites, who were the most powerful nation on
the earth at the time, feared by all for their ruthlessness. An Israelite, Jonah reluctantly preached a
warning message in the city of Nineveh itself with surprising success:

On the first day, Jonah started into the city. He proclaimed: “Forty more days and Nineveh will be
overturned.” The Ninevites believed God. They declared a fast, and all of them, from the greatest
to the least, put on sackcloth. … When God saw what they did and how they turned from their
evil ways, he had compassion and did not bring upon them the destruction he had threatened. 4

2
Charles Finney, August 1852, Guilt Modified by Ignorance, http://www.gospeltruth.net/1852OE/520818_guilt_ignorance.htm
3
Of course, Christians have this role to play only because of Jesus’ unique work. As 1 Timothy 2:5-6 reads: “For there is one God
and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all men—the testimony given in
its proper time.”
4
Jonah 3:4-5, 10

Copyright 2011
The idea that God visits judgment on nations for injustice was expressed eloquently by President
Abraham Lincoln in his second inaugural address, given near the end of the Civil War. Instead of vilifying
Southerners and blaming the Confederacy for the costliest and bloodiest war in American history,
President Lincoln repented for the terrible evil of slavery on behalf of the nation and admitted that the
national suffering was an appeasement of divine justice. Because the United States had failed to
repudiate slavery, despite the efforts of prophetic mediators like Charles Finney, God was exacting what
His justice demanded.

Yet, if God wills that it [the Civil War between the Union and Confederacy] continue until all the
wealth piled by the bondsman's two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and
until every drop of blood drawn with the lash shall be paid by another drawn with the sword, as
was said three thousand years ago, so still it must be said “the judgments of the Lord are true
and righteous altogether.”5

God does not demand retribution, but He demands justice; if there is no justice, then He will bring a just
retribution. The Bible consistently depicts God as a righteous and holy Judge who is simultaneously
gracious, ready to extend compassion to those who repent and turn from evil. As He said through Ezekiel,
“I looked for a man among them who would build up the wall and stand before me in the gap on behalf of
the land so I would not have to destroy it.” By advocating policies that adhere to the “true and righteous
judgments of the Lord,” as Lincoln put it, Christians cooperate with God in seeking to avert a just
retribution upon society. This retribution is not necessarily supernatural, but can be understood to mean
the very natural results of egregious inequality and injustice—a breakdown in family relationships,
numbed consciences, loss of civility, increased crime, vigilantism, worker strikes, social unrest, and even
civil war.

The Book of Judges describes what happened in Israelite society when they abandoned the principles of
justice and righteousness laid out in the law given to Moses. Very often, skeptics point to the outrageous
injustices portrayed in the Book of Judges as evidence against biblical morality. Because these episodes
of fratricide, kidnapping, rape, and mass murder are in the Bible, skeptics blithely assume that God
sanctions such actions. However, the Bible includes these tragedies to illustrate the natural
consequences for society when it deviates from God’s law. God did not desire Israelite society to tear
itself apart in this way—quite the contrary! Appropriately, the last verse of the book reads, “In those days
Israel had no king; everyone did as he saw fit.” 6 The inference is that charismatic leadership was not
enough; the Israelites needed a just government to enforce God’s principles of justice and righteousness. 7
The example of Judges is contrasted with the Book of Ruth that follows, an uplifting story set during the
same period. The Book of Ruth shows how some exceptional communities still adhered to the Mosaic law
by providing for the poor and needy in society.

Standing in the Gap Democratically

Throughout history, Christians have been at the forefront of social issues, advocating on behalf of the
weak and oppressed, and doing what they could to right wrongs through peaceful means. More often than
not, these Christians worked for good against established authorities and powers, just as the Old
Testament prophets often stood against the rich and powerful on behalf of the poor and weak. In the New
Testament, James provides one of the earliest examples of Christian advocacy of social justice. Citing the
Law of Moses, James launches into a prophetic condemnation, typical of Old Testament prophets, of
entrenched interests who exploit the working poor:

5
Abraham Lincoln, March 1865, Second Inaugural Address, http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/lincoln2.asp
6
Judges 21:25, also repeated in 18:1 and 19:1.
7
Deuteronomy 17:14-20 describes a king who follows the law of God in his personal conduct and in his rule.

Copyright 2011
 Now listen, you rich people, weep and wail because of the misery that is coming upon you. Your
wealth has rotted, and moths have eaten your clothes. Your gold and silver are corroded. Their
corrosion will testify against you and eat your flesh like fire. You have hoarded wealth in the last
days. Look! The wages you failed to pay the workmen who mowed your fields are crying out
against you. The cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord Almighty. You have
lived on earth in luxury and self-indulgence. You have fattened yourselves in the day of slaughter.
You have condemned and murdered innocent men, who were not opposing you. 8

This type of strident advocacy was sure to upset comfortable people who probably otherwise would have
given little thought to their unjust business practices. Several centuries later, John Chrysostom, the
famous preacher and bishop of Constantinople, used his pulpit to warn against the excesses of the rich
and powerful in that capital city. Speaking on Jesus’ parable of the Sheep and the Goats in Matthew
25:31-46, Chrysostom delivered a lyrically beautiful, but terrible message to the elite of the empire:

You eat in excess; Christ eats not even what he needs. You eat a variety of cakes; he eats not
even a piece of dried bread. You drink fine Thracian wine; but on him you have not bestowed so
much as a cup of cold water. You lie on a soft and embroidered bed; but he is perishing in the
cold … You live in luxury on things that properly belong to him … At the moment, you have taken
possession of the resources that belong to Christ and you consume them aimlessly. Don't you
realize that you are going to be held accountable? 9

John Chrysostom confronting Empress Aelia Eudoxia, a painting by Jean-Paul Laurens (1880s).

In speaking up for people who lived on the margins of society, Chrysostom earned the wrath of Empress
Eudoxia. Unwilling to blunt his message, Chrysostom was soon banished to the Caucasus where he died
from the rigors of travel and climate. Christians who disrupt the norm by speaking out against injustice
can expect the same type of critical response today. While leading non-violent protests against
segregation in Birmingham, Alabama, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was publically denounced by several
Christian ministers who characterized his actions as too radical and disruptive. 10 In his Letter from a
8
James 5:1-6, where James echoes the law in Deuteronomy 24:14-15, “Do not take advantage of a hired man who is poor and
needy, whether he is a brother Israelite or an alien living in one of your towns. Pay him his wages each day before sunset, because
he is poor and is counting on it. Otherwise he may cry to the Lord against you, and you will be guilty of sin.”
9
On Matthew, Homily 48:8
10
The U.S. Civil Rights movement led by Christians such as Dr. King may provide an example where the advocacy against injustice
may have averted divine retribution. Although it is true that the movement stirred violence resulting in deaths, including that of Dr.

Copyright 2011
Birmingham Jail, Dr. King responded, explaining the need for strident but peaceful advocacy on the part
of Christians.

There was a time when the church was very powerful. It was during that period when the early
Christians rejoiced when they were deemed worthy to suffer for what they believed. In those days
the church was not merely a thermometer that recorded the ideas and principles of popular
opinion; it was a thermostat that transformed the mores of society. … They brought an end to
such ancient evils as infanticide and gladiatorial combat. 11

Writing from his jail cell, Dr. King argued that Christians must not stand by idly as witnesses to injustice.
Besides civil disobedience, Dr. King relied on democratic means to effect change. Quoting Micah 6:8 in a
later speech, he urged civil rights protesters to vote for God-fearing government representatives for the
overall good of society.

Let us march on ballot boxes until we send to our city councils, state legislatures, and the United
States Congress men who will not fear to do justice, love mercy, and walk humbly with their God.
Let us march on ballot boxes until all over Alabama God’s children will be able to walk the earth
in decency and honor.12

Dr. King’s sentiment is the same as the Apostle Paul writing to Timothy and the church at Ephesus:

I urge, then, first of all, that requests, prayers, intercessions and thanksgiving be made for
everyone—for kings and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all
godliness and holiness. This is good, and pleases God our Savior, who wants all men to be
saved and come to a knowledge of the truth.13

Although Paul wrote at a time when Christians did not have the right to vote for their leaders, Christians
living in democracies today can apply this advice to themselves first by praying for their elected
government officials, but then also by praying for God to help the electorate decide who to vote into office
and what policies to support or oppose. The renowned New Testament scholar C.E.B. Cranfield writes
that Christians today can find guidance for their democratic responsibilities in verses such as 1 Timothy
2:1-4 quoted above, even though the historical context is much different than the situation for many
believers today. Commenting on Romans 13:1-5, Cranfield writes:

The proper exposition of Paul’s words involves for the Christian living in a democracy the
translation of them into the terms of a different political order. Such a Christian can, and therefore
must, do much more for the maintenance of the state as a just state. His “subjection” will include
voting in parliamentary elections responsibly, in the fear of Christ and in love to his neighbor, and,
since such responsible voting is only possible on the basis of adequate knowledge, making sure
that he is as fully and reliably informed as possible about political issues, and striving tirelessly in
the ways constitutionally open to him to support just policies and to oppose unjust. 14

Expounding on 1 Timothy 2:1-4, Cranfield notes that “the purpose of civil government and of the state in
God’s intention is a purpose of mercy toward men,” specifically individual men, women, and children for

King himself, it could be argued that the success of the civil rights movement avoided greater bloodshed and societal disruption.
Had the Civil Rights Bill, Voting Rights Bill, and Fair Housing Act never passed into legislation, can anyone doubt the severe societal
repercussions that would have followed?
11
Martin Luther King Jr., April 1963, Letter From a Birmingham Jail
12
Martin Luther King, Jr., March 1965, Our God Is Marching On!
13
1 Timothy 2:1-4
14
C.E.B. Cranfield, Romans: A Shorter Commentary, p. 321

Copyright 2011
whom Jesus died. 15 This scope of this mercy is not limited to a single country, but extends throughout the
entire world. In each person in need of assistance, Jesus is present to be either honored or neglected.
The realization that the government exists for the sake of precious people should cause the Christian to
soberly consider his or her democratic responsibility. Measuring policies and legislation against God’s
merciful purposes in government, Christians will remember that “persons are infinitely more precious than
property.” In practical terms, this means the Christian voter will not limit his or her concerns to the local
sphere, but will side with generous and unselfish policies that look to alleviate global hunger or ensure the
personal liberty and dignity of those without a voice—“the underprivileged, the misfits, and the lame dogs
of society,” as Cranfield puts it. And, while not a pacifist, in times of war the Christian will never forget that
even the lives of the enemy are precious to God.

Social justice advocacy is not a replacement for the gospel of Christ. Certainly, Christians must transform
society by promulgating the gospel of Jesus Christ, which leads to an inner change in people that is
incomparably more effective than outward coercion. Yet, once the inward change takes place, spiritually
reborn people will then become God’s representatives in society, speaking and working on His behalf.
They have the same anointing, or divine authority, of Jesus, who came to preach good news to the poor,
bind up the brokenhearted, proclaim freedom for the captives, release from darkness for the prisoners,
and proclaim a day of vengeance for God against both spiritual and physical oppression. 16 Christians’
reborn nature compels them to take action for a more just society, the Bible guides them, and the Holy
Spirit empowers them to do so.

“Well, we're doin’ mighty fine, I do suppose,

In our streak of lightnin’ cars and fancy clothes,
But just so we're reminded of the ones who are held back,
Up front there ought 'a be a Man In Black”

Singer Johnny Cash, “The Man in Black” and a Christian advocate for justice

15
This paragraph and the following quote drawn from Cranfield’s essay, “The Christian’s Political Responsibility According to the
New Testament,” first published in Scottish Journal of Theology 15, (1962), pp. 176-192.
16
Luke 4:16-21

Copyright 2011