Subscribe to Christianity Today
Subscribe to Christianity Today
Donate to Christianity Today
February 9, 2010
Free Newsletters:
RSS Feeds | Audio | Twitter

Home > 2008 > April (Web-only)Christianity Today, April (Web-only), 2008  |   |  
Speaking Out
Election 08's 'False Clerics and Schismatic Spirits'
The ubiquity of religion in this campaign season is distinctly un-Lutheran.



ADVERTISEMENT

The campaign season has brought many news stories and analysis pieces on religion's role in the presidential election. Beyond questions of whether Democrats can win more evangelicals' votes or whose health-care plan is most just, however, are deeper questions of how God has called Christians to act in society. In the coming months before the election, Christianity Today will be publishing a wide spectrum of viewpoints on the proper role of Christianity in electoral politics. Here, Uwe Siemon-Netto offers his Lutheran perspective.

The religious aspect of the 2008 election leaves this confessional Lutheran once again mystified. First there was the kerfuffle over whether Christians could elect a Mormon to the White House, a dispute making no sense to followers of Martin Luther, who said, "The emperor need not be a Christian so long as he possesses reason." Meanwhile, the amiable Mike Huckabee mused inexplicably about an alleged need to conform the Constitution more to the Bible. Then John McCain got in hot water for accepting the endorsement of Texas pastor John Hagee, a vituperative critic of the Roman Catholic Church.

The latest uproar is over the church Sen. Barack Obama has affiliated himself with, and whether he should have fled Jeremiah Wright after the pastor offered such hideous political pronouncements as "God damn America."

All this makes a staunch Lutheran groan in desperation. Did not Christ tell Pilate: "My kingdom is not of this world" (John 18:36)? Which of these seven words is so hard to understand?

Hearing Wright's unsettling videos (and Obama's elucidations) made me think fondly of my own congregation. I belong to Mount Olivet Lutheran Church in downtown Washington, D.C. This is an all-black parish, just like Obama's. My wife and I, along with another congregant and the organist, are the only white members. We did not join Mount Olivet to make a political statement, however; we did so simply because it was closest to our home, and because it was liturgical and faithful to Scripture and the confessional writings of the Lutheran Church. That was all we needed.

No doubt our pastor, John F. Johnson, and many congregants have experienced just as many frustrations as Wright on account of their race. But I have never heard about it from the pulpit or in committees and voters' meetings. Johnson preaches every Sunday on the prescribed readings for that day. That's the beauty of lectionaries in liturgical churches; they are meant to shield homilists from the hubris of their urge to be "original." Therefore our pastor is a much more convincing preacher than Wright. As a confessional Lutheran, he knows, as do his listeners, that personal gripes have no place in divine service. They have learned from childhood to distinguish properly between the spiritual and the secular realms, between law and gospel, between the "two kingdoms," as we Lutherans call the two realities constituting every Christian's paradoxical existence — kingdoms in which every Christian holds dual citizenship.

There is the "right-hand" kingdom that will ultimately be glorified in the kingdom of God. It is infinite, and the church is part of this realm. Here God has revealed himself in Christ. Here Christ rules by grace. Here all are equals, all forgiven sinners, all members of Christ's body. And then there is the temporal "left-hand kingdom," where God conducts a strange mummery and never reveals himself. "Through good and bad princes God governs the terrestrial world," Luther said. In a democracy, these "princes" include all of us, the voters. We make mistakes, of course, but God will ultimately correct those. This is the realm of the law and of practical reason, both under sin, yet gifts from God to operate in this world.

share this pageshare this page



E-mail this pageWrite CTPrint this articlePost a comment





  


Subscribe to Christianity Today and get 3 free trial issues. No credit card required.

Please allow 4-6 weeks for delivery. Offer valid in U.S. only.

If you decide you want to keep Christianity Today coming, honor your invoice for just $19.95 and receive nine more issues, a full year in all. If not, simply write "cancel" across the invoice and return it. The three trial issues are yours to keep, regardless.


Click here for international orders2-for-1 Gifts!

[Reader Reviews]
Average User Rating: 

Displaying 1 - 3 of 11 comments.See all comments
Isaac C. Rottenberg   Posted: April 05, 2008 5:02 PM
As a survivor of Nazi horrors, this kind of two-kingdom theology frightens me as much as Jeremiah Wright's "ideologization" of the Gospel. The big problem in Germany was not so much Lutheran pastors who hailed Hitler, but a Lutheran quietism that robbed churches of their prophetic voice. What irony to quote the sad case of Paul Althaus, whose theology of "peoplehood" made him sympathetic to the Nazi Blut und Boden heresy and Bonhoeffer who, after his US visit, became a political activist. The Gospel of the Kingdom is indeed not about traffic rules, but it IS -among other things-about such mundane realities as justice. Thank the Lord, tertium datur--as I hope future contributors will point out.

Larry Perrault   Posted: April 04, 2008 3:47 PM
Huckabere of course was talking to a room full of Bible-believing Christians. In other words, to them, he was stating the obvious ideal that The Consitition should specift wgat they believe to be the truth. In fact, it already does. Bit clarification is called for in our perceptual context, as it was with abolition. Still, Huckabee needed to be cognizant of the fact that his words would be recorded, played to the public, and pictured as a call to theovcracy. Therefore, the comment was insufficently careful.

Wally   Posted: April 04, 2008 2:50 PM
This comment is more directed at Matt than at the article. I hope that's OK. Matt, it's not a matter of Luther or the Bible. Perhaps the author set an unintentional trap for you by quoting Luther instead of Jesus, but more than one distinction of Jesus' come to the mind of this Lutheran who happens to agree with much of the article. Challenged on taxes, Jesus said, "Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's and to God the things that are God's." Asked if he claims to be a king by Pilate, Jesus answers, "My kingdom is not of this world!" So Siemon-Netto's "two kingdoms" distinction not only goes back to Luther, but also to Christ himself. That being said, keeping the two kingdoms separate and knowing what belongs to which kingdom is not necessarily easy, and Lutherans to tend to be [certainly this one is] a bit quietist as history shows. I merely one to point out that Luther's very useful doctrine of the two kingdoms derives from Jesus himself, contrary to your assertion.

The allotted time for commenting has ended.

[Browse More Christianity Today]

Search






















Search by Name
Or use Advanced Search to search by program, region, cost, affiliation, enrollment, more!

Search by:





Books & Culture
Christianity Today
Church Law & Tax Report
Church Finance Today
Leadership Journal
Men of Integrity
Outcomes
Kyria.com
Your Church
ChristianityTodayLibrary.com
PreachingToday.com