This fall, I plan on participating at a campus-wide political organization while also attending a religious affiliated small group from my faith community. Most of my friends have been supportive of both of my decisions, but some have been very critical, arguing that politics and faith should not be strongly intertwined. And it is easy to agree. You can look at the Thirty Years War in the age of the Reformation, ‘The Troubles’ plaguing Protestants and Catholics in Northern Ireland, or the ongoing Central African Republic Civil War which has put religious factions fighting against each other. In short, religion may easily pollute effective government because it unnecessarily divides an otherwise united people, causing religious followers to question whether they ought to involve themselves in on-going political movements.
All political leaders, at one point or another, make a mistake. It’s a fact of life, no one is perfect. Now, I know that faith is by no means a prerequisite for good morals, and I have seen many upstanding irreligious neighbors who have been kind to my family. However, the public witness of a believer matters, as that individual may be the only representation of the faith known to the community. So, it is important for believers to step up and participate in politics for the sake of showing that one from that religious body can be represented in politics but also to convince skeptics that religious individuals can be responsible representative in government, and not create a persona of tyrannic hate that lusts over self-interest.
Especially when considering the situation religious minorities, members of faith need to be in government to provide necessary input to fellow officials. For example, a law might be proposed that would have little impact on the wide population, but would be incredibly damaging to a specific sect of faith. It is vital then, that the government ought to be an accurate depiction of the people whom it governs, and not be reserved for those who may have few boundaries when considering to be public servants.
Now, even if one feels it is not best to be involved in politics via the legislature, the believer is not excused to refrain from the process of lawmaking. One can easily advocate for the needs of the community through various means of lobbying, and be able to discern the difference between apparent needs and urgent obligations in a respective community. But even if any sort of pressure on government officials is to fail, the believing citizen still ought to put selfish needs asides and serve the undesirable for the betterment of the community.
The greatest threat to faith practice today is the unquestioned acceptance of social norms that discriminate towards others. Perhaps we need to re-frame how we view faith in the public square, and not view religion not as a rival to political loyalty, but as a partner to the advancement of government benevolence. We must call out our leaders when they repeatedly make unjust decisions, provide distinct perspectives the government would otherwise have no awareness of, and serve the underprivileged without any expectation of the favor being one day returned. We must choose to shape our respective faiths not in just a bland and out-of-touch manner, but in a life-giving, long-term sustaining way that focuses on the meeting the basic needs of all members of the community, not just those in power or those who share our faith tradition.
