Bottom Line: L.O.S.E. is our new organization (Lovingly Opposed to Sin and Evil) whose plan is to end evil in our lifetime . . . lovingly! Here are the ten loving “thou shalt nots” for traditional Christians in politics.
Hat Tip: I am thankful to our new Facilitator of Loving Academic Computer Instruction and Dean (FLACID), Joe Carter, for pointing out the need for this list. As FLACID we can only hope Joe will bring LOSE to the next stage of its evolution.
Ten Commandments for Evangelical Leaders and Traditional Christians in Politics:
1. Christian leaders must condemn evil at every turn, but never work with any individual who might end an evil. If asked for help or advice that has any “this worldy” aspect, the Christian leader must only talk about theology or life in the next world and never about solutions to present day evils except in the most general terms.
In fact, Christian leaders should avoid the taint of being close friends with political leaders. Let them be close friends with secular leaders so the odium of ending particular evils (while failing to achieve utopia) falls on secularists!
This helps us remain non-partisan and promises continued work for LOSE in the future.
2. Christian leaders must not distribute any materials that imply that everyone in America is not opposed to evil. This is especially the case with those “evils” on which there is not widespread agreement. This tends to marginalize other people and make them feel sad and not part of the big tent that Jesus Christ established.
3. Christian leaders must appear as ignorant as possible about the actual state of our government and politics in public. Their sermons should avoid topics of present day interest, especially elections. (Preach on abortion when nobody is thinking about it!)
The model at all times should be the other worldly Victorian clergyman who was unaware that Victoria was on the throne let alone the present prime minister. This worked out well for the English Church which while unattended is believed to be non-partisan.
(”Oh, my dear,” archdeacon Smythe-Jones said in confusion as he brushed the tea cake crumbs from his thread bare jacket, “has Mr. Melbourne left the government?”
She smiled lovingly at his childlike understanding of the politics of the day, “Back to work on your book on Christianity and the Social Crisis, uncle! Don’t you know Mr. Melbourne has been dead these twenty years?” She laughed fondly at his confused look, “Go back to solving the social crisis and leave dirty old politics to men like Reggie.”
“Quite so,” the arch-deacon sighed, “but how I would love to have a chat with Mr. Melbourne. He would understand the need for the English Church to embrace the relevance of the irrelevant.” )
4. Christian leaders should do all in their power to avoid meetings where too specific a mention of a particular evil will break down the consensus forming in our movement. All evil is evil . . . never get bogged down in the quagmire of detail.
Unless prepared to attend meetings or meet leaders on all sides of any question regarding an evil, the Christian leader risks the safety of his vacuity by associating with one side.
Remember: personal efforts are humble and their limited effectiveness brings only praise on the Church (”How Brother Smythe-Jones loves the poor!”) while actually dealing with social issues like abortion effectively risks the wrath of people we like. (”Brother Smythe-Jones is a tool of the Republican party!”)
Evil is bad! That is the cry and when it looks too likely that a movement or leader may end any particular evil (thus failing to stamp out all evil), we should strive for the utopian over the weak compromise of the merely better.
Make the perfect the enemy of the good!
5. Christian leaders should not be captured by the political system or assumptions of American culture except for a veneration of the separation of Church and state (which though not found in the Constitution in so many words is in the academic penumbra of it).
7. Christian leaders should avoid the stigma of patriotism. By loving all the neighbors we see on television, we can avoid the dirt and work (where we are sometimes wrong!) of loving our actual neighbors.
8. When a politician does well and ends an evil, we must not commend him for it or say he has done the work of the Lord. We can help the Kingdom in every way (art, music, philosophy, theology) except politics. Since politics (unlike every other field) can be bad and an idol, we must avoid associating political leaders (more tainted than most) with the Church.
Better to see Constantinople sacked than to support Constantine. Better an unjust government than a Saint Louis! Better to write papers on helping the poor than to support Good Duke Wenceslas on the Feast of Stephen.
No Gladstone on our watch!
The only way to avoid being overwhelmed by American political assumptions is to worship the American political assumption of absolute separation of Church and State!
We must avoid at all costs the religious extremism of the Battle Hymn of the Republic!
Never say “as He died to make men holy, let us die to make men free.”
Never say “they have builded Him an alter in the evening dews and damps.”
And for the love of God: never act as if Abraham Lincoln and his triumph might be better for the Kingdom than that of Jefferson Davis and his party.
That would be partisan and LOSE is against evil and partisanship. We think slavery is naughty and wicked and bad and stuff . . . but we are against the Church being involved in actually ending it.
9. Christian leaders must be like the Biblical prophets and speak bold, general words, but never speak them to leaders since that would be partisan. When you think of prophets who did rebuke leaders (Nathan to David) remind yourself that this was a different culture where such specific rebukes were possible.
Remember: the Biblical prophetic example guides us except where the American separation of Church and state over rules it.
10. Christian leaders must pretend that all political parties are equally involved in stamping out evil and that all evils are equal.
Hypothetical:
If one political party wants to kill babies and the other political party wants to save them, point out that the party that wants to save babies does not support their being fed by the government . . . and hence favors starving them.
