Getting Honest on Politics and Faith

This is a post I need to write for myself, although of course I'm putting it up for you too. Weblogs are not "Dear Diaries" after all. Which is why I don't buy the excuse that people try sometimes after they put up a post that seems to have offended half the blogosphere unnecessarily. You know - "Oh I seem to have caused a kerfuffle and I was just thinking out loud to myself". So I'm thinking out loud for my own benefit but I'm aware you are reading too.

Firstly I need to state the obvious. This is my blog. When I sit down in front of my own blog and feel mildly depressed something is wrong. Yesterday I didn't even want to post. This is not your fault - it's mine, because the truth is I've been afraid to be honest. For a number of months now I've been aware of that, and in the last couple of months acutely so. It isn't that I'm not honest in what I do say here. It's what I don't say that is starting to bother me.

I'd like to bring in this post from La Shawn Barber here. She writes concerning the Cuban boy Elian Gonzalez - the one whose relatives didn't want him to return to Cuba to his father. La Shawn writes:

"If a father wants to raise his child in Castro's Cuba, neither the United States nor the child's distant relatives had any say in the matter. I was firmly behind the Clinton adminstration on this one.
I strongly support parental rights, and unless there's evidence that a child is being abused or some other criminal act has occured, the parents' rights trump concerns about communism."

I left this comment:
I agree 100% sister. It is quite wrong to use a child as an ideological pawn when that child is loved, cared for, and has a bonded relationship to their parent. I'll go further - I believe it is unChristian to remove a boy from his natural parent when he is not abused or neglected. There are those occasions when faith must trump a political line. This is one of them. Cultural relativism would wreak PC havoc otherwise. And those who disagree need to look at the logical extension of their position - it would then be ok to remove children and create one of the most severe traumas a child can experience because we don’t like the political climate of their country. Absolutely not.

I picked this post as an example because I have been thinking about the cognitive dissonance that occurs when matters of faith are manipulated to suit political ideology. It's a type of Christian political correctness that compromises faith because we do not want to critique the political ideology we subscribe to. On a personal note - I don't always agree with La Shawn. Sometimes I don't understand her posts - because I'm not familiar with some of the issues or figures being discussed. Sometimes I've learned things from her posts. And sometimes, as in the Elian Gonzalez post - I feel like doing cartwheels.

I agree that Christians can be involved in politics - but when Christians buy into toeing the party line even if it means overriding conscience then we are salt without savour - a wasted effort. I ate, slept and breathed politics before I was a Christian. I know the legalism that ensues from taking on a whole ideology as the blueprint. I know about demonising the opposition. I know about passionately believing in an agenda and pushing aside the conscience pangs on issues because it means losing ground or losing face. I know how liberating it is to not have to live like that anymore.

I've been giving a lot of thought to the fact that we are all created in God's image. The image is marred, but we retain the ability to do certain things - to organise our societies, to construct norms, and to caretake our environment. And this is where I need to be up front. I do not reject something just because it comes from a source that is not "on my side". I don't buy their whole philosophy, but I don't demonise them either. For example, the environment is hugely important to us here. People across the spectrum have a high regard for conservation - we like our country and we know it's good for tourism to keep our natural beauty intact. There are disagreements over details sometimes - but the fact is environmentalism is not a dirty word here. It's not a liberal idea that will cause the ruination of civilization. For us it's important - and as a Christian I find a biblical basis for advocating appropriate stewardship of our natural resources. On some issues I agree with the Right here - we need to make use of certain resources in industry. On some issues I agree with the Greens - who have some weird policies but do at times bring to attention things we need to know about.

Multi-culturalism is a way of life for us. It's not some political ideal - it's an accurate description of our population. We have Maori, European, South African, Pacific Island, Middle Eastern and Asian, New Zealanders. Our government has come to increasingly reflect that diversity among our elected representatives. I think most of us enjoy multi-culturalism. Sure, we have some "political-correctness-gone-mad" as we like to say. But we have a lot that is good from recognising that everyone has something to offer. It also means that as a Christian I understand that people of every tribe and tongue will stand before God, that God is no respecter of persons, that he himself is our peace who has broken down the wall of enmity that was between us - I understand that there is no racial or cultural superiority in God's eyes - there is responsibility.

I'm also somewhat tired of the theological politics that I have encountered while surfing about online. Recently there was one of those "kerfuffles" over some posts by Michael Spencer. He can write what he likes - he's not my guru. I didn't like the post where he signed off with "screw you, screw you all". He removed that part later but unfortunately the cyber slap in the face had already occurred by then. I left him a polite comment to let him know it had affected me and that I was glad he had changed the post. But really - who is Michael Spencer? Who am I for that matter? Why do we build up these spiritual blogstars and then cry foul when our idol turns out to be just as fallibly human as we are?

When I come online I want to express myself and read others who are human just like me. I'm looking for the image - I'm looking for the vein of gold running through the words.

I recall when Wangari Maathai won the Nobel Peace Prize - I wrote about it here. Some weblogs criticised her. Tick "we-must-criticise-anything-that-appears-liberal". Yet I saw a wonderful example in what she had done to combat soil erosion, which is a huge problem in Africa, and in her public declaration of the spiritual beliefs which underpinned that work. I also don't regret one word that I wrote about Terri Schiavo. I don't buy the pro-euthanasia arguments dressed up in Christianese. So criticise me for sounding liberal on one hand and for being conservative on the other. It doesn't matter - I'm looking for something else. I'm looking for signs of the image. I'm looking to hold my conscience right with the Image Maker. That's what matters most to me.

Thankyou for listening.

Continued in Part 2: More on Politics, Culture, and Faith