Here is a shortened version of what Sandy Christie said to us on 24th April
I recall the apocryphal tale of the vicar who showed his political colours - after an election - by his choice of the first hymn the next Sunday: 'Now thank we all our God' if his candidate was chosen, 'Through the night of doubt and sorrow' if the main opposition got in, and 'God moves in a mysterious way' if the third party triumphed.
But I am not going to talk about parties now (or afterwards), and want to talk rather of the relationship between christianity and politics.
C S Lewis attributed the woes of history to the confusion of religion with politics. Desmond Tutu, when asked if the two should be mixed, replied "you must be a rich person - I have never heard a poor person in any doubt about the answer". So here are pointers on one hand to the danger and on the other to the necessity of mixing the two.
Let's see what Jesus had to say. Nearly everyone knows his famous words:
Give back to Caesar that which is Caesar's and give back to God that which is God's. reported in Mark chapter 12. But why did those words so amaze his hearers?
Jesus was responding to a question asked by the Pharisees and Herodians - was it right to give taxes to Caesar? Not at all an innocent question but a hand grenade. The Pharisees objected to taxation by an occupying power, the supporters of Herod supported the tax. Only 25 years before, another Galilean had cleared the Temple as Jesus had just done and led a revolt that was quickly crushed by Roman military might.
The questioners hoped to trap Jesus because YES would mean he was moving from talk about the Kingdom of God to political action challenging Roman power and would therefore have to be crushed, while NO would mean that his teachings about the Kingdom were without substance and could be disregarded.
Aware of the trap, Jesus asks for a silver coin. Coins were an important symbol of power in the ancient world and this one showed Caesar's image and on one side would have said 'Tiberius Caesar son of the divine Augustus' and on the other 'Pontifex Maximus' or great high priest - thus being a claim to both civil and religious authority.
So Jesus' words mean that Caesar should be repaid from what he has made, namely the coin with his image; and that God should be repaid from what he has made, namely everything, including most importantly the allegiance owed to the creator.
This subtle answer denies Caesar's claim to religious authority and asserts God's authority over Caesar while making no claim to civil power. It subverts the expectations of both Pharisees and Herodians.
To a question aimed at upsettting Jesus' revolutionary teaching, Jesus gave a revolutionary answer and offers us a 'revolutionary revolution'.
Revolutions are about achieving political power and doing things differently. But Victor Hugo remarked that revolutions change everything except the one thing that really matters- the human heart. The storming of the Bastille in 1789 released 7 inmates: within a few years the revolutionaries imprisoned hundreds. Everything had changed but nothing had changed.
But Jesus offers a choice between 2 very different kings - a king like Caesar with the power, the silver and the coins, and the King without even one coin who leaves his palace in heaven to come to a place where he has nowhere to lay his head, who surrenders himself for his people.
He took on our weakness so we can share his glory and gentle kingdom. And when we grasp this we are in a real revolution; we change from inside to out in a way no political party or sytem can ever bring about change.
Let's think about the practical import of this, by considering 3 views of politics and the election
First is the disillusioned view:- whoever gets in makes no difference, don't vote - it only encourages the politicking. Following Jesus challenges such apathy because the kingdom of God includes economic justice, feeding the hungry and healing the sick and we need to concern ourselves with achieving these things. .Desmond Tutu said that anyone who though the Bible had nothing to do with politics must be reading a different bible..
Second is the highly committed view of those who are sure that the problems of society lie wholly with the other side. Their own exercise of power will make everything fine. But that is the confusion C S Lewis had in mind - that exercising political power can be the Christian answer. Instead Jesus's revolution is transformingly moderate, causing us to start to work with people who have different political approaches.
Third is the complacent view of those who feel that the balance is pretty much right. Here the Christian fath is transformingly radicalising. It ask us to look again at society and see how far things are from the way they should be. William Wilberforce was radicalised by his conversion to give his life to abolishing slavery, Martin Luther King fought racial injustice, the Jubilee 2000 campaign pursued debt relief for poor nations. We are radicalised to give back to God the things that are God's.
No wonder Jesus's answer amazed his hearers and gave them lots to think about.
When they had thought, they released an armed revolutionary called Barabbas and nailed Jesus to a cross and later put an armed guard on his tomb. The political powers of the day dusted their hands and said "thank goodness that's over".
But it was just the beginning. Do you want to join the real revolution?
|