Political missionaries
“If you can’t beat them, join them!”
This old adage comes to mind when I hear the apocalyptic whining coming from many evangelicals about the Democratic Party’s control of the White House and Congress. It would seem that Christians, embracing Jesus teaching of being “salt and light” (Matthew 5:13-16), would consider joining the Democratic Party—as missionaries—to influence its direction instead of simply complaining about where things are headed.
Jesus’ teaching of salt (used in the first century as a fertilizing agent for barren soil and manure) and light (used in lamps to illumine dark spaces) should be sufficient motivation for many of the 65 million or so evangelicals to take on a missionary role and become the Democrat’s leaders, change the platform, and redirect the party’s agenda.
Over the next few years the Republican Party will likely ditch evangelicals altogether in favor of focusing on themes like limited government and free markets because running an election, in today’s America, on morally conservative values is the best way to lose. The era of the “moral majority” is now officially over.
Nationwide, there are about 42 million registered Democrats and around 31 million Republicans, according to data compiled by The Associated Press. Perfect! If 42 million evangelicals became missionaries to the Democratic Party, those mores would take over the party’s entire platform.
Instead of being salt and light and “shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves” (Matthew 10:16), we whine, throw rocks, disengage, retreat, run away, and hide from a suffering-oriented mission. It is easier to be reactive and throw rocks than to strategically and proactively engage. At the core, however, Christians have forgotten that the “culture war” is actually spiritual and what needs to be employed are the methods and devices of the Kingdom. People need to be persuaded and changed from the inside out.
Daniel provides another forgotten example of being salt and light in a challenging context. Daniel remained faithful to God while being salt and light among the Babylonians. Now Democrats are far from Babylonians, but it seems like a workable strategy. Like Daniel, we are called to be in the world and not of it (John 17:4-6), so there are many organizations that Christians simply cannot join and influence for good reasons (James 4).
It seems that Kingdom-oriented, culture-redeeming, culture-transforming Christians would not only join agreeable organizations but would also join organizations to endure hardship and suffering in order to influence, change, and lead the culture. If Christians would begin influencing the moral ethos of both major political parties, where will this leave those opposed to Judeo-Christian values? Either in third parties or on the sidelines.
I grant that change would not be immediate, but it’s worth it in the long run. Is it not odd that Christians are willing to be missionaries among the world’s religions but shy away from being missionaries to the nation’s culture forming institutions? No political party will ever share Judeo-Christian values unless Kingdom-oriented, missionary-minded Christians put down the rocks and take up their cross and “go.”




Learn it! Speak it! Live it!
Bring Christmas to a child in need!








Click to Print
Include Comments











back to top26 Comments to “Political missionaries”
Does it really work that way in politics? I thought the idea was to form a party with particular principles, make them your platform, and then those who agree would join.
If enough people wanted it, could someone change the entire platform of a political party?
Report comment to moderator
I don’t disagree with the premise, that we Christians need to change the world one person at a time.
The premise that I don’t agree with is that “the culture war is over” merely because an election was lost or a law is not passed. I don’t buy that most of the people voting for the Democrats agreed with them entirely. Look at California, where Mr. Obama creamed Mr. McCain but that Marriage was upheld as between a man and a woman. I think Mr. Obama won was because he seemed more presidential and inspiring and trustworthy, the conservatives in power lost their “conservativeness”, Mr. Obama could run a 50-state campaign being flush with cash, and that most people vote with their pocketbook and the current economic crisis was blamed on Mr. Bush (even though it most likely is the problem of both parites).
The “culture war” continues, but we know that God will win.
Report comment to moderator
Great idea! I was thinking of joining NAMBLA for the same reasons: Find an organization whose core values are 180 degrees opposed to mine and join it to change it from the inside!
You can’t be serious.
Report comment to moderator
Bradley
This is absurd, ….. joining a political party which one clearly OBSERVES to stand for sinful practices to be “missionaries”? –
We can all join homosexual organizations, Planned Parenthood, every socialist/Marxist organization in our city, why not the Communist Party?
Report comment to moderator
I have for many years looked at the Democratic party and seen a subset faction group for.. you name it. Blacks, hispanics, homosexuals, govt employee union members, the abortuary clinic repeat-customers and owner/operators whom I term “abortionistas”. Both parties have their own Jewish groups. But what the Democratic party needs and has needed for quite a while is a faction that would speak up for Christian Hetero Anglo Male ProLifers, that overlooked and cast out slice of political demography I term the CHAMPs of the party.
It aint easy being a CHAMP in the Dem party, but I welcome others willing to be the equivalent of feces in the party punchbowl
Report comment to moderator
“…because running an election, in today’s America, on morally conservative values is the best way to loose [sic].”
Does anyone else not accept this premise? I would argue that John McCain lost *in part* for the very opposite reason: that conservatives detected in him half-hearted commitment to conservative principles, and that non-conservatives saw him as sort of like a liberal only less so, so why not vote Obama and get the whole package?
If you start with that, and add in Bush’s unpopularity and the American electorate’s longstanding tendency to prevent either party from retaining the halls of power for too many years in a row, you’ve got a coherent explanation for November 4 without need for dubious conclusions like joining the Democratic Party to attempt to change its direction.
Report comment to moderator
I’ll say this much, Sawgunner: if the Dems would put up a national candidate with actual pro-life credentials, this CHAMP would take a long look at him — especially if the GOP puts up another RINO.
Report comment to moderator
I agree RR. To move more left is silly. Hold fast to conservative principles so that you are a sort of salt and light, a stark contrast. If the majority refuse to join, oh well. At least you didnt compromise your core just to win.
Although I would think the better way to get good men and women in the office is to start raising them. In other words, christian families need to start having 5 to 10 kids again. In a generation or two youd be unstoppable
It is certainly a form of christian discipleship, one that is much more effective than political fights.
Report comment to moderator
Thanks, RR, for pointing out the typo.
Report comment to moderator
Instead of seeking to “lift a barrel from the inside” of the Democratic Party, why don’t we work toward mobilizing millions of evangelicals and send them as missionaries to the unreached people groups of the world (which includes millions upon millions of people who have never heard the name of Jesus)? Who knows, such a movement might actually shake up the Democratic (and Republican) Party toward Kingdom priorities…
Report comment to moderator
You have got to be kidding me.
First we should alter Christian doctrine to pander to minorities, now we should all be Democrats. Yeesh.
Report comment to moderator
Our land was at one time populated by huge White Pines, which were then cut down; the land turned into farm land. Years later it was bought by my husband and me and replanted with hundreds of trees. I often wonder if the former farmers were rolling in their graves, as they saw all their tree-cutting efforts going by the wayside. I know the farmer next door, whose cows “happened” to graze over here, was not happy.
Sawgunner is right about all the special groups in the Democratic Party. When we were involved there were lots of Christians in the party. Many tried make the platform with good values. It is not a matter of just over-running the party. Many have “been there, done that”. Some are still trying and yes, they are brave and dedicated.
Like the farmers seeing so much of their hard work undone, there are many former Dems who can relate.
There is no christian party. Nor should there be. Hearts need to be won and then let those people go into whatever party they choose.
Report comment to moderator
Alas, this idea doesn’t even seem to work in mainline churches where you would think someone would care about God . . . I can’t see it happening in any political party.
Report comment to moderator
I think the author here is onto something. We need more Daniels out there to be amongst those involved in public policy that oppose Christ.
Even though Daniel most likely had his family and friends killed during Nebuchadnezzar’s overthrow of Judah, Daniel was willing to be used mightily by God amongst the Babylonians despite their paganistic style of governing. Remember, they were willing to burn to death in a furnace those found guilty of a crime.
The Babylonians relied on astrologers, magicians, diviners, sorcerers, and enchanters for guidance so you know their ideology was based on the values of Satan. Daniel on the other hand, relied on prayer with God for his guidance. Even so, he was willing to remain under the domain of Nebuchadnezzar and work along side these satan lead advisors.
When the Medes and the Persians took over, Daniel remained faithful to God allthewhile serving under their rule as well. We know that under King Darius, it was permissible to feed criminals to the lions as well as their families. Would any of us want to be part of a government that endorsed this?
Daniel and some of his fellow Jewish believers took their stands when appropriate against their leaders risking even their lives so as to not go against God that they served. Somehow, they were able to find a way to serve in a godless government and still be serving God. It is possible.
In the end, Nebuchadnezzar and Darius both came to acknowledge and proclaim laws in support of Daniels God. I assume this is what christian conservatives want, a president that acknowledges our God and passes executive orders reflecting a society that carries Christ centered values.
Report comment to moderator
Anthony and Co.
I hear you. More and more republicans and other conservative groups abandon Christians. I forget who said it, but someone once said, “The church is the republicans mistress.” Much of the republican’s platform is rubbish. I am a card-carrying republican. I agree with Chalzz on the note that we need more Daniels. In an article by Christianity Today, in their Christian Vision Project, there is an article exploring this reality. Daniel sought to be a good Babylonian. Immersed in a pagan culture that celebrated everything that God’s word stood for. Daniel took a stand, prayed for the welfare of the king and country, and participated in their government. From the inside he engaged the culture. (Jonathan Dobson has a good article at theresurgence.com on this topic). We as Christians are called to engage. The question naturally arises, “what is the best way to do that?” Bradley suggests working from inside the DP. Major qualms fill my heart about doing that. I am a single-issue voter on the issue of abortion. If that notion would change in the DP’s platform, I would be there.
Also as Christians we need to recognize the lesson of Esther. While we engage culture, and transform it in a manner that glorifies God, it ultimately ends in futility due to sin. After all Esther did in Susa, taxes only rose.
Anthony… great idea, but there is the abortion issue. If the republicans abandon Evangelicals and do a 180 on this issue, then I might. Your post captured the reality that the bastion of the Evangelical voice, within the Republican, dwindles increasingly every day. That scares us. For now I am stuck and confused as an exile of this world, an alien, a citizen of a foreign land, in deciding what to do politically. I serve the King of kings. How can I do that best in this land I do not know.
thank you for your post.
Report comment to moderator
Chalzz and Robbie_Schmidtberger
YOU POST: “Daniel and some of his fellow Jewish believers took their stands when appropriate against their leaders risking even their lives so as to not go against God that they served. Somehow, they were able to find a way to serve in a godless government and still be serving God. It is possible.”
You speak about a godless government – its one thing to be born into a land with a godless regime, its another to have a choice as to which party you will affiliate yourself with which represents your beliefs. There are two main parties in the USA, and several others. To align yourself with the party which stands for obvious sinful practices is not standing for the truth, its playing a game – that good may come from joining the evil – It has nothing to do with Daniel.
I wouldn’t think of joining a church that used false doctrine in hopes that I could persuade them to follow the risen Christ.
Jesus told us:
We have become accustomed to believing that we must constantly go after the SAME un-CHURCHED individuals as though we might finally convince them of the Christ as Savior, that Salvation is real, the Cross of Christ and His shed blood is our only way to Eternal life, when we believe and repent. The Word of God doesn’t tell us to continue to hunt down those who don’t believe, those who blaspheme, as you can see in Acts 18 Paul “when they opposed themselves, and blasphemed, he shook his raiment, and said unto them, Your blood be upon your own heads;” It should be no different today, those who sit in the pig pen of sin after hearing God’s Word should be left alone to disbelieve.
Patience or concern are no longer issues when individuals make it plain they want nothing to do with Jesus Christ and Salvation. Remember;
Report comment to moderator
This method is used to great effect by those who join organizations in order to change them from within and not necessarily for the better. Just ask the Boy Scouts how much money they have had to spend defending against the leaven that has insidiously entered their ranks.
The question has more to do with motivation. Am I truly trying to be salt and light? Or am I trying to be insidious leaven? There are elements of both at work here in our country and culture, in our politics on both sides of the aisle, and in our churches. Wheat and Tares…
What we also need is discernment.
Report comment to moderator
The difficulty is that Evangelicals draw such bright lines, either as antithesis (for all you reformed types) or as a Worldly/Spiritual split. What is this, but a fear of contamination? It certainly does not partake of the idea of overcoming the gates of hell.
Oh well.
The political difficulty with separation, is that you only have one path to win. You must somehow convince enough to join your side, and by demographics alone that is not going to happen, as Marc Ambinder pointed out today. So I don’t really see how this retreat to purity that some apparently advocate works politically.
But as Anthony noted, this is not really about politics, it is about spiritual things; and I would add, it is also about mission. Democrats are not some foreign exotic to be rejected, they are your neighbor. Moreover, many of them –one in four in your church, actually– share your convictions. If you simply write them off as some sort of unreachable tribe, how then does the Gospel get heard? In your concern for purity, what have you established except this, that you are afraid of your neighbor, that deep down inside you don’t really believe God is going to work there.
You don’t have to join the Democratic Party to have an influence, join them instead at the PTA, meet up with them at civic events, get involved with your fundraisers. What you will discover is that there exists as wide a variety among Democrats as among conservatives; you may even find that some share your same militant commitment on life (we have plenty of these in our county).
If God can send a Jonah to Nineveh, why do you imagine that somehow God is not also in the business of reclaiming lives of those in the Democratic Party? Unless you share nothing will happen — and isn’t that what Paul said, “how shall they hear….?”
Report comment to moderator
While I often appreciate Anthony’s sentiments, I think he’s dreaming on this matter. I should note that the conservative Christians and Evangelicals hold considerable sway in the Republican Party, but they’ve never had the numbers to take it over completely. So how are they gonna take over the Democratic Party as Anthony proposes? They’ll definitely be a minority in the Democratic Party even if all of them joined up (which is never gonna happen).
While Evangelicals are welcome in the Democratic Party, it is a party with *many* seats at the table. We will certainly make room for one more voice at the table, we certainly aren’t going to let you hog the whole table.
By the way, the “infiltrate and take over” will not work on a party that’s dedicated to it’s diversity.
I think conservative Christians and Evangelicals would be better off in the long run if they accepted that America is a more diverse country now, and worked to peacefully coexist with people who think and believe different than they do. I know it’s tough to go from the majority to the minority, but trust me – being in the minority is not as awful as it sounds. Sure, sometimes it sucks, but most of the time it’s pretty good.
Report comment to moderator
I think Harris does a good job of illustrating the line we can draw as evangelicals. One does not have to join the Democratic Party to have influence with Democrats. I know of social conservative Democrats who are born again christians. They believe in the right to life but work for this change from within the party. There are things about the Republican party that they just cannot stand to be associated with.
Not sure how they justify being part of what I call the “sin” party (they endorse abortion industry, the gambling industry, the pornography industry, the homosexual agenda, the legalization of drugs, the legalization of prostitution, etc., basically the vices of mankind), but they have found a way to turn a blind eye to the dark side of the Democratic party.
If they are believers, and they are being lead by the Holy Spirit, then who are we to question their motives for being in the Democratic Party. I just learned recently that a friend of mine became a born again believer through one of his fellow Dungeons and Dragons game players who was a born again christian. You can question all you want why this believer was involved with Dungeons and Dragons but God used this man to reach out and bring a non-believing player to the Lord. The bottom line is we just don’t know what God is doing and we must trust the believer if they feel lead to what could be considered a questionable endeavor.
I went salsa dancing tonight for instance, but I didn’t spend the evening rubbing up inappropriately with other bodies. Instead I presented the dance in a very tasteful and respectful fashion and spent far more time talking and building relationships through communication than through dance interaction. Some might question a member of a conservative baptist church spending his evening in a bar dancing salsa, but to me it is a mission field!
Report comment to moderator
Two concludiing points from me:
The National Right to Life should have from the git-go been a national BiPartisan RTL. Allocate seats on the board of directors to Democrats. Heck, allocate seats to Greens and Libertarians as well. The proLife issue needs to transcend narrow partisan labels to achieve meaningful reform.
Did anyone read the recent Kathleen Parker editorial where she says basicly the R party should run the evangelical conservatives outta town? It would lead to the Linc Chafee-ization of the party and cement minority status in congress. Forever.
Report comment to moderator
Michelle (13), interesting analogy with the mainline churches. There remain within those bodies orthodox Christians who see their mission as holding the line on various issues. Often these are churches and denominations they have grown up in and they find it hard to leave, but eventually perhaps harder to remain.
I was a Democrat for many years but beginning in the late 1980s it just became harder and harder for me, particularly with the issue of abortion. Interestingly, I believe many of the leading liberals — Kennedy, Jessie Jackson, among others — were pro-life at one point. But when the liberal political tide began to turn on that issue toward a dogmatic pro-choice stance, they did as well.
It just seemed like a losing battle to me. And since more and more of my votes were being cast for Republicans (when would there ever be a national Democratic candidate who was pro-life?), I “withdrew” from the Democratic party and registered as a nonpartisan/Decline to State (I couldn’t quite bring myself to embrace being a Republican after all those years in the opposing party!).
I’m hopeful that the Democrats will someday begin to rethink abortion and allow for more dialogue and diversity within their ranks on that issue — I do think the pro-life cause has made significant inroads in the way people in general perceive abortion. More and more people, I think are seeing abortion not as a casual choice as it was portrayed and promoted in the 1970s, but at best it’s mostly seen by “pro-choice” people now as a heartbreaking, last-resort decision that most likely will carry with it much regret.
Report comment to moderator
Anthony, I tend not to read your columns because I usually find them condescending and offensive. But in this case, I did, and feel compelled to respond.
What you are really advocating is capitulation and appeasment.
I can stomach neither, and I hope your readers ignore your foolish advice.
The Democratic Party propogates serious, eternity-affecting immorality on a number of fronts. Joining them, as you advocate, lends the Christian “stamp of approval” to the unthinking public.
Report comment to moderator
Dav
I doubt there are too many readers who are taking Bradley’s adivce.
Report comment to moderator
4 – Good comment, Victoria.
Report comment to moderator
I’ll follow Anthony’s suggestion and join the Democratic party right before I die.
That way, I’ll help out by having a Democrat die rather than a Republican.
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDonTheWeb.com to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!