March 6, 2025 • 41 mins
Today's episode dives into the intricate relationship between faith, politics, and citizenship through a conversation with Dr. Daniel Bennett, highlighting the challenges Christians face when balancing their allegience to the Kingdom of God with the responsibilities of their earthly citizenship. We explore the key themes of navigating our loyalty to our faith, political engagement and what the love of our country looks like from a Christian perspective.
• Discussion of Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s struggles as a pastor in Nazi Germany
• The importance of balancing political engagement with Christian principles
• Exploring the distinction between patriotism and nationalism
• The role of humility in political discourse among believers
• Insights from Dr. Bennett's book "Uneasy Citizenship”
• Practical steps for Christians to engage in politics without compromising their faith
Read Dr. Bennett's book "Uneasy Citizenship," a powerful resource for anyone wrestling with the intersection of faith and politics. More from Dr. Bennett : https://danielbennett.substack.com/
Thanks for listening! Visit our website rfwma.org and follow us on Facebook :https://www.facebook.com/limitlessspiritpodcast/
and Instagram: @limitlessspiritpodcast
Help us make more inspiring episodes: https://rfwma.org/give-support-the-podcast/
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Welcome to Limitless Spirit, a weekly podcast with
host Helen Todd, where sheinterviews guests about pursuing
spiritual growth, discoveringlife's purpose through serving
others and developing a deeperfaith in Christ.
Speaker 2 (00:17):
Welcome to Limitless Spirit.
I'm your host, helen Todd, andtoday we talk about the
intersection of patriotism,politics and faith.
Imagine yourself living in acountry where the political
regime is such that it conflictswith your faith.
(00:38):
So, for example, imagine adevoted pastor who watches his
country descend into moral andpolitical darkness.
The church begins to compromise, aligning itself with the
powerful instead of standing forrighteousness, and some
believers retreat into silence.
Others wholeheartedly embracethe nationalistic fervor of the
(01:02):
time.
And then there is this one manwho refuses to choose either
path.
I'm talking, of course, aboutDietrich Bonhoeffer, and if
you've seen the recent filmBonhoeffer, agent of Grace, you
know this story well.
Bonhoeffer finds himself as apastor in Nazi Germany and
(01:24):
watches the church that he hasbeen very committed to align
itself, while many in the churchalign themselves with the Nazi
regime.
So he is a man who is caughtbetween his love for his country
and his ultimate allegiance toGod, and he faces an impossible
(01:45):
question when earthlycitizenship demands something
that contradicts the call ofChrist, what should a Christian
do?
And in a sense, this sametension is relevant today,
because we live in the worldwhere politics, culture and
faith often collide andChristians find themselves in a
(02:06):
similar struggle.
How do we remain faithful toChrist while living as engaged
citizens in our countries?
How do we avoid the traps ofpolitical idolatry on one hand,
and passive disengagement on theother hand?
My guest today is Dr DanielBennett.
He's an associate professor ofpolitical science at John Brown
(02:29):
University.
He's a frequent guest innational and regional media,
including Wall Street Journal,new Yorker, npr and such.
Dr Bennett has spent yearsstudying this very question and
in his recent book UneasyCitizenship Embracing the
Tension in Faith and Politics,he unpacks how Christians can
(02:53):
navigate this difficultlandscape with wisdom, humility
and faithfulness.
Today, we talk about why somany believers feel caught
between faith and politics andhow scripture is often misused
to justify conflicting views.
Most importantly, we talk abouthow we can reclaim a biblical
(03:16):
approach to citizenship.
So, whether you're feelingdisillusioned with politics or
struggling how to engage as abeliever, or simply are looking
for a way to live out your faithin a divided world, I think you
will find this conversationvery interesting.
Let's dive in.
Hello Dan, welcome to LimitlessSpirit.
(03:41):
How are you today?
Speaker 3 (03:42):
I'm doing well.
It is a day that I'm in theclassroom a lot, so it's
energizing.
It's also tiring.
It's a paradox of teaching.
Speaker 2 (03:50):
Well, I'm happy to offer you a little break from
the classroom, although I thinkit must be a very exciting time
to speak into young minds withall the cool and exciting things
that are happening, so theymust have a lot of questions for
you, especially being theprofessor of political science
(04:13):
and philosophy.
But I'm excited to talk aboutthe subject that I think is very
important for every Christianand very important right now
when we have a change ofadministration in our country
that is going to carry an impactnot only on our lives but the
lives of people across the world.
(04:34):
And so my husband and I got toattend the inauguration of the
47th president, and it was anincredible experience for me and
I, you know, I wasn't born inthe United States, I became a
citizen 19 years ago, and so itwas very meaningful for me and
an incredible experience, butalso made me think that the love
(04:59):
for our country.
It's a very powerful emotionand it was very deeply felt at
the inauguration.
But sometimes it can conflictour higher citizenship and a
higher calling, and you happenedto write a book on this subject
.
So I'm very intrigued and Ihave to ask.
Speaker 3 (05:23):
First, so what prompted you to write this book?
And he had written a bookrecently at that time called why
(05:43):
Liberalism Failed.
And this wasn't an indictmenton the political ideology of the
left in the United States oreven the West, but more of an
indictment on the classicalliberal framework, going back to
people like John Locke and theEuropean Enlightenment, where we
saw the foundations for thingslike individual rights and
(06:04):
liberties and consent of thegoverned, these kinds of things.
And in the book he'sessentially making the argument
that liberalism in that contexthas kind of become a victim of
its own successes, where anemphasis on individual rights,
individual liberties, hasessentially taken the place of
any shared consumption of thegood and the sort of structures
(06:27):
and foundations that are neededto uphold a classical liberal
political framework.
And so Deneen has later writtenthat he's kind of leaning into
this, what he might call anilliberal framework or
post-liberal, I think, is thebetter terminology here.
And I was thinking about some ofthese implications for
Christians, and this was aconference for Christian faculty
(06:49):
at Christian colleges anduniversities, and I remember
jotting something down in thenotebook that we were given and
the phrase was uneasycitizenship thinking about how
we hold our citizenship asChristians, you know, tightly.
But we also have to be willingto hold it somewhat loosely and,
as I later you know, spelledout in the book uneasily, given
(07:12):
the hope that we have in Christ,the identity that we have, as
you know, certainly as citizensof the kingdom, but inevitably,
you know, we're called to be inthe world, not of the world, but
in the world seeking the goodand flourishing of our neighbors
, and this just creates, I think, an inherent sort of tension
for us living in this politicalmoment.
So those are the kinds ofthings I decided to write the
(07:34):
book about, and it does seemlike it's been a lot longer than
six years, but here we are.
Speaker 2 (07:40):
So let's first set the foundation for this
conversation and maybe highlightsome of the examples, like
real-life examples where ourearthly citizenship sometimes is
in conflict with our heavenlycitizenship.
And feel free to draw fromhistory or from very modern
(08:01):
examples, or both for thatmatter.
Speaker 3 (08:03):
Well, certainly, I'm probably a little more
comfortable drawing from morecontemporary examples, in the
American context at that.
So it's a little narrow, Isuppose.
But you know, if I just thinkabout you know, as a political
scientist, thinking about theways in which we make our
decisions in the voting boothwhat kinds of things influence
our decisions for thepoliticians we choose to elect,
(08:26):
the types of policies we supportthrough referenda or
initiatives.
And you know, there could bepolicies or individual elected
officials whose policies that wegenerally align ourselves with,
but whose individual characteror other approaches to public
(08:46):
life might rub us the wrong wayas people of faith.
On the other hand, there aresome people whose character
seems to align with what wewould want in an elected
official, someone who speakshighly of the influence of faith
, or even the Christian faith,on his or her public service,
and yet whose politicalpositions are deeply out of step
with what we would consider tobe a faithful or biblically
(09:07):
oriented portfolio of thesepolicies.
And so those are just reallytwo obvious examples where
people of faith could come todifferent conclusions about the
right way to order and structureour political citizenship.
Do we vote in a way thatmaximizes policy victories at
(09:28):
the expense of potentialcharacter in elected officials?
Or do we vote for character,knowing that it's going to be a
little bit of an uphill climbwhen it comes to achieving our
policy successes?
And then there's the questionsof how we make sense of
differences among Christians onhow to even approach certain
issues.
So take an issue like abortion,for example.
(09:50):
I think Christians across theboard, at least, should at some
level agree that abortion isevil.
It's an awful procedure and anawful act act.
And I think different faithcommunities have different
responses about how Christiansshould respond to the issue of
abortion through policy.
Should it be through, you know,bans and restrictions on the
procedure?
(10:10):
Should it be throughdiscouraging the necessity of
the procedure among certaingroups of people, through
expanding social safety programs?
Or should it be a combinationof the two?
What do we choose to emphasizestemming from the influence of
our faith when it comes to thisparticular issue?
And we can do that with anynumber of issues immigration,
education, national defense,like I said, social safety net
(10:34):
programs.
The list goes on and on.
So we, as Christians, areconstantly living in the here
but not yet figuring out how webest steward the command to love
God and love neighbor in apluralistic and, in our context,
democratic society where wehave the choice politically and
these choices aren't alwaysclear as to what the Christian
(10:56):
option should be.
Speaker 2 (10:57):
Well, and I want us to talk about.
You know the ways thatChristians engage in politics,
and there are two extremes there.
But before we touch on that,let's talk about patriotism.
So, from the perspective ofChristianity, do you think
patriotism is a positive thingor a negative thing?
Speaker 3 (11:20):
Well, I think patriotism isn't inherently
suspect, nor is it inherentlyrequired by scripture.
I think, like many things,patriotism is a feeling of
emotions or values that weassociate with love for or
passion for one's country orcommunity and, like anything
else, it can be taken to a lessthan ideal, extreme right.
(11:44):
I don't think there's anythingwrong with enjoying watching the
4th of July fireworks andgetting emotional about what it
means to be American and,frankly, for people who came to
this country and later becamecitizens, I mean, I think these
experiences are probably evenheightened.
Like you alluded to, watchingthe inauguration.
I was born in the United States.
I have a very differentperspective on a lot of these
(12:05):
questions than recent immigrantsor citizens who have
naturalized into the UnitedStates.
You know we're watching theinaugural festivities and the
pomp and circumstance associatedwith the outgoing president
meeting the incoming president.
It really just makes me feelpatriotic and excited about the
peaceful transfer of power.
So all that to say is I don'tthink there's anything
(12:25):
inherently wrong with beingpatriotic, right, as a Christian
, I think Christians, you know,can in many ways should love our
communities and seek thebetterment of our government for
protecting the welfare of thecommunity.
But patriotism is not the samething as blind loyalty.
In fact, patriotism might oftenlead to dissent at times.
(12:47):
Patriotism might lead toconflict or correction in
moments.
It doesn't mean necessarilysupporting the government.
It means supporting theframework.
Maybe that holds up thegovernment, and there too, I
think there's a differencebetween patriotism and
nationalism as well.
Some of these things often areconflated.
I do think it's a mistake forfolks who criticize so-called
(13:09):
Christian nationalism to thinkthat anyone who flies the
American flag and happens to bea Christian is a Christian
nationalist.
I do think there are probablydangerous forms of Christian
nationalism, but being patrioticand a Christian isn't that.
Speaker 2 (13:22):
So how do you define the difference between
nationalism?
I know it's a loaded question,but I mean I was trying to
figure it out for myself and Idon't think we're like a very
clear answer to that there.
I think there are ideas aboutthat, but what, in your opinion,
is the major difference betweenpatriotism and nationalism?
Speaker 3 (13:43):
Well, with the caveat that I'm not speaking for all
of my discipline or certainlyall of Christian academics, I'll
say that for me, patriotism ismore about a positive feeling
towards one's country andtraditions and people broadly
understood, whereas nationalismcan be positive, but it can also
take a more negativeconnotation when it comes to
(14:04):
comparing us versus them.
I think a lot of the nationalismthat we see historically and I
think the temptation is fairlyeasy to fall into this is that
we prioritize us and demonizeothers or them in unhealthy and
unproductive ways.
I think patriotic Americansshould be not necessarily in
favor of the immigrationpolicies supported by, say, the
(14:28):
Democratic Party, but weshouldn't also be saying well,
I'm patriotic, therefore I don'tthink we should have any or
limited immigration into thecountry.
I think patriotic approaches tothis say hey, if we believe in
America, let's try to make it asinclusive and open to as many
people as possible who want tocome here and follow our systems
and processes, etc.
(14:48):
Certain nationalistictendencies lately tend to maybe
disagree with that perspective,saying that anytime we start
talking about changing theculture or changing the existing
order of things, I don't seethat the same as patriotism.
I see that more as a form ofunhealthy nationalism that seeks
to put up barriers between usand them.
Speaker 2 (15:10):
And I'm also thinking that nationalism means
different things in differentcountries, because America is
such a multi-ethnic country.
So nationalism is morecongruent with patriotism,
probably, in America, whereas ina country like Russia or France
, you know, nationalism meansprobably elevating that
(15:33):
particular group, like theFrench or the Russians, about
the others.
So I think it's not a.
You know, there is no cleardefinition without the context.
Speaker 3 (15:45):
I think France is a great example of this, just
given the influence that Frenchsociety places on French
identity.
Speaker 2 (15:54):
being French, and if you want to come a little
superior, let's face it.
Speaker 3 (15:58):
Yes, and especially true with new immigrants,
especially coming from, you know, from North African or Middle
Eastern countries, who bringMuslim faith with them.
They say sure, you can come toFrance, but you better
subordinate your religiousbeliefs and practices to French
identity.
Here in the US the traditionhas been you come here.
And part of the United States,in my mind, making it such a
(16:21):
great and unique nation globally, is that you bring your
traditions with you and it allbecomes part of our American.
And that makes things messy attimes, it makes things
complicated, but given thechoice to downplay those
differences and let them simmerversus getting them out in the
open and having discussion andlearning from each other, I
would choose that rather than anexclusivity nationalism that
(16:46):
comes in certain countries.
Speaker 2 (16:47):
I would have to agree and that's why, in the end, I
feel I get to travel a lotthrough my work.
You know, and talk to peoplefrom many different countries.
In the end, most of them wantto come to Syrian, you know, and
(17:18):
yet still be a citizen of theUnited States and a full sense
of it.
So let's think about the GreatCommission.
You know, when Jesus gives theGreat Commission in Matthew 28,
19 through 20, don't you thinkthat he sort of addresses
patriotism and expands it beyondthe borders of our country and
(17:42):
alludes to our heavenlycitizenship and the
inclusiveness of the whole worldinto this kingdom?
Speaker 3 (17:50):
Sure, I think it has to.
And you know when Jesus isspeaking and when he first, you
know, shares this message withthe people in, you know, first
century Judea.
Really, you know the cultureand the political context of
that era are very different thanours today, but we believe as
Christians that Jesus is bothfully God and fully man.
(18:13):
And you know he certainlyunderstood the progression of
history and it's not as if he'dbe caught off guard by the
globalized, politically changedenvironment in which we
currently live in the 21stcentury.
So, you know, for us asChristians, and especially as
American Christians, ourpatriotism can't close us off
(18:35):
from the rest of the world anymore than we would expect other
countries and the Christiansthere to say well, we're only
going to focus on our peoplehere at home.
So, yeah, I think Christians inthe US are blessed with an
abundance of resources andopportunities to be a hub for
evangelism, a support formissionary, and we've done this
(18:56):
historically right, sendingmissionaries to all corners of
the world from our differentdenominational traditions, et
cetera.
There's evidence to suggestthis might be slowing down a
little bit with the decline ofchurch attendance and
religiosity in the US, and somaybe the US's role there in the
next few decades is going toshift.
So, yeah, I think AmericanChristians have to think beyond
(19:17):
our national borders and we canbe patriotic and think not only
are we sharing the good news,but we do so from a place of
real blessing and abundance.
What this doesn't necessarilymean is that we should then
expect the United Statesgovernment to take a really
aggressive foreign policy withrespect to international
(19:39):
development and really justspending untold money overseas.
Now I'm not saying this is goodor bad.
I'm saying that those twothings, I think, are different
questions and certainly anytimewe want to get the government
involved with religious missions, I think we ought to put pause
on that.
But yeah, as Christiansindividually in our
congregations goodness, we havesuch a great opportunity, with
(20:02):
the wealth, the stability of oursystem, to really think about
the Great Commission in a waythat previous Christians just
haven't had the chance.
Speaker 2 (20:12):
Well, I want to bring up another modern day example
where I think politics hasreally very negatively affected
the church, and that's the warbetween Russia and Ukraine.
You know, the world veryclearly took the side for the
most part of Ukraine and youknow rightfully so when it was
(20:34):
invaded by Russia, but it causedtremendous division between the
church in Russia and Ukraine.
So not just the divisionbetween the countries, which is
a tragedy in itself, but we'renot talking about that but it
caused division between the bodyof Christ, and not only in
these two countries, becausethey instantly aligned
(20:57):
themselves.
Not instantly at first, therewas a lot more common sense, but
as the time went on and the warwas more withdrawn, the
churches aligned themselves withtheir patriotism, you know, and
with their governments, youknow, and with their governments
(21:18):
, and in the end the churchoutside of those two countries
also aligned itself.
And so the church in Russiafound itself ostracized to a
great extent and still is.
And I was a witness, aconversation between Christians,
not American Christians butevangelical Christians where
there was a couple that wasplanning a mission trip to
(21:39):
Russia to encourage the churchand this couple was ostracized
by other Christians saying oh,how can you even think about
doing something like you know,and it's just such a painful
reality.
But it's a great example how wemature Christians that fully
(22:00):
know the Scripture andunderstand the spirit of the
Scripture, we can't help butalign ourselves with what's
happening politically.
So that brings us.
Do you have any thoughts onthat?
Speaker 3 (22:13):
So that brings us?
Do you have any thoughts onthat?
I mean it just it's a reminderthat you know the fall is real
and its implications extendeverywhere, including into the
body of Christ, at least in itsearthly manifestation.
It's a good reminder too thatthe divisions that often, you
know, plagued the earliest daysof the church are still manifest
today, certainly domestically,but also internationally.
(22:33):
Church are still manifest today, certainly domestically but
also internationally, and I'mnot going to pretend to solve
these problems that in somesense, you know go back.
You know decades, centuriesbetween different practices of
Christianity, but especially forthose of us sitting on the
sidelines, you know certainlybeing willing to engage with and
support the church in bothcontexts In this instance it's
(22:56):
Russia and Ukraine.
You know as the church isstruggling, I imagine in both
countries pretty significantly,we on the outside can be a
source of support, prayer,financial help and encouragement
to those faith leaders seekingto make sense of these tragedies
seeking to make sense of thesetragedies.
Speaker 2 (23:16):
That's very true.
So I think we have highlightedwell enough the tensions between
our earthly and heavenlycitizenship.
But what is the solution?
So you know, from looking atthe American Christianity,
politics is a very inflammatorysubject, and so it seems like
Christians tend to respond intwo extremes.
(23:37):
They're either over-involved orthey choose to withdraw and say
well, politics is not for me,I'm not even going to be
involved on any level, I don'twant to know what's going on.
So I'm assuming you don't agreewith either extreme.
Speaker 3 (23:57):
You would assume correct.
Speaker 2 (24:00):
And I am assuming that in your book you are
offering a solution.
Speaker 3 (24:05):
Or at least proposing an alternative.
Yeah, and I'm not saying thisis the only alternative, but
it's one that makes sense to me.
Certainly.
As a political scientist, I seethe dangers of extreme
political polarization and Iwrite about this in the book as
a real challenge for effectivepolitical engagement moving
forward, not just for Christiansbut just for Americans in
(24:27):
general.
And there absolutely is atendency on the flip side to
withdraw, to find politics asinherently corrupted or not a
productive forum for Christiansto engage in.
And I'm increasingly convincedthat our role as people of faith
(24:49):
can't be to sit on thesidelines while our culture
burns around us, and culture ofcourse includes our political
environment.
So I do think we have aresponsibility, not just as
citizens or people in ourcommunities, but also as
Christians called to be in theworld not of the world to
(25:10):
practice a better and morehopeful and faithful kind of
politics.
This is one that wouldprioritize a distinctly
Christian posture in thepolitical environment, not
necessarily seeking specificpolicy outcomes or victories,
but rather seeking them in a waythat honors the Lord.
This doesn't mean we can't bepartisan.
(25:30):
This doesn't mean we can'taffiliate with a political party
.
I think there's good reasonsfor us to be in political
parties to seek the reform wherereform is needed and strengthen
where strengthening is needed.
But it also doesn't mean thatwe have to fall in line behind
just one political party.
I think one of the realproblems with our two-party
system in the US is therejection, frankly, of a more
(25:55):
conservative Christian, maybeeven pro-life voice in the
Democratic Party today, somevoices in that party like Justin
Gibney or Michael Ware, who areDemocrats but would identify as
pro-life.
They find themselvesincreasingly ostracized.
And then you take people on thepolitical right who bring their
(26:15):
Christian convictions with themin the public square.
You know certainly someone like.
I think the clear name rightnow is someone like David French
, who was a religious libertyattorney and worked for Alliance
Defending Freedom, which is theChristian legal organization in
the US, and, you know, hasfound himself on the outside of
the current Republican Party forhis criticism of the Trump
(26:37):
administration.
And all that said, I thinkthose three men and they just
happen to be men are reallyexcellent examples of how to be
a faithful Christian witness,and it's no surprise that all
three men have been attacked byothers for not being
sufficiently deferential to theestablished political
environment in which theyoperate.
I think Christians, if we aredoing politics well, we're never
(27:02):
going to be perfectlycomfortable in one political
party.
Right, we should always be ableto find things to criticize, to
speak prophetically against andto seek a better way forward in
both political parties.
So this posture matters a greatdeal.
We should seek not to win forthe purpose of winning and
defeating our opponents.
(27:23):
We should seek to win becauseit's in the best interest of our
communities, because we careabout human flourishing, because
we care about our neighbors.
And ultimately, I think we alsoshould approach politics with a
source of humility, knowing that, even though we believe we have
the right political answer tothese questions and we're
approaching them as people offaith, there could be things we
(27:44):
can learn from our brothers andsisters in the church who have
different perspectives on this.
So I'm a white evangelical.
I would still define myself asan evangelical Christian and I'm
sure I have different politicalperspectives than my Black
Protestant brothers and sistersin the church.
I don't think it's remotelyappropriate for me to think that
, just because they tend to havedifferent voting patterns than
(28:05):
I might, that they're somehowless Christian than I am, in the
same way that I would hope theywouldn't think I was less
Christian than they were becauseI might have different voting
patterns than them.
So there's a humility thatcomes with it being a Christian
in the political square.
Not that we're willing to justthrow our beliefs overboard or
embrace a sort of moralrelativism of your truth is
(28:25):
yours, but rather seeking toreevaluate what we believe about
specific policy answers inlight of our faith commitments.
So that's a very brief coverageof the more substantive
arguments I make in the book.
It really is attempting for amore hopeful and probably
confounding political posturethan the world is used to.
Speaker 2 (28:47):
And I think what you're painting is the ideal
picture.
You know the way things shouldbe, but do you think it's
practically possible and whatwould be some steps that we need
to take as individuals, ormaybe as society or the church?
You know who should lead theway.
Speaker 3 (29:09):
I have no illusion about waking up tomorrow and you
know everyone reads my bookwe'll wake up tomorrow and all
our problems will be fixed inthe political sphere.
Right, that's not going tohappen.
Right, our institutions areentrenched.
There's very little motivationfor surrender or compromise in
the political space because ofpolitical polarization,
(29:32):
electoral gerrymandering, youknow.
Competitive elections in theHouse of Representatives and
Congress are becoming less andless so.
All that to say, the questionof what we can do, it has to
start at the individual level,right?
So we're not going to reformour institutions or systems
overnight, but we can makeincremental, slow, steady
(29:52):
changes to our own behaviors.
Maybe we don't necessarily, whenwe're reading something online
or listening to someone talkabout politics that happens to
disagree with us, maybe we don'tjump to those negative
conclusions that we're soconditioned to do.
Maybe we do take a quick secondand think okay, I'm not going
(30:13):
to assume the worst about thisperson just because they
disagree with me politically,especially if they're a fellow
believer.
You might be inclined to ask afollow-up question.
Tell me more about that.
Why do you align with that?
That's not my experience.
I'd love to hear what motivatesor resonates with you, and
simply having the conversationcan sometimes can temper some of
(30:33):
these more extreme tendenciesin the political space.
I think one of the things thatwe can do individually and in
small communities is give eachother the benefit of the doubt.
Our disagreements are justintractable and that's okay.
We shouldn't surrender thetruth that we hold dear or
(31:02):
tightly to those positions forthe sake of a false peace or
harmony.
But we should be aware enoughto know that that's probably not
the median voter in ourcommunities.
The person who votes Republicannext to you in the pews is
probably not a budding fascistor authoritarian wannabe who
wants to tear down the politicalsystem of the US, just as the
(31:22):
person who votes for Democratssitting next to you in the pews
is not someone who wants todefund law enforcement in the
United States or take away therights of white Christians to
educate their kids in ahomeschooling environment.
I think we're conditioned totreat our political opponents
with the least amount of charitypossible and extend that
(31:44):
charity to our political allies,when I wish we'd be more
comfortable extending thatcharity widely and looking more
critically at our owncommunities for the sake of you
know improving where we canimprove and finding common
ground, and you know potentialroom for compromise where it can
(32:04):
be reached.
Speaker 2 (32:05):
You use this term at least twice, saying we are
conditioned to respond in acertain way.
So let's think about that whoand what conditions us?
Speaker 3 (32:17):
So part of it's our media environment in which we're
operating Social media, andwhat drives traffic is often the
more extreme content.
Very rarely will you see a newsarticle or a social media post
talking about something positivethat's happening in the
political world.
It's usually painting somethingin a fairly negative way.
(32:38):
Frankly, those are what weenjoy clicking on and reading.
We, as a people, tend to likeconflict and like to learn about
people's worst tendencies.
I go back to the fall right.
It's a product of the fall thatwe enjoy this type of conflict
in our communities, and so thisis something else we can do
intentionally is being a bettersteward of our media diet.
Jeffrey Bilbrow is a professorof English at Grove City College
(33:03):
and he's written a lot ofinteresting things, including a
really great book about how tobe a better consumer of media,
and part of that is not ditchingour technology consumer of
media, and part of that is notditching our technology.
We don't have to becomeLuddites and reject all the
trappings of modern life, but wehave to let it work for us
rather than let it control us,and so being intentional about
(33:27):
who we follow, who we engagewith, what kinds of sources
we're consuming and then slowlybreaking out of that tendency to
be outraged all the time andinstead look for the good where
it exists and affirm and bepositive and praise good where
(33:48):
it exists, rather than alwayslooking for negative things to
harp on, share and highlight inour communities.
Speaker 2 (34:00):
And I think you know Jesus in his infinite wisdom,
when he gave the call to theGreat Commission, he had this in
mind.
Knowing our tendencies, youknow, to fall into the worldly
patterns and align ourselves,maybe, with the things that are
not aligned with His message.
He sent us into the nations,and I can tell you, being in
(34:20):
these nations that are sometimeshostile to the United States
and the policies and the foreignpolicy of the United States,
being in these countries, youknow, and being with the people,
knowing them, has really shapedmy perspective on how I feel
about them.
I could never share the gospelwith the people that I hate, you
know, and therefore not hatingthem and not hating them is
(34:45):
knowing them.
You can't hate people once youknow them.
It's been a great antidote tothe Catholic patriotism.
So perhaps that was his planall along, because I often
wonder, he doesn't really needour help in anything.
So he didn't enlist us becausehe needed help in promoting his
(35:06):
message.
Speaker 3 (35:09):
Technology and globalization and the ability to
travel remarkably vastdistances and remarkably short
periods of time that the earlychurch could never have even
envisioned.
We have that at our fingertipsnow, and research shows that the
more you get to know people andsupposed outgroups, the less
likely you are to have thesenegative stereotypes or
(35:31):
connotations about them.
You are to have these negativestereotypes or connotations
about them so so much of ourvitriol or anger against the
other is predicated on notknowing them.
Really, simply havingconversations with folks for a
few minutes can help to tempersome of those more negative
postures that we carry with us,and that applies when we're
doing politics, but it certainlyapplies when we're seeking to
(35:53):
share the good news.
Speaker 2 (35:55):
Absolutely, dan.
Thank you so much for writingsuch an important book.
So Uneasy Citizenship.
I am going to post the link tothe book but also to your sub
stack.
And you write on many othersubjects I assume that are
probably just as important.
Many other subjects I assumethat are probably just as
(36:19):
important.
Speaker 3 (36:20):
So any final thoughts you have for our listeners,
potential future readers of yourbook.
Yeah, I would just say, in themonths and years ahead as we,
you know, continue to enter intoa time of political uncertainty
and volatility that we can beengaged in politics.
We shouldn't withdraw becauseit gets messy.
In fact, those are spaces whereChristians may be needed more
than ever before.
(36:40):
The church still has a greatrole to play in fulfilling God's
story, and let's not neglectpolitics just because it's hard
right.
We, as Christians, have aunique opportunity to do these
things well for the sake of ourneighbors.
Speaker 2 (36:56):
And I think it's important to remember if you are
on a political high right nowbecause of what's happening,
there will be a time that youwill be down on the low.
It's such as the nature ofpolitics.
You know victories come and go,and so being adequately
prepared, with the perspectiveof the gospel, for both highs
(37:18):
and lows, I think, is what'sgoing to keep us grounded and
balanced.
Speaker 1 (37:22):
Amen.
Speaker 2 (37:23):
Thank you so much.
Speaker 3 (37:25):
Thank you.
Speaker 2 (37:28):
Today's conversation with Daniel Bennett reminds us
that the tension between faithand politics isn't something to
run from.
It is, in fact, something toembrace with wisdom and humility
.
As followers of Christ, we'recalled to be salt and light in
this world, but we're alsocalled to live as citizens of a
(37:49):
heavenly kingdom that transcendsany earthly nation.
Looking back at the movie aboutDietrich Bonhoeffer, my
favorite scene in this movie iswhen, just moments before his
execution by hanging, bonhoefferand his fellow prisoners are
sharing the bread and wine incommunion and the prison guard
(38:10):
steps in.
And while other prisoners lookat him with discomfort and even
disdain, bonhoeffer, withouthesitation, shares the communion
elements with him.
You see, where politics dividedthem to the point of death, the
body and the blood of Jesusbrings this beautiful unity
(38:31):
among them.
Brings this beautiful unityamong them.
We have explored how scripturecan be misused to justify
political views and why it is soeasy to get up in partisan
identities and, most importantly, how knowing God's heart should
guide our engagement in publiclife.
It is not about our engagementin public life.
(38:57):
It is not about winningarguments or gaining power.
It's about faithfullyrepresenting Christ in
everything we do.
So as you go about your week.
I want to leave you with thisquestion Are you letting your
heavenly citizenship shape howyou engage with your earthly one
, and are you seeking God's willfirst, or are you letting
political allegiances dictateyour actions and attitudes?
(39:19):
If today's episode challenged orencouraged you, I invite you to
read Daniel's book UneasyCitizenship.
It is a powerful resource foranyone wrestling with how to
navigate the complexrelationships between faith and
politics.
We will post the link in theshow notes so you can easily
(39:40):
access it and pick up the book.
And if you found thisconversation valuable, please
share it with a friend or leaveus a review.
It helps us reach more peoplewith these important discussions
.
It helps us reach more peoplewith these important discussions
.
I also encourage you to visitour website, rfwmaorg.
It's a wonderful resource ifyou're ready to live out your
(40:04):
faith through the GreatCommission, through short-term
missions, and it connects youwith the opportunities to serve
across the world and live outyour faith with passion and to
share it with others.
So tune in for another episodenext week.
Until next time, I'm Helen Todd.
Speaker 1 (40:24):
Limitless Spirit Podcast is produced by World
Missions Alliance.
We believe that changed liveschange lives.
If your life was transformed byChrist, you are equipped to
help others experience thistransformation.
Christ called his followers tomake disciples across the world.
World Missions Alliance givesyou an opportunity to do this
(40:48):
through short-term missions inover 32 countries across the
globe.
If you want to help those whoare hurting and hopeless and
discover your greater purpose inserving, check out our website,
rfwmaorg, and find out how toget involved.
Welcome to Limitless Spirit, a weekly podcast with
host Helen Todd, where sheinterviews guests about pursuing
spiritual growth, discoveringlife's purpose through serving
others and developing a deeperfaith in Christ.
Speaker 2 (00:17):
Welcome to Limitless Spirit.
I'm your host, helen Todd, andtoday we talk about the
intersection of patriotism,politics and faith.
Imagine yourself living in acountry where the political
regime is such that it conflictswith your faith.
(00:38):
So, for example, imagine adevoted pastor who watches his
country descend into moral andpolitical darkness.
The church begins to compromise, aligning itself with the
powerful instead of standing forrighteousness, and some
believers retreat into silence.
Others wholeheartedly embracethe nationalistic fervor of the
(01:02):
time.
And then there is this one manwho refuses to choose either
path.
I'm talking, of course, aboutDietrich Bonhoeffer, and if
you've seen the recent filmBonhoeffer, agent of Grace, you
know this story well.
Bonhoeffer finds himself as apastor in Nazi Germany and
(01:24):
watches the church that he hasbeen very committed to align
itself, while many in the churchalign themselves with the Nazi
regime.
So he is a man who is caughtbetween his love for his country
and his ultimate allegiance toGod, and he faces an impossible
(01:45):
question when earthlycitizenship demands something
that contradicts the call ofChrist, what should a Christian
do?
And in a sense, this sametension is relevant today,
because we live in the worldwhere politics, culture and
faith often collide andChristians find themselves in a
(02:06):
similar struggle.
How do we remain faithful toChrist while living as engaged
citizens in our countries?
How do we avoid the traps ofpolitical idolatry on one hand,
and passive disengagement on theother hand?
My guest today is Dr DanielBennett.
He's an associate professor ofpolitical science at John Brown
(02:29):
University.
He's a frequent guest innational and regional media,
including Wall Street Journal,new Yorker, npr and such.
Dr Bennett has spent yearsstudying this very question and
in his recent book UneasyCitizenship Embracing the
Tension in Faith and Politics,he unpacks how Christians can
(02:53):
navigate this difficultlandscape with wisdom, humility
and faithfulness.
Today, we talk about why somany believers feel caught
between faith and politics andhow scripture is often misused
to justify conflicting views.
Most importantly, we talk abouthow we can reclaim a biblical
(03:16):
approach to citizenship.
So, whether you're feelingdisillusioned with politics or
struggling how to engage as abeliever, or simply are looking
for a way to live out your faithin a divided world, I think you
will find this conversationvery interesting.
Let's dive in.
Hello Dan, welcome to LimitlessSpirit.
(03:41):
How are you today?
Speaker 3 (03:42):
I'm doing well.
It is a day that I'm in theclassroom a lot, so it's
energizing.
It's also tiring.
It's a paradox of teaching.
Speaker 2 (03:50):
Well, I'm happy to offer you a little break from
the classroom, although I thinkit must be a very exciting time
to speak into young minds withall the cool and exciting things
that are happening, so theymust have a lot of questions for
you, especially being theprofessor of political science
(04:13):
and philosophy.
But I'm excited to talk aboutthe subject that I think is very
important for every Christianand very important right now
when we have a change ofadministration in our country
that is going to carry an impactnot only on our lives but the
lives of people across the world.
(04:34):
And so my husband and I got toattend the inauguration of the
47th president, and it was anincredible experience for me and
I, you know, I wasn't born inthe United States, I became a
citizen 19 years ago, and so itwas very meaningful for me and
an incredible experience, butalso made me think that the love
(04:59):
for our country.
It's a very powerful emotionand it was very deeply felt at
the inauguration.
But sometimes it can conflictour higher citizenship and a
higher calling, and you happenedto write a book on this subject
.
So I'm very intrigued and Ihave to ask.
Speaker 3 (05:23):
First, so what prompted you to write this book?
And he had written a bookrecently at that time called why
(05:43):
Liberalism Failed.
And this wasn't an indictmenton the political ideology of the
left in the United States oreven the West, but more of an
indictment on the classicalliberal framework, going back to
people like John Locke and theEuropean Enlightenment, where we
saw the foundations for thingslike individual rights and
(06:04):
liberties and consent of thegoverned, these kinds of things.
And in the book he'sessentially making the argument
that liberalism in that contexthas kind of become a victim of
its own successes, where anemphasis on individual rights,
individual liberties, hasessentially taken the place of
any shared consumption of thegood and the sort of structures
(06:27):
and foundations that are neededto uphold a classical liberal
political framework.
And so Deneen has later writtenthat he's kind of leaning into
this, what he might call anilliberal framework or
post-liberal, I think, is thebetter terminology here.
And I was thinking about some ofthese implications for
Christians, and this was aconference for Christian faculty
(06:49):
at Christian colleges anduniversities, and I remember
jotting something down in thenotebook that we were given and
the phrase was uneasycitizenship thinking about how
we hold our citizenship asChristians, you know, tightly.
But we also have to be willingto hold it somewhat loosely and,
as I later you know, spelledout in the book uneasily, given
(07:12):
the hope that we have in Christ,the identity that we have, as
you know, certainly as citizensof the kingdom, but inevitably,
you know, we're called to be inthe world, not of the world, but
in the world seeking the goodand flourishing of our neighbors
, and this just creates, I think, an inherent sort of tension
for us living in this politicalmoment.
So those are the kinds ofthings I decided to write the
(07:34):
book about, and it does seemlike it's been a lot longer than
six years, but here we are.
Speaker 2 (07:40):
So let's first set the foundation for this
conversation and maybe highlightsome of the examples, like
real-life examples where ourearthly citizenship sometimes is
in conflict with our heavenlycitizenship.
And feel free to draw fromhistory or from very modern
(08:01):
examples, or both for thatmatter.
Speaker 3 (08:03):
Well, certainly, I'm probably a little more
comfortable drawing from morecontemporary examples, in the
American context at that.
So it's a little narrow, Isuppose.
But you know, if I just thinkabout you know, as a political
scientist, thinking about theways in which we make our
decisions in the voting boothwhat kinds of things influence
our decisions for thepoliticians we choose to elect,
(08:26):
the types of policies we supportthrough referenda or
initiatives.
And you know, there could bepolicies or individual elected
officials whose policies that wegenerally align ourselves with,
but whose individual characteror other approaches to public
(08:46):
life might rub us the wrong wayas people of faith.
On the other hand, there aresome people whose character
seems to align with what wewould want in an elected
official, someone who speakshighly of the influence of faith
, or even the Christian faith,on his or her public service,
and yet whose politicalpositions are deeply out of step
with what we would consider tobe a faithful or biblically
(09:07):
oriented portfolio of thesepolicies.
And so those are just reallytwo obvious examples where
people of faith could come todifferent conclusions about the
right way to order and structureour political citizenship.
Do we vote in a way thatmaximizes policy victories at
(09:28):
the expense of potentialcharacter in elected officials?
Or do we vote for character,knowing that it's going to be a
little bit of an uphill climbwhen it comes to achieving our
policy successes?
And then there's the questionsof how we make sense of
differences among Christians onhow to even approach certain
issues.
So take an issue like abortion,for example.
(09:50):
I think Christians across theboard, at least, should at some
level agree that abortion isevil.
It's an awful procedure and anawful act act.
And I think different faithcommunities have different
responses about how Christiansshould respond to the issue of
abortion through policy.
Should it be through, you know,bans and restrictions on the
procedure?
(10:10):
Should it be throughdiscouraging the necessity of
the procedure among certaingroups of people, through
expanding social safety programs?
Or should it be a combinationof the two?
What do we choose to emphasizestemming from the influence of
our faith when it comes to thisparticular issue?
And we can do that with anynumber of issues immigration,
education, national defense,like I said, social safety net
(10:34):
programs.
The list goes on and on.
So we, as Christians, areconstantly living in the here
but not yet figuring out how webest steward the command to love
God and love neighbor in apluralistic and, in our context,
democratic society where wehave the choice politically and
these choices aren't alwaysclear as to what the Christian
(10:56):
option should be.
Speaker 2 (10:57):
Well, and I want us to talk about.
You know the ways thatChristians engage in politics,
and there are two extremes there.
But before we touch on that,let's talk about patriotism.
So, from the perspective ofChristianity, do you think
patriotism is a positive thingor a negative thing?
Speaker 3 (11:20):
Well, I think patriotism isn't inherently
suspect, nor is it inherentlyrequired by scripture.
I think, like many things,patriotism is a feeling of
emotions or values that weassociate with love for or
passion for one's country orcommunity and, like anything
else, it can be taken to a lessthan ideal, extreme right.
(11:44):
I don't think there's anythingwrong with enjoying watching the
4th of July fireworks andgetting emotional about what it
means to be American and,frankly, for people who came to
this country and later becamecitizens, I mean, I think these
experiences are probably evenheightened.
Like you alluded to, watchingthe inauguration.
I was born in the United States.
I have a very differentperspective on a lot of these
(12:05):
questions than recent immigrantsor citizens who have
naturalized into the UnitedStates.
You know we're watching theinaugural festivities and the
pomp and circumstance associatedwith the outgoing president
meeting the incoming president.
It really just makes me feelpatriotic and excited about the
peaceful transfer of power.
So all that to say is I don'tthink there's anything
(12:25):
inherently wrong with beingpatriotic, right, as a Christian
, I think Christians, you know,can in many ways should love our
communities and seek thebetterment of our government for
protecting the welfare of thecommunity.
But patriotism is not the samething as blind loyalty.
In fact, patriotism might oftenlead to dissent at times.
(12:47):
Patriotism might lead toconflict or correction in
moments.
It doesn't mean necessarilysupporting the government.
It means supporting theframework.
Maybe that holds up thegovernment, and there too, I
think there's a differencebetween patriotism and
nationalism as well.
Some of these things often areconflated.
I do think it's a mistake forfolks who criticize so-called
(13:09):
Christian nationalism to thinkthat anyone who flies the
American flag and happens to bea Christian is a Christian
nationalist.
I do think there are probablydangerous forms of Christian
nationalism, but being patrioticand a Christian isn't that.
Speaker 2 (13:22):
So how do you define the difference between
nationalism?
I know it's a loaded question,but I mean I was trying to
figure it out for myself and Idon't think we're like a very
clear answer to that there.
I think there are ideas aboutthat, but what, in your opinion,
is the major difference betweenpatriotism and nationalism?
Speaker 3 (13:43):
Well, with the caveat that I'm not speaking for all
of my discipline or certainlyall of Christian academics, I'll
say that for me, patriotism ismore about a positive feeling
towards one's country andtraditions and people broadly
understood, whereas nationalismcan be positive, but it can also
take a more negativeconnotation when it comes to
(14:04):
comparing us versus them.
I think a lot of the nationalismthat we see historically and I
think the temptation is fairlyeasy to fall into this is that
we prioritize us and demonizeothers or them in unhealthy and
unproductive ways.
I think patriotic Americansshould be not necessarily in
favor of the immigrationpolicies supported by, say, the
(14:28):
Democratic Party, but weshouldn't also be saying well,
I'm patriotic, therefore I don'tthink we should have any or
limited immigration into thecountry.
I think patriotic approaches tothis say hey, if we believe in
America, let's try to make it asinclusive and open to as many
people as possible who want tocome here and follow our systems
and processes, etc.
(14:48):
Certain nationalistictendencies lately tend to maybe
disagree with that perspective,saying that anytime we start
talking about changing theculture or changing the existing
order of things, I don't seethat the same as patriotism.
I see that more as a form ofunhealthy nationalism that seeks
to put up barriers between usand them.
Speaker 2 (15:10):
And I'm also thinking that nationalism means
different things in differentcountries, because America is
such a multi-ethnic country.
So nationalism is morecongruent with patriotism,
probably, in America, whereas ina country like Russia or France
, you know, nationalism meansprobably elevating that
(15:33):
particular group, like theFrench or the Russians, about
the others.
So I think it's not a.
You know, there is no cleardefinition without the context.
Speaker 3 (15:45):
I think France is a great example of this, just
given the influence that Frenchsociety places on French
identity.
Speaker 2 (15:54):
being French, and if you want to come a little
superior, let's face it.
Speaker 3 (15:58):
Yes, and especially true with new immigrants,
especially coming from, you know, from North African or Middle
Eastern countries, who bringMuslim faith with them.
They say sure, you can come toFrance, but you better
subordinate your religiousbeliefs and practices to French
identity.
Here in the US the traditionhas been you come here.
And part of the United States,in my mind, making it such a
(16:21):
great and unique nation globally, is that you bring your
traditions with you and it allbecomes part of our American.
And that makes things messy attimes, it makes things
complicated, but given thechoice to downplay those
differences and let them simmerversus getting them out in the
open and having discussion andlearning from each other, I
would choose that rather than anexclusivity nationalism that
(16:46):
comes in certain countries.
Speaker 2 (16:47):
I would have to agree and that's why, in the end, I
feel I get to travel a lotthrough my work.
You know, and talk to peoplefrom many different countries.
In the end, most of them wantto come to Syrian, you know, and
(17:18):
yet still be a citizen of theUnited States and a full sense
of it.
So let's think about the GreatCommission.
You know, when Jesus gives theGreat Commission in Matthew 28,
19 through 20, don't you thinkthat he sort of addresses
patriotism and expands it beyondthe borders of our country and
(17:42):
alludes to our heavenlycitizenship and the
inclusiveness of the whole worldinto this kingdom?
Speaker 3 (17:50):
Sure, I think it has to.
And you know when Jesus isspeaking and when he first, you
know, shares this message withthe people in, you know, first
century Judea.
Really, you know the cultureand the political context of
that era are very different thanours today, but we believe as
Christians that Jesus is bothfully God and fully man.
(18:13):
And you know he certainlyunderstood the progression of
history and it's not as if he'dbe caught off guard by the
globalized, politically changedenvironment in which we
currently live in the 21stcentury.
So, you know, for us asChristians, and especially as
American Christians, ourpatriotism can't close us off
(18:35):
from the rest of the world anymore than we would expect other
countries and the Christiansthere to say well, we're only
going to focus on our peoplehere at home.
So, yeah, I think Christians inthe US are blessed with an
abundance of resources andopportunities to be a hub for
evangelism, a support formissionary, and we've done this
(18:56):
historically right, sendingmissionaries to all corners of
the world from our differentdenominational traditions, et
cetera.
There's evidence to suggestthis might be slowing down a
little bit with the decline ofchurch attendance and
religiosity in the US, and somaybe the US's role there in the
next few decades is going toshift.
So, yeah, I think AmericanChristians have to think beyond
(19:17):
our national borders and we canbe patriotic and think not only
are we sharing the good news,but we do so from a place of
real blessing and abundance.
What this doesn't necessarilymean is that we should then
expect the United Statesgovernment to take a really
aggressive foreign policy withrespect to international
(19:39):
development and really justspending untold money overseas.
Now I'm not saying this is goodor bad.
I'm saying that those twothings, I think, are different
questions and certainly anytimewe want to get the government
involved with religious missions, I think we ought to put pause
on that.
But yeah, as Christiansindividually in our
congregations goodness, we havesuch a great opportunity, with
(20:02):
the wealth, the stability of oursystem, to really think about
the Great Commission in a waythat previous Christians just
haven't had the chance.
Speaker 2 (20:12):
Well, I want to bring up another modern day example
where I think politics hasreally very negatively affected
the church, and that's the warbetween Russia and Ukraine.
You know, the world veryclearly took the side for the
most part of Ukraine and youknow rightfully so when it was
(20:34):
invaded by Russia, but it causedtremendous division between the
church in Russia and Ukraine.
So not just the divisionbetween the countries, which is
a tragedy in itself, but we'renot talking about that but it
caused division between the bodyof Christ, and not only in
these two countries, becausethey instantly aligned
(20:57):
themselves.
Not instantly at first, therewas a lot more common sense, but
as the time went on and the warwas more withdrawn, the
churches aligned themselves withtheir patriotism, you know, and
with their governments, youknow, and with their governments
(21:18):
, and in the end the churchoutside of those two countries
also aligned itself.
And so the church in Russiafound itself ostracized to a
great extent and still is.
And I was a witness, aconversation between Christians,
not American Christians butevangelical Christians where
there was a couple that wasplanning a mission trip to
(21:39):
Russia to encourage the churchand this couple was ostracized
by other Christians saying oh,how can you even think about
doing something like you know,and it's just such a painful
reality.
But it's a great example how wemature Christians that fully
(22:00):
know the Scripture andunderstand the spirit of the
Scripture, we can't help butalign ourselves with what's
happening politically.
So that brings us.
Do you have any thoughts onthat?
Speaker 3 (22:13):
So that brings us?
Do you have any thoughts onthat?
I mean it just it's a reminderthat you know the fall is real
and its implications extendeverywhere, including into the
body of Christ, at least in itsearthly manifestation.
It's a good reminder too thatthe divisions that often, you
know, plagued the earliest daysof the church are still manifest
today, certainly domestically,but also internationally.
(22:33):
Church are still manifest today, certainly domestically but
also internationally, and I'mnot going to pretend to solve
these problems that in somesense, you know go back.
You know decades, centuriesbetween different practices of
Christianity, but especially forthose of us sitting on the
sidelines, you know certainlybeing willing to engage with and
support the church in bothcontexts In this instance it's
(22:56):
Russia and Ukraine.
You know as the church isstruggling, I imagine in both
countries pretty significantly,we on the outside can be a
source of support, prayer,financial help and encouragement
to those faith leaders seekingto make sense of these tragedies
seeking to make sense of thesetragedies.
Speaker 2 (23:16):
That's very true.
So I think we have highlightedwell enough the tensions between
our earthly and heavenlycitizenship.
But what is the solution?
So you know, from looking atthe American Christianity,
politics is a very inflammatorysubject, and so it seems like
Christians tend to respond intwo extremes.
(23:37):
They're either over-involved orthey choose to withdraw and say
well, politics is not for me,I'm not even going to be
involved on any level, I don'twant to know what's going on.
So I'm assuming you don't agreewith either extreme.
Speaker 3 (23:57):
You would assume correct.
Speaker 2 (24:00):
And I am assuming that in your book you are
offering a solution.
Speaker 3 (24:05):
Or at least proposing an alternative.
Yeah, and I'm not saying thisis the only alternative, but
it's one that makes sense to me.
Certainly.
As a political scientist, I seethe dangers of extreme
political polarization and Iwrite about this in the book as
a real challenge for effectivepolitical engagement moving
forward, not just for Christiansbut just for Americans in
(24:27):
general.
And there absolutely is atendency on the flip side to
withdraw, to find politics asinherently corrupted or not a
productive forum for Christiansto engage in.
And I'm increasingly convincedthat our role as people of faith
(24:49):
can't be to sit on thesidelines while our culture
burns around us, and culture ofcourse includes our political
environment.
So I do think we have aresponsibility, not just as
citizens or people in ourcommunities, but also as
Christians called to be in theworld not of the world to
(25:10):
practice a better and morehopeful and faithful kind of
politics.
This is one that wouldprioritize a distinctly
Christian posture in thepolitical environment, not
necessarily seeking specificpolicy outcomes or victories,
but rather seeking them in a waythat honors the Lord.
This doesn't mean we can't bepartisan.
(25:30):
This doesn't mean we can'taffiliate with a political party
.
I think there's good reasonsfor us to be in political
parties to seek the reform wherereform is needed and strengthen
where strengthening is needed.
But it also doesn't mean thatwe have to fall in line behind
just one political party.
I think one of the realproblems with our two-party
system in the US is therejection, frankly, of a more
(25:55):
conservative Christian, maybeeven pro-life voice in the
Democratic Party today, somevoices in that party like Justin
Gibney or Michael Ware, who areDemocrats but would identify as
pro-life.
They find themselvesincreasingly ostracized.
And then you take people on thepolitical right who bring their
(26:15):
Christian convictions with themin the public square.
You know certainly someone like.
I think the clear name rightnow is someone like David French
, who was a religious libertyattorney and worked for Alliance
Defending Freedom, which is theChristian legal organization in
the US, and, you know, hasfound himself on the outside of
the current Republican Party forhis criticism of the Trump
(26:37):
administration.
And all that said, I thinkthose three men and they just
happen to be men are reallyexcellent examples of how to be
a faithful Christian witness,and it's no surprise that all
three men have been attacked byothers for not being
sufficiently deferential to theestablished political
environment in which theyoperate.
I think Christians, if we aredoing politics well, we're never
(27:02):
going to be perfectlycomfortable in one political
party.
Right, we should always be ableto find things to criticize, to
speak prophetically against andto seek a better way forward in
both political parties.
So this posture matters a greatdeal.
We should seek not to win forthe purpose of winning and
defeating our opponents.
(27:23):
We should seek to win becauseit's in the best interest of our
communities, because we careabout human flourishing, because
we care about our neighbors.
And ultimately, I think we alsoshould approach politics with a
source of humility, knowing that, even though we believe we have
the right political answer tothese questions and we're
approaching them as people offaith, there could be things we
(27:44):
can learn from our brothers andsisters in the church who have
different perspectives on this.
So I'm a white evangelical.
I would still define myself asan evangelical Christian and I'm
sure I have different politicalperspectives than my Black
Protestant brothers and sistersin the church.
I don't think it's remotelyappropriate for me to think that
, just because they tend to havedifferent voting patterns than
(28:05):
I might, that they're somehowless Christian than I am, in the
same way that I would hope theywouldn't think I was less
Christian than they were becauseI might have different voting
patterns than them.
So there's a humility thatcomes with it being a Christian
in the political square.
Not that we're willing to justthrow our beliefs overboard or
embrace a sort of moralrelativism of your truth is
(28:25):
yours, but rather seeking toreevaluate what we believe about
specific policy answers inlight of our faith commitments.
So that's a very brief coverageof the more substantive
arguments I make in the book.
It really is attempting for amore hopeful and probably
confounding political posturethan the world is used to.
Speaker 2 (28:47):
And I think what you're painting is the ideal
picture.
You know the way things shouldbe, but do you think it's
practically possible and whatwould be some steps that we need
to take as individuals, ormaybe as society or the church?
You know who should lead theway.
Speaker 3 (29:09):
I have no illusion about waking up tomorrow and you
know everyone reads my bookwe'll wake up tomorrow and all
our problems will be fixed inthe political sphere.
Right, that's not going tohappen.
Right, our institutions areentrenched.
There's very little motivationfor surrender or compromise in
the political space because ofpolitical polarization,
(29:32):
electoral gerrymandering, youknow.
Competitive elections in theHouse of Representatives and
Congress are becoming less andless so.
All that to say, the questionof what we can do, it has to
start at the individual level,right?
So we're not going to reformour institutions or systems
overnight, but we can makeincremental, slow, steady
(29:52):
changes to our own behaviors.
Maybe we don't necessarily, whenwe're reading something online
or listening to someone talkabout politics that happens to
disagree with us, maybe we don'tjump to those negative
conclusions that we're soconditioned to do.
Maybe we do take a quick secondand think okay, I'm not going
(30:13):
to assume the worst about thisperson just because they
disagree with me politically,especially if they're a fellow
believer.
You might be inclined to ask afollow-up question.
Tell me more about that.
Why do you align with that?
That's not my experience.
I'd love to hear what motivatesor resonates with you, and
simply having the conversationcan sometimes can temper some of
(30:33):
these more extreme tendenciesin the political space.
I think one of the things thatwe can do individually and in
small communities is give eachother the benefit of the doubt.
Our disagreements are justintractable and that's okay.
We shouldn't surrender thetruth that we hold dear or
(31:02):
tightly to those positions forthe sake of a false peace or
harmony.
But we should be aware enoughto know that that's probably not
the median voter in ourcommunities.
The person who votes Republicannext to you in the pews is
probably not a budding fascistor authoritarian wannabe who
wants to tear down the politicalsystem of the US, just as the
(31:22):
person who votes for Democratssitting next to you in the pews
is not someone who wants todefund law enforcement in the
United States or take away therights of white Christians to
educate their kids in ahomeschooling environment.
I think we're conditioned totreat our political opponents
with the least amount of charitypossible and extend that
(31:44):
charity to our political allies,when I wish we'd be more
comfortable extending thatcharity widely and looking more
critically at our owncommunities for the sake of you
know improving where we canimprove and finding common
ground, and you know potentialroom for compromise where it can
(32:04):
be reached.
Speaker 2 (32:05):
You use this term at least twice, saying we are
conditioned to respond in acertain way.
So let's think about that whoand what conditions us?
Speaker 3 (32:17):
So part of it's our media environment in which we're
operating Social media, andwhat drives traffic is often the
more extreme content.
Very rarely will you see a newsarticle or a social media post
talking about something positivethat's happening in the
political world.
It's usually painting somethingin a fairly negative way.
(32:38):
Frankly, those are what weenjoy clicking on and reading.
We, as a people, tend to likeconflict and like to learn about
people's worst tendencies.
I go back to the fall right.
It's a product of the fall thatwe enjoy this type of conflict
in our communities, and so thisis something else we can do
intentionally is being a bettersteward of our media diet.
Jeffrey Bilbrow is a professorof English at Grove City College
(33:03):
and he's written a lot ofinteresting things, including a
really great book about how tobe a better consumer of media,
and part of that is not ditchingour technology consumer of
media, and part of that is notditching our technology.
We don't have to becomeLuddites and reject all the
trappings of modern life, but wehave to let it work for us
rather than let it control us,and so being intentional about
(33:27):
who we follow, who we engagewith, what kinds of sources
we're consuming and then slowlybreaking out of that tendency to
be outraged all the time andinstead look for the good where
it exists and affirm and bepositive and praise good where
(33:48):
it exists, rather than alwayslooking for negative things to
harp on, share and highlight inour communities.
Speaker 2 (34:00):
And I think you know Jesus in his infinite wisdom,
when he gave the call to theGreat Commission, he had this in
mind.
Knowing our tendencies, youknow, to fall into the worldly
patterns and align ourselves,maybe, with the things that are
not aligned with His message.
He sent us into the nations,and I can tell you, being in
(34:20):
these nations that are sometimeshostile to the United States
and the policies and the foreignpolicy of the United States,
being in these countries, youknow, and being with the people,
knowing them, has really shapedmy perspective on how I feel
about them.
I could never share the gospelwith the people that I hate, you
know, and therefore not hatingthem and not hating them is
(34:45):
knowing them.
You can't hate people once youknow them.
It's been a great antidote tothe Catholic patriotism.
So perhaps that was his planall along, because I often
wonder, he doesn't really needour help in anything.
So he didn't enlist us becausehe needed help in promoting his
(35:06):
message.
Speaker 3 (35:09):
Technology and globalization and the ability to
travel remarkably vastdistances and remarkably short
periods of time that the earlychurch could never have even
envisioned.
We have that at our fingertipsnow, and research shows that the
more you get to know people andsupposed outgroups, the less
likely you are to have thesenegative stereotypes or
(35:31):
connotations about them.
You are to have these negativestereotypes or connotations
about them so so much of ourvitriol or anger against the
other is predicated on notknowing them.
Really, simply havingconversations with folks for a
few minutes can help to tempersome of those more negative
postures that we carry with us,and that applies when we're
doing politics, but it certainlyapplies when we're seeking to
(35:53):
share the good news.
Speaker 2 (35:55):
Absolutely, dan.
Thank you so much for writingsuch an important book.
So Uneasy Citizenship.
I am going to post the link tothe book but also to your sub
stack.
And you write on many othersubjects I assume that are
probably just as important.
Many other subjects I assumethat are probably just as
(36:19):
important.
Speaker 3 (36:20):
So any final thoughts you have for our listeners,
potential future readers of yourbook.
Yeah, I would just say, in themonths and years ahead as we,
you know, continue to enter intoa time of political uncertainty
and volatility that we can beengaged in politics.
We shouldn't withdraw becauseit gets messy.
In fact, those are spaces whereChristians may be needed more
than ever before.
(36:40):
The church still has a greatrole to play in fulfilling God's
story, and let's not neglectpolitics just because it's hard
right.
We, as Christians, have aunique opportunity to do these
things well for the sake of ourneighbors.
Speaker 2 (36:56):
And I think it's important to remember if you are
on a political high right nowbecause of what's happening,
there will be a time that youwill be down on the low.
It's such as the nature ofpolitics.
You know victories come and go,and so being adequately
prepared, with the perspectiveof the gospel, for both highs
(37:18):
and lows, I think, is what'sgoing to keep us grounded and
balanced.
Speaker 1 (37:22):
Amen.
Speaker 2 (37:23):
Thank you so much.
Speaker 3 (37:25):
Thank you.
Speaker 2 (37:28):
Today's conversation with Daniel Bennett reminds us
that the tension between faithand politics isn't something to
run from.
It is, in fact, something toembrace with wisdom and humility
.
As followers of Christ, we'recalled to be salt and light in
this world, but we're alsocalled to live as citizens of a
(37:49):
heavenly kingdom that transcendsany earthly nation.
Looking back at the movie aboutDietrich Bonhoeffer, my
favorite scene in this movie iswhen, just moments before his
execution by hanging, bonhoefferand his fellow prisoners are
sharing the bread and wine incommunion and the prison guard
(38:10):
steps in.
And while other prisoners lookat him with discomfort and even
disdain, bonhoeffer, withouthesitation, shares the communion
elements with him.
You see, where politics dividedthem to the point of death, the
body and the blood of Jesusbrings this beautiful unity
(38:31):
among them.
Brings this beautiful unityamong them.
We have explored how scripturecan be misused to justify
political views and why it is soeasy to get up in partisan
identities and, most importantly, how knowing God's heart should
guide our engagement in publiclife.
It is not about our engagementin public life.
(38:57):
It is not about winningarguments or gaining power.
It's about faithfullyrepresenting Christ in
everything we do.
So as you go about your week.
I want to leave you with thisquestion Are you letting your
heavenly citizenship shape howyou engage with your earthly one
, and are you seeking God's willfirst, or are you letting
political allegiances dictateyour actions and attitudes?
(39:19):
If today's episode challenged orencouraged you, I invite you to
read Daniel's book UneasyCitizenship.
It is a powerful resource foranyone wrestling with how to
navigate the complexrelationships between faith and
politics.
We will post the link in theshow notes so you can easily
(39:40):
access it and pick up the book.
And if you found thisconversation valuable, please
share it with a friend or leaveus a review.
It helps us reach more peoplewith these important discussions
.
It helps us reach more peoplewith these important discussions
.
I also encourage you to visitour website, rfwmaorg.
It's a wonderful resource ifyou're ready to live out your
(40:04):
faith through the GreatCommission, through short-term
missions, and it connects youwith the opportunities to serve
across the world and live outyour faith with passion and to
share it with others.
So tune in for another episodenext week.
Until next time, I'm Helen Todd.
Speaker 1 (40:24):
Limitless Spirit Podcast is produced by World
Missions Alliance.
We believe that changed liveschange lives.
If your life was transformed byChrist, you are equipped to
help others experience thistransformation.
Christ called his followers tomake disciples across the world.
World Missions Alliance givesyou an opportunity to do this
(40:48):
through short-term missions inover 32 countries across the
globe.
If you want to help those whoare hurting and hopeless and
discover your greater purpose inserving, check out our website,
rfwmaorg, and find out how toget involved.
Popular Podcasts
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy And Charlamagne Tha God!
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Decisions, Decisions
Welcome to "Decisions, Decisions," the podcast where boundaries are pushed, and conversations get candid! Join your favorite hosts, Mandii B and WeezyWTF, as they dive deep into the world of non-traditional relationships and explore the often-taboo topics surrounding dating, sex, and love. Every Monday, Mandii and Weezy invite you to unlearn the outdated narratives dictated by traditional patriarchal norms. With a blend of humor, vulnerability, and authenticity, they share their personal journeys navigating their 30s, tackling the complexities of modern relationships, and engaging in thought-provoking discussions that challenge societal expectations. From groundbreaking interviews with diverse guests to relatable stories that resonate with your experiences, "Decisions, Decisions" is your go-to source for open dialogue about what it truly means to love and connect in today's world. Get ready to reshape your understanding of relationships and embrace the freedom of authentic connections—tune in and join the conversation!