“My kingdom is not of this world” (John 18:36). So begins the first statement of Jesus in the Praetorium before Pilate. Jesus’ way of living had brought him before a heathen authority figure, which had the power to decide his fate. But there is no defence speech, no appeal to the law, no appeal to a higher authority figure or institution.
Jesus never was a political figure, nor did he aspire to be one. In stark contrast to what the Jewish population of the time expected the Messiah to be, here stood not a person that was ready to take power from the oppressing Roman forces by means of political or military activity, but someone who would gain the world by giving his life.
The fact that Jesus became a political figure had nothing to do with him being intentional about being one. Rather, who he was and how he acted was so different from his surroundings that his mere existence became political.
I believe that those who wish to aspire to be followers of Jesus should not primarily aspire to be political. Rather, they should seek to walk with the Messiah, obey the voice of God and see if what they do naturally might turn out to be political.
This requires some humility on our part. In fact, lots of it. Despite what we might believe (or have been taught to believe), democracy is not a Biblical principle. On the contrary, the whole concept is foreign to the people of God as we see them presented in the Bible. The idea that the majority of a population is best suited to guide a country‘s fate is foreign to Biblical thinking.
But as Christians, we are asked to participate in society and seek its well-being. We are called to use our (limited) power to set up society for flourishing. We are to “seek the good of the city” we dwell in, even though it might be a foreign land.
What now of democracy and elections? It seems to me that we have two options how to vote: One is the “better choice model” (when we primarily vote for the better candidate). Or we can vote the “lesser evil” (when we primarily vote against the candidate we deem to be worse). It seems to me that the second option has become more prevalent in society as many people are defining themselves more by what they are against than what they are for.
What to do then? In a world full of political candidates with questionable morals, shady deals and twisted truths, there remain three things to do:
First, if you find that one of the candidates or parties, whose morals align with Christian ethics, has a shot of winning and being promoted to a position of influence: Go for them.
If on the other hand, one of these candidates and parties has entered the race, but it seems obvious that there is no realistic chance of them winning: You might consider voting for them as an act of protest. Many well-meaning Christians will tell you that you have wasted your vote; but if you could not have in good conscience voted for any of the main candidates, then you will have set a clear boundary to what you are willing to support.
Lastly, the most shunned option of all: Abstain as an act of resisting to participate in a system you reject. If you have the privilege to live in a democracy, it is important to understand that you have the right to vote, not the obligation to. This liberty shall not be infringed upon. As a matter of fact, it might be the better thing to do: Would you be happy if your treatment at the hospital would be voted on by a group of strangers that don’t know anything about medicine? Would you be pleased if your car mechanic would take a democratic poll of people on the street of how your car should be fixed? If you answered no to these questions, why would you think that the same people you would not trust with a medical decision or your car are qualified to make grand geopolitical decisions that will guide the future of your nation? If you are reading this in the U.S., your founders didn’t trust you either. This is why the electoral college exists. The decision of the people can be taken away from you. If you take a long honest look at yourself and where you are in life, the most patriotic thing you could do might be not to vote. If you can’t keep your house in order, are you fit to decide the future of a nation?
In my opinion, it is time that Christians took serious the weight of the words of Jesus of the passage quoted above: “My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, then my servants would be fighting so that I would not be handed over to the Jews, but as it is, my kingdom is not of this realm.” (Matthew 18:36).
We as Christians will have to give up the notion that a kingdom not of this world can be established by using the systems of the world. Historically speaking, church and state have been uneasy bedfellows. The more the church was accepted by the state, the closer it was to losing its identity and purpose. We do not have an enduring city, but we look for the city that is to come. Until Jesus returns, we will always be strangers and sojourners in a foreign land, with no claim or right to citizenship.
Simon Röck
Director of Studies, THS Akademie