Here is another question I recently received:
1)
When talking about Christianity and politics you
will always seek to render to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is
God’s. How can a Christian decide which of
God’s values should be enforced by law and which should be enforced by other
means?
This is a very good question calling for a great deal of
careful thought. We should note first that
everybody legislates morality—even the atheist—for morality expresses the
values we hold dear and laws are the codification of those values. So the really important and interesting
question is not whether we should
legislate morality, but rather which
morality we should seek to legislate—your question.
First, some of God’s laws go straight to the human heart and
are, for that reason, unenforceable by human law. These should remain off the books. I am thinking, for example, of the first and
the tenth commandments (“You shall have no other gods before me” and “you shall
not covet”). There are other divine laws that address human public behavior
and need enforcement for the purposes of limiting human selfishness and
cruelty. “You shall not kill”, “you
shall not steal”, “you shall not bear false witness,” and possibly “caring for
the poor and marginalized” all belong to this category. The Christian and the non-Christian can often
find common ground in these areas. But
even here it gets tricky: Abortion in my view is a form of killing that should
have laws written against it—but what precise form should they take (what form
of the law is likely to pass, what should the sanctions be for breaking the law
when so many don’t view the unborn as a person, and what provisions should be
made in the case of rape and other special circumstances). How about killing in a war if the war is not
a just one (and who decides whether a war is just or not)? Or take the command against stealing. What constitutes stealing, and what sorts of
stealing should we write laws about (Are excessive interest rates
stealing? Are certain executive salaries
outside the range of what is fair and just and therefore a form of stealing
from share-holders and employees? Who
decides?).
Even trickier are laws that pertain to marriage and sexual
behavior. Christians may agree, for
example, that gay sex and therefore gay marriage are wrong, but they may in
good conscience disagree on the best way to advance the cause of traditional
marriage in our culture. Some may
earnestly believe that legislation is not the way to go, that it will only
drive gay people from the church; others may be convinced that legislation is
the way to go. And how, even if
Christians all agreed that gay sex should be forbidden by law, would such laws be enforced?
So the answer to the “which law” question is nuanced. Christians should think and talk about the
question, refining their thinking and knowing that they may well have to live
with the fact that they will come out in different places on the question in
particular instances. For this reason, I
believe that pastors, speaking on behalf of Christ from the pulpit, should be
very reluctant to dictate on the question.
As private citizens, not speaking for Christ, but simply talking about
their own view in informal conversation, they can and should speak their
mind.