Tag: politics

  • Allan Bevere: The President as Pastor-in-Chief?


    Words, sentences, and paragraphs have context and content. Often what we say reveals deeper things about our convictions than we realize when we utter them; and if we reflect upon what they actually reveal about us, we might wish we had not opened our mouths.
    It has been common for Donald Trump’s evangelical supporters to justify their support of a man of extremely questionable character by uttering the now familiar shibboleth that the POTUS is not the “pastor-in-chief” (a phrase first uttered in reference to President Obama). I think if we drill down beneath that phrase we will find something unacknowledged by those who have used it and also something quite unsavory. Let’s get underneath the topsoil, shall we?
    Read more …
    [slideshow_deploy id=’2564′]

  • Politics Moment: Rejecting the Liberal and Conservative Labels

    Energion owner Henry Neufeld interviews Allan R. Bevere, author of The Politics of Witness and the just released Colossians & Philemon: A Participatory Study Guide on the U. S. election and our response to it. This was recorded on Friday, July 15, 2016, before the coup attempt in Turkey, but the attack in Nice and relations between law enforcement and members of the community in the United States were included. Allan served for some time as a police chaplain.
     

  • Politics Moment: Chris Eyre on the Rapid Change of Prime Ministers in the UK

    Chris Eyre answers a few questions on British politics asked from an American perspective.

  • Politics Moment: Elgin Hushbeck, Jr. on the Status of the U. S. Election

    Energion owner Henry Neufeld interviewed Elgin Hushbeck, Jr. and asked him about the Clinton email scandal, the chances of the Republicans replacing Donald Trump at the last moment, and what is likely to happen next in general. Enjoy!
     

  • Politics Moment: British Labour Party

    This is the second politics moment for this week, in which I ask Chris Eyre about the nature and logistics of the leadership turmoil in the British Labour party.
     

  • Politics Moment: Brexit for Americans

    Global Christian Perspectives will be on break for the next 3-4 weeks, so during that time I will be posting some short interviews of political interest with the various participants in the GCP discussions.
    On Friday, July 1, 2016, I interviewed Chris Eyre in two parts, the first on understanding Brexit and the referendum and political process involved, the second on the current leadership turmoil in the British Labour party. The first part, on Brexit, is embedded below.

  • Can a Christian Politician Campaign as a Christian?

    by Allan Bevere

     
    [ene_ptp]By the title of this post I am not asking whether a Christian can campaign for office on some kind of Christian platform. The nature of my inquiry instead is given the rough and tumble and even nasty nature of the world of politics, can a politician who embraces Christian faith run a campaign that looks Christian in character?
    Many years ago, a parishioner of a church I was serving at the time asked me if I ever considered running for political office. I responded in somewhat glib fashion, “I deal with enough politics in the church as it is. Why would I want to intentionally set foot directly into the fray?”
    I have never and would never consider running for political office even locally, not only because I would be terrible at it, and even my supporters would want to throw me out long before serving one term, but as I have said in previous posts, the real political action isn’t taking place in Washington DC, or in local municipalities; the real political action is taking place in the church, God’s kingdom come on earth.
    But since I am a political animal and follow politics closely (which suggests that I probably need to get a life), I have given some thought over the years as to what a campaign for election would really look like if the one running made a conscious effort not to do anything of which Jesus would not approve?
    Let me first set a couple of things in context:
    First, while I very much believe in civility and that as a Christian civility is important, I do not think that the summation of Christian ethics and character is simply to be kind. Jesus did not die on the cross and rise again from the dead, so that I might be nice. Jesus himself became angry at injustice and hypocrisy. St. Paul was none too pleased with the Galatians. So, in this post I am not suggesting that anger and tough words are never acceptable for Christians. Of course, the Bible warns us to measure our words carefully. The problem is not anger per se, or tough words per se; the problem is that often the anger and harsh verbiage come at the wrong time or is expressed in the wrong way.
    Second, neither do I want to suggest that Christians cannot be part of the rough and tumble of political life precisely because it is rough and tumble by nature. Life by its very nature is rough and tumble. It’s not the rough and tumble that concerns me when it comes to political campaigns. What is of direct interest to me in this post is two-fold: the willful distortion and manipulation of facts that seem to go hand in hand with political campaigns, and the unjustified and often unproven attacks on an opponent’s character, both of which are questionable from a Christian perspective.
    First, everyone who follows politics closely knows that political critique of an opponent is almost always selective when it comes to the facts. One politician can accuse another of voting for a tax increase, when the whole truth of the matter is that the legislation voted for was part of a broader package of programs supported by the accuser herself. Or, one can insist that the nemesis being opposed voted for tax cuts for the rich, when the tax cuts also included cuts for the middle class with the latter fact conveniently being left out. This kind of willful distortion happens all the time, and I find it quite difficult to believe that Jesus would approve of such manipulation and distortion of the truth for the sake of political expediency.
    Second, is the inevitable attack on a person’s character during a campaign. It’s not enough to say that an opponent voted for health care reform and here are the reasons it was a bad idea, or that the challenger would have voted against it and here are the reasons that would have been a bad idea. Instead, both sides feel the need to assign nefarious motivations to their reasoning. My opponent supports death panels that will decide whether patients live or die, or my challenger doesn’t care about all the little children who have no health care. If they get sick, his remedy is for them to die quickly.
    Now this is not to say that politicians always do things from impure motives; all of us, at times, can support or oppose something based on questionable and selfish concerns. But such an accusation should have clear and definitive proof before it is made. But that is not what happens in politics. Indeed, what I find is that both sides of the political aisle, and Christians included, are all too willing to trash the character of those whose politics differ from theirs. The political philosophy seems to be, “If you don’t embrace my politics, you are bad!” Brothers and sisters in Christ, these things ought not to be for the followers of Jesus.
    And in connection to all of this is the negative campaigning that everyone says they will not do when the election season starts. But sooner or later almost everyone resorts to it because study after study shows two things: the American voters hate negative campaigning, and the American voters find such campaigning to be convincing. So whether such negative ads start because one politician is down in the polls or whether the politician in the lead has to respond with some negativity of her or his own, it is prevalent nonetheless. And I highly doubt that Jesus would approve of the character assassination of another.
    And related to this—what possible justification could any Christian give for making public embarrassing information about a political opponent’s past? Why would any Christian seek to humiliate someone else in such a way? And to respond, “Well that’s politics,” is not a Christian response. Is there anyone who is not sure what Jesus would do in this situation?
    So, even if I ever had a desire to run for political office, I would never do so because I do not think that I could successfully run a campaign in keeping with the character of Jesus Christ, and just maybe that is the real problem. It is entirely possible for a Christian to run a political campaign that would, in the final analysis, be very Christian in character, but it is quite doubtful that such a campaign would elect anyone.
    The number one concern when it comes to the politics of the nations is not truth or virtue—it is power fueled by money—and the end justifies the means.
    That is why my central political concern is the church and its mission in the world; for only the church is God’s true politic in the world… and when all is said and done the Democrats and Republicans will be left “waiting for the bus” as God’s kingdom passes them by on the way to new creation.
    [slideshow_deploy id=’2564′]

  • Politics as Usual?

    by Bob Cornwall

    PicI must admit that I’m a bit puzzled by the current political season? I may be a pastor, but I’ve always been interested in politics. I first got involved in politics as a ten-year-old. It was 1968. My parents were both active in the Republican Party. I got to spend time at the Republican headquarters and stood with the teenagers who lined the road when Richard Nixon came to town. We all wore sashes that declared “Nixon’s the One.” Four years later, as a fourteen-year-old, I went door-to-door for the party’s candidates. I was so interested in politics that I began to dream of a day when I could enter the political ring. I admit I was young and maybe naïve, but I believed that this was an honorable profession.
    I’m older now. I changed parties during seminary. I’m not quite as active in politics as I was as a fourteen-year-old, but despite everything I continue to believe that politics can be an honorable profession. At least I hope so. If not, then I fear for the country in which I have spent my life. There has always been a dark side to politics, but there was a time, or at least I thought there was, when people could sit down and work out their differences.
    As a Christian and as a religious leader I believe that people of faith can play a productive role in public life. But to do so, we need to recognize the importance of political pluralism. I have a responsibility to advocate for just laws. I have a responsibility to be a good citizen. I live in a democracy (a republican form), in which my vote has important implications. As I vote I should ask what my implications for the nation and the world that vote has.
    People like to complain about the state of our politics, but have we forgotten that those in positions of political leadership were put there by the citizens of this nation. Unfortunately, many citizens forgo their opportunity to cast a vote. Participation is extremely low. If Congress is dysfunctional or the courts seem unaccountable, could it be that we have been negligent in our voting patterns, especially in off-year elections?
    At the same time as some choose not to vote, others work to disenfranchise citizens. They make it difficult to vote due to limited polling places, inconvenient voting times, or placing barriers to getting registered. These burdens have hit those who poor and those whose ethnicity differs from the majority. I don’t think we should force people to vote, but I do think we need to take our citizenship seriously. If for no other reason, then out of concern for our neighbors, whomever they are and wherever they may live. That is, let us expand our neighborhoods to embrace the entirety of the community.
    I write this as a follower of Jesus who believes that my love for God can and should be expressed by my love for my neighbor. As this is the season of Lent and the journey takes us toward the cross, I’m ever mindful that Jesus was tortured and executed by the state. Jesus, I believe, identifies with the tortured and the executed. Thus, I should do the same.
    Like I said at the beginning, I’m puzzled by this political season. I hear lots of rhetoric that is rather unseemly. I hear candidates embrace torture and exclusion. Is this politics as usual? Am I naïve to believe that public service is honorable? I hope not! It is for this reason that I wrote the essays that form my book Faith in the Public Square, even as I continue to give to God my Ultimate Allegiance!
    [slideshow_deploy id=’2343′]

  • Is Something Wrong with Social Justice

    Is Something Wrong with Social Justice

    9781631990830We recently released a new book in the Topical Line Drives series, What is Wrong with Social Justice?. In it Elgin Hushbeck, Jr. presents his case that “social justice” is not actual justice. In fact, he claims, it is inimical to true justice.
    Energion author Bob LaRochelle has  a somewhat different view. While he appreciates the tone and quality of Elgin’s argument, he continues to disagree with the main point.
    Join the discussion on Bob’s blog or here.
    Also: Watch here for information on a Google Hangout on Air that will feature Elgin and Bob discussing their differences on this issue. The hangout will be on October 28 at 7 pm central time.

  • Joel Watts – Question 6 (Profit) – Answer

    Joel Watts – Question 6 (Profit) – Answer

    http://www.dreamstime.com/-image29189594

    Links:

    Question 6
    Elgin Hushbeck – Question 6 (Profit) – Answer
    For we do not aim to be rich merely for our own sakes, but for the sake of our children, our neighbors, friends and most of all, for our community. For the private fortunes of individuals are the wealth of the state. (Cicero, De Officiis)
    St. Thomas Aquinas cites Augustine in saying “The businessman who is eager for profit blasphemes at his losses, and he lies and swears falsely over the price of his goods. These, however, are the vices of the businessman himself, not of business in general, which can be conducted without these vices” (Summa Theologica II-II, 77, 4)
    For more of what could be considered my philosophical starting point, see here.
    1.) What is the value of profit as a motive for action in the marketplace and competition as a regulating force?
    The theology of the scientific theory of evolution is one benefiting us here, I believe. “Life will find a way” is a statement common in movies about dinosaurs resurrected for our benefit and the creators’ profits. But, in this Hollywood statement are tenets of great philosophical struggles. Life will find a way.
    Why must life find a way? Because the forces of non-life are always present and are the primary substance of the universe. As of yet, we have found life only on one planet, in one solar system, in one small part of the growing universe. Non-life is the constant of the universe. Yet, we have life.
    “Find.” Find implies motive. We must find a way because it is natural. Competition and push-back are those things that drive us in our need to find a way to survive.
    The same thing occurs with profit. Without the desire to live by what we make, we do not flourish as humans, but languish as natural beasts of the field. I believe in the concept of human flourishing, that of finding out who we are meant to be. I believe humans are naturally competitors. We compete against our siblings, against our schoolmates, and against one other in the pursuit of jobs, fame, and fortune. Profit and not material gain such as land, goats, and children is the modern goal of that pursuit. To deny, then, the pursuit of profit as a human need is to suggest we have somehow “become as the angels” have thus have need of nothing, not even love. The pursuit of profit is part of human flourishing.
    At small levels, competition does present a regulating force; however, when profits are too large and thus power too easily bought, competition is easily snuffed out. Even Adam Smith knew this. When profits are kept low, competition is naturally occurring because more people are able to invest in order to achieve profits. Further, when profits are kept low, this means consumers have more money to spend. But, to keep them low, one must employ external forces, such as government regulations.
    2.) Do you trust profit making organizations more than non-profit? Under what circumstances?
    This is a rather difficult question to ask, given the wide range of organizations under those banners. Even non-profits must make money in order to say afloat.
    I would venture to guess that the reasons many non-profits form as such are the tax laws. If we were to rectify them first, we might see the end of this dubious separation.
    As far as a matter of trust, I do not think I can fully apply that term to a non-human entity. Corporations are not persons, my friend. I do, however, have different expectations for the two groups.

Energion Direct
Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.