Hubben and Why I May not Vote in the Upcoming Elections

I just finished (actually, it's taking me so long to read or blog lately, that I really finished it weeks ago but am just getting around to finishing this blog) reading Dostoevsky, Kierkegaard, Nietzsche and Kafka by William Hubben. Not an especially long read, the book is a brief analysis of the life and works of four wildly important existentialists. Hubben does a good job outlining a type of progression of thought, beginning with Sören Kierkegaard. Dostoevsky is next, then the nihilism of Friedrich Nietzsche, and finally Franz Kafka desperate in hoplessness and lack of meaning.

One amazing insight of these "Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse," as Hubben refers to them, is how insightful they are about 19th century Christianity. Each, for different reasons, found the merging of Christianity and government to be ultimately distasteful and a complete rejection of what Christianity has always stood for. Though Dostoevsky's Russian nationalism is emphasized as a theme, this paragraph on Nietzsche said much:

"In the vein of Kierkegaard's thinking, with which he was unacquainted, Nietzsche, the Antichrist, is indignant about the unholy fusion of state and religion, as he also believes that the state prevents the Single One from attaining his dignity. Original Christianity taught man not to conform to the state and even to separate himself from his family for the sake of the spirit. Our statesmen, 'anti-Chrisitians in their deeds,' have clearly changed this. They attend communion. they promote 'Christian' thinking in their speeches and schools. The chasm between the world and the faith of Jesus has been eliminated. Now the Christian is a soldier, a judge, a patriot who knows nothing about non-resistance to evil. He defends his honor instead of accepting humiliations; he is as proud as though he had never heard of the humble Galilean's teachings, and the Church has become precisely that institution Jesus had wanted to abolish." (108)

Assuming that Hubben's treatment of Nietzsche's thoughts on Christianity are accurate (and from what I've read of Nietzsche, they certainly don't contradict his thoughts on Jesus), I think this paragraph has some weight. Though Nietzsche's relationship to Christianity is, at the very least, antagonistic, he does make a particularly insightful observation of the result of the fusion of government and Christianity--that it damages Christianity. Though I don't think the statement "separate himself from family for the sake of the spirit" is accurate, the notion that the statesmen misunderstand Christianity is absolutely true.

In my time I have noticed that this fusion is most often used as a manipulation tactic by both of the main political parties. Each has a propensity to proclaim itself "Christian," and loves to relate its planks to Christian values. This consistently sets Christians in a strange position in which they feel the need to "vote their Christian values," but find themselves voting for a person whom they do not understand, know, or trust, because they have assumed that his views are really the "Christian" views.

Let me start another way. I have always been turned off by businesses which advertise on their signs or in their Yellow Page ads that they are "Christian" businesses. You find plumber ads with the ichthus symbol and lawyer signs with Bible verses. But what does one have to do with the other? What does the business owner gain from such a maneuver? Is he promoting the Kingdom of God? Is our call to advertise that we are Christians or is the call to behave like Christ? My conclusion is that the reason business owners do this is that so many Christians are convinced that Christianity is supporting Christian entertainment and frequenting Christian businesses to promote other Christians.

Similarly, politicians love to talk about their "faith." But I've never heard a politician describe a faith that I felt I had much in common with. I have voted pro-life since I was old enough to pull a lever because I felt my Christian faith necessitated that. Yet, those who claimed to be pro-life never acted on their pro-life positions. And, on top of that, the global situation has only worstened as those I have voted for have made decisions which have now turned into other problems.

The bottom line is, I'm not sure I'm voting this time for two reasons. One, as a citizen I doubt very much I'm going to find someone I really can get behind. Two, as a Christian, I don't think it's the point!

I think Bonhoeffer's thoughts on Luther are relevant to my thinking on this now:

"It was the Reformation that broke asunder the unity of the faith. That was not because Luther willed it so. He was indeed wholly concerned for the true unity of the Church. But the word of the Bible forced him to the conclusion that the unity of the Church can lie only in Jesus Christ as He lives in His word and sacrament, and not in any political power. In this way he shattered the whole structure of the Church, which was founded upon Roman tradition. Only a Pope who submitted unreservedly to the word of the Bible could be the shepherd of a united Christendom. But the Pope, bound as he was by tradition, was incapable of submission, and that is why the unity of Christendom was destroyed. The corpus christianum is resolved into its true constituents, the corpus Christi and the world. In His Church Christ rules not by the sword but solely with His word. Unity of Faith exists only in obedience to the true word of Jesus Christ. But the sword is the property of the secular government, which in its own way, i the proper discharge of its office, also serves the same Lord Jesus Christ. There are two kingdoms which so long as the world continues, must neither be mixed together nor yet torn asunder. There is the kingdom of the preached word of God, and there is the kingdom of the sword. The kingdom of the Church, and the kingdom of the world. The realm of the spiritual office, and the realm of secular government. The sword can never bring about the unity of the Church and of the faith. Preaching can never govern the nations. But the Lord of both kingdoms is the God who is made manifest in Jesus Christ (Ethics, 95-96)."

For what it is worth, I'm not certain how closely Bonhoeffer's synopsis of Luther on the topic actually mirrors his own views, but I like the paradox offered here.

This is a disjointed thought--but I've found my time so precious lately! I'm busy and loving my new job.

Final thought. Please pray as I'm working on a new article submisson. The last few weeks have done more to solidify some of my thinking on church leadership and gender roles than any time I have spend studying. I am considering writing an article rethinking 1 Timothy 2-3 based on my recent sermons. You can check them out by clicking the link to my podcasts.

Thanks!