pages

Thursday, September 23, 2004

Presbyterian Politics and Israeli Regard

A very short time I ago I commented on how perhaps the Church should be even more political. What I meant was that perhaps the body of Christ and especially its individual organs should translate what they believe (as they claim) into their choices as they vote. If you believe in the Bible you believe abortion is wrong and if you beleive abortion is wrong that should affect how you vote. More immediately learned believers and leaders within a Church should and can take a public stand with these ideas.

I believe that that should have limitations; political power in the hands of certain Popes led to the Crusades.

The reason for limitations is most relevent in light of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)'s new movement against Israel. I believe that they are crossing lines. Rather than casting votes or affecting policy based on deep beliefs

The difference is that the Church and the Church body as defined in the Bible, or as seen through God's eyes is not divided into denominations based on differences in belief of various minutia. They are not meant to represent political blocs and under no circumstances was Simon Peter (arguably the first Pope, appointed leader of the early church by Christ) empowered to lead Christians in violent revolt to re-shape the policies of government.

The Church, as it is today, is divided into more than just the first Church, the Universal Church (which is the Catholic Church, not to be confused with the United Church or the Unitarians), and Protestant miscellany. It is still is one body under Christ but the administrative functions are... empowered in certain ways.

I believe that Christians should make a difference in this world and defend what is right because it is right. That is why our votes should be guided by our beliefs there and that our political beliefs should be stated if we truly wish to make a difference.

The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) isn't influencing politics the ways other moralistic movements do and isn't working so much as a Chritian should when he fulfills his democratic duties. The Church, in reference to the organization, is wielding power like a club over a matter of taste. Rather than stating spiritual and Biblically-based moral beliefs in a verbal manner or through voting they take an offensive against Israel, the birthplace of Christianity and basically the only place in the middle east where Christians can worship unmolested, because of a difference in belief regarding a military and national security manner within Israell. So members, not neccessarily as Christians, are asked to economically punish Israel? It's counterproductive and it's not exactly how Christians should act as Christians.

As citizens or people it's apropriate. To do so in the name of the Church is a miscommunication. I believe the Church as a body as its mission firmly planted in evangelism. I believe the Church, as each seperate institution as a Church, is the method through which we fulfill this mission. As Christians we may unite and stand against injustice.

As Christians I don't believe it's our place to unite as a group and to punish nations for differences of strategy. I believe what the Presbyterian Church is doing for Christians (and really against Christians) is akin to stabbing to stabbing oneself in the foot because you took a wrong turn.

No comments: