How Should Christians Vote? (Part 1)

“If there were a nation of gods, it would be governed democratically. So perfect a government is unsuited to men.” - Jean Jacques Rousseau

Now that we have explored a little political theory, some history, and a bit of Christian doctrine it is a good time to begin delving more directly in the subject that has brought us here. As I have written about previously, there are those who would have us make a theocracy, there are also some Christian thinkers who would suggest withdrawing from the political realm altogether. Neither of these perspectives are sufficient for the world we live in today. In the Old Testament the LORD established moral, ritual, and political laws for the nation of Israel. This was because God was the head of state and the giver and sustainer of their spiritual and temporal lives. When Christ came, he fulfilled all aspects of the law (Matthew 5:17-20). He did not come to abolish it, but to fulfill it. So what does this mean for our discussion today? As J.I. Packer puts it, “The moral, judicial, and ritual law in the Mosaic books carried the message that life under God is to be seen and lived not compartmentally, but as a many-sided unity.” (1) Though our ultimate home is above, while on this earth our call is to live as Christ did, to be image bearers of him in all areas of our lives. We cannot compartmentalize our faith from our temporal citizenship. We are the reflection of our creator and savior, for those who call themselves Christians what we do here on earth not only has eternal implications for ourselves, but for all those who look on us and our witness. This is a high calling, and not one that should be flippantly tossed aside. Our citizenship above directly impacts our citizenship below. This means that how we vote, who we vote for, the policies we champion, and how we go about championing our causes is a reflection of our life in Christ. Just as there are many parts of the body of Christ, and we all have different callings, one may fulfill their God-given purpose by focusing on community action, social justice initiatives, or one may run for office. Since no aspect of political involvement is explicitly disallowed by scripture, any could theoretically be pursued. For the vast majority of us, being active, voting citizens will be our largest contribution to the political process in this country. We are uniquely positioned in the world, and within history, to have some power in choosing the rulers of our local government, state, and nation. This, however, comes with certain moral dilemmas that previous Christians did not have to deal with on this scale, such as:

• How do we elect someone to lead when we know all of us are sinful humans?

• Is it morally and ethically right to vote for a “lesser of two evils?”

• What kind of standard can/should we hold these secular leaders to?

• Should Christians be single-issue voters?

• Should we only vote for Christians?

• Should Christians vote at all?

As discussed in a previous post, the Divine Right of Kings was the cornerstone that all Christian monarchical governments were built on. This doctrine stated that the sovereign received the directive and right to rule directly from God, not from their subjects. There were also those who believed that this right was handed down genealogically directly from Adam as the first king. Since there have been many who refuted this throughout the ages, (2) I will not dwell on this much more than to reiterate the point that we are uniquely positioned. For the past 247 years this great American experiment (along with other democracies around the world) has had the unintended consequence of forcing Christians to think through political participation in ways we rarely had to before. This is not to say that we can or should wholly discard Christian political thought from before 1776. There is much to be gleaned from the writings of the early leaders and I plan to include many quotations from them. For instance, when writing about a ruler who has been in error and could be corrected, Gregory I recommends that those who are in the position to, should make a “humble suggestion to that effect.” (3) While many of us are not in the position to speak directly with our elected representatives, we thankfully live in a democratic society that allows us to write letters, make phone calls, go to offices, and most importantly vote. The vote is the most powerful tool in the hands of the citizenry to make suggestions on where we think changes need to be made. Therefore, voting, especially as it relates to the first three questions listed above, will be the main focus of the discussion today.

One of the only Biblical examples we have of people choosing a leader (4) comes from the story of Saul in 1 Samuel. When the people of Israel chafed under the judges and sons of Samuel they came as one voice asking for a king to be appointed over them. God pointed out that this request was not a rejection of Samuel, but a rejection of God himself (1 Samuel 8:7). Their first loyalty and love was meant to be to God, but the people cried out “make us like the other nations, give us a king!” God gave in to their desires, which ultimately turned for his glory, but at the expense of many Jewish lives, peace, and their witness to the world around them. Just as Christians today, the nation of Israel in the Old Testament was meant to be a people “set apart for the Lord.” Yet they craved political expediency, and threw aside what set them apart from everyone else - sole devotion to God as Lord, the King over all, for a man who threw temper tantrums and constantly turned his back on God. Gregory I again drew a conclusion from this passage, along with Hosea 13:11, that from the beginning the Jews received a hypocrite as king. Through their rejection and God’s wrath at their request we can infer that “God assigns us rulers to fit our deserts, we may infer from their performance how to weigh our own worth… The qualities of rulers then, are assigned as their subjects deserve.” (5)

As then, God certainly still knows the outcomes and has his hand on every election, from the smallest school board to the presidency. Unlike the world Gregory I resided in, we have the functional power to select our leader so in choosing do we select one that we aspire to or one that reflects us in our wretchedness? Since we know that we are all sinners, that we are all hypocrites at some level, it is inevitable that our elected leaders will be hypocrites as well. However, it is my firm belief that when choosing a leader we should not choose one who represents those qualities that we find most base in all of us, but one who aspires to, and inspires all to rise above who we often fail to be. It is low hanging fruit, but over the course of the past few years I sometimes heard Christians say that President Trump was our “Saul” or “Cyrus,” that the Democrats fought dirty so we needed someone to fight back and win, which has recently been labeled as the most important thing though “winning” an election is nowhere to be found in scripture. This comparison still confuses me, because even a cursory reading of the Bible shows that Saul was not a blessing to the people. He led them in battle, he even won some fights for them, but at the end he drew them away from God. The Kingdom of Israel was not left better for having asked for Saul. Cyrus, again, was not the original plan. He came into the story because the people of God rejected God and his ways. They turned their back on God’s purpose for them in this world, and were sent into exile until they repented… Not something to aspire to. Our response should not be to read these stories and think “yes, give us Saul, give us Cyrus!” We should be crying out for more of God! We should be seeking God first and foremost. When voting for a leader for our nation, the first and best thing to do is examine our own hearts. To searchingly pray for wisdom, revival, and righteousness in our own hearts. If we truly receive the ruler we deserve, our posture should be one of humble contrition as we seek to bring ourselves into right relationship with our true King. We cannot control those who do not know Christ, but what is within our power is first seeking holiness, then determining a temporary temporal candidate to vote for.

Beyond seeking first the kingdom of God, voting for a particular candidate can start with one simple question: do they claim to be a Christian? Even beyond directly claiming to be a Christian, do they use the Bible as the source of some of their actions, do they claim to be a “defender of the Christian faith,” or does the church more broadly elevate them to a position as the “church’s candidate?” While it is impossible to know the exact status of another's heart in relation to Christ, as Christians we can certainly gain a sense of the authenticity of their faith. If they claim Christ our next logical questions to ask should be, does their life exhibit the fruits of the Spirit, or do they seem to gratify the desires of the flesh (Galatians 5)? Do they seem to be among those who Jesus counted as “blessed” in the Beatitudes (Matthew 5)? Though not a direct comparison, do they roughly fit the qualifications for leaders within the church as laid out in Titus and in the other Epistles? A political office is not a church position, but if a politician is claiming to be a Christian they should look, walk, and talk like a Christian. It is not something that can be compartmentalized. Of those who deceive and act righteous, yet are evil at heart Titus states: “They profess to know God, but they deny him by their works. They are detestable, disobedient, unfit for any good work” (Titus 1:16). These are some tests that those of us with true faith can use to see if someone’s faith is genuine. If they fail that test then they are what I would call a false Christian. My great fear in voting for someone, with a primary reason being that they say that they are Christian yet they look nothing like Christ, is that our witness to the world will be destroyed.

I am a hypocrite, you are a hypocrite, we are all hypocrites, yet those who are in Christ are in the process of being sanctified. We were once dead in our sins, yet God came in and made us a new creation. We had nothing to do with that change. God breathed life into my dead soul, he changed, and is changing, my desires. It is not that my outward action is perfect, yet I strive toward that goal. Falling flat on my face each day, but hoping in a Savior that is infinitely stronger to hold me than I am in my failing. So this means, in Christ, I am humble, I am repentant, I am trusting in His grace every moment of every day. When I stand before someone who is not in Christ and state this position, it shows not my power, but Christ’s. When they see the humility of me admitting that, yes, I am a hypocrite, hopefully they see Christ who is reaching out with love. Jesus is always drawing those to himself that he wills, we do not know when the Spirit is moving so it is our duty to be ready in all seasons and situations to show Christ. As Paul says: “For though I am free from all, I have made myself a servant to all, that I might win more of them” (1 Corinthians 9:19).

It is our greatest purpose in life that we preach the gospel with our mouths and with our works so that we might save even one more from life separated from God. Not that our witness will always work, or that we will always see fruit, but that is not the point. Being an obedient servant to the will of God by glorifying him, loving him, and pointing others to him is the point… If this theoretical candidate claims to be in Christ, does seem to act like it, and I agree with their policy positions, I would likely vote for them. Because that is something I can defend. If their actions while in power exhibit the qualities listed above, that gives us a foundation to stand on, and it supports our claims while in conversation with non-believers. We can disagree on policy all day, that does not necessarily have bearing on the spiritual outcome of a discussion. But if a non-believer complains about a politician who claims to be a fellow Christ-follower, and they seem to be a true Christ-follower, that gives us a door to speak the truth with authority. Again the Apostle says:

“Working together with him, then, we appeal to you not to receive the grace of God in vain. For he says, ‘In a favorable time I listened to you, and in a day of salvation I have helped you.’ Behold, now is the favorable time; behold, now is the day of salvation. We put no obstacle in anyone’s way, so that no fault may be found with our ministry, but as servants of God we commend ourselves in every way: by great endurance, in afflictions, hardships, calamities, beatings, imprisonments, riots, labors, sleepless nights, hunger; by purity, knowledge, patience, kindness, the Holy Spirit, genuine love; by truthful speech, and the power of God; with the weapons of righteousness for the right hand and for the left; through honor and dishonor, through slander and praise. We are treated as impostors, and yet are true; as unknown, and yet well known; as dying, and behold, we live; as punished, and yet not killed; as sorrowful, yet always rejoicing; as poor, yet making many rich; as having nothing, yet possessing everything.” (2 Corinthians 6:1-10)

When speaking the truth in love, while supporting and demonstrating the true Spirit of Christ we give the Gospel a chance. We try our best to remove all human obstacles from someone and Christ. Not that the LORD needs our feeble attempts, but we are his chosen vessels of action in this world. I cannot claim to have eternal saving faith if I do not have faith that my life will be ok if an election is lost. Failing to demonstrate Christ, failing to walk how we talk, and supporting those who do so as well, puts obstacles in people's way and completely destroys our position of moral authority.

What do I say to a non-believer when they ask why I voted for someone who claims to be a Christian yet looks like the world? They would most certainly not frame the question in this way, it would likely be more of a statement of how we are all hypocrites. To which I would wholeheartedly agree as above, but how can I defend voting for a supposed Christian politician who exhibits more of the qualities of one who gratifies the desires of the flesh, as opposed to the fruits of the Spirit? I can defend hypocrisy with repentance, that is how a biblical Christian should look. In fact, humble repentance is one of the most beautiful examples of the gospel we can see this side of Heaven. But I cannot defend hypocrisy with unrepentance. Saint Anselm says:

“Disobedience not followed by penitence is more dangerous than obedience which in the hope of God’s mercy undertakes even that which seems impossible. Because, the power and merit of obedience, when that alone urges one into danger, either defends one from sin, or if perchance one does err, it is but a slight error if ever attended by repentance. But not one of the good deeds of him who lives in a state of disobedience is done without a stain being left upon it.” (6)

Do Christians of today truly believe that the works that come from those living in disobedience will stand the test? Even good deeds done from a place of sin will be destroyed by the stain left on them. Do I tell my non-Christian friends that I ignore the candidates' moral failings? I know they are a bad person, but does my agreement with their policy stance further the cause of Christ? On the day of judgment how will I give an account for this? Jesus states: “I tell you, on the day of judgment people will give account for every careless word they speak, for by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned” (Matthew 12:36-37). A little heavy for a post about voting, but we have to be aware that all we do in this life reverberates through eternity. When the world sees us, it is supposed to see a reflection of Christ. For those that are being sanctified that reflection is becoming clearer each day and it is in the truth of this reflection that our witness stands. When we support candidates that claim Christ yet look nothing like him, we demonstrate to the world that either our faith is weak in our supposed Savior, or that our Savior is too weak to do what we claim he can do. When Jesus taught the disciples to pray, the vertical aspects of that prayer, “hallowed be your name, your kingdom come, your will be done” point to the beginning and ending of all time. Eventually his Kingdom will come, but it will not be by any earthly power or political means. Our faith in these things coming to pass should not be built upon the sand of human politics.

If a "Christian" politician is found to be in some grievous sin, of lust, corruption, cruelty, or any other sin listed that we hold ourselves to; they should show a repentant heart, publicly admit their sin and publicly show penance. By this they would let the world know that their previous actions were not those of a Christian. If they refuse to do so, the church should be the first to call them out. We cannot sit idly by and let a politician drag the name of Christian through the mud. Too long has the church valued power over piety from those who call themselves Christian politicians. We have excused, and even encouraged, enmity, strife, fits of anger, rivalries, lies, and the list goes on! Gregory VII says, “All kings and princes of this earth who live not piously and in their deeds show not a becoming fear of God are ruled by demons and are sunk in miserable slavery. Such men desire to rule, not guided by the love of God, as priests are, for the glory of God and the profit of human souls, but to display their intolerable pride and to satisfy the lusts of their mind.” (7) Harsh words, but I do not think that any Christian would disagree and say that rulers who do not fear God are not slaves to sin.Thus we must make a distinction between those who fear God, and those who only pay lip service to that while living for their own prideful ambition.

I say that they must show penance publicly, I do not believe public repentance is a requirement for all Christians in other situations. However, when a politician claims to be a Christian, speaks at religious events, and justifies some of their policies on Christian principles as many today do, they have made their faith public. They have opened themselves up to judgment by the world, for better or worse, and as such they should be held to a higher standard when it comes to repenting of their sin. They must show that they are not ruled by pride, but by the holy humility and repentance that only comes from Christ. Furthermore, Paul states: “But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one. For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? God judges those outside. 'Purge the evil person from among you.'” (‭‭1 Corinthians‬ ‭5‬:‭11‬-‭13‬) If Paul exhorts believers to not even eat with unrepentant Christians, how do we justify voting for them?

Let me attempt an allegory to drive this point home. Suppose I have a tomato plant. Suppose I tell you I love this tomato plant, and that it produces the best, most delicious, tomatoes in the world. I don’t stop talking about how the tomatoes from this plant have changed my life. By eating them I am so much happier, healthier, as well as able to have more wisdom and discernment. Most importantly these tomatoes give me hope for the future, I know I will be able to eat them for the rest of my life and that they will give health and eternal happiness. Then suppose there is a county fair with a tomato contest. The judges in this contest want to see the best tomatoes, from the best tomato plants in the county. Curiously, instead of entering one of my tomatoes, from my supposedly wonderful tomato plant, I enter a tomato from my neighbor's plant, but claim it as my own. My neighbor’s tomatoes look somewhat similar to mine, taste a little bit like mine, but have none of the long-term benefits. They do not have the same health benefits, and while it gives some hope, it only lasts a few years and is certainly not eternal. When you ask me why I would do such a thing I say that I know that winning this contest in the county fair is the most important contest of our lives. I know my neighbor’s tomato is not like mine, but most importantly, I know it will win. My neighbor’s tomato looks, tastes, and has the qualities of tomatoes I know the judges want… Now suppose at some time after this county fair I attempt to sell you some of my tomatoes. How likely are you to take them, or even to continue listening to me extolling its virtues when you know that I didn’t even feel confident enough to enter them into the county fair? Would you not scoff in my face, and refute that my tomatoes are good with the fact that I myself did not think it was good enough. Your trust in me as the keeper of the tomatoes, and in my tomatoes themselves would rightfully be eradicated. I could not blame you if you never wanted to try them because I was such a poor representative of their goodness. Now what if, instead of entering my neighbors tomatoes, I indeed entered my own. Whether they win or lose the contest my vociferous praise of these tomatoes continued unabated. As you see me lose the contest you see and continue to hear my deep love and devotion to my tomatoes, would you not be the least bit curious to learn more about them? To hear more from my mouth about these tomatoes that even though I lost the contest I still love them and count them as worth more than anything else in the world. That staying loyal and true to my tomatoes is much more valuable than the fleeting praise of man. My praise still stands on their firm foundation, I did not cut the foundation out from under me by bowing to the wishes of the judges. Knowing that it was not I that was the foundation, but something much greater. Would not this confidence in my tomatoes compel you to seek and to taste for yourself the wonders that I claim?

Obviously this allegory is not perfect, but when we support politicians who do not represent what we supposedly live our lives for we destroy the very foundation that we stand on. The conclusion is simple: if a politician claims to be a Christian yet looks nothing like a Christ-follower in the process of being sanctified we cannot support them. There is simply too much at stake. As Christians, we have to do a better job of being ok with the thought of losing elections. To be clear, this is something that politicians from both parties are guilty of. Right now we have a president in office that claims to be a Christian, yet supports abortion. Right now in Tennessee we have an elected member of the House of Representatives who is a Republican and professed evangelical that is on the record having had multiple affairs, and encouraged his lovers to get abortions. These scandals barely registered as a blip in his bright red district full of evangelical voters. Again, Gregory VII when speaking of doing what is best for personal power versus what is best for the church states: “For it is evident that he who fails to provide to the best of his ability so great and necessary an advantage for our holy mother, the Church, does not love God and his neighbor as befits a Christian man. If this one virtue of charity be wanting, then whatever of good the man may do will lack all saving grace.” (8) Without saving grace, what is the point of anything we do on this earth?

Well, I hoped to answer the first three questions from the beginning of this post, and I got maybe half of the first one? But I think this is a good place to stop for today and continue the discussion next week. Thank you for reading this far if you did!

✝Editor’s Note: After writing this blog post I read a 2020 article from Pastor John Piper that has many of the same elements and lines of thought as the above. Although I do not explicitly remember reading it, I am sure because of my great admiration for Pastor John that in the lead up to the 2020 election I did. So in the course of writing my own blog post his article was within my subconscious and still holding a very real sway over my line of thinking. I hope the reader will see my post (and subsequent posts) as an accompaniment to and not any form of plagiarism of Pastor John. His article can be found here: https://www.desiringgod.org/articles/policies-persons-and-paths-to-ruin

1) Packer, J. I. (1989). Concise Theology: A Guide to Historic Christian Beliefs. Tyndale House Publishers, Inc.

2) For one of the most succinct refutations see: John Locke, Second Treatise of Government.

3) O’Donovan, O., & O’Donovan, J. L. (1999). From Irenaeus to Grotius: A Sourcebook in Christian Political Thought, 100-1625. Pg. 202

4) Although I understand that they did not elect Saul, they chose to have a king in place of God, so they did choose to have a human leader which is what we do.

5) O’Donovan, O., & O’Donovan, J. L. (1999). From Irenaeus to Grotius: A Sourcebook in Christian Political Thought, 100-1625. Pg. 201

6) Saint Anselm. (2012). Cur Deus Homo. Forgotten Books.

7) O’Donovan, O., & O’Donovan, J. L. (1999). From Irenaeus to Grotius: A Sourcebook in Christian Political Thought, 100-1625. Pg. 246

8) O’Donovan, O., & O’Donovan, J. L. (1999). From Irenaeus to Grotius: A Sourcebook in Christian Political Thought, 100-1625. Pg. 249