The Christian's Responsibility to Vote
In Romans 13, Paul tells us about the source of authority and political power: that, in essence, God ordains or chooses the people who are put in positions of leadership and authority. Some believe that this renders voting completely irrelevant, but I couldn't disagree more. Romans 13:4 says, "For [a political leader] is God's servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing," and this fits very well with the idea that I think the forefathers of our country had in mind: a government by the people and for the people, that would not run every aspect of our lives, but rather exist primarily to protect our freedom and ensure that people are held responsible if they "do wrong." Indeed, Romans 13:5 says, "Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience." The caveat, of course, is that if our leaders' policies contradict our conscience, we must put God first. That being said, I believe that part of this submission, in good conscience, is to exercise our right and responsibility to vote.
Scripturally speaking, if God chooses our leaders, then we can infer that it is by that very same wisdom that He has established a representative democracy for our country. We recognize through positional truth that God graces us with a specific and important role to play in carrying out His will here and now on earth; He has chosen us to be His hands and feet here on earth. What I mean by that, is that He gives us a unique role to play in His plan; His will is carried out when we agree to play our part and make it happen. Consider the examples of Abraham, Noah, Moses, Nehemiah, Joshua, Jonah, and others. None of these men just sat on their laurels and waited for God to "do His thing." They were called by Him, and answered that call by actively responding to it. 2 Chronicles 7:14 says, "if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land." Similar conditional propositions are at work in all of these cases: if we do our part, then God rewards our obedience. If someone chooses not to agree with God and carry out His will here on earth, it doesn't happen-usually to disastrous effect-not because God can't do it Himself, but because He chooses to use us as His agents. Building upon that idea, if God set up our government as one where we the people choose our own leaders, isn't it entirely possible that His will is for us to choose certain leaders, and that these leaders will be chosen only if we prayerfully consider who we should vote for?
God doesn't want us to simply pray for change, but to actually do something about it. We are called to be a people of action, to worship with the activity of our lives. To me, the argument that both candidates are poor choices is not an acceptable one. I doubt that many of the people in first-century Jerusalem cared much for the emperor of Rome, but the command holds the same. Matthew 22:15-22 can be interpreted in several ways. I see it to mean that money, since it has Caesar's likeness and name on it, belongs to him, and it is worthless to the Christian. We are not told to give Caesar the authority of God, or any authority over us at all for that matter, other than the laws which have been put in place. This being the case, the founding fathers' idea of what our government should be-an institution charged with protecting liberties and little more-fits well into this statement. We are not expected to bow before our leaders, but only submit to their authority in negative matters (this, by the way, stands in direct contradiction to the interpretation of the Warren court, which Obama agrees with). Still, we are charged with submitting to our government to a certain extent. Since a democracy requires votes of the people to operate, we must at least give our vote.
Hypothetically speaking, what if the vote was as clear-cut as a choice between a largely free society where the practice of any religion is protected on one hand, or a totalitarian society where we are not even legally allowed to be Christians? Would our attitudes change? Large changes in government are not always heralded in by revolutions; sometimes they just rely on a slow erosion of freedom. If you've ever visited the Holocaust museum in Washington, D.C., you may recall seeing a well-known poem by German pastor Rev. Martin Niemoeller, in which he writes about the rise to power of the Nazis in Germany. They came for various minority groups, one after the other, and he laments that he didn't speak up for any of these because he didn't belong to any of the groups. Finally, though, the Nazis came for him, and because he had not spoken up as the others were systematically taken, there was no one left to speak up for him. If we neglect our responsibility to speak up in the form of a vote, we could end up in the same place sooner than we think. But if we prayerfully consider our decision and cast our ballot, we can be a part of positive change here on earth. The final source of that change, of course, is God Himself, and we should pray for whomever our elected leaders should turn out to be.
Scripturally speaking, if God chooses our leaders, then we can infer that it is by that very same wisdom that He has established a representative democracy for our country. We recognize through positional truth that God graces us with a specific and important role to play in carrying out His will here and now on earth; He has chosen us to be His hands and feet here on earth. What I mean by that, is that He gives us a unique role to play in His plan; His will is carried out when we agree to play our part and make it happen. Consider the examples of Abraham, Noah, Moses, Nehemiah, Joshua, Jonah, and others. None of these men just sat on their laurels and waited for God to "do His thing." They were called by Him, and answered that call by actively responding to it. 2 Chronicles 7:14 says, "if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land." Similar conditional propositions are at work in all of these cases: if we do our part, then God rewards our obedience. If someone chooses not to agree with God and carry out His will here on earth, it doesn't happen-usually to disastrous effect-not because God can't do it Himself, but because He chooses to use us as His agents. Building upon that idea, if God set up our government as one where we the people choose our own leaders, isn't it entirely possible that His will is for us to choose certain leaders, and that these leaders will be chosen only if we prayerfully consider who we should vote for?
God doesn't want us to simply pray for change, but to actually do something about it. We are called to be a people of action, to worship with the activity of our lives. To me, the argument that both candidates are poor choices is not an acceptable one. I doubt that many of the people in first-century Jerusalem cared much for the emperor of Rome, but the command holds the same. Matthew 22:15-22 can be interpreted in several ways. I see it to mean that money, since it has Caesar's likeness and name on it, belongs to him, and it is worthless to the Christian. We are not told to give Caesar the authority of God, or any authority over us at all for that matter, other than the laws which have been put in place. This being the case, the founding fathers' idea of what our government should be-an institution charged with protecting liberties and little more-fits well into this statement. We are not expected to bow before our leaders, but only submit to their authority in negative matters (this, by the way, stands in direct contradiction to the interpretation of the Warren court, which Obama agrees with). Still, we are charged with submitting to our government to a certain extent. Since a democracy requires votes of the people to operate, we must at least give our vote.
Hypothetically speaking, what if the vote was as clear-cut as a choice between a largely free society where the practice of any religion is protected on one hand, or a totalitarian society where we are not even legally allowed to be Christians? Would our attitudes change? Large changes in government are not always heralded in by revolutions; sometimes they just rely on a slow erosion of freedom. If you've ever visited the Holocaust museum in Washington, D.C., you may recall seeing a well-known poem by German pastor Rev. Martin Niemoeller, in which he writes about the rise to power of the Nazis in Germany. They came for various minority groups, one after the other, and he laments that he didn't speak up for any of these because he didn't belong to any of the groups. Finally, though, the Nazis came for him, and because he had not spoken up as the others were systematically taken, there was no one left to speak up for him. If we neglect our responsibility to speak up in the form of a vote, we could end up in the same place sooner than we think. But if we prayerfully consider our decision and cast our ballot, we can be a part of positive change here on earth. The final source of that change, of course, is God Himself, and we should pray for whomever our elected leaders should turn out to be.