Kingdoms on Earth Revisited

I commented on my facebook wall at the end of last Saturday that the Bersih 2.0 march is over. I also raised the question whether Christians should be involved (in the context of Romans 13:1-7) and what would Jesus Do (WWJD) i.e. would Jesus has marched?

A dear brother has answered in a posting to Micah Mandate which he has graciously given me permission to repost here.

Bersih 2.0 – Would Jesus have marched?

11 July 2011 | TinyURL ^TM

Dear [Alex],
In your Facebook reference to Bersih 2.0, you said that you are glad the rally is over and you asked the question, “Is this the Christian approach to do things? What will Jesus do?” I guess the sight of so-called “street battles” in our capital city between protestors and the police are too distasteful to you and unbecoming behaviour for a follower of Christ. Furthermore it looks too much like a revolt against a sitting government in which case it would be against the words of Paul in Romans 13:1 that we must all submit to governing authorities.

In case you were not aware, I was there to support Bersih and what it stands for. Let me try to explain to you why I went.

In doing voters’ registration for the past year and a half, I have come across too many irregularities firsthand – people who tried to register over and over again but failed for no reason, people who voted before but deregistered, again for no reason. People in the same house but assigned to different constituencies, people who never registered but found themselves registered in some Felda scheme they have never heard before. I can go on and on.

What about gerry-mandering and malapportionment of constituencies? BN strongholds, fewer voters per seat; opposition strongholds, more voters per seat. E.g. Kapar 112K voters PKR; Putrajaya 6K voters BN. Generally, this has been the pattern nationwide. Boundaries are modified after each election to reflect change in the voting patterns. In fact, the way it is, even if the majority of people voted for opposition by 55% to 45%, BN will still form the government. Is this fair?

What about election fraud? The abuse of postal votes where police and military personnel have to vote under duress of being witnessed by their superiors and their votes are used to shore up key BN losing candidates. The buying of votes is now part of the BN election strategic now, doesn’t mind that it is a clear violation of election rules. Remember the famous “You help me, I help you” offer by the PM, not once but over and over again? He promised and delivered that if you vote for his candidate today, he will personally sign the cheque for millions of ringgit tomorrow, if not, don’t bother to come and collect. Is this right just because the PM does it? It is a known fact that huge amount of money were used to buy votes at by-elections these past few years. Power outages during crucial counting of ballots so that bags of ballots could be swapped are regular occurrences.

The fact that 4.3 million eligible M’sians are not registered as voters (about 1/3 of total eligible voters) when they could be registered at a click of a mouse like in S’pore where every citizen automatically becomes registered on their 21st birthday, is yet another concern. Yet, M’sians have to find out themselves how to register, find a place to register, fill up a form in duplicate, submit it, crossing their fingers hoping that SPR would not reject them. They won’t even be notified if they are registered or not, they have to go online to check on their own. Why should it be so in this day and age of technological advancement? The problem is not the lack of technology or funds but the lack of political will to want to register these unregistered voters. Could it be that these 4.3 million are mainly young voters who are more open to change and are better informed than their parents?

There are many, many more issues as demanded by Bersih 2.0 but I won’t go on.
For me, it is an issue of justice. There is a perversion of justice here. And believe me, the people who made up the Bersih 2.0 committee are not thugs or unlearned people. They have tried for years to get the authorities to reform our electoral system but to no avail. Taking to the streets for a peaceful demo is our constitutional right and that only after all other avenues have been exhausted.

I was there. I saw with my own eyes how the PDRM assaulted ordinary men and women without provocation or warning. The protestors were outstanding in their discipline – 50,000 over people and not a single property damage reported, no littering because we picked up our own rubbish and put them in the trash can. There were no street battles or unruly protestors provoking the police as portrayed by the government and the mainstream media. Despite the continuous assault by the police with tear gas and water cannons, the people did not fight back. There was no anger on the faces of the protestors, no fear, no despondency, just a quiet determination to be heard and for our rights to be upheld. I salute these pakciks, makciks, aunties and uncles, the young generation who came out despite the intimidation and unprecedented attempt by the authority to lock down an entire city. I am very proud to counted amongst them.

As we marched together, one elderly Malay gentleman turned to me, looking into my Chinese eyes, he said in Malay “This is the real 1Malaysia”, I agreed and said it is. It is not a slogan, not a logo, not a jingle without any reality. It is a walk. When people come together not to defend their own race or religion but to ask for their most fundamental right to be respected, the right to justice and to be heard, we are one, for we are. When every now and then we broke out into singing our national anthem, it was never more meaningful, especially when we came to the part “Rakyat hidup bersatu dan maju” – The People live in unity and in progress. We are Malaysians, we are all God’s creation, loved by Him.

For too long our nation has been divided when after fifty-three years of independence we should be more united and integrated. I still remember those times before politicians put their dirty fingers into the cultural pot and muddle it up, we were more 1Malaysia. There was no slogan or logo or PR firms to tell us how to be united but just a human decency to respect and accept each other’s differences, be it religion, race or social standing. Most of my best friends in school were people not of my own race and we never thought or talk in term of race or religion. We were Malaysian.

But today, after 30 years of “engineering”, we are so polarised that we have formed our own little “ghettos”, cut off from people not of our own race. We do not understand each other’s cultures, traditions, manners and customs like we used to or we should. In many of us, there is a deep-seated suspicion, resentment, and some, even hatred of the other races. We have forgotten that we are just people, who by divine providence, found ourselves sharing the same homeland. This is OUR home.

That day, as I marched with my fellow Malaysians, it all came back to me – we are as we should be, just honest, decent human beings who care for the future of this nation. I saw elderly pakciks and makciks being rudely spoken to, roughly man-handled and some arrested for simply being there. Have we lost our decency that we have to behave this way even if we are only discharging our duties? The protestors were peaceful but the provocateurs were the police. Have they forgotten who pays for their monthly salaries and who chose the political masters they are now serving? The very people they are now calling and treating as traitors, chasing them around like animals, firing tear gas and water cannons on! We are the rakyat, as you are.

Coming back to your question, [Alex], what would Jesus do? If Jesus were to be living in this country and in this time, what would He have done? If he had known about the injustice done to the people through a flawed and corrupt electoral system, would Jesus have kept quiet and looked away and perhaps plan to migrate to “greener pastures”? If he had wanted to speak up but was told that he needed to apply for a permit and that permit was turned down, would he have just shrugged his shoulders and said, “I tried”? Would Jesus have said, “But the Bible said I have to submit to all governing authority, I can’t go against the government”? You know what. If Jesus had turned the other cheek to all the wrongs and evil in his days and submitted to the governing authorities, He would probably have lived to a ripe old age, gotten married and have children and grandchildren. So would all his disciples – Peter, Paul, Stephen, James, and countless others, they would not have been killed by the governing authorities. Jesus was framed by the politicians of his day, the Pharisees, accused of high treason and executed or as we would like to call it, crucified. Most of the early disciples were martyred because they spoke up, that is, became a “security risk” to the governing authorities. They refused to submit to their demands to be silent and they were executed.

But [Alex], you may be saying, “But Jesus didn’t hold illegal rallies and go on street marches”. Well, he spoke to thousands when he delivered the Sermon on the Mount and when He fed thousands with only two loaves and five fishes. And wherever He went, hundreds, if not thousands followed Him. But He has permit, you say. Well, we don’t know if He has permit or not, though I doubt it. What if He needed to apply for permit and was not given? Would He still have delivered the Sermon on the Mount and fed thousands? I’ve a feeling that Jesus would still have gone ahead. What if in the middle of delivering the sermon, the governing authorities fired tear gas into the crowd and charged at them with batons, turning an otherwise peaceful gathering into a riotous scene. Was Jesus to be blamed though He offered no resistance to the police?

As a man, Jesus was a fire-brand speaker and a radical social reformer and He has asked us to follow in His footsteps. You are right to ask, “What would Jesus do?” I am just not too sure that I would agree with your assumption that Jesus would not be involved in the Bersih 2.0 rally. It was just as well that tear gas and water cannons were not invented during Jesus’ time, otherwise the Gospel pages would be rather scant and most of His speeches would have been interrupted by those same governing authorities He was condemning. Providentially for us, He was able to speak freely even though it offended the authority greatly, enough to plot His death.

[Alex], it is my hope that you would realise that it is not easy for us as Christians to live a pluralistic society like ours and to try and figure out what Jesus would do if He was here. One thing for sure, Jesus was not one to avoid controversies or be cowed by those who opposed Him or is one who avoided taking action when the occasion calls for it; I think of Him overturning the money-changers’ tables in the Temple.

Let me close with this quote by Jesus when He was asked about John the Baptist. In Mathew 11:12 – And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffers violence, and the violent take it by force. By “violent” I am sure Jesus does not mean those who would hurt others just to get what they want but Jesus meant that in order to advance the kingdom of heaven, it must be by people who have an inner character quality of quiet determination and discipline to pursue after that which God has called him to. With that I conclude and hope even if taking to the streets is not your cup of tea, you would at least stand with us for what Jesus stood for – freedom, justice, fairplay and love, for that is what Bersih 2.0 is about.

Another thing that I realised when I marched with fellow Malaysians of all races and religion, I am staking a claim to the future of Malaysian on behalf of my children and their children and on behalf of my race and religion. For now we are still defined by our race and religion but may there come a day when we are not. Maybe I will write to you again to explain further about this. Till then, take care.

Your brother in Christ,

more

What do you think?

.

Kingdom of Heaven, Kingdoms on Earth

Christians and Governments
Text: Rom. 13:1-7

Sermon statement
Christians are to take care of the Kingdom of Heaven and let God take care of the kingdoms on earth.

read more

.

Evangelicalism and World Domination?

There is an interesting article on evangelicalism The Possibility of a New Evangelical Movement in the U.S.A by Paul N. Markham (Western Kentucky University) published by Journal of Religion and Society, vol 12 (2010). The author started with a brief history of the development of evangelicalism and ends with its recent association with the Religious Right. However, he sees a shift of evangelicalism from the Religious Right with its association with politics. It is not a shift from social activism but into another form of social activism. The author concludes,

The “crisis” among new evangelicals appears evident as they increasingly disassociate from the Religious Right and take up a progressive theological agenda oriented toward social justice – with an emphasis on a broad range of social issues. What is less clear is how they develop a shared narrative and means of sustained informal interaction. Despite the lack of an apparent organizational center, there are significant commonalities among the new evangelicals. The most significant of these shared aims is their growing agenda, which places an emphasis on social justice issues and the degree to which their theological expression is intimately bound to the exercise of social responsibility. 

This description of evangelicalism is hardly compatible with another description of evangelicalism by Iain Buchanan's The Armies of God: A Study in Militant Christianity (Penang, Malaysia: Citizen International, 2010).

The book blurb at the back reads,

This book looks at the ways that Western politics incorporate, and exploit, religion. In particular, it examines the rise of US evangelicalism as a force in world affairs. It looks in detail at some of the most powerful agencies involved, and at the way they operate - often as US government proxies - in such countries as Iraq, Thailand, and India...Armies of God is a plea for us to realize just how pervasive (and unspoken) is the role of religion in power politics - and how destructive we have allowed it to be.

This book offers an interesting perspectives on North American Christianity. I would not refer to it as "evangelicalism" as the author did because evangelicalism is a movement with a wide varieties of Christian denominations and groupings. The thesis that evangelicalism is a hegemony is therefore false as there is no one entity that can be classified thus. This will also means that to classify World Vision, Full Gospel Businessman's Fellowship, Habitat for Humanity, Haggai Institute and Youth with a Mission (YWAM) as evangelicals are not tenable, much less that these organizations are evangelical organizations to control the world.

That evangelicalism as a movement and North American Christianity as a whole has been used and exploited by politicians is not surprising. That is why many Christians are leaving the Religious Right. But to insinuate that evangelicals are plotting with USA leaders to dominate the world is a bit far fetch. Religions are often the victims rather than the culprit when it comes to world domination.

Two more comments about this book. First is who is Iain Buchanan? It is surprising that the author of such an expose did not tell the readers who he or she is. Second is that most of his or her references are from the Internet. That the bulk of his or her arguments are supported by writings published on the Internet do not give credibility to the thesis because they are not peer-reviewed and thus do not carry the same weightage as from published sources.

From a learning point of view, I have benefited from this book. It allows me to see North American Christianity from another point of view. Though it is controversial in the way some events are interpreted, it reminds me again that different people see the world differently because of their worldview filters.

.

Christians in Politics in Malaysia

This is an interesting article in the Sunday Star in Malaysia.

Sunday September 19, 2010

Christians & politics

By ANDREW SIA

Opinions are divided on Christian involvement in politics, but most people agree on the need to fight for justice.

starmag@thestar.com.my

SINCE the “political tsunami” of March 8, 2008, Christians have become increasingly vocal on national issues. However, according to the Malaysian Census of 2000, only 10% of Malaysia’s population is Christian, with the majority being in Sabah and Sarawak (where they make up 40% of the population).

But what Christians lack in numbers, they may make up for in influence. As one local Christian politician put it, “Christians may not be so numerous but we are usually well-educated, middle-class and well-connected, especially in urban society. The moment something happens, it will be widely discussed in cell group meetings or put up on the Internet.”

Malaysian Christians praying for the Pope John Paul in 2005. Prayer aside, Christians in the country have begun to speak up and take action to contribute towards nation-building. – File photo

read more.

.

A Month of National Holidays

In his Grace@Work Commentary GRACEWORKS MAIL 31/10 August 6, 2010 Edition.
(A ministry of Graceworks: www.graceworks.com.sg) Rev Dr Tan Soo Inn writes about National Day Celebration in August. For Singapore, their National Day is on 9 August and for Malaysia it is on 31 August. I like what he writes about the needed pro-active role of the Singaporean and Malaysian churches.

The church represents the Kingdom of God in society. In the words of Newbigin, the church must function as the "hermeneutic (interpret, unfold the significance . . . ) of the gospel." (The Gospel in a Pluralist Society, 222 ff) Newbigin also suggests six characteristics that will mark church communities that are trying to flesh out the gospel for society. (The Gospel in a Pluralist Society, 227 - 233)

1. It will be a community of praise.
" The Christian congregation . . . is a place where people find their true freedom, their true dignity, and their true equality in reverence to One who is worthy of all the praise we can offer." (228)

2. It will be a community of truth.
"A Christian congregation is a community in which through the constant remembering and rehearsing of the true story of human nature and destiny, an attitude of healthy scepticism can be sustained, a scepticism which enables one to take part in the life of society without being bemused and deluded by its own beliefs about itself. " (229)

3. It will be a community that does not live for itself but is deeply involved in the concerns of its neighbourhood.
" . . . the local congregation (must be) perceived in its own neighbourhood as the place from which good news overflows in good action . . ." (229)

4. It will be a community where men and women are prepared for and sustained in the exercise of the priesthood in the world.
"It is in the context of secular affairs that the mighty power released into the world through the work of Christ is to be manifested. . . . (The validity of our preaching) carry weight only when they are validated by the way in which Christians are actually behaving and using their influence in public life." (230)

5. It will be a community of mutual responsibility.
"If the Church is to be effective in advocating and achieving a new social order in the nation, it must itself be a new social order." (231)

6. It will be a community of hope.
" . . . the gospel offers an understanding of the human situation which makes it possible to be filled with a hope which is both eager and patient even in the most hopeless situations." (232)

read more here

Newbigin is an importance influence in my own thinking about the church and I am glad that Soo Inn brought him into the discussion about the hermeneutic role of the churches in Singapore and Malaysia.

Stanley Martin Hauerwas: "Dietrich Bonhoeffer on Truth & Politics"

Dietrich Bonhoeffer is well known for his heroic opposition to the Nazis. Dr. Hauerwas' lecture examines Bonhoeffer's understanding of lying and why it's approporiate to hold politics to a higher standard of truthful speech. This relationship between truth and politics is a particular challenge for democratic regimes. Series: "Burke Lectureship on Religion & Society"

,

Malaysian Politics, Money and the Church

One of the many fallout from the Sibu by-election in Sawawak in which the ruling coalition Barisan Nasional (BN) lost is the the money given to four Methodist churches in Sibu just before the polling day.

Haris Ibrahim a Muslim made some insightful comments in Desperately seeking Peter. The Methodist church is in need of your ‘rock-like’ foundation

While I share the sentiments of Goh Keat Peng in his blog ‘We don’t take such money’

I respectfully appeal to the churches directly involved in this episode:
If it isn’t true and it didn’t happen, then please say so.
If it is true, offered and received, give it all back.
WE DON’T WANT SUCH MONEY. Let the church be poor (as a church mouse) but
as the Book of Proverbs say, poor but happy keeping a clear conscience.

I also respectfully appeal to all Malaysian churches through the Christian Federation of Malaysia:
Please let us send a clear, unmistakeable and irrevocable message to the country and the world. As citizens and tax-payers we deserve to practise and observe our religious faith in peaceful and orderly fashion and we should get reasonable amounts of resources to enable us to do so. Any sitting government is welcome to sit down with us, discuss and understand in a timely and civil way our religion and our community’s needs and concerns regarding places of worship, burial grounds and our bibles in Bahasa Malaysia as well as how we will continue to serve all Malaysians in need through our social services. Provide the facilities and resources justly due to us but please don’t give us “special grants” only at the eve of by-elections. WE DON’T TAKE SUCH MONEY. No, thank you. Never under such circumstances.

However it must be noted that in Malaysia, Christians often only get a break before by-elections or the general elections - approval of building plans, conversion of land for religious use or permit for large Christian gatherings. Is that Malaysian politics or God answering prayers?

.

Anthony Egan on South Africa

In 2-11 February 1990, a ‘long week’ that shook the world, beginning with the unbanning of the African National Congress and other political movements and culminating with Nelson Mandela’s release from Pollsmoor Prison. This is akin to the tearing down of the Berlin wall, events that we never imagine will happen. Here Jesuit Anthony Egan SJ reflects on the event.

iWitness: South Africa: Twenty years on
Memories of the seminal events that took place in South Africa twenty years ago this week, which ended with Nelson Mandela’s release from prison on 11 February 1990, will live long in the minds of those who experienced the atmosphere in the country at the time. Anthony Egan SJ describes the reaction to this crucial chapter in the struggle against apartheid. How did people of faith see these events as a sign of the coming of God’s kingdom?

Read >>

.

Barry Wain's Malaysian Maverick

Barry Wain (2009) Malaysian Maverick: Mahathir Mohamad in Turbulent Times, New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan

Barry Wain is Writer-in-Residence at the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies in Singapore. He was a former editor of The Asian Wall Street Journal. An Australian, Wain has spent 37 years as a journalist in Asia.

The book blurb at the back cover,

The grandson of an Indian immigrant and the first Malay commoner to become prime minister of Malaysia, Mahathir Mohamad turned the Muslim-majority Southeast Asia country into one of the developing world's most successful economies. During his 22 years in power he adopted pragmatic economic policies alongside repressive political measures, and showed that Islam was compatible with representative government and modernization...But in mixing business and politics, Mahathir encouraged cronyism and failed to prevent the spread of corruption. Authoritative and impatient, he jailed opponents, sacked rivals and undermined institutions as he pursued his obsession with development...

This is an interesting book that is written by a journalist. His aim was to present and review ex Malaysian prime minister's term of office from the grassroot level.

Angry in Malaysia

My dear brother in Christ, Dr Tan Soo Inn wrote an interesting commentary on the situation in Malaysia. I am reposting it here with his permission.


GRACE@WORK MAIL 29/09
July 17th, 2009 Edition.
This ecommentary is sent out free but your donations help this ministry in
its commitment to bring truth to life. Details below.
(Grace@Work Mail is a ministry of Graceworks: www.graceworks.com.sg)


Commentary: Angry in Malaysia
By Soo-Inn Tan


"My dear brothers, take note of this: Everyone should be quick to listen, slow
to speak and slow to become angry, for man's anger does not bring about
the righteous life that God desires. Therefore, get rid of all moral filth and
the evil that is so prevalent and humbly accept the word planted in you,
which can save you." (James 1:19-21 TNIV)



If you are a follower of Jesus in Malaysia, you are probably angry. Consider
the following.

1. Two Muslim journalists infiltrate a Catholic church incognito. They had
heard that a number of Muslims had been converted to Christianity through
this church. They found no evidence of such conversions. During mass they
come forward to take the communion wafer. They did not swallow and held
the wafer in their mouths till they had left the church building. They then
spitted out the wafer and took pictures. They then published an article about
their "adventure" together with pictures of the spitted out communion wafer.
To date there is no reprimand from any official government body. Police
reports have been made.

I come from a free church tradition. I believe the communion bread remains
bread though I believe the Spirit of Christ is at the Lord's Supper. This is
besides the point. Malaysia is a multi racial, multi religious country where the
constitution protects the dignity of all religions. The silence from the
government is deafening. Imagine if some Christian journalists had thrown
the Koran on the floor, took pictures, and published the story. Of course we
should forgive our enemies. But there are other issues involved, including
holding the government responsible to its call to protect the dignity of all
religions.

2. In recent times the Malaysian Anti Corruption Commission (MACC) has
been aggressively investigating public servants from opposition parties. (Of
course whether a party is considered an opposition party depends on your
perspective. In truth the "opposition" parties form the duly elected
governments in a number of states.) Christians should be at the forefront of
any fight against corruption. But when politicians from the governing party
are rarely investigated while so many politicians from "opposition" parties
are investigated, something is seriously wrong.

The glaring double standard gives lie to the fact that the Anti Corruption
Commission is a non partisan body committed to eradicate corruption
wherever it is found. It seems that the Commission is but a political tool of
the ruling party.

3. And now we learn that a political aide, who was interrogated by the
Commission, has fallen to his death from the 14th floor of the Anti
Corruption Headquarters. He had been taken to the MACC office at 6pm on
Wednesday (July 15th) to assist in the Commission's investigation into the
alleged abuse of constituency development funds by several state
assemblymen. Did he jump? Was he pushed? We do not know.

What we know is this. He was interrogated till 3.45am in the morning. In the
words of Goh Keat Peng:

[Why was a witness being held for questioning for ten hours and only
released at 3.45am? What kind of case is it and what is the urgency of the
case in question that the witness had to be deprived of sleep and forcibly
kept awake till 3.45am? Was the nation deemed to be in grave danger had
the witness in question been sent home at a respectable time and asked to
report again for questioning the next morning?

The nation could endure long years of waiting over so many other much
longer pending cases involving so much more public money and have much
greater weight in public interest but this particular case could not wait for
the next morning when the witness in question would have been fresher and
better rested?
(http://www.themicahmandate.org/2009/07/i-cannot-remain-neutral-about-i
ssues-of-morality/)]

Like I said if you are a follower of Jesus in Malaysia you should be angry. I
am. Which is why I remember James 1:19-21. I know righteous anger can
quickly become unrighteous. I know that when I get angry my discernment
is compromised. I am more vulnerable to manipulation. I become rash and
speak and act prematurely. When I am angry, I need to bear in mind at least
two things:

1. Unrighteous anger will not accomplish God's purposes. If our concern is to
be agents of God's work, unrighteous anger is out.

2. When we are consumed by anger we only see the evil "out there." We
stop working at the evil inside us. We forget the ongoing call to "get rid of all
moral filth and the evil that is so prevalent" in our own lives.

However fear of unrighteous anger should not paralyse us from doing what
is right. Followers of Jesus are called to speak up against injustice.

["Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves,
for the rights of all who are destitute.
Speak up and judge fairly;
defend the rights of the poor and needy."
(Proverbs 31:8-9 TNIV)]

And as John the Baptist discovered, "speaking truth to power" may demand
the highest price (Matthew 14:1-12). There is a time to speak up. There is a
time to act. There is a time for righteous anger. But we must guard our
hearts and ensure that all we say and do flow out of the twin loves for God
and neighbour (Mark 12:28-31).

Whatever righteous anger may look like, it must come from a heart that has
such a deep passion for God that we are deeply pained that His ways are
violated. It must come from a heart with such a deep compassion for human
beings (of whatever race or religious background) that we are roused when
human life is violated. And it must come from a heart that is always
suspicious of its own righteousness.

John Calvin and his Politics

There have been much misconceptions about John Calvin and his politics in the governance of Geneva. Richard Hooker in Reformation: John Calvin gives us some background

Geneva had been under the rule of the House of Savoy, but the Genevans successfully overthrew the Savoys and the local bishop-prince of Geneva in the waning years of the 1520's. The Genevans, however, unlike the citizens of Zurich, Bern, Basel, and other cities that became Protestant in the 1520's, were not German-speakers but primarily French-speakers. As such, they did not have close cultural ties with the reformed churches in Germany and Switzerland. The Protestant canton of Bern, however, was determined to see Protestantism spread throughout Switzerland. In 1533, Bern sent Protestant reformers to convert Geneva into a Protestant city; after considerable conflict, Geneva officially became Protestant in 1535.

Calvin, by now a successful lawyer, was invited to Geneva to build the new Reformed church. Calvin's efforts radically changed the face of Protestantism, for he directly addressed issues that early Reformers didn't know how or didn't want to answer.

His most important work involved the organization of church governance and the social organization of the church and the city. He was, in fact, the first major political thinker to model social organization entirely on biblical principles. At first his reforms did not go over well. He addressed the issue of church governance by creating leaders within the new church; he himself developed a catechism designed to impose doctrine on all the members of the church. He and Guillaume Farel (1489-1565) imposed a strict moral code on the citizens of Geneva; this moral code was derived from a literal reading of Christian scriptures. Naturally, the people of Geneva believed that they had thrown away one church only to see it replaced by an identical twin; in particular, they saw Calvin's reforms as imposing a new form of papacy on the people, only with different names and different people.

So the Genevans tossed him out. In early 1538, Calvin and the Protestant reformers were exiled from Geneva...

In 1540 a new crop of city officials in Geneva invited Calvin back to the city. As soon as he arrived he set about revolutionizing Genevan society. His most important innovation was the incorporation of the church into city government; he immediately helped to restructure municipal government so that clergy would be involved in municipal decisions, particularly in disciplining the populace. He imposed a hierarchy on the Genevan church and began a series of statute reforms to impose a strict and uncompromising moral code on the city.

read more

Another perspective is from Dr W. Stanford Reid, Emeritus Professor University of Guelph, Canada writing in John Calvin: One of the Fathers of Modern Democracy

According to Calvin, the church has a role to play with regard to the state. The church is responsible, Calvin believed, to set forth the biblical teaching concerning the state and its function. Yet, and this is basic to Calvin’s thought, the church is not to rule the state. Calvin believed in a theocracy, not an ecclesiocracy. Both the rulers of the church and the civil magistrates are directly responsible to God for their actions, but they do not rule over each other. The church may admonish the magistrate as to what God’s law says, but cannot determine how that law is to be applied in matters of civil jurisdiction. The magistrate may advise the church concerning matters relating to civil affairs, but cannot force the church to conform to civil rules in its teachings, worship, or government. In this, Calvin laid down very clearly the principle of the separation of the functions of church and state. They are related and mutually supportive, but also independent of each other. This means, if the state attempts to interfere in the operation of the church or seeks to restrict its spiritual work, the church has the right and duty to disobey, although it will have to suffer the consequences of such disobedience.

At the same time, Calvin believed that the church’s form of government was to be fundamentally democratic. In this way it served as a pattern for the state to imitate. He did not believe that ministers and other church officials should be imposed on the church by the civil government or by a small group of wealthy or aristocratic individuals. Instead, he believed that ministers, elders, and deacons should be appointed by the people of the church as a whole.

read more

Reid regards John Calvin as one of influential founders of modern democracy.

What do you think?

.

Calvinism and the Political System of USA

Calvinism and Liberty

Reformed influences on America's founding principles.

Michael W. McConnell | posted 2/06/2009

A fascinating book review on the influence of early Calvinism in the formation of the US political system.

The Reformation of Rights: Law, Religion, and Human Rights in Early Modern Calvinism John Witte, Jr. Cambridge Univ. Press, 2007 388 pp., $29.99, paper

King George III blamed the American Revolution on Calvinist clergymen, whom he called "the black regiment"—a reference to the austere clerical robes worn by New England preachers. He was not far wrong. But few educated Americans now are aware of the Calvinist contribution to founding-generation ideals of republicanism, equality, and resistance to tyranny. If asked, most modern Americans would attribute 18th-century political liberalism to the secular Enlightenment, and thus to the decline in religious belief among people of the West. Most think the idea of the social contract, along with the right of the people to rebel against tyranny, originated with John Locke's Second Treatise of Government, published in 1790. Some, whose knowledge of Puritanism extends no farther than the Salem witch trials, imagine that Calvinist theology must have opposed democracy and liberty.

John Witte's new book, The Reformation of Rights: Law, Religion, and Human Rights in Early Modern Calvinism, will therefore come as an eye-opener to many. According to Witte, Reformed Protestants developed a biblically based theory of social contract (or "covenant"), together with ideas of popular sovereignty, fundamental rights, and the legitimacy of revolution, more than 100 years before Locke. Witte offers the essential scholarly caveats—Calvinism was not the only source of ideas of political freedom; when Calvinists were in power they did not always extend the benefits of freedom to others—but fundamentally, he presents the claim that Reformed Protestantism was the "seedbed" of American constitutionalism: "American religious, ecclesiastical, associational, and political liberty were grounded in fundamental Puritan ideas of conscience, confession, community, and commonwealth." In fact, as he points out, "every one of the guarantees in the 1791 Bill of Rights had already been formulated in the prior two centuries," along with "a number of the core ideas of American constitutionalism—popular sovereignty, federalism, separation of powers, checks and balances, church and state, and more" by "Calvinist theologians and jurists."

read more

Jesus for President

Amid all the buzz of politics and elections, Jesus for President is a refreshing reminder that our ultimate hope lies not in partisan political options but in the Jesus who gave his life for us. Politics for ordinary radicals who want to love the world into the kingdom of God.

Jesus for President is a radical manifesto to awaken the Christian political imagination, reminding us that our ultimate hope lies not in partisan political options but in Jesus and the incarnation of the peculiar politic of the church as a people “set apart” from this world.

A fresh look at Christianity and empire, Jesus for President transcends questions of “Should I vote or not?” and “Which candidate?” by thinking creatively about the fundamental issues of faith and allegiance. It’s written for those who seek to follow Jesus, rediscover the spirit of the early church, and incarnate the kingdom of God.

Book description from Zondervan