Some time ago I read Crunchy Cons by Rod Dreher. Then, more recently, I read God’s Politics by Jim Wallis. I initially expected the books to say similar things, but they certainly did not. Dreher argues that the modern take on “Conservativism” as envisioned by the current incarnation of the Republican Party is actually quite removed from many values traditional “Conservatives” might hold and that faith is a key element in moving again to towards true “Conservatism.” Wallis on the other hand, argues that “Liberals” need to learn to talk about faith so that they can win elections and still support abortion and homosexual unions. He of course doesn’t word it this bluntly, but this seems to me to be the core of his book. These messages are quite different, yet they cross many of the same lines and they’ve had me thinking about politics and faith for some time now.

Some of these thoughts were sparked again the other day as I was listening to NPR’s coverage of Congress’ flurry of activity just prior to the August recess. One of the issues they covered was the extension of state-level health care for children, known as the “S-Chip” program. The issue was fairly evenly split along “party lines” with the Democrats supporting extending the coverage, with several soundbites from Republicans opposing the extension, particularly New York’s petition to extend the coverage up to families making approximately $82,000/year.

At first glance, one might understand the Republican opposition to extending state-sponsored health care for children of families making almost $100,000 a year, but the issue is not as clear as one might initially expect (as it rarely is). It was pointed out, for example that the same health-care package that might cost a family of four approximately $20,000/year in one state might cost a family in another state $55,000/year. $55,000 out of $82,000 is quite a different story than just saying people making $82,000 want health care assistance. States have always had the option of filing for waivers based on their own economic issues and this was no exception other than that Republicans were using the bare numbers as political ammunition with no context

As I listened to the sound bites going back and forth, I really found myself disliking the Republican position and understanding the arguments of the people who so often say that the Republicans look out first (and possibly only) for the wealthy. I know, I know, I was drawn into the slant that NPR wanted to put on the story, but that slant didn’t seem as far-fetched to me as it once did. I really found myself wondering whether helping families care for their children was in fact a “liberal” issue after all. But on the other side of the issue, I’ve seen many welfare dependent families that have actually been disenchanted by the very programs that were supposed to help them. More welfare creates not only more government but more dependence upon government.

As a Christian, I believe in smaller government, but does that also mean I should not believe in welfare? I do believe that we have sometimes gone overboard, creating welfare-dependent families, who, for all of our good intentions, find themselves trapped in cycles of poverty. I do believe that much of the welfare system exists because many local churches (and Christians at the more basic level) have neglected their duty to care for the poor, orphans and widows (Matthew 25:40, James 1:27, etc.) and at first glance it seems extreme to offer assistance to families making $82,000/year while expanding government and taxes to do so. Truth be told, I appreciated points from both sides but was torn because I could not accept either argument as a whole.

What’s clear is that we as Christians must be willing to tackle difficult issues and pursue mercy alongside justice. As D.A. Carson says in Love in Hard Places: “we had better be more interested in effective results than in the slogans of the party faithful.” What’s clear is that there are very few very vocal people urging local churches to take action against poverty and even then the topic is brought up in politics, it is brought up as a political issue rather than one of compassion and duty. The result is that we have been left to wade through the political mire choosing the “lesser of two” evils while the spectre of “pure and undefiled religion” (James 1:27) shadows our every move.

It’s interesting that for all of the talk of faith and politics in books and even from 2008 Presidential candidates, on Capitol Hill, at least in the soundbites, it’s business as usual and even on such an issue as poverty reduction there was talk of the implications of faith on public policy. This pushes the issue further and points out that we as individual believers and communites of believers probably don’t live our faith out at the forefront of life as well.

• Read Love in Hard Places by D.A. Carson
• Read God’s Politics: Why the Right Gets It Wrong and the Left Doesn’t Get It by Jim Wallis
• Read Crunchy Cons by Rod Dreher