Talking PoliticsBy Harold Heie

Christians need a better way of voicing their political opinions

After earning a Ph.D. in mechanical and aerospace engineering, Harold Heie learned he loved to teach and served 40 years as a math professor and administrator at four Christian colleges, including Northwestern, where he was vice president for academic affairs from 1980 to 1988. A senior fellow at the Center for Christian Studies at Gordon College and the Council for Christian Colleges & Universities, Heie is the author of Learning to Listen, Ready to Talk: A Pilgrimage Toward Peacemaking (iUniverse 2007) and a co-editor of Christians Engaging Culture: A Better Way (Cascadia Publishing, forthcoming 2009). He lives in Orange City.

For many Christians voting in the 2004 election, the primary moral issues were abortion and gay marriage. While these remain important issues, there is a growing recognition among Christians and other “values voters” that there are additional important moral issues that impact one’s politics.

Increasingly, Christians are voicing concern about issues like poverty, social justice, global climate change, an ailing criminal justice system, health care, and quality education for all children.

A Christian’s position on each of these issues is deeply informed by one’s values. A myth—which is thankfully dying—is that religious people want to bring their values into political discussions, while secularists are neutral. Not true!

All human beings have value commitments informed by their worldview beliefs, whether they are religious or secular. Politicians do not check their values at the door when they enter the halls of Congress. So there is no compelling reason for keeping our expression of “religious values” in the private realm. Political discussion should be an even playing field, where all values can be expressed and considered.

The expanded list of moral issues—and the recognition that all citizens have value commitments that inform their beliefs on these issues—is good news. But discussing these moral issues could be a nightmare if everyone, including Christians, decides to do politics as usual.

War of Words

The current political system is broken. As I see it, the root problem is a “fixed-position” model for discussion—as seen in legislative debates and media coverage of those debates.

In its starkest form, politicians on both sides of the aisle hold stubbornly to their party’s fixed position on an issue without any inclination to take even a small step toward the opposing position. The result is nasty verbal confrontation and the political gridlock so rampant today. Politicians model an unwillingness to listen to the contrary views of others. They refuse to be open to the possibility of learning from those with whom they disagree, with the goal of seeking common ground.

Christians are easily prone to fixed-position discussions. In fact, Christians often amplify verbal confrontation in political discussion. We argue “I have the truth—so there.” We too easily play the Bible trump card, bringing political conversations to a halt with “Here is what the Bible says about [the issue at hand], and that settles it.”

Of course, one’s position on an issue should be deeply informed by biblical understanding. But appealing to the Bible when talking with those who do not accept its authority will quickly end the conversation. Rather, Christians engaged in politics need to express their values in terms that are accessible and understandable to those who don’t share their faith. Only then is it possible to search for common ground.  

Listening, Learning, Loving

Christians need to model a better way of political discussion about the many moral issues our nation faces. The better way is to engage in respectful conversation with those who disagree with you—whether they are fellow Christians, people committed to other religious faiths, or secularists. To be respectful partners in conversation—in politics and everywhere else, including our homes and churches—we should:

• Listen well, ensuring that each person feels welcome to express his or her perspective on the issue at hand.
• Seek to understand different perspectives, religious or secular, by trying to understand the assumptions behind another's views and the reasons for our differences.
• Share our perspectives in a non-coercive way that invites further conversation with those who disagree.
• Seek some common ground with those who disagree with us, while also trying to shed more light on our differences.
• Demonstrate respect and concern for all participants in the conversation, even when significant common ground is hard to achieve due to irreconcilable differences in perspective.

My suggestion that Christians model respectful conversation in discussion—political and otherwise—is deeply informed by my understanding of the Christian faith. It is an expression of humility, to which all Christians are called. As finite, fallible human beings, we do not have a "God's eye" view of the truth. As I Corinthians 13:12 reminds us, one aspect of the human condition is that "we see through a glass darkly."

Respectful conversation also expresses love for others, another Christian calling (Matthew 22:37-40). Christian love is not coercive. To genuinely love includes providing a welcoming space for people to freely express their beliefs and then respectfully discussing disagreements we may have, being open to the gift of learning from one another.

By first listening and then responding respectfully to a person who disagrees with me, I will be able to present my Christian perspective on the issue at hand. At the same time, I will be loving the other person and opening the possibility for mutual learning.

What I propose won’t be easy. It requires that Christians be characterized by what is a very rare combination these days: commitment and openness. Religious scholar and author Ian Barbour describes this rare synergy in his definition of “religious maturity”: “It is by no means easy to hold beliefs for which you would be willing to die, and yet to remain open to new insights; but it is precisely such a combination of commitment and inquiry that constitutes religious maturity.”

This combination of commitment and openness is hard to find—in politics and everywhere else. Openness to the beliefs of others without commitment to your own too easily leads to relativism: You have your beliefs; I have mine—end of conversation. Commitment without openness too easily leads to fanaticism, even terrorism. As C. S. Lewis observed—and to which recent world events tragically testify: “Those who are readiest to die for a cause may easily become those who are readiest to kill for it.”

One of the most pressing needs in our world today is for human beings—Christians and all others—to embrace and live in the tension between commitment and openness. Christians committed to doing so in politics have the potential to be a significant redemptive influence.