In a few days, our beloved country will be back to the ballot to elect her leaders. In the era of social media, opinion is not in short supply. Individuals and groups alike are ensuring that their voices are heard loudest and frequently. The church has not been left behind. Church leaders and members continue to express opinion. This raises important questions and concerns. When a church leader expresses political opinion or preference, is it personal or institutional? How should the institutional Church deal with political issues? There are pitfalls here. Christians tend to believe that because the Bible is “on their side,” they can speak with authority on every issue. When Christians use this broad brush, they become simply another political interest group, pontificating on matters which they often are woefully uninformed.
Arguably, it is a physical impossibility for the Church (all believers) to enter into a similar political ideology. The Church consists of believing, committed disciples, in all parts of the world. I opine that it will be a physical impossibility for them all to get together worldwide, or even at the local level to reach a common mind on an item of political policy, preference or ideology. In fact, even at denominational level, which does not represent the Church as we know it, it is very difficult to build consensus on local church leave alone national political matters. Sometimes it is even a nightmare to choose which colour to paint on the church walls!
We must honestly admit that no matter how big and wealthy our denominations are; they are not the Church. Denominational affiliations are not entirely based on unchangeable New Testament canonical teachings that make every adherent of that particular denomination duty bound to uphold. Believers and Church leaders are free to hold different political convictions especially where the issues in question are not in direct conflict with the Word of God. Even when denominational leaders issue political statements, they should bear clear in mind that they are either speaking for themselves or a particular group of people who hold that particular view and hopefully have given him or her the mandate to do so on their behalf. It is naïve to think that such statements are acceptable by the whole Church or even a particular denomination as an entity or even a congregation. This explains why denominations, local congregations and groups occasionally split right down the middle in opinion and practice in political matters among others.
Nevertheless, Christians can get together in groups, conferences and movements to formulate Christian policies for economic, social and political action. This is where denominations belong. In this sense, they are not speaking and acting in the name of the Church, but in the name of the group they represent. In this scenario, differences are not over canonical matters. Divergent views, therefore, can and should be tolerated and sacrificed at the altar of the unity of the Body of Christ which is His Church.
The Church, as a body which purports to speak God’s truth, should speak only to those matters in which fidelity to Holy Scriptures itself make it necessary to speak out. The Church should claim no superior wisdom except in those areas where she is uniquely able to bring biblically informed truth to the debate.
When Christians express themselves, either as individuals or groups, they should be as well informed as possible on the subject. Although it is better to run the risk of being mistaken at times than to keep silent on political issues, it is better still to be well informed and avoid making a fool out of ourselves. We should not allow ourselves to be stampeded into silence by politicians and experts who may pose as being the only ones who know and claim exclusive rights to comment on matters of national social, political and economic importance. It is surprising how often politicians and experts are wrong, especially when it is not their primary motive to discover and do the will of God.
There should never be allowed a time when the Body of Christ is split into camps over political issues. Christians ought to be able to discuss political issues together with tolerance and in love. The Church should be the place where people of differing political viewpoints come together to talk, to disagree respectfully, to discover reasons for their differences, to laugh at themselves, to find common ground and even to learn from each other. The Church should be the place where genuine; truth seeking conversations about real issues take place in an atmosphere free from exaggeration, innuendo, and character assassination. The Church should be the objective and sober referee in the political process, helping all persons and parties to seek the greater good, rather than to settle for life in the political gutter.
This ideal is extremely desirable in an ethno-politically polarized country like Kenya. Its absence could easily lead to serious inter and intra denominational rifts. It must be remembered that during the campaigns for the referendum vote, it was sad to watch Church leaders change their political positions because of pressure related to ethnic alignment. The weeks that followed saw a flurry of meetings to heal rifts that had emerged between individual Church leaders and within denominations and congregations.
It is an understatement to say that the nation itself had experienced ethnic divisions in proportions not experienced in a long time. In the face of political differences, contradictions and struggle, the Church preaches peace and co-operation among people holding various political views. She also acknowledges the presence of various political convictions among her members, clergy and laity, except for such as to lead clearly to actions contradicting the faith and moral norms of the Church tradition.
The views expressed here are purely the author’s and not of the Green Pastures Tabernacle Church (GPTC) or any bodies the author and GPTC are associated and/or affiliated to. This an edited excerpt from a Thesis for a Master’s Degree in Christian Leadership Studies undertaken in 2006 by the author.