If I were a leader in government, even if I were an atheist, I would cultivate the support of Christians for public purposes – if I had good government projections for the people as policy. Christians are friends for government entities holding attainable ideals. No other cultural group in general society will be more loyal for social good. This support is based on biblical injunction; a personal feeling that government is an institution God favors; a social means for serving citizens needing services and equity; a way to carry through the injunctions to public cooperation for development of habitat; a protective device against crime and war threat; and, a means for preserving freedom within the context of nature’s limits. In the light of God’s common grace, all persons, no matter their creed, or absence thereof, are to be served equitably. Government is supposed to make laws that provide equity, protection and service for all the governed. Because humanity is at the top of creation, which includes an important image of God (personhood related to more than nature), it is assumed that the individual has rights that will not be denied no matter how an individual may conduct self within the boundaries of those rights. On such a basis is the injunction that a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty. Even so excellent a concept of government and equality of rights will have challenges from those selfish to challenge equity and freedom, so to use them to advance private purposes. Human depravity touches those in and out of government. Christians favor the ideal, and, if rightly instructed, will support those who seek it. God works for freedom with responsibility.
One of the problems in gaining the implications of the above is found in the somewhat shallow understanding of mankind functioning in society. For example: the tendency of North and South after the Civil War was that the South moved solidly for Democrats, and the North moved for Republicans – until the worst of the animosities of warfare were spent. There was that under force of State (unit of state as preference) versus National (unit in combined states as preference) solidarities. It had been a problem in moving from confederacy after the Revolutionary War to the Constitution of Federal Union with George Washington elected first president. Even in mid-twentieth century William Faulkner said he would favor the rights of Mississippi in any showdown with the national government. During the emerging power of the National, the percentage of adherents to churches was higher in percentages in the South than the North. In the shifting of views that gradually took place emerging strongly during the Franklin Roosevelt era, Democrats became stronger in the North and Republicans grew stronger in the South. Political preference shifted, but the Christian viewpoint tended to hold both North and South that Government should fit limited but effective force for public good. Conservative and Liberal (for government) in American identity by the mid-twentieth century were changed somewhat from that following the founding fathers. Definitions were changed. Human rights, smaller government, lower costs of government, greater responsibility on the public, and the like became points of greater interest and change in American Government. The conflict continues, most obviously in political parties. Christians want to serve, or should, any government that most fully adopts divine patterns of common grace whether led by pagan or Christian leaders.
Better analyses and recommendations in society are needed. Historians and students of government in social development need to clarify the forces that guide ordered governments. The point is not to place blame or extol virtue, but to find that process serving us best in society, whether theistic or neutral of faith. God’s concern continues for reducing the effects of human depravity, in God’s story of redemption, which is best communicated in a nation that is most free, is most respectful of God’s creation that includes the entirety of the human race and nature. The Church, by which we mean all true Christians, is supportive (or ought to be) of those who provide the righteous (right) pattern of government for all, devout or profane, free or restrictive, that functions for the good of the creation and the future. Serving rightly (righteously) is God’s way. It can be done, and Christian leaders can espouse it fairly to all. Persons, believing the pattern is rightly and equitably formed, need to do more to gain it than is presently the case. *Mark W. Lee, Sr. — 2016, 2020