Well, the last element of the emerging church movement is the fact that most in the movement vote Democrat — which certainly separates them from much of evangelicalism. McKnight writes,
I don’t think the Democratic Party is worth a hoot, but its historic commitment to the poor and to centralizing government for social justice is what I think government should do. I don’t support abortion — in fact, I think it is immoral. I believe in civil rights, but I don’t believe homosexuality is God’s design. And, like many in the emerging movement, I think the Religious Right doesn’t see what it is doing.
McKnight is insightful enough to see one problem with this viewpoint —
Sometimes, however, when I look at emerging politics, I see Walter Rauschenbusch, the architect of the social gospel. Without trying to deny the spiritual gospel, he led his followers into the social gospel. The results were devastating for mainline Christianity’s ability to summon sinners to personal conversion. The results were also devastating for evangelical Christianity, which has itself struggled to maintain a proper balance.
I ask my fellow emerging Christians to maintain their missional and ecclesial focus, just as I urge my fellow evangelicals to engage in the social as well.
McKnight is unquestionably right to insist that efforts at social improvement through government be tempered by a commitment to personal and congregational mission. As soon as we see government as the solution — rather than Jesus — we’ve left our Biblical calling.
My view is that no spiritual movement should be associated with any human power. To be allied in any sense with either party strikes me as very dangerous.
I mean, the Christian right has made this mistake. And I think there’s a mistake in being too allied with the left (“too allied” being defined as allied at all). Both parties are blends of righteousness and evil, and while we have no choice but to vote for one candidate or the other — if we vote at all — we have to stay away from the temptation to see no evil in our own party.
And once we develop the discipline of seeing the evil in both parties, we find ourselves less and less allied with either — which is, I think, a good thing. Indeed, the church will be — by far — more influential as soon as it steps out of both parties and unites as a single Christ-centered movement pushing for the entire agenda of Jesus — rather than doing the most worldly thing possible: picking sides between two kinds of evil.
(2 Cor 6:14-17) Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness? 15 What harmony is there between Christ and Belial ? What does a believer have in common with an unbeliever? …
17 “Therefore come out from them and be separate, says the Lord. Touch no unclean thing, and I will receive you.”
Money quote:
"And once we develop the discipline of seeing the evil in both parties, we find ourselves less and less allied with either — which is, I think, a good thing. Indeed, the church will be — by far — more influential as soon as it steps out of both parties and unites as a single Christ-centered movement pushing for the entire agenda of Jesus — rather than doing the most worldly thing possible: picking sides between two kinds of evil."
Right you are, Jay. It is devastating to watch believers polarize over elections. It's not the disagreements in and of themselves but the vitriol that seems to go along with them. There is a certain political science professor at one of our fellowship schools who has been subject to all kinds of abuse for not supporting the "Christian candidate." No, he does not advocate gay marriage or abortion, he just doesn't think of them as the only issues of our society. And the way that people have responded to him has often been deplorable.