Faith/Politics Meditations: The Spectrum of Faith-to-life Application

          It’s helpful, in any discussion, to make sure you’re talking about the same terms. Often, two sides of a debate will struggle to communicate or understand one another because they could be talking about the same term but assuming very different connotations, aspects or even denotations.

          That said, it should be realized that there’s a diverse spectrum of how a religious faith is assumed to apply to one’s lifestyle. And few seem to be taking that into account when arguing about religious liberty, whether or not it’s being violated, and its role in politics. Mostly, the ends of the spectrum are brought up. Both of these ends, I believe, Christians should avoid, because neither are the proper application of biblical principles to one’s individual daily life.

          On one end, there is politicized faith. The media and critics of the church are too familiar with politicized faith, those who vehemently lobby select biblical and other values (admittedly, some of them self-serving) into the halls of power, all the while leaving behind other biblical values (including humility and servanthood) behind. Politicized faith plays so much into political ideology and activity that the rest of the Bible’s relevance almost disappears and the faith itself is seemingly downplayed into a set of political stances. It should be no surprise, then, that people write literature attempting to disprove the historical and theological claims of the whole Bible just to, oddly, justify a secondary political or ideological stance. Some are afraid of how religious liberty will be used by those with politicized faith.

          On the other end, there is privatized faith. Privatized faith is just that: private. You can barely tell, if at all, that someone with a private faith belongs to a certain religion because their whole lifestyle doesn’t remotely differ from others, like a mild hobbyist who follows a TV show. Those, for example, that merely attend church but don’t apply the Bible’s teachings to their daily life (who are sometimes called Christian “nominals”) have what could be called a privatized faith. If all faiths practiced in the land of the free were privatized, then few laws (if any) would be considered violations of religious liberty (and more lawmakers’ and political leaders’ jobs would be a lot easier). But they’re obviously not.

          Both lawmakers and practicing religious folk (Christians included) need to find a healthy place in the middle of this spectrum of faith-to-life application so that, out of a selfless love for our neighbors and our country, we can better navigate the bumps on the road to unity with our diverse differences. Otherwise, more and more tragic stories of the failed integration of faith and culture will occur.