Religion and politics: are they a good mix? Depends on how mixed they are: like Indian rojak (ingredients are separate from and dipped into the gravy in bowl when necessary) or Chinese rojak (prawn paste all well-mixed with ingredients).
I am a Christian leader, a pastor to be specific. I have beliefs and convictions, some of which are peripheral and I am prepared to be open to varying interpretations. Some of these beliefs are so deeply held that I am willing to forgo almost anything to uphold them. These beliefs and convictions inform me and direct and explain my actions. They are an important part of who I am.
As I believe, so I am, and so I speak, and teach. As a Christian leader, I speak the truth of God in love and as accurately as I can interpret it with God’s help, whether in small group conversations, classroom teaching or in the bigger setting of Sunday worship. I have spoken what I believe the message of God is with regards to all kinds of moral and societal issues. I have talked about abortion, euthanasia, justice, treatment of domestic helpers and other matters over the pulpit. I am in full agreement to this Obama sound byte: “Secularists are wrong when they ask believers to leave their religion at the door before entering into the public square.” Which of course is not what Lee Hsien Loong was asking the believers to do. He was asking for tolerance and sensitivity.
It is within the right of a pastor to speak of his convictions and opinions on all matters that govern and concern our life. And we can certainly do it in the pulpit as well as in the public square as well. Many USA pastors encourage their members to write emails to their representatives to signal to the federal government their views on various moral matters like abortion and homosexuality. I doubt I’ll ever do this, as I wonder if it is of any use at all in the Singapore context. And I also think it gets tacky when the pastor tries to rally the congregation to vote in a certain way or to join a political party. Some megachurch pastors in the Philippines have politicians beholden to them because they are able to command the loyalty of sizeable voting members and they are not averse to mobilize members to vote certain politicians into office. I think if you want to do this get out of the pastorate and be a politician.
But I do wonder about the rightness of taking things further in situations of great oppression and injustice that impoverishes and tramples the general population? Like what Cardinal Sin did when he rallied the Filipino people to rise against Marcos. And I well remember the nuns and priests standing and walking with the people in their protests. I admit to admiring such courage. What about the Buddhist monks protesting against the tyranny of the military junta in Myanmar? Doesn’t these extenuating circumstances justify a mixture of religion and politics? My fellow pastors in Malaysia seem to have taken a more active voice and role in politics than the Singapore bishops would permit. Doesn’t the corruption and injustice so blatantly paraded to all in Malaysia warrant and justify, indeed sanctify such involvement?
Looks like for now I am a Chinese who prefers just Indian rojak. 
However if pastors are put in situations of palpable suffering and intolerable oppression, like ole Moses was, who knows what magic, what fire may surface from the wilderness of passivity?
by Poach
23 Aug 2009 at 21:55
Blogpastor,
For me, I’d like to be able to integrate and hybridize being a contemplative Christian and an activist Christian. I am eagerly looking forward to heaven but desire to see God’s way of living realized here on earth.
Brian McLaren’s “Finding Our Way Again: The Return of the Ancient Practices” and Barbara Brown Taylor’s “An Altar in the World: A Georgraphy of Faith” are my present helpful companions and I recommend them.
Just because I believe I am headed to heaven does not mean I can neglect working for justice and peace for those who are not getting any justice or peace, food and water, school and work, safety and medical care, etc.
My faith is personal and it constrains me to publicly express (in word and in action) it so that I can say with others, “the Kingdom of God is here today.”
I do not have the right to oppress people with my personal beliefs but I do have the responsibility to live my life the way Jesus shows me how to each and every day.
by Steven Sim
23 Aug 2009 at 23:51
Blogpastor, Thanks for highlighting this “crossroad issue” (aptly represented by your picture above) for christians, past and modern.
Perhaps it would be easier if we say if pastors ought not use their ministry for partisan politics (but granted, no hard and fast rule), just like a civil servant/doctor should not. But to say pastors should not have a voice in politics (i know you didn’t say that) or indeed “take things further in situation of great oppression & injustice” is rather a half gospel.
The God of the bible is a god who concern himself not with religiosity, indeed, the religiosity and the spirituality of the old Hebrew prophets were, how to live together in this God’s world. That’s socio-political.
As an organization, I respect the idea that the church is circumstanced by its bishop/head, especially for coherence. But I believe individual pastors/christians should have awareness of God’s demand for justice and righteousness that they will act when the need arise, whether the bishop approves or not. I mean, ideally the bishop as a follower of Christ and foremost at that, ought to have a keener sense of such God’s requirement and act first. But with or without, just like Luther who went against his bosses despite not willing to do so, had to because of conscience and God’s word.
And being political does not mean going against the government, or indeed supporting the government all the time. I think it’s about being prophetic, telling forth the good news of God’s rule, where justice and peace and harmony and reconcilliation and righteousness prevails. More than that, I must write a blog post I guess…
But thanks for highlighting this again!
Steven Sim
by BolivianBeat
24 Aug 2009 at 17:47
ALL of us indulge in partisan politics! Even the indifferent are unknowingly involved in partisan politics. Their indifference maintains the status quo. And the status quo benefits, those, especially the elite, who defend a system which benefits them.
by alwyn
25 Aug 2009 at 16:02
i did up a rough chart (http://alwynlau.blogspot.com/2009/05/charting-faith-politics.html) on faith & politics a few months back, as a way of mapping out the differences among Christians on the topic. Clearly Christians have differing priorities about ‘what it means to be a Christian’ – it’s good news, though, that social justice has come to the fore in recent years.
by Blogpastor
26 Aug 2009 at 21:28
Hear ye! hear ye!
by Blogpastor
26 Aug 2009 at 21:31
Thanks Steven,you are a Christian involved in politics because you really believe in God’s cause of justice and righteousness. I respect that.
by Blogpastor
26 Aug 2009 at 21:33
Interesting but sobering take.
by Blogpastor
26 Aug 2009 at 21:43
Hi Alwyn, thanks for the enlightening diagram showing the categories of Political withdrawal, Advocacy and protest, and Creative reconciliation. It seems to me all these are valid responses and a Christian may even fit into more than one of the categories.
by journeyman
27 Aug 2009 at 18:22
Interesting that Jesus was found to be a threat to established social order by the pharisees and the ruling elite of his time. I wonder if He wer to come again, we would treat him any differently?
Has civilization or 2000 years of spreading the gospel and church attendance made any difference?
Extrapolating from the unfolding US’s national behavior post 911 and its prosecution of its “War on Terror,” I think the results are not very encouraging.
Are we(Christians) condemned to be only “highfalutin aspirationals?”
by kenny
28 Aug 2009 at 23:27
There are still weeds in the garden of Eden but our Father is the gardener. There is hope.
by Timothy P
19 Oct 2009 at 14:46
I believe that there is a critical need in churches and Christians to engage in every arena of life, be it politics, culture, business. This is where the rubber meets the road, where our faith encounters, interacts and responds to our environment, not just in the safe comforts and confines of the church walls.
Having said that, there’s a need for balance of wisdom/discernment and boldness/courage to make our stand based on biblical convictions. We should not fully not engage or be involved due to fear of getting into trouble, but at the same time, we should not be naive and impulsive to think that we can just say or do whatever we want, regardless of the law and consequences. The greatest challenge is balancing the two.
by Gentle lamb
22 Oct 2009 at 07:14
There is not much New Testament support for Christians to use the pulpit for politics. Jesus avoided it. As for being and siding with the poor and outcasts, that was a natural way of life and association, not a political statement or a protest or a deliberate involvement in social justice.
Politics is very dirty and the church will be impacted if it was involved and it will be ultimately become one with the world system.
That said, the church has been deeply involved in Politics and the powers of this world especially after Constantine, to its own hurt and demise.
Our rights to speak what we actually think or our personal convictions must be carefully balanced as we are speaking as an oracle of God from the pulpit. We must be careful lest we add to the Word of God through our interpretation.
by buddhist-lover
27 Oct 2009 at 01:20
Thinking aloud:
The virtues of FAIRNESS and RESPECT are very relevantly important in our pluralistic society and secular state.
In our pluralistic society with different worldviews (Buddhism, Atheism, Taoism, Hinduism, Christianity, Agnosticism, New Age Spirituality & so on), we should apply the golden rule in the public square: Respect others’ freedom to live according to their non-Christian values just as we want them to respect our freedom to live according to our Christian values, as long as no OBVIOUS harm is involved. For example, a Christian should respect a Buddhist’s conviction that homosexuality’s moral and spiritual status is equal to that of heterosexuality. Respecting other groups’ differing values include letting them having their freedom to choose abortion, to gamble, to live a promiscuous life, to have non-martial sex, to have homosexual romance, and so on, even though we may disagree with their value system.
In other words, Christians should not try to lobby the go government to take away others’ freedom to live according to their non-Christian values (even though some of those things which does not cause any obvious harm are regarded as “sinful” by Christians), just as Christians would not want other religious and non-religious groups to lobby the government to take away Christians’ freedom to live according to their Christian values.
Since many of us do not want our society to adopt Islamic values (e.g. banning or restricting the sale of pork, closing all pubs, covering all women’s head and so on), we should not expect our pluralistic society to function base on Christian values (to be fair).
There is no need for agreement in values for our society to function in harmony and in FAIRNESS; what is needed is mutual-respect. What is needed is to put in practise the Golden Rule preached by Gotama Buddha, Jesus, Confucius and so on.
So when Christians participate in different forms of politics, they ought to be mindful of upholding fairness and granting others the space to live according to their different value systems (e.g. some atheists’ liberal value system).
As Christian ethicist Stanley Hauwerwas taught, Christian values make full sense only within a Christian worldview. The Christian community can practice their Christian values (e.g. non-abortion, non-divorce, non-greediness and non-consumerism) within their own Christian community and use that to demonstrate to others the beauty of their Christian values. This is witnessing.