The article below is abstracted from the Kairos Research Center Malaysia Publication

under the series on "Understanding the Modern World Through Christian Eyes"
May 2011 issue with the theme "Faith Confronts Power"
http://www.Kairos-Malaysia.org
___________________________________________________________________

THE CHRISTIAN AND POLITICS

By Eugene Yapp

A preacher recently told his congregation that Christians should not get
entangled with politics or seek changes in government no matter how bad or corrupt the
authorities are. According to him, the Christian’s responsibility is to be a model citizen,
pray dutifully against corrupt government and continue to “make disciples of all
nations” by proclaiming the gospel to the unreached and unsaved.

This incident illustrates the ambivalence of many Christian leaders and lay-
people when it comes to issues involving citizenship, politics and government. Since
politics is perceived as “dirty”, Christians are often told to leave such pursuits to the
world. Yet, much of our welfare and well being as citizens of Malaysia are inextricably
linked to politics.

Today, there is diversity of opinions within the Christian community regarding

political involvement. Indeed, since the March 8 General Election, many are pushing
for an agenda of change in the process of decision-making within the larger political
framework. This leads to perplexing questions such as: What sort of change do we
aspire to bring about? What transformation do we wish to see in the political making
processes? What role should the church play and how should it relate to the present
political culture, its structures, institutions and varied agenda?

Culture of Politics

Is there such a notion as the culture of politics? To answer this question, we

need to ask a more basic question, that is, what is culture? The anthropological
understanding of culture approximates the idea of civilization – as the product of
human activities. While this definition is valid, culture cannot be seen merely as
deriving from social and human activities alone. Culture must be understood from a
much broader and deeper sense that encompasses a theological reading as well. Culture
understood theologically means “humanity”. That is to say, culture is the embodiment
and expression of humanity. It encompasses all of human life and interests as man
exercises his capacity to grasp truth, appreciate the good and beautiful, search for
meaning to life and govern his action according to his moral dictates and judgment for
the good of himself, his family and all that he is.

In this sense, politics and the political process constitute culture and we can
speak of the “culture of politics”. Unfortunately, the culture of politics in Malaysia
today has come to be synonymous with "party politics" usually drawn along religious
and racial lines. The slogan, “if you are not for me, then you are against me” best
exemplifies the sort of sentiments inherent in today’s political climate. In that respect,
politics in Malaysia has come to be understood solely as an inter-play in power
relations and who can gain the upper hand.

But this is a skewed understanding of politics. In its finest sense, politics refers
to the process by which people reflect on and make collective decisions about how best
to arrange and manage the collective life of the nation in all aspects: political, social,
economic, judicial/ethical and moral. It is about contributing towards the good life and
righteousness of society. That will entail maintaining the good but must also include
acting against all forms of evil, corruption, injustice, discrimination
and oppression whether by the authorities or otherwise, for the positive welfare and
well being of society and nation.

In seeking for the positive welfare and well being of the nation, Aquinas
comments that human beings cannot be happy unless they live within the context of a
political community. Accordingly, living well comes not from living as individuals in
isolation with each individual making personal decisions based on personal consumerist
tendencies; it comes from living a life that seeks the common good. Thus, each citizen
of a nation must seek out, articulate and work out how this good may be achieved.
Correspondingly, the ruler or governing authorities must administer in a manner that
will facilitate the sort of conditions that are “enjoyable” for people to live in simply
because the chief aim of being human is the “enjoyment of the Divine” (c.f. Isaiah
10:1-2; Proverbs 29:4; 29:14; 31:8-9).

The Church and Political Engagement

Due to the skewed understanding of politics and how politics is played out in
Malaysia, the church is presented with various postures to adopt when it comes to
political engagement. First, there are those Christians who adopt a more conservative
position that may be termed a “politics of caution”. Such Christians exercise restraint
and caution when it comes to political engagement simply because the nature of politics
is so fraught with uncertainties that no clear benefits are anticipated to be derived from
being involved. Often times, such a posture is motivated by fear or the threat of losing
whatever good and comfort we have gained in this world. While it is true that politics
today carries much negative connotations, an approach based on caution will only
isolate the church further and strengthen the perception that Christianity is irrelevant to
matters of public life.

Then, there are those who practice the “politics of accommodation” where
Christians are perceived to be better off negotiating with the ruling coalition (while
recognising they are far from perfect) since they are the majority and the real power
holders. While there are merits in seeking to negotiate with the ruling government, the
danger is that these power holders who control the might of the state apparatus will
only push for their own agenda, thereby leaving the church to serve the interests of the
state.

There are yet other Christians who appear to be carried away with a “politics of
change” – where due to frustration or desperation with the ruling government, they take
up the agenda and struggles for real and meaningful change in terms of people-centred
reforms and greater respect for human rights and civil liberties (Aliran Monthly, Vol.31,
No.1, 2011). Proponents of the “politics of change” assert that for real change to
materialise, the opposition must be on the “road to Putrajaya”. To be sure, the call for
reforms in terms of human and civil rights is a valid one. However, it is doubtful
whether such changes are possible even if the opposition “takes Putrajaya”, given the
propensity to internal strife and bickering within the parties making up the coalition.
 Given this complex scenario, citizens of the nation including Christians are
often left wondering about which posture to adopt when talking about political
engagement. The task is also complicated by the fact that the options highlighted above
have their own merits and demerits.

Christian Identity and the Task of the Church

Ng Kam Weng reminds us succinctly that the identity and therefore the task of
the church is to be the church. He posits the argument and rationale thus,

Christians are set apart on grounds of their special experience and their commitment to
a different set of values … Their action is not to be taken as an escape from their
situation but rather a strategic move to ensure their ability to engage with the world on
Christian terms. Only then will the church succeed in demonstrating a superior form of
social and religious organisation.

As a community “engaging the world on Christian terms”, it is imperative that

the body of Christ does not subscribe to a “politics of caution” nor succumb to a
“politics of accommodation”. Neither do we wish to capitulate to a “politics of change”
for the sake of change. As the body of Christ, our task is to speak the “truth in love”
through every channel available, challenge the abuse of power and seek a level playing
field in terms of power relations for the good of all. In short, the church is to be above
culture and to seek transformation of the culture that we live in. This transformation is
unique and different from what the world understands it to be – it is not brought about
by man’s design or engineered from without; it comes from within through the power
of the kingdom of God.

In speaking about transformation of culture by the power of the kingdom of

God, two passages of scripture are particularly relevant. The first is John 19:1-15.
When Pilate summoned Christ to respond to the charge of blasphemy against him as
“King of the Jews”, Christ confronted Pilate with these startling words, “You would
have no authority over me at all unless it had been given you from above” (19:11). In
this encounter Christ was unmasking Pilate’s false pretensions by forcing him to
acknowledge who really had actual power and authority. Here we see Christ
confronting earthly powers and revealing them for what they are – merely provisional
and temporal and subjected to the higher claims of Christ. The church must therefore
hold tightly to scripture to relativize all claims by the state to final authority and to
render any state ideology as merely provisional.

But how does the church facilitate the conditions for transformation? Matthew
25:31-46 provides us with some insights. Here we have the famous parable of the
separation of the sheep from the goats. The words of Christ are poignant,

For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a
stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you
visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.’ Then the righteous will answer him,
saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink?
And when did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? And
when did we see you sick or in prison and visit you?’ And the King will answer them,
‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to
me’ (Matthew 25: 35-40).

This passage reminds us that the acts of kindness undertaken by believers constitute the
works of the body of Christ. These acts are social, political and ethical intervention in
the world that Christ came to save. These acts are therefore “practices of
transformation” because they give hope to those who are lost and oppressed, or in
bondage due to political manipulation and injustice.

It is through such hope that the welfare and well being of the hopeless in the
community and the nation are uplifted. Such practices of transformation arise from love
– a love based on our faith in Christ. Hence, we may say ours is a “politics of
transformation” in that we facilitate the conditions for transformation by speaking the
truth, standing against injustice and challenging misuse of power in wider society, thus
allowing the kingdom of God to usher in true and genuine transformation.

EUGENE YAPP IS AN EXECUTIVE SECRETARY AT NECF.

The “Politics of Transformation” in Action
What practical action can the church take in order to be meaningfully involved in a
“politics of transformation”? We suggest the following areas for engagement.

Promoting religious liberty and ethnic relations

The goal of promoting religious liberty and ethnic relations is social peace. This peace
will facilitate an acceptance of all ethnic and religious groups with each co-existing and
relating to one another with mutual respect, thereby contributing to the collective good
of the nation. To achieve this, churches must collectively advocate for the following
issues to be addressed:

€ The ban on the use of Malay Bibles, the word “Allah” and thirty-two other
religious terms.
€ The restriction of non-Muslim religious societies in schools.
€ The forced conversion of children to Islam.

Preserving justice and human rights

The goal of preserving justice and human rights is to ensure that public justice is done.
When justice is done, the rights of the people will be upheld, thereby minimizing anger
and discontent, and thus contributing to the collective good of the nation. To achieve
this, churches must collectively advocate for the following issues to be addressed:

€ The lack of independence in the Judiciary.

€ Interference from the Executive, e.g., the use of the ISA 1960.
€ Marginalization of indigenous communities.

Seeking economic parity

The goal of seeking economic parity is economic sufficiency. To attain economic
sufficiency, the government must ensure that state resources are not mismanaged and
that corruption is stamped out at all levels. To achieve this, churches must collectively
advocate for the following issues to be addressed:
€ Improving the current TI-M Corruption Perception Index.
€ Question excessive spending by the government in wasteful projects
€ Patronage politics and “rent-seeking”, political financing and sludge funds.
Enhancing free social and democratic space
The goal of enhancing free social and democratic space is national righteousness.
When free social space and democratic processes are truly practised, society will thrive
in national righteousness and there will then be room for transparency, accountability
and respect for diversity in views and opinions. To achieve this, churches must
collectively advocate for the following issues to be addressed:

€ Restrictive clauses in the Printing Presses & Publication Act 1984, Sedition Act
1984, Internal Security Act 1960.
€ Electoral reforms – registration of voters, electoral rolls and irregularities,
improper campaigning.
€ The role of civil society, NGOs, the right to protest and dissent