The question of political allegiance has largely been relegated to two categories: Far-right “conservative� or far-left “liberal.� Realizing the fact that this dichotomy is void of any substantive dialogue, many authors and thinkers have sought a new via media in the political and social spectrum, creating a faith-based progressive movement that tends to dumbfound hardcore Fox News and CNN analysts. This is a worthy aim, but the question has to be asked if the new political spectrum is any better than the usual suspects. Gregory Boyd is certainly not the first to question the overall structure of the political arena in light of Christ’s teachings, but he definitely is one of the best at summarizing an alternative approach to political thought for those who would rather bow at the foot of the cross than at the doorstep of the white house.

If one had a year to simply read up on Christian thought in regards to politics, you would inevitably spend most of your time in the library checking out books by the Anabaptist thinker John Howard Yoder and the professor Stanley Hauerwas. And if one did not desire to spend a year doing this, they could simply read this book. Boyd notes Yoder and Hauerwas nearly in every chapter. He throws in a healthy dose of Lee Camp, Walter Wink, and Tony Compolo for lighter digestion, but the book’s thought process follows strongly that of Yoder. In fact, another name for this book could be “Yoder for the Modern Evangelical,� seeing as how this reviewer could not find one point that did not rely on the previous thinking of Yoder or a point by the author that disagreed with Yoder on any level.
That is not a slam on Boyd, for there is nothing new under the sun. This is how good thinking works; it builds upon the foundation of other thinking giants. All the similarities and repackaging does not take away from its enticing message: “The path through politics is not the road to God.â€? At its very core, the political arena is just as marred by sin and Satan’s rule as the rest of the created order. Boyd would almost have the reader think that it is more marred than other area of creation. Regardless of your opinion, one cannot shake the argument that Boyd presents early on: The kingdom of the world is not cut from the same stone as the Kingdom of God, nor do they exercise their power in the same way. The kingdom of the world bears and wields the sword over othersâ€"it is a “power overâ€? kingdom. This is not all bad, as God has apparently allowed worldly governments this right so as to discipline evil-doers in the short term and provide justice for those who have been wronged.

But the Kingdom of God does not find its power in lording over others, but in giving up itself. It is a “power-under� kingdom that at times looks rather ridiculous. To the world, the “power under� motif seems foolish and unsuccessful. But the Kingdom of God was never based upon what seems to work, but upon the love of God. The primary symbol of such a kingdom is the cross, not an artillery shell. Fallen humans tend to identify every other group but their own as an “enemy.� This should not be the case with Christ’s disciples. Such an “us versus them� mentality has been carried throughout human history. The stench of such a fallacy can be smelled from the early days of the American nation (or any other country). Check out the chapter entitled “The Myth of a Christian Nation.� Boyd dares the reader to ask “But what about our founding fathers? Weren’t they Christians?� This is a valid question.

However, Boyd identifies true Christians as those being “Christ-like.� The characteristic most associated with such a person is love, sacrificial love. One has to make a very tricky argument to prove that we, as a nation, have ever truly acted Christ-like. When did we act Christ-like? When we spread disease to thousands of American Indians in the name of manifest destiny? When we enslaved several hundred thousand African workers in the name of progress? When we violently bombed other countries in the name of nationalistic religion?
A citizen of the kingdom of God, a true “resident alien� cannot place too much stock in the system of earthly government. “The distinctly kingdom question is not, ‘How should we vote?’ The distinctly kingdom question is, ‘How should we live?’� It is the manifestation of the true Church, those who are willing to have “power under� others that bring in the kingdom of God. The civil religion of America is hardly such a discipleship program. Such pseudo-Christianity, Boyd argues, actually does more harm than good to the message of Jesus. Jesus could have easily called down the angels and became a victorious Caesar, but he chose to become a crucified Savior. Such a reality brings up tough questions to all Christians, but especially to those serving in armed forces, those using political power to bring about a desired end, and those who are serving a president, rather than a god. Do not fear, Boyd has several chapters dealing with each of those categories as well. They are tough to swallow, but right on the mark.

“Kingdom of God participants must retain a healthy suspicion toward every version of the kingdom of the worldâ€"especially their own.â€? While the kingdom of God tactics of Jesus may seem weak to those who do not wish to carry their cross, Boyd notes that it is the weak way of life that is truly the only way to transform hearts, rather than simply bend knees.

Reviewerâ€"Michael Cline

Michael Cline is a freelance pastor and a sparingly employed thinker, who is always on the brink of his next big something-or-other. Some of these thoughts happen to flow out through the channel labeled “published writing� but many more of them empty themselves through a trash shoot labeled “Recliner Ramblings,� a little known speck of writing which can be digested at www.reclinerramblings.blogspot.com.

Send This To A Friend