A better political way

The European Evangelical Alliance does politics without the culture wars

There are major differences in style of political engagement between US and European evangelicals. Admittedly, one reason is that US evangelicals are far more numerous, enabling them to hold greater political influence and causing opponents to view them as a greater threat.

Regardless of that important factor, the European Evangelical Alliance’s (EEA) model of socio-political engagement is worth studying.

The EEA explicitly rejects a confrontational, culture-wars mentality. As Jiri Unger, general secretary of the Czech Evangelical Alliance, has stated, “Whenever we enter the public space primarily to defend our own rights or privileges and not to serve the common good, we hide the Gospel and lose our focus on the salvation of individual people. Let’s continue to use the abundance of opportunities that we still have to share our hope in Christ.”

Julia Doxat-Purser, socio-political representative for the EEA, highlighted simple concepts that may seem self-evident but are often overlooked in the heat of politics:

• Since we are called to love our enemies, we should engage with grace and respect, even on hot-button issues.

• We should not cut off relationships with anyone or any group, any more than we do when seeking to share the gospel directly.

• The church must remain nonpartisan, though Christian individuals may join and work through various political parties.

• We should treat people, including those not on our side politically, as human beings made in God’s image and not demonize them.

• We should welcome conversations with people of different views, seeking to give them helpful information as they make their decisions.

• The EEA resists being labeled as interested only in a narrow set of issues with which Christians are often associated. It seeks to be a trustworthy information source and partner. As a result, rarely is any politician or group unwilling to meet with EEA representatives.

For more details, read the Q&A below. I think you’ll find it well worth four minutes of your reading time.

Q&A with Julia Doxat-Purser

How has the EEA gained respect as a player in European politics?

We don’t just talk to people who are on our side, but also with those who are not on our side. We treat them as fellow human beings who want to make the world better a place, not as the enemy. We think what we believe is reasonable and can be helpful to them as they make their decision.

We do work on issues of abortion and sexuality, but we refuse to be labeled as caring only about those issues. Since we are seen as working with people of different political persuasions, providing helpful information, and trustworthy, it’s rare that people don’t want to talk with us.

I was in a meeting with a member of the European Parliament, talking about human rights in China. He suddenly asked, “What do you think about abortion?” I answered, “I don’t know if we would agree on abortion, but we are both concerned about human rights in China, so let’s stick to that topic.”

Another EEA representative was meeting with a very senior European Commission official who said, “You do know we don’t do God here.” My colleague replied, “Yes, but you do human rights, and that’s what we are here to talk about.” They developed a good working relationship, and my colleague was able to help the European Commission develop good policy on religious freedom issues.

How do you deal with the variety of views you represent within the EEA?

European countries vary widely in terms of the proportion of evangelicals, experience of democracy, and political leanings. The EEA needs to represent all of them, so we speak only where most of them will agree with us. We know we can speak in support of religious freedom. On other issues, we develop a policy position and have it reviewed by an advisory team with members from different regions of Europe. If it is a sensitive matter, we take it to the EEA board.

Sometimes it can be difficult to bite our lips. For example, we want to stand with Ukraine, but not in a way that gets Russian evangelicals arrested.

How do you approach the issue of participation in political parties?

The EEA strongly believes the church must be nonpartisan, although individual Christians may join political parties. One reason why the church must be nonpartisan is that no party is completely right. Our security can never be placed in a political party. It’s okay for individual Christians to join a political party, but we must never give a party our complete loyalty. If we do, it’s idolatry.

There’s a gospel-related reason for nonpartisanship too. If we give the impression that Jesus is, for example, a member of the Green party, then if you’re not a Green you will not be interested in Jesus.

We need to be biblically rooted in our thinking. From the Bible, it’s clear that families are important. But there can be left-leaning and right-leaning views on how to support the family.

Some politicians love to get the church on board with them by giving us some political wins or funding, inviting them to nice events, and talking about the Christian heritage of our nation. But then we may go quiet when they act unethically, because we are too close to them and reliant on their funding. You might say that’s politics, but that also might be manipulation.

What is your reaction to Christians’ tendency to engage forcefully in culture wars?

I can understand how Christians can get caught up in culture-wars thinking. We are labeled as extremists because we stand up for the unborn. We are called dangerous for standing up for traditional marriage. It feels like war, and we are tempted to start fighting when attacked. But what would Jesus do? One of the hardest things he calls us to do is love our enemies. The only people he got angry with were the religious leaders.

That doesn’t mean we stay silent or withdraw. We should engage, even on hot-button issues, but with grace and respect. We should make our criticisms specific and not demonize people in general. That is hard to do when social media is full of evidence that we hate the other side.

We should always be seeking to persuade. We are Christ’s ambassadors, so his reputation is at stake. It’s more effective politically not to shut doors on anyone, and people think you are more reasonable this way.

When we share the gospel, we are very careful in our communication, seeking to build bridges and persuade others. Why should we be different in politics?

I don’t believe a culture-wars model of engagement honors Christ, and I don’t believe it works either.

What points would you like to make for Christians elsewhere in the world who seek to be salt and light in their own political contexts?

Let us all examine policies and politicians in search of biblical virtues. Justice, compassion, responsibility, righteousness, freedom, and faithfulness don’t belong to any political ideology. All human beings are made in God’s image, including the ones we don’t like, and God wants human beings to flourish in their lives and their relationship with him. That’s what good political decision making should focus on.

When the Israelites wanted a king (see 1 Samuel 8), God said it wouldn’t go well, and it didn’t go well. That is a warning against a concentration of power. We don’t see democracy in the Bible, but we have a strong indication in favor of checks and balances.

There are two responses we should avoid: either switching the news off, because it’s too scary or depressing, or getting so caught up in events that we start thinking and speaking in the same way as everyone else. To be salt and light, we should speak in a way that makes a good impact, not as others do.