What do you think?
Rate this book
Faithful Politics: Ten Approaches to Christian Citizenship and Why It Matters
Christians who seek to relate their faith to politics have always encountered tensions. Instead of easy answers and simple checklists, we need tools to help us thoughtfully navigate the complexities of Christian faithfulness in an increasingly diverse and polarized society.
In this book, Miranda Zapor Cruz guides readers in forming a vision of citizenship that brings Christian convictions into political engagement while avoiding common pitfalls. Cruz provides a measured, nonpartisan overview of different ways Christians have approached political participation. These ten views represent a range of theological approaches to the relationship between the kingdom of God and the country, including Anabaptist, social gospel, principled pluralist, and Christian nationalist. Cruz describes strengths and weaknesses of each view, with a focus on Christian faithfulness.
In the United States, Cruz argues, Christians who share very similar faith convictions can arrive at different political conclusions. There are, however, principles from Scripture and theology that should inform our thinking and remind us that our ultimate citizenship is in the kingdom of God. Faithful Politics helps us learn from Christians of the past as we discern how to be salt and light in our own time and place.
In this book, Miranda Zapor Cruz guides readers in forming a vision of citizenship that brings Christian convictions into political engagement while avoiding common pitfalls. Cruz provides a measured, nonpartisan overview of different ways Christians have approached political participation. These ten views represent a range of theological approaches to the relationship between the kingdom of God and the country, including Anabaptist, social gospel, principled pluralist, and Christian nationalist. Cruz describes strengths and weaknesses of each view, with a focus on Christian faithfulness.
In the United States, Cruz argues, Christians who share very similar faith convictions can arrive at different political conclusions. There are, however, principles from Scripture and theology that should inform our thinking and remind us that our ultimate citizenship is in the kingdom of God. Faithful Politics helps us learn from Christians of the past as we discern how to be salt and light in our own time and place.
232 pages, Paperback
Published August 20, 2024
13 people are currently reading
119 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 13 of 13 reviews
April 5, 2024
This fascinating book by a scholar of theological history examines several strategies Christians have used over the centuries for engaging (or not engaging) with politics, from Anabaptist separation to the social gospel to principled pluralism. The author makes the case that there are many valid options for Christian engagement with political issues, and we can learn a lot from each of them. This book is a call for Christians to be "salty" and choose loyalty to God over devotion to any one political party, whether we’re voting, campaigning or running for office. The author also explores two ways of engaging with politics that she argues do not glorify God (dominionism and Christian nationalism) and explains why these are unbiblical.
This book is deeply researched, but complex theological concepts are explained clearly enough to be easily understandable to those of us without a seminary background. I like that it doesn’t prescribe particular views on specific political issues, but instead focuses on how Christians on either side of the political aisle can honour God through their politics. I think this book would make a really interesting small group study, particularly in politically and theologically diverse congregations.
This book is deeply researched, but complex theological concepts are explained clearly enough to be easily understandable to those of us without a seminary background. I like that it doesn’t prescribe particular views on specific political issues, but instead focuses on how Christians on either side of the political aisle can honour God through their politics. I think this book would make a really interesting small group study, particularly in politically and theologically diverse congregations.
July 6, 2025
Cruz acknowledges that she is writing in a polarised political climate, and thus instead of mentioning specific political parties, issues, or platforms, she proposes to lay down principles and "approaches to faithful political engagement" (xv, xvii). Drawing from Augustine's City of God, Cruz argues that, because God's kingdom is not of this world, "partisan platforms are inevitably out of step with the Kingdom of God; therefore no single party should capture the full allegiance of a Christian" (xvi), and any approach to politics that requires "absolute loyalty to the country [and] refuses to recognize ways in which the country falls short of its own ideals and of the Kingdom, is not an option for Christians." (12) She then supports her proposition that the USA is different from the Kingdom by pointing to their different conceptions of freedom (the former for self, the latter for others), power (the former based on coercion, the later on weakness), and justice (the former with diverse norms, the latter with just one norm, God's own being) (13-18). To address many Christians who believe that God's promises to Israel apply to the USA, Cruz acknowledges that the Bible is not against engagement with politics and the government (pointing to Daniel and Esther), but points out that Biblical Israel was a specially placed nation in a unique covenant with God (27). Thus one cannot read verses like 2 Chronicles 7:14 and interpret it as God promising prosperity to any modern nation in exchange for the nation ‘return[ing] to God’ (whatever that may mean) (28). When it comes to engaging with governments, Cruz draws from Jesus' response to the religious leaders in Matt 22:21, as well as Rom 13 and Rev 13, submitting that Christians' "default posture" should be one of "submission to and respect for governing authorities—even those for whom we did not vote or those whose policies we disagree." However, Christians are also to discern when political loyalties move "toward idolatry", be it loyalty to a president or a party (37). Participating in partisan politics can damage the church's Christian witness and corrupt the gospel – we should not think that we Christians are somehow immune to grasping for power (48-49). Christians may have ideological leanings, but their loyalty should be to Christ over party, and Christian faith must not be made "dependent upon any political entity." (49) Cruz thus submits that if we "do not feel tension between our faith and our partisanship, we [have likely] bent our faith to align with our politics." (51)
After laying down broad principles, Cruz proceeds to explore various approaches towards faithful political engagement. First, she explores separatist approaches, such as anabaptist isolation (i.e. forming separate communities and living apart from society) and strategic withdrawal (like that advocated in The Benedict Option, where Dreher argues for Christians to form a subculture of their own by homeschooling, patronising stores run by fellow Christians, and choosing careers with minimal moral compromises and/or dilemmas). She opines that while such approaches "clearly differentiate between the church and the world", they risk "neglecting present human needs that public policy can address" (81-82).
She next explores approaches towards separation of church and state – complete separation (eg. the historically baptist position, where the church stays out of politics entirely) and two kingdoms separation (drawing from Augustine, Luther distinguished between the state's responsibility and care for bodies (punishing evildoers) and the church's responsibility and care for souls (salvation and morality), though he also acknowledged that "the governing authority and its sword are a divine service", and the ruler must "aim at the common good", "not seeking their own gain" (96)). Cruz opines that while separation minimises the risk of conflating kingdom and country, it might also fail to intervene "in extreme circumstances of government failing in its purpose", such as in Hitler's Nazi Germany where the Confessing Church was silent on Hitler's policies, even his anti-Semitism, focusing only on government action that intruded upon the church's spiritual sphere (100-101).
Thirdly, Cruz explores various iterations of the social gospel, such as the civil rights movement, mainline denominations engaging in and voicing out social concerns, and the Roman Catholic encyclical Rerum Novarum and the Roman Catholic social teaching that followed. In evaluating the social gospel, Cruz opines that it allows Christians to take seriously their ability to affect their communities and the world for the better, in line with Scripture's concern for justice (126), but it also runs the risk of an over-realised eschatology (thinking we can create a society where God's Kingdom is a reality) (122-123).
Fourth, Cruz explores two approaches rooted in Calvinist theology – direct Christian influence (the other side of the social gospel coin; the belief that government should enforce Christian values as a foundation for society's shared morality) and principled pluralism/sphere sovereignty (forwarded by Abraham Kuyper, who submitted that there are a number of spheres that order society such as government, church, family, and marketplace, and the spheres of authority should not encroach on another sphere's domain, i.e. the government can enforce justice but shouldn't demand particular beliefs or moral convictions from citizens). Advocates of the former like Wayne Grudem appeal to (what they call) an "evangelical and conservative" interpretation of Scripture as the "right" interpretation that government should enforce, but this not only "dismisses the biblical interpretation of a large percentage of American and global Christians", but Grudem's "evangelical conservatives" have also had a history of mishandling Scripture (eg. the civil rights movement, contra. Martin Luther King Jr, who was not a conservative evangelical by Grudem's standards) (141-143). Additionally, the former underlies the historical alignment of American evangelicals with the Republican party, and when they have shown themselves to align with the party because of just a few issues, adopting or excusing the rest of the party's positions, it damages their Christian witness as they come off as hypocrites and/or grasping at political power at any cost (especially with their "culture war" rhetoric) (144), leading to the church's decline (146). The main critique of sphere sovereignty is that it is grounded in natural law, and thus it is subject to its critiques, such as its potential for abuse (eg. by Hitler and the Nazis, as pointed out by Karl Barth ("All arguments based on Natural Law are Janus-headed")) (152-153). Additionally, there is a lack of clarity concerning the limits of each sphere (eg. in which sphere does poverty alleviation fall), and what to do when a sphere "fails to fulfil its vital function and thereby harms the common good." (153)
Lastly, Cruz lays out two approaches she opines is incompatible with faithful Christian witness. The first is dominionism (underlying the (in)famous Seven Mountains Mandate), which teaches that the church is called to engage in spiritual warfare and take over spheres of society and establish the kingdom of God. Not only is this "not what the Bible teaches", but adherents' reliance on Old Testament passages (especially those to do with promises and warfare) do so "without regard for the historical, cultural, and even covenantal differences between biblical Israel and the contemporary United States" (170). Additionally, advocates (like Bill Johnson) push a method of interpreting Scripture that "sets aside the author's intent and the historical context so the Holy Spirit can reveal new meaning", coming dangerously close to the ancient montanist and gnostic heresies (171). Lastly, dominionism has borne "unhealthy fruit" as many have used it to justify "religiously motivated violence and domestic terrorism." (172)
The second is Christian nationalism, the belief that "America was founded as a Christian nation by (white) men", "The United States is blessed by God", and it "has a special role to play in God's plan for humanity." (177) The 'Christian' in Christian nationalism is also divorced from theological tenets of Christian orthodoxy, replacing it with "assumptions of nativism, White supremacy, patriarchy, and heteronormativity, along with divine sanction for authoritarian control and militarism." (177-178) It is clear how this approach damages Christian witness and has borne bad fruit (188-191).
Overall, I found Cruz's book to be a good survey of political theology and approaches Christians take towards politics. I thus think that this is a good read for any Christian who engages in politics, not necessarily for changing one's mind, but at least to make one conscious of the theology underlying their political engagement, and to introduce them to the alternatives that their Christian brothers and sisters hold to alongside them. I also appreciate Cruz's first few chapters focusing on principles rather than political issues and positions, making this a book that I can recommend to Christians across the political spectrum (and if a Christian disagrees with those principles, it allows ones to engage with them on these more important, deeper considerations, rather than arguing over (surface-level) political positions).
After laying down broad principles, Cruz proceeds to explore various approaches towards faithful political engagement. First, she explores separatist approaches, such as anabaptist isolation (i.e. forming separate communities and living apart from society) and strategic withdrawal (like that advocated in The Benedict Option, where Dreher argues for Christians to form a subculture of their own by homeschooling, patronising stores run by fellow Christians, and choosing careers with minimal moral compromises and/or dilemmas). She opines that while such approaches "clearly differentiate between the church and the world", they risk "neglecting present human needs that public policy can address" (81-82).
She next explores approaches towards separation of church and state – complete separation (eg. the historically baptist position, where the church stays out of politics entirely) and two kingdoms separation (drawing from Augustine, Luther distinguished between the state's responsibility and care for bodies (punishing evildoers) and the church's responsibility and care for souls (salvation and morality), though he also acknowledged that "the governing authority and its sword are a divine service", and the ruler must "aim at the common good", "not seeking their own gain" (96)). Cruz opines that while separation minimises the risk of conflating kingdom and country, it might also fail to intervene "in extreme circumstances of government failing in its purpose", such as in Hitler's Nazi Germany where the Confessing Church was silent on Hitler's policies, even his anti-Semitism, focusing only on government action that intruded upon the church's spiritual sphere (100-101).
Thirdly, Cruz explores various iterations of the social gospel, such as the civil rights movement, mainline denominations engaging in and voicing out social concerns, and the Roman Catholic encyclical Rerum Novarum and the Roman Catholic social teaching that followed. In evaluating the social gospel, Cruz opines that it allows Christians to take seriously their ability to affect their communities and the world for the better, in line with Scripture's concern for justice (126), but it also runs the risk of an over-realised eschatology (thinking we can create a society where God's Kingdom is a reality) (122-123).
Fourth, Cruz explores two approaches rooted in Calvinist theology – direct Christian influence (the other side of the social gospel coin; the belief that government should enforce Christian values as a foundation for society's shared morality) and principled pluralism/sphere sovereignty (forwarded by Abraham Kuyper, who submitted that there are a number of spheres that order society such as government, church, family, and marketplace, and the spheres of authority should not encroach on another sphere's domain, i.e. the government can enforce justice but shouldn't demand particular beliefs or moral convictions from citizens). Advocates of the former like Wayne Grudem appeal to (what they call) an "evangelical and conservative" interpretation of Scripture as the "right" interpretation that government should enforce, but this not only "dismisses the biblical interpretation of a large percentage of American and global Christians", but Grudem's "evangelical conservatives" have also had a history of mishandling Scripture (eg. the civil rights movement, contra. Martin Luther King Jr, who was not a conservative evangelical by Grudem's standards) (141-143). Additionally, the former underlies the historical alignment of American evangelicals with the Republican party, and when they have shown themselves to align with the party because of just a few issues, adopting or excusing the rest of the party's positions, it damages their Christian witness as they come off as hypocrites and/or grasping at political power at any cost (especially with their "culture war" rhetoric) (144), leading to the church's decline (146). The main critique of sphere sovereignty is that it is grounded in natural law, and thus it is subject to its critiques, such as its potential for abuse (eg. by Hitler and the Nazis, as pointed out by Karl Barth ("All arguments based on Natural Law are Janus-headed")) (152-153). Additionally, there is a lack of clarity concerning the limits of each sphere (eg. in which sphere does poverty alleviation fall), and what to do when a sphere "fails to fulfil its vital function and thereby harms the common good." (153)
Lastly, Cruz lays out two approaches she opines is incompatible with faithful Christian witness. The first is dominionism (underlying the (in)famous Seven Mountains Mandate), which teaches that the church is called to engage in spiritual warfare and take over spheres of society and establish the kingdom of God. Not only is this "not what the Bible teaches", but adherents' reliance on Old Testament passages (especially those to do with promises and warfare) do so "without regard for the historical, cultural, and even covenantal differences between biblical Israel and the contemporary United States" (170). Additionally, advocates (like Bill Johnson) push a method of interpreting Scripture that "sets aside the author's intent and the historical context so the Holy Spirit can reveal new meaning", coming dangerously close to the ancient montanist and gnostic heresies (171). Lastly, dominionism has borne "unhealthy fruit" as many have used it to justify "religiously motivated violence and domestic terrorism." (172)
The second is Christian nationalism, the belief that "America was founded as a Christian nation by (white) men", "The United States is blessed by God", and it "has a special role to play in God's plan for humanity." (177) The 'Christian' in Christian nationalism is also divorced from theological tenets of Christian orthodoxy, replacing it with "assumptions of nativism, White supremacy, patriarchy, and heteronormativity, along with divine sanction for authoritarian control and militarism." (177-178) It is clear how this approach damages Christian witness and has borne bad fruit (188-191).
Overall, I found Cruz's book to be a good survey of political theology and approaches Christians take towards politics. I thus think that this is a good read for any Christian who engages in politics, not necessarily for changing one's mind, but at least to make one conscious of the theology underlying their political engagement, and to introduce them to the alternatives that their Christian brothers and sisters hold to alongside them. I also appreciate Cruz's first few chapters focusing on principles rather than political issues and positions, making this a book that I can recommend to Christians across the political spectrum (and if a Christian disagrees with those principles, it allows ones to engage with them on these more important, deeper considerations, rather than arguing over (surface-level) political positions).
April 20, 2024
Faithful Politics is a book I didn't know how much I needed. Zapor Cruz has used her unique education, experiences, and expertise to write a book that every Christian should read. Somehow staying very unbiased and unpartisan, she gives an expertly crafted history and theology of major political movements within the United States to show where they miss representing the gospel and what they offer Christians, if anything, to learn from. Her summary and recommendation on how to approach being a politically active person in our country (which is necessary) and have a sound perspective and witness to the gospel is original and vaulable and something that will shape my conversations about politics with and without members of the church. Her section on Christian Nationalism was particularily powerful. If you have been burned by false gospels in the name of Christ to advance dominionism, nationalism or any such theology or want to be better about connecting with people who approach their faith in this way, I highly recommend this book. This is a true advancement of the gospel in a chaotic political society that is our current American experience.
August 23, 2025
Very thorough and academic. Helpful in understanding different approaches to Christian citizenship. Well written and cited.
I don’t agree with all the author’s points on conservative evangelicals and Christian nationalism, but she is fair and thorough in addressing most everything in the book.
A recommended read for those interested in learning about the history or Christianity and politics. I was particularly interested in discussion of NAR and Dominionism, which I was unfamiliar with.
I don’t agree with all the author’s points on conservative evangelicals and Christian nationalism, but she is fair and thorough in addressing most everything in the book.
A recommended read for those interested in learning about the history or Christianity and politics. I was particularly interested in discussion of NAR and Dominionism, which I was unfamiliar with.
August 28, 2024
Do we choose Republicans because the Presidential candidate carries a Bible? Do we choose Democrats because my Christian friends are there? Do we choose parties simply because their policies are more Christian? How do we practice our Christian Faith in our often heated political environment? What is the difference between heavenly and earthly citizenship? How do we know if our actions are serving God or Caesar? How do we live as heavenly citizens while on earth? In our polarized climate, how can Christians behave as peacemakers? Is there such a thing as a Christian political party? Should we vote for candidates who claim to be Christians? These are some of the questions that trouble many Christians. Before attempting to answer any of these questions, we might need to ask a more fundamental one: "What does it mean to practice faithful politics?" This one question is the basis of this book to show us what it means to be salty, prophetic, separationist, and social. Underlying these principles are biblical applications of dual citizens, first of the Kingdom and then of earthly citizens. Living as Kingdom citizens means recognizing the different approaches to politics as compared to what we see in everyday worldly affairs. For instance, instead of limiting ourselves to relationships based on our nationality statuses on earth, we learn a universal perspective of seeing people as fellow humans living under grace from heaven. Instead of fighting one another to gain access to limited resources on earth, we learn to share in the hope that the economies of God will always be more abundant.
Author Miranda Zapor Cruz weaves in Scripture, Theology, History, and various cultural contexts in conversation with politics. She describes what it means for us to be citizens of the Kingdom. Taking lessons from Augustine's "City of God" treatise, she points out that Kingdom citizens are called to be different from the world. She guides us on how to live as dual citizens: Of the Kingdom and of the Earth. She emphasizes the opposing values of Kingdom and Country regarding loyalty, Freedom, and Power. Such contrasts are critical in distinguishing our dual roles. After discussing the differences, Cruz shows us what it means to live as biblical dual citizens in our engagement with government, justice, and discernment between submission and resistance. She takes special care to explain the different contexts of biblical Israel and modern American governments. Chapter Three follows up on Christian participation in politics. Here we learn about the American political system, its history, the benefits and risks of joining any party, and the risk of becoming "bland" instead of "salty" believers in the political arena. After setting forth these principles of engagement, Cruz takes us through ten approaches to Christian citizenship and political participation. Of these ten approaches, the first five are "separatist" models, followed by one social gospel model, two Calvinist options, and two non-recommended models of dominionism and Christian nationalism. They are all arranged from the most isolated to the most conflated.
1) Separatist 1: As Anabaptist Radical Isolation
2) Separatist 2: As Anabaptist Prophetic Witness
3) Separatist 3: Evangelical separation based on strategic withdrawal
4) Separatist 4: Historic Baptist Separation of Church and State
5) Separatist 5: Two Kingdoms Separation based on Luther's Political Theology
6) Social Gospel
7) Calvinist 1: Principled Pluralist
8) Calvinist 2: Direct Christian
9) Dominionism
10) Christian Nationalism
The first three separatist approaches are called "keeping the kingdom out of the country" while models #4 and #5 are called "Keeping the country out of the kingdom." The former believes that the present country will never become the Kingdom of God and thus better to be kept separate. The latter however do a slight reverse insisting that without the separation, the State would contaminate the Church. In model #6, adherents believe that the Christian gospel can influence and make the Kingdom of God a reality on earth as it is in heaven. Social gospel proponents will actively engage in society but risk granting too much trust in world systems and earthly justice. The two Calvinist approaches (#7 and #8) propose the role of stewardship and responsibility when engaging world governments. The "Direct Christian" approach tends to be the path taken by conservative parties that believe conscience and politics should never be divided. The "Principled Pluralist" believes that world governments are ordained by God and Christians ought to be involved for the common good. The author describes #7 and #8 under the umbrella of "Keeping the Country Under the Kingdom." The last two models are incompatible with Christianity because their principles of engagement revolve around domination and majority or total control. Cruz concludes by taking salient points of each model to provide us a path forward on how we can be biblical, separatist, salty, and Kingdom-loyal.
My Thoughts
===============
Firstly, this book is timely, especially with the coming November 2024 presidential elections in the United States. The ten models listed for us are not new positions. They have been professed by different groups of believers today, some more some less. By giving us the historical developments of each model, readers can analyze their own political orientations more intelligently. Things today do not exist in a vacuum. They arise from certain causes which should inform our broader understanding. In general, many Christians are not sure how to be faithful in their politics. Most of them have been influenced by mass media, friends, public opinions, social media postings, personalization algorithms, and political candidates. Even Bible-affirming people are more influenced by world philosophies instead of biblical values. Hopefully, Cruz's presentation will help us be more informed in our political choices, in time for us to discern our votes.
Secondly, it is important to note that the author distinguishes nonpartisanship from neutrality. Just because one does not take sides does not mean one will never vote for any of them. The main benefit of reading this book is to ensure that we become more informed about biblical values and the application of principles to help us analyze and make sense of our political choices. We can also evaluate all the promises made by various candidates and better appreciate our roles as dual citizens of heaven and earth. Instead of beginning with our choices in mind, we begin with God's Word. That said, it is easier said than done. That is why I recommend taking time to understand each of the ten models before taking our positions. The ten models are not author recommended ones (especially (#9 and #10). The author is simply laying out the landscape of many existing positions.
Finally, I like the way the author concludes with the five key paradigms of faithfulness: Salty, Prophetic, Separatist, Social, and Pluralist. She does not straitjacket any of the ten models on us but encourages us to use these five paradigms to evaluate all of them. Politics is essentially about power struggle. When issues become politicized, opposing parties adopt positions to gain some advantage over their opponents. We should be careful not to become unwitting pawns to power-grabbing or lobbying entities. I usually tell fellow believers at state or national elections that we are selecting national or community leaders and not popes or bishops for the state. The more we understand the biblical implications of the above faithfulness paradigms, the better equipped we will be in discerning how we should vote or not vote at all. Having said that, when it comes to leadership, I suggest leaders or people in positions of influence assert the principles of Kingdom-living over and above any temptation to choose a candidate, party, or political affiliation. Leaders should never put the cart of orientation before the horse of biblical convictions.
Miranda Zapor Cruz is professor of historical theology at Indiana Wesleyan University. She holds a PhD in religion, politics, and society from Baylor University's J. M. Dawson Institute of Church-State Studies and an MDiv from Princeton Theological Seminary.
Rating: 4.5 stars out of 5.
conrade
This book has been provided courtesy of IVP Academic via NetGalley without requiring a positive review. All opinions offered above are mine unless otherwise stated or implied.
Author Miranda Zapor Cruz weaves in Scripture, Theology, History, and various cultural contexts in conversation with politics. She describes what it means for us to be citizens of the Kingdom. Taking lessons from Augustine's "City of God" treatise, she points out that Kingdom citizens are called to be different from the world. She guides us on how to live as dual citizens: Of the Kingdom and of the Earth. She emphasizes the opposing values of Kingdom and Country regarding loyalty, Freedom, and Power. Such contrasts are critical in distinguishing our dual roles. After discussing the differences, Cruz shows us what it means to live as biblical dual citizens in our engagement with government, justice, and discernment between submission and resistance. She takes special care to explain the different contexts of biblical Israel and modern American governments. Chapter Three follows up on Christian participation in politics. Here we learn about the American political system, its history, the benefits and risks of joining any party, and the risk of becoming "bland" instead of "salty" believers in the political arena. After setting forth these principles of engagement, Cruz takes us through ten approaches to Christian citizenship and political participation. Of these ten approaches, the first five are "separatist" models, followed by one social gospel model, two Calvinist options, and two non-recommended models of dominionism and Christian nationalism. They are all arranged from the most isolated to the most conflated.
1) Separatist 1: As Anabaptist Radical Isolation
2) Separatist 2: As Anabaptist Prophetic Witness
3) Separatist 3: Evangelical separation based on strategic withdrawal
4) Separatist 4: Historic Baptist Separation of Church and State
5) Separatist 5: Two Kingdoms Separation based on Luther's Political Theology
6) Social Gospel
7) Calvinist 1: Principled Pluralist
8) Calvinist 2: Direct Christian
9) Dominionism
10) Christian Nationalism
The first three separatist approaches are called "keeping the kingdom out of the country" while models #4 and #5 are called "Keeping the country out of the kingdom." The former believes that the present country will never become the Kingdom of God and thus better to be kept separate. The latter however do a slight reverse insisting that without the separation, the State would contaminate the Church. In model #6, adherents believe that the Christian gospel can influence and make the Kingdom of God a reality on earth as it is in heaven. Social gospel proponents will actively engage in society but risk granting too much trust in world systems and earthly justice. The two Calvinist approaches (#7 and #8) propose the role of stewardship and responsibility when engaging world governments. The "Direct Christian" approach tends to be the path taken by conservative parties that believe conscience and politics should never be divided. The "Principled Pluralist" believes that world governments are ordained by God and Christians ought to be involved for the common good. The author describes #7 and #8 under the umbrella of "Keeping the Country Under the Kingdom." The last two models are incompatible with Christianity because their principles of engagement revolve around domination and majority or total control. Cruz concludes by taking salient points of each model to provide us a path forward on how we can be biblical, separatist, salty, and Kingdom-loyal.
My Thoughts
===============
Firstly, this book is timely, especially with the coming November 2024 presidential elections in the United States. The ten models listed for us are not new positions. They have been professed by different groups of believers today, some more some less. By giving us the historical developments of each model, readers can analyze their own political orientations more intelligently. Things today do not exist in a vacuum. They arise from certain causes which should inform our broader understanding. In general, many Christians are not sure how to be faithful in their politics. Most of them have been influenced by mass media, friends, public opinions, social media postings, personalization algorithms, and political candidates. Even Bible-affirming people are more influenced by world philosophies instead of biblical values. Hopefully, Cruz's presentation will help us be more informed in our political choices, in time for us to discern our votes.
Secondly, it is important to note that the author distinguishes nonpartisanship from neutrality. Just because one does not take sides does not mean one will never vote for any of them. The main benefit of reading this book is to ensure that we become more informed about biblical values and the application of principles to help us analyze and make sense of our political choices. We can also evaluate all the promises made by various candidates and better appreciate our roles as dual citizens of heaven and earth. Instead of beginning with our choices in mind, we begin with God's Word. That said, it is easier said than done. That is why I recommend taking time to understand each of the ten models before taking our positions. The ten models are not author recommended ones (especially (#9 and #10). The author is simply laying out the landscape of many existing positions.
Finally, I like the way the author concludes with the five key paradigms of faithfulness: Salty, Prophetic, Separatist, Social, and Pluralist. She does not straitjacket any of the ten models on us but encourages us to use these five paradigms to evaluate all of them. Politics is essentially about power struggle. When issues become politicized, opposing parties adopt positions to gain some advantage over their opponents. We should be careful not to become unwitting pawns to power-grabbing or lobbying entities. I usually tell fellow believers at state or national elections that we are selecting national or community leaders and not popes or bishops for the state. The more we understand the biblical implications of the above faithfulness paradigms, the better equipped we will be in discerning how we should vote or not vote at all. Having said that, when it comes to leadership, I suggest leaders or people in positions of influence assert the principles of Kingdom-living over and above any temptation to choose a candidate, party, or political affiliation. Leaders should never put the cart of orientation before the horse of biblical convictions.
Miranda Zapor Cruz is professor of historical theology at Indiana Wesleyan University. She holds a PhD in religion, politics, and society from Baylor University's J. M. Dawson Institute of Church-State Studies and an MDiv from Princeton Theological Seminary.
Rating: 4.5 stars out of 5.
conrade
This book has been provided courtesy of IVP Academic via NetGalley without requiring a positive review. All opinions offered above are mine unless otherwise stated or implied.
February 26, 2025
Summary: Ten ways of approaching the relationship between pursuing God’s kingdom and engaging in politics.
What does it mean to be a Christian citizen? Is it possible to participate in politics while remaining faithful to pursuing God’s kingdom? And to what degree ought one try to realize the vision and values of God’s kingdom in the laws, policies, and practices of one’s country? These are some of the questions Miranda Zapor Cruz unpacks in Faithful Politics. However, if you are looking for the approach to Christian politics or a recommendation on choosing between political parties, you won’t find that here.
In all, the author considers ten approaches Christians have taken toward political engagement. Before considering these, she makes a clear distinction between the United States and the kingdom of God. Specifically, she argues one cannot conflate kingdom and country. Then she observes how Christians have always understood themselves as dual citizens, although what that meant in the first century under imperial Rome is very different from our geopolitical context. Finally, she argues that clearly recognizing these distinctions and having a clear vision of the kingdom allows us to be “salty” Christians in society.
With this in mind, she turns to different approaches Christians have taken to politics. First she considers separatist approaches that keep kingdom out of country. She distinguishes between isolationist separatism and prophetic separatism. One just keeps its distance while the other keeps distance but also speaks truth to political reality. Churches (like mine) in the Anabaptist tradition have taken this approach. The next approaches keep country out of the kingdom. This includes the Baptist separation of church and state and the two kingdoms separation of Martin Luther. Both have helped frame the historic separation of church and state in the United States.
Then we turn to the approach of “Bringing kingdom into the Country” reflected in the nineteenth century social gospel approach. This approach sought through social and moral reform to transform the country into a Christian society, an approach reflected in the civil rights movement. One thing I missed in her treatment, which includes direct action, is the role of non-violent civil disobedience. Discussion of the question of when Christians should resist unjust laws would have been helpful. Next, the author outlines two Calvinist approaches to “Keeping the Country Under the Kingdom.” One is the principled pluralist approach emphasizing God’s sovereignty over different spheres of life. The other is the direct Christian influence approach, which seeks to bring the country in line with certain Christian values and convictions.
For each of the above approaches, the author outlines strengths and shortcomings for each approach. Her next two chapters considers approaches contemporary Christians have adopted she argues are incompatible with Christian faith. The first of these is dominionism both in its Christian Reconstruction and New Apostolic Reformation (NAR) forms. She critiques the biblicism of Christian Reconstruction and the gnostic and Montanist tendencies of NAR. She notes how both apply messianic language to earthly political figures. Finally, she notes the unhealthy fruit of these movements including vigilantism and political violence.
Turning to Christian nationalism, she notes its “closed American exceptionalism,” its equation of America with Christian nationhood, and the privileging of Christianity above other beliefs. Very simply, one cannot be a faithful citizen of the Kingdom of God that breaks down every dividing boundary and be a Christian nationalist. And like Reconstruction and NAR, the endemic physical and rhetorical violence of Christian nationalism is incompatible with the way of Christ.
Cruz concludes that Christian political engagement at its best draws on the first eight approaches at their best. That is, it is salty, prophetic, separationist, social and principled pluralist. Above all, it centers faithfulness to Christ. I appreciate the historical treatment of different traditions, particularly because many Christians are unaware of the good political thought of those who have gone before them. And I appreciate her efforts to synthesize the best of these different approaches and to learn from them all. Still, I wonder if this would have been a different book if written post-January 20, 2025. Cruz notes the differences of political engagement with imperial Rome from our present day. I cannot help but wonder if there is less of a difference, and whether there might be more to learn from the first Christians.
_____________
Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary copy of this book from the publisher for review.
What does it mean to be a Christian citizen? Is it possible to participate in politics while remaining faithful to pursuing God’s kingdom? And to what degree ought one try to realize the vision and values of God’s kingdom in the laws, policies, and practices of one’s country? These are some of the questions Miranda Zapor Cruz unpacks in Faithful Politics. However, if you are looking for the approach to Christian politics or a recommendation on choosing between political parties, you won’t find that here.
In all, the author considers ten approaches Christians have taken toward political engagement. Before considering these, she makes a clear distinction between the United States and the kingdom of God. Specifically, she argues one cannot conflate kingdom and country. Then she observes how Christians have always understood themselves as dual citizens, although what that meant in the first century under imperial Rome is very different from our geopolitical context. Finally, she argues that clearly recognizing these distinctions and having a clear vision of the kingdom allows us to be “salty” Christians in society.
With this in mind, she turns to different approaches Christians have taken to politics. First she considers separatist approaches that keep kingdom out of country. She distinguishes between isolationist separatism and prophetic separatism. One just keeps its distance while the other keeps distance but also speaks truth to political reality. Churches (like mine) in the Anabaptist tradition have taken this approach. The next approaches keep country out of the kingdom. This includes the Baptist separation of church and state and the two kingdoms separation of Martin Luther. Both have helped frame the historic separation of church and state in the United States.
Then we turn to the approach of “Bringing kingdom into the Country” reflected in the nineteenth century social gospel approach. This approach sought through social and moral reform to transform the country into a Christian society, an approach reflected in the civil rights movement. One thing I missed in her treatment, which includes direct action, is the role of non-violent civil disobedience. Discussion of the question of when Christians should resist unjust laws would have been helpful. Next, the author outlines two Calvinist approaches to “Keeping the Country Under the Kingdom.” One is the principled pluralist approach emphasizing God’s sovereignty over different spheres of life. The other is the direct Christian influence approach, which seeks to bring the country in line with certain Christian values and convictions.
For each of the above approaches, the author outlines strengths and shortcomings for each approach. Her next two chapters considers approaches contemporary Christians have adopted she argues are incompatible with Christian faith. The first of these is dominionism both in its Christian Reconstruction and New Apostolic Reformation (NAR) forms. She critiques the biblicism of Christian Reconstruction and the gnostic and Montanist tendencies of NAR. She notes how both apply messianic language to earthly political figures. Finally, she notes the unhealthy fruit of these movements including vigilantism and political violence.
Turning to Christian nationalism, she notes its “closed American exceptionalism,” its equation of America with Christian nationhood, and the privileging of Christianity above other beliefs. Very simply, one cannot be a faithful citizen of the Kingdom of God that breaks down every dividing boundary and be a Christian nationalist. And like Reconstruction and NAR, the endemic physical and rhetorical violence of Christian nationalism is incompatible with the way of Christ.
Cruz concludes that Christian political engagement at its best draws on the first eight approaches at their best. That is, it is salty, prophetic, separationist, social and principled pluralist. Above all, it centers faithfulness to Christ. I appreciate the historical treatment of different traditions, particularly because many Christians are unaware of the good political thought of those who have gone before them. And I appreciate her efforts to synthesize the best of these different approaches and to learn from them all. Still, I wonder if this would have been a different book if written post-January 20, 2025. Cruz notes the differences of political engagement with imperial Rome from our present day. I cannot help but wonder if there is less of a difference, and whether there might be more to learn from the first Christians.
_____________
Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary copy of this book from the publisher for review.
April 5, 2024
Comprehensive Look At Different Ways Different Christian Communities Have Viewed Politics Over The Millenia. This book is truly one of the most comprehensive looks at the subject that I've yet run across, and for that alone is to be commended. It is also immensely readable, which is always a nice bonus in an academic-oriented book.
Perhaps the only "negative" thing to be said here (and certainly some will view this as quite the positive, or even argue she doesn't go far *enough*), is that Cruz at times can be a bit *too* tough on the Christian Nationalism crowd, while openly claiming a high degree of tolerance for every other perspective she discusses. Even as I oppose the Christian Nationalists myself (finding more cause for Anarchism in the text of the Bible than any support for any modern nation, *including* the modern State of Israel), I would have liked to have seen their positions presented with the same detached rational approach as all of the other perspectives presented - mostly because I truly believe that when presented in those same terms, the Christian Nationalists *still* lose, and lose bigger because they *were* given a rational chance.
Even this, though, is not the actual cause of the star deduction. The cause of the star deduction is instead the complete non-existence of any hint of a bibliography, which are generally present even in these Advance Reviewer Copy forms of texts, as I have quite a bit of experience reading and reviewing over the last several years (where 20-30% is considered my norm, though I've also openly discussed perhaps lowering that a touch more recently).
Still, even that is a flaw that will hopefully be corrected in the final form of the book.
Overall an interesting and comprehensive examination of the topic, one anyone interested in Christianity and Politics in America - for any reason - should make it a point to read. Particularly before any Presidential Election. Yes, including the one being conducted less than 90 days after the publication of this very book. Very much recommended.
Perhaps the only "negative" thing to be said here (and certainly some will view this as quite the positive, or even argue she doesn't go far *enough*), is that Cruz at times can be a bit *too* tough on the Christian Nationalism crowd, while openly claiming a high degree of tolerance for every other perspective she discusses. Even as I oppose the Christian Nationalists myself (finding more cause for Anarchism in the text of the Bible than any support for any modern nation, *including* the modern State of Israel), I would have liked to have seen their positions presented with the same detached rational approach as all of the other perspectives presented - mostly because I truly believe that when presented in those same terms, the Christian Nationalists *still* lose, and lose bigger because they *were* given a rational chance.
Even this, though, is not the actual cause of the star deduction. The cause of the star deduction is instead the complete non-existence of any hint of a bibliography, which are generally present even in these Advance Reviewer Copy forms of texts, as I have quite a bit of experience reading and reviewing over the last several years (where 20-30% is considered my norm, though I've also openly discussed perhaps lowering that a touch more recently).
Still, even that is a flaw that will hopefully be corrected in the final form of the book.
Overall an interesting and comprehensive examination of the topic, one anyone interested in Christianity and Politics in America - for any reason - should make it a point to read. Particularly before any Presidential Election. Yes, including the one being conducted less than 90 days after the publication of this very book. Very much recommended.
May 5, 2024
Faithful Politics by Miranda Zapor Cruz will help to provide understanding as to how Christians got to where they are in today's political world. It gives a detailed description of how politics are viewed by the different Christian denominations in the US. Sources are cited throughout for those who may want to do further reading.
I found it interesting and sometimes enlightening to see how different Christian denominations (some I hadn't heard of or been exposed to) have embraced certain biblical ideas and have ignored others, sometimes (often?) on opposite sides of the Christian "spectrum."
I especially appreciated the section about how many evangelicals claim God's Biblical promises to Israel as promised to the United States. America is not Israel, our government isn't (or should not be) our Messiah, and our country is not Heaven. But the author doesn't only touch on this. She also addresses the either/or tendency in politics versus a more thoughtful position that considers each facet of politics and each issue to be voted on on an independent basis, versus all or nothing Democrat or Republican.
I did not personally feel as if the author was leaning left or right politically (which is a difficult thing to achieve today); rather, I feel it has the ability to challenge any reader. It's not a book that I read and the whole time found things wrong with it, nor was it a book that I simply nodded my head as I read (and let me be honest - getting bored.)
This would be a great read in preparation for the upcoming election and the various issues on the ballots., regardless of where the reader stands in their faith.
Thanks to NetGalley for the advance digital copy in exchange for an honest review.
I found it interesting and sometimes enlightening to see how different Christian denominations (some I hadn't heard of or been exposed to) have embraced certain biblical ideas and have ignored others, sometimes (often?) on opposite sides of the Christian "spectrum."
I especially appreciated the section about how many evangelicals claim God's Biblical promises to Israel as promised to the United States. America is not Israel, our government isn't (or should not be) our Messiah, and our country is not Heaven. But the author doesn't only touch on this. She also addresses the either/or tendency in politics versus a more thoughtful position that considers each facet of politics and each issue to be voted on on an independent basis, versus all or nothing Democrat or Republican.
I did not personally feel as if the author was leaning left or right politically (which is a difficult thing to achieve today); rather, I feel it has the ability to challenge any reader. It's not a book that I read and the whole time found things wrong with it, nor was it a book that I simply nodded my head as I read (and let me be honest - getting bored.)
This would be a great read in preparation for the upcoming election and the various issues on the ballots., regardless of where the reader stands in their faith.
Thanks to NetGalley for the advance digital copy in exchange for an honest review.
February 27, 2024
Thank you to NetGalley and InterVarsity Press for this Advanced Reader's Copy.
Cruz weaves an excellent framework through which Christians can understand and better engage with citizenship in the Kingdom of God alongside national, regional, and even state citizenship. When I first opened her work, I worried that I would encounter bias that may undercut her ten-view approach. I found myself happily surprised that this was not the case. In her research and analysis, Cruz discusses a range of ideological approaches to dual citizenship in the Kingdom of God and of country. I thought she did well in discussing potential pitfalls in each approach, but that her most ambitious proposal (a better, personal framework) was her most successful. I was surprised to find that Cruz doesn't encourage the reader to choose one ideology or another--particularly in a time in which it seems that indoctrination, one way or the other, is unavoidable. Rather, Cruz suggests that depending on the viewpoint of the individual, their understanding of the Kingdom of God could lead them to partisanship in any respective political sect. This felt refreshing. Cruz aimed to arm the reader with tools through which to make decisions without forcing decisions onto the reader, and my assessment is that she succeeded. I think Cruz's work will be perfectly timed for Christian readers who hope to make an informed decision, whatever that decision may be, come November 2024.
Cruz weaves an excellent framework through which Christians can understand and better engage with citizenship in the Kingdom of God alongside national, regional, and even state citizenship. When I first opened her work, I worried that I would encounter bias that may undercut her ten-view approach. I found myself happily surprised that this was not the case. In her research and analysis, Cruz discusses a range of ideological approaches to dual citizenship in the Kingdom of God and of country. I thought she did well in discussing potential pitfalls in each approach, but that her most ambitious proposal (a better, personal framework) was her most successful. I was surprised to find that Cruz doesn't encourage the reader to choose one ideology or another--particularly in a time in which it seems that indoctrination, one way or the other, is unavoidable. Rather, Cruz suggests that depending on the viewpoint of the individual, their understanding of the Kingdom of God could lead them to partisanship in any respective political sect. This felt refreshing. Cruz aimed to arm the reader with tools through which to make decisions without forcing decisions onto the reader, and my assessment is that she succeeded. I think Cruz's work will be perfectly timed for Christian readers who hope to make an informed decision, whatever that decision may be, come November 2024.
January 1, 2025
In this book, Dr. Miranda Zapor Cruz offers a wonderfully comprehensive trek through a variety of expressions of Christian political engagement. When detailing what Cruz views as faithful, or “salty” expressions of Christian political witness, she remains unbiased and straightforward in her evaluation. After building this foundation, she provides a thorough but grounded critique of unorthodox positions, such as Christian Nationalism.
As a pastor, I have found that most of the congregants I have had the pleasure of knowing want to follow Jesus faithfully. However, many of them, in an attempt to be faithful, have absorbed the theological perspectives that are most accessible. Even as these positions may be harmful or unorthodox. In the United States, I have found that the pervasive nature of Christian Nationalism and Dominionism particularly with its accessibility through popular books, television and radio shows, social media posts and the like, often becomes a default rather than fringe position. For this reason, I love that this book exists. I believe it will be a helpful primer to offer a range of orthodox alternatives in an accessible volume while gently but robustly condemning positions which damage Christian Witness. This is a wonderful tool for those in ministry who maintain a hope that the Church can be an instrument of faithful political witness in our world.
As a pastor, I have found that most of the congregants I have had the pleasure of knowing want to follow Jesus faithfully. However, many of them, in an attempt to be faithful, have absorbed the theological perspectives that are most accessible. Even as these positions may be harmful or unorthodox. In the United States, I have found that the pervasive nature of Christian Nationalism and Dominionism particularly with its accessibility through popular books, television and radio shows, social media posts and the like, often becomes a default rather than fringe position. For this reason, I love that this book exists. I believe it will be a helpful primer to offer a range of orthodox alternatives in an accessible volume while gently but robustly condemning positions which damage Christian Witness. This is a wonderful tool for those in ministry who maintain a hope that the Church can be an instrument of faithful political witness in our world.
November 30, 2024
A helpful overview of the most prevalent approaches by Christians throughout church history. I appreciated Cruz's balance about the faithful approaches along with her conviction that Christian nationalism is not a faithful political system for followers of Jesus. I learned a lot and highly recommend for anyone wanting to learn more about how Christians can be approach politics. We can't withdraw completely as politics is a forum by which we can love our neighbor.
March 29, 2025
Incredibly important book. Those that most need its words will probably never read beyond the introduction. I am different than the author but I found peace and love in her words even amidst disagreement and that is the best we can give one another. This is an American books by someone who loves her country but cares for the kingdom of God first and foremost.
January 8, 2025
Cruz does a good job of laying out various approaches to politics as a Christian. I would estimate that many people in the camp that I have been associated with most of my life would disagree with much of her critique of some approaches, but I thought they were fair and enlightening. I really appreciated reading this book and feel more equipped as I seek to navigate this crazy landscape of politics and Christianity in the current age.
Displaying 1 - 13 of 13 reviews