Does Jesus Vote Straight Republican?

Currently the GOP is the party of "political religion."  

The polls say Republican Donald Trump has locked up the Evangelical vote.

It wasn't always that way.  During the civil rights transition of the 1960s black churches and black ministers led the political action, called to it by the religious call toward justice.  Many Protestant churches were a political force for integration, toleration, and inclusion.

Scene from a Trump TV ad

Polls show that "regular churchgoing" and "lack of a college degree" are the best two demographic indicators of Trump support.  Those two factors are more significant than income. Trump is not conservative, he is populist.

But there is an area of overlap between the two impulses:  Conservatives respond to the symbols of tradition and authority and group identity.  They like freedom, which is best expressed as the right to worship traditional religion together freely.   They like individualism, but dislike independent and individual expressions of protest against the National Anthem.  Conservatives didn't celebrate Colin Kaepernick; they boycotted his team out of anger that he insulted America.

Tromping on a Kaepernick jersey

I witnessed Trump crowds standing to cheer when they heard him say America was in misery and crisis, that its government and economy was corrupt, that its leaders in both parties were weaklings and fools, that our president was an illegitimate fraud.   They are angry at America--but they defend vigorously the symbols of traditional America: the flag, the National Anthem, the Christian cross.  It is patriotism that elevates the symbols of America, if not the country itself.  The symbols have become sacred.


Traditional conservatives like Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio emphasized their support for patriotic symbols and described the threat of terrorism as an end-time war of civilizations.  Support for authority, unity, and the integrity of the group are hallmarks of conservative thought.   Trump-style populism is nativist and patriotic, so he appeals to the group identity impulse.  Trump's America first theme is openly patriotic.  Trump's stages are festooned with flags.   That is the overlap between conservative and populist.  They get angry if someone appears to disrespect the symbols of the in-group.

Watch the 30 Second Ad

Ted Cruz Political Ad:  Fighting for a cross on public land

The net result is that it appears that evangelical beliefs coincide with Trump support through the mechanism of group identity.   As I wrote Saturday, evangelical women were voting overwhelmingly for Trump, not Hillary.   One spokeswoman said they needed leadership in defense of tradition, not saintliness; she liked warrior virtues not Christian ones.  Identity trumped gender.

Association does not mean causation.   The sun does not rise because the rooster crows.   Evangelical women may not be supporting Trump because they are evangelical.   It may be that evangelicals have a higher degree of group fellowship than do non church-goers.   Evangelicals--as evangelicals--may not be "conservative" after all.   Many among them may respond to a much different sentiment--a Matthew 25 "feed the hungry, clothe the naked" form of spirituality.  Evangelical women may supporting Trump out of their sentiment of group solidarity, not because of their evangelical spirituality.  

Indeed, for some, evangelical belief pushes away from Trump.

Or so I am let to understand thanks to a thoughtful observation by an evangelical Christian male who has posted here before, a green project developer for Skanska USA, an international developer and builder.  He says it is inaccurate to think that the only form of evangelical spirituality is one built around being conservative or for Trump.   Let him explain:  

Guest Post, by John Coster

After reading your post today [i.e. the October 1 post] I felt compelled to write my thoughts about what I would term the 'Evangelical conundrum".

As I suspect you know, the history of modern Evangelical principles goes back before the 17th century but the label and movement gained traction in the 19th and 20th centuries led by people like Billy Graham. Originally, Evangelical Christianity was a theologically-based movement, embracing the Bible as God’s truth and the notion of a life-changing new "spiritual birth" from faith in Jesus' deity and belief in his atonement for our sins. It defined a personal and communal spiritual awakening. 

That was before the Moral Majority turned the label into a conservative political movement. I believe this phenomenon has divided Evangelicals into at least two camps. On one side there are the politically-active, socially conservative activists like Dobson, Falwell and Huckabee – who believe in legislated morality. On the other side are people like Ron Sider who founded Evangelical’s for Social Action, and many others who hold that God transforms us from the inside, and then we express that transformation in practical ways like caring for the poor and marginalized, advocating for and seeking justice for the oppressed, loving (not screaming at) their enemies, living piously, engaged in Earth stewardship, and sharing the Gospel message to those who are willing to hear. This second group sees themselves primarily as citizens of Heaven's Kingdom first, and their tribe or nation second. It truly is God first, then country. Their hope is not in what they see as flawed human institutions, although they don't abandon those institutions either.

So when the polls bundle Evangelicals into a single demographic, I think they miss the big gap that exists between the two camps. I consider myself an "Evangelical" in the second camp and have never embraced the political movement version because much of it seems so antithetical to Jesus' teachings as I understand them.
  
I am disappointed but not surprised in what I see the moral and spiritual decline of the World in general and our country in particular. But I don't expect that a secular government can bring about the kind of personal and cultural change that I believe can only come from a direct  personal encounter with the Divine. Laws have historically never produced the kind of righteous living the moral activists promote . Even the theocracy of ancient Israel couldn't produce it.

So when I vote, it's usually for who I think will govern most wisely and effectively, even if I don’t agree with their moral stance on everything.  I think Trump’s values, words and actions fundamentally violate my understanding of Jesus' teachings, but far worse, I believe Trump would be a foolish and destructive chief Executive for any country.
                                                      #     #     #

About John Coster.   I studied Theology and Biblical Studies at Multnomah University; have helped raised funds and worked on the ground in Christian relief - in education, healthcare, and water development in Africa with SIM;  micro-finance and village development in El Salvador with Agros Foundation ; have met and worked with Dr. Billy Graham in his evangelistic "crusades" in the US and former Soviet Union; and presently I chair of the elder board at Creekside Covenant Church in Redmond WA.   His wife, Patti, lead's the church's outreach to homeless people.

Check out my podcast:

October 2 Podcast: The Truths that Hillary and Trump know full well, but must not say

This October 2 podcast talks about the polls, about Trump's self-inflicted wounds, and about the things that Trump and Hillary know full well to be true, but must not admit.   The podcast is a spirited conversation between me and Thad Guyer, an attorney who represents whistleblowing employees, with an international practice.   He watches the election from home base in Saigon.