Author: John Stonestreet
After his White House days, Chuck Colson spoke clearly and often about issues of personal and public morality, criminal justice, the limits of the state, religious freedom, and many other matters related to politics. But he never publicly endorsed a political candidate. The Colson Center remains committed to that practice.
At the same time, Colson believed that all citizens should have the right, and therefore had the moral responsibility, to vote—something taken from him because of a criminal conviction in the Watergate proceedings. After Florida governor Jeb Bush restored his full civil rights as a citizen, including the right to vote in 2000, he advocated the same for anyone who had paid their debt to society.
Chuck also believed that, for Christians, the duty to vote went beyond our rights as citizens of the United States. St. Augustine taught that citizens of the kingdom of God should be the best citizens of whatever society they were in. What that meant for us, Chuck said, is that “we must vote.”
It’s understandable that some Christians struggle to see how voting could be a sacred activity when looking at a ballot that offers so little that aligns with their values. Even so, the choice to not vote, in order to “keep our hands clean,” is a form of pietism, not Christianity. James is clear that if there is good that we can do, we should; and to not do the good we can is sin. Dietrich Bonhoeffer, facing far worse political realities than ours, rejected pietism as contrary to Christian responsibility. Because Christianity is an incarnational faith, he wrote, it has to be lived in “the tempest of the living.”
But how should we vote? Often, Christians and other citizens of conscience describe voting as choosing between “the lesser of two evils.” A former colleague has suggested a better approach, in my view.
Christians should think of voting, not as choosing between the lesser of two evils, but as a way of “lessening evil.” Not only does this approach better fit the political realities of our current context, it also recognizes the inherent limits of politics; limits we seem to have forgotten in this hyperpolitical moment. Also, voting to lessen evil can recognize the moral inadequacies of candidates while still seeking to accomplish good through voting.
In the American context, the “lesser of two evils” approach exaggerates the importance of individual political candidates for good or for evil, especially who is in the White House. This, in turn, can lead people to underestimate the importance of local and statewide elections. But, as Chuck Colson often said, “Salvation will never arrive in Air Force One.” Neither, for that matter, will the apocalypse. Still, on the issues that matter most (such as life and family, children’s rights and religious liberty), the midterm elections on November 3—including state and local races and ballot initiatives—will be incredibly consequential.
For example, several states will be voting on ballot issues related to sex-based school sports and medical transitioning for children. Fourteen states will vote on amending state constitutional rights, including about marriage and the rights of religious individuals and groups. Once again, abortion is on the ballot. In Nevada, Virginia, and Idaho, voters will decide if abortion becomes a formalized right, even a constitutional right in two of them. In Missouri, voters have the opportunity to reaffirm a state-wide abortion ban.
Of course, the election will also determine which party holds the majority in state houses, as well as in the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives. Voting to lessen evil can help navigate between flawed candidates while never excusing bad character. It recognizes that character is revealed by both a candidate’s behavior and his or her policies.
Our prayer and our vote should always be for the best outcomes, but the most important work the Church does is pre-political. While it matters who is in the White House and State House, it matters far more who is in our houses. Years ago, Chuck Colson observed that the church had become “dangerously polarized into two camps: politicized and privatized views of faith. [N]either view,” he continued, “has anything to do with historic Christianity.”
In Christ, our hope is found. Our hope is neither found nor lost in elections. Still, He has called us to engage the world around us as ministers of His reconciliation. For us, that means more than just voting, but not less. Vote so that good can be upheld and evil can be lessened.