As I write this Iraq is still in shambles after the transfer of power and US troop reductions. Last month there were “only 600 attacks.” Afghanistan is in turmoil over concerns of election fraud and continuing successful militant attacks on foreign troops and local infrastructure. Many Canadians and Americans are asking, “What are we fighting for?” The answer is “freedom” or “democracy.” The fact is that neither of these values are being implemented as our culture conceives them. Afghanistan recently passed their controversial wife “obligation” bill which would allow a husband to refuse his wife monetary support and even food. Although it was objected to by all those western leaders attempting to assist Afghanistan there is nothing they can do because how to you attack the democratically elected government you helped implement? If you want “true” democracy then you had better be willing to accept the will of the majority regardless of what it does to the minority. This is only the first and most evident problem with the idea that democracy is the value worth fighting for. Democracy is only a viable option is the people have moved beyond living ‘according to the flesh.’ Our society still functions on the vestiges of its past but the signs of decay are all around.
Everyone is agreed that the goddess of democracy is to be worshipped:
Republicans:
“Ours is the cause of human dignity; freedom guided by conscience and guarded by peace. This ideal of America is the hope of all mankind. That hope still lights our way. And the light shines in the darkness. And the darkness will not overcome it.” George Bush, Remarks to the Nation, Ellis Island, September 11, 2002. [But who guides the conscience? Who is the Prince of Peace?]
“There’s power, wonder-working power, in the goodness and idealism and faith of the American people” George Bush, State of the Union Address, January 28, 2003. [Where is the power? Is it not in the death of Jesus and the servant nature of those who follow him?]
Democrats:
“You know, people outside of this country are expressing disappointment because they got high expectations for America. And they want America to lead, they want America to lead through our values, and through our ideals and through our example. But they have high expectations of us because, I think, that this country is still the last best hope on earth.” Barack Obama, The Late Show with David Letterman (April 9, 2007). [Those values which led Letterman to start talking about your suit? click through to read further...America=triviality]
“The American military has succeeded. It is the Iraqi government, which has failed to make the tough decisions that are important for their own people.” Hillary Rodham Clinton, June 20, 2007. [Those tough decision need to be backed up by wonder-working power, not notions of democracy. Who has the power to change lives and nations?]
Lest we think it is only Americans who put their hope in democracy to save the world, here is a quote from the UK’s former Prime Minister:
“There can be no debate about the rights and wrongs of what is happening in Iraq today. The desire for democracy is good. The attempt to destroy it through terrorism is evil.” Tony Blair, February 21, 2007. [The desire for the Kingdom of God is good. Christ warned that the world would attempt to destroy his body but his body is not a democracy, it is led by a head that cannot be outvoted]
The second problem with the notion that democracy trumps all else is that Christians and churches and whole denominations have attempted to outvote God. The body of Christ is not a democracy, it is a benevolent dictatorship in which the dictator went to the cross and died so that his subjects might live in true freedom – freedom from sin and death! A single person or even an entire denomination cannot vote to overturn the dictates of God. I have heard agitators state that they will call a vote and after the ballots are counted they expect the losing side to accept the will of the majority in order to keep unity in the church/denomination. If the subject under debate is that important then the losing side cannot (in good conscience) remain in fellowship with those who (they know) are violating the will of God. If the subject is not that important then there is no reason to have a contentious vote in the first place. If we accept the premise that the Kingdom of God is not a democracy but a dictatorship in which our duty is to obey the will of Christ our head the question of decision making remains. Who speaks for Christ? The Catholic Church had that question answered centuries ago but our Protestant solutions have varied. We currently embrace democracy but generally it has reflected the political leadership of the era. Luther answered “Scripture alone” is our guide and most would accept that but the problem is that both (or more) sides of an argument claim to have scriptural support. Who decides the meaning of scripture? Which hermeneutic do we engage it with? What manner of exegesis will give us God’s will for today? The answers are difficult to come by but one thing should be clear: we cannot count on the democratic paradigm to save us for “For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths” (2 Tim 4:3f). Doesn’t that sound like democracy?
.
Come on, you know you want to! And then surf over to 
