During this election year cycle, there is a contest for the soul of America, and it is being fought in the church. It is being fought particularly among many Evangelicals. I’ve heard the battle cry to take back America and return to our Christian values and heritage.  It’s a chilling prospect that some are willing to overlook a Christ who died rather than ‘take back’ the Jewish land for God’s kingdom. It’s also a chilling prospect that some are willing to resort to lies in order to restore an ideal imagination of what this country should be as a Christian nation.

Where is God in all this? Many believe they are doing God’s will. They believe God is calling them to purge the land of evil, save the unborn, protect kids, and restore the family and community. So, I have to ask this…Who is more important to God? Are conservative Evangelicals more important to God, than a liberal, a trans person, or a Haitian living in Springfield, Ohio? And are progressive Evangelicals more important to God, than a farmer, a working-poor mother, or a High School drop-out?

Who does God love more? Who is God going to bless, and who is God going to curse? It seems – and I could very well be wrong –  that some conservative Evangelicals think they are the ones whom God is going to bless. And some of those same persons are the ones who will punish or dismiss anyone who thinks differently. We see this same belief vice-versa on the progressive side.

Whether theology, social issues, or politics, we believers choose sides presumably to be closer to the true nature of God and God’s intent. But how does one know for sure what is God’s intent? This is fundamentally a difficult question to answer, because the only final authority on who is right and who is straying or wrong about these things is God.

Some would say the final authority question is perfectly clear because the Bible is our ultimate authority as Christ-followers. But many good people who love Jesus and study the Scriptures carefully have differing points of view. So, whose interpretation will it be when both are using academic processes and the leading of the Holy Spirit to evaluate the texts?

We will never get past first base with these conundrums because there is a foundational crisis of authority among Evangelicals. Molly Worthen in Apostles of Reason: The Crisis of Authority in American Evangelicalism  addresses precisely this conundrum. Dr. Worthen argues that the problem within evangelicalism is not authoritarianism, but a lack of recognized authorities. We have legions of authorities, but no Pope. We have scholars, preachers, thought leaders, podcasters, influencers, billionaire and millionaire Christians, all alike claiming that they hold ‘the truth.’ Who do we believe?

Dr. Worthen writes, “Evangelicals are torn between sovereign powers that each claim supremacy.”¹Worthen, Molly, Apostles of Reason: The Crisis of Authority in American Evangelicalism (Oxford University Press, 2013), 2. She goes on to discuss the varieties of competing authorities in ten chapters from Reformed neo-evangelicals, to inerrantists and non-inerrantists, to Pentecostals, to evangelical feminists and anti-feminists. Dr. Worthen’s work is particularly potent as she describes how the Evangelical debate about the ‘purity’ of the Bible’s authority morphed into modern-day culture wars about women in ministry, and eventually into politics as we experience it in 2024.

We clearly see the effects of it today with Evangelicals claiming that God is on the side of their red or blue leader and her or his agendas. Evangelicals frequently think the ‘other’ is outside the divine will of God and are possibly blaspheming God’s authority.

So how do we come back from this chasm which has become as wide as the Grand Canyon? We can’t even see each other anymore from one side of the canyon to the other, there is so much division between us. And hate!  To be transparent, I’m not sure if we can, but Daniel Chandler has an interesting idea worth considering.

Evangelicals frequently think the 'other' is outside the divine will of God and are possibly blaspheming God’s authority. The problem within evangelicalism is not authoritarianism, but a lack of recognized authorities. (1/3) Share on X

We have legions of authorities, but no Pope. We have scholars, preachers, thought leaders, podcasters, influencers, billionaire and millionaire Christians, all alike claiming that they hold ‘the truth.’ Who do we believe? (2/3) Share on X

Dr. Molly Worthen concludes that 'Evangelicals are torn between sovereign powers that each claim supremacy.' (3/3) Share on X

In Free & Equal: What Would a Fair and Equal Society Look Like?, Daniel Chandler resurrects the theory of the political philosopher John Rawls. Rawls is probably most well-known for his ‘cake dilemma.’ If you were to give two children a cake to share, how would you ensure that both are happy with the result? Rawls would say that the only way to be fair and assure there is no complaint is to involve both children in the process. One child would cut the cake anyway he or she would want, and the other child would get the first pick of the slice she or he preferred.

Thinking about the cake dilemma through a formational lens as a Christ-follower, I find myself wondering the following: If Christ metaphorically gave us all cake with his death and resurrection, if he surely came so that whoever believes in him shall not perish, how does it work when one is gay and one is not? If one is for Trump and another for Harris? If one is pro-life and one is not? How does the cake, the body of Christ get divided between us? Who is the authority that gets to slice the cake or decide who can even have some? Some might say that the other party doesn’t get cake because they are sinners, outside the will of God. Again, who decides this? On whose authority does this choice rest?

If we adhere to the Holy Word of God, if we listen deeply for the guidance of the Holy Spirit, how do we come to a firm conclusion about who is right and who is wrong? What this simple experiment suggested by Rawls illustrates is that first and foremost, we must maintain a separation of authorities. We accept the reality that we all see things differently and have our own authorities to back us up. Christians will think differently about almost anything.

For this cake experiment to actually work, there are two basic premises at play:

1. Firstly, there is a respect for the rights of each individual. Each child gets a piece of cake. Each person who chooses to love and follow Christ gets to participate.
2. Secondly, there is an embrace of fairness. This means what every 5-year-old knows to be fundamental to the classroom and playground: We both get some cake.

To translate this perspective to our cultural conundrum, we must agree that we are all created in the image of God and that Jesus loves us equally. We all have equal access to God through Christ. This means that we can agree to disagree, but we cannot become the authority over another. We each have a right to our views²This assumes that people are acting ethically. – And yet, we must remain fair. We certainly can’t take the entire cake for ourselves and tell the other party to bugger off.

As Christians, we must accept the reality that we all see things differently and have our own authorities to back us up. Christians will think differently about almost anything. (1/2) Share on X

We are all created in the image of God, and Jesus loves us equally. We all have equal access to God through Christ. We can agree to disagree, but we cannot become the authority over another. We each have a right to our views. (2/2) Share on X

So how might we do this as Christians in this hostile season? Theoretically, in order to divide the cake, we would have to come together in the process. We would have to authentically listen to each other with respect. We would offer dignity to each as loved and created by God. We would have a desire to be fair and share the cake.

Now honestly and realistically, I don’t think at this point that we could ever come together to share the cake, although I know that some groups are valiantly trying to do so. This country is being defined as belonging to some of us, not all of us. So, is this hopeless?

What I find helpful is knowing that we don’t agree on authorities, so we have to make room for the authority of the other. We don’t try to usurp it or overwhelm it with our own arguments. The red people are loved by God. The blue people are loved by God. The red people have one authority. The blue people have another.

I am not naïve. I know that there are many forces with deep pockets and defined agendas who are cutting a deep streambed so that the water will flow in their direction. The outcome of the election will advantage their lives, their future generations, and their businesses. I also know and am aware that just because people use a label, doesn’t mean they represent that label. Some are knockoffs. People running for office can use the label Evangelical or Christian to privilege them with that voter block.

This is now in the hands of God on a systems scale. It is a mountain that I cannot move.

However, those of us who are grieving this state of affairs can do the following: I am compelled to find some other ‘child’ who wants cake and believes that they have the ultimate truth, and thus the authority to be right. I am compelled to listen to their story, ask thoughtful questions, and show empathy for their point of view.

I know I can’t change much during this contentious, frightening election season. But I can change who I am as a child wanting some cake. I can give the other person dignity by listening to them and caring about their point of view. I can alleviate some of my own anxiety by not ‘othering’ the opposite side. And after a conversation with someone who votes differently, I will know in my heart, not just my head, that God loves us all equally.

Will you join me in having conversations with people from across the aisle?

///

Here are helpful questions from the Solutions Journalism Network for these cross-partisan conversations:

• What is a social view for which you are passionate about?
• Which life experiences have shaped your views?
• Imagine for a moment that you get what you wanted in regards to this issue. How would your life change?
• For those who disagree with you, what would you like them to understand about you?
• What do you want to understand about those with whom you disagree?
• Why is this personally important to you?

///

Those of us who are grieving this state of affairs can do the following: Find someone who believes that they have the ultimate truth and listen to their story. Ask thoughtful questions and show empathy for their point of view. Share on X