Scandalous Witness (Lee Camp) -- A Review
SCANDALOUS WITNESS: A Little Political Manifesto for Christians. By Lee C. Camp. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2020. Viii + 183 pages.
The
2020 election cycle has raised the question of the role of religion in America’s
political life. In 2016 it was reported that some 81% of White Evangelicals voted
for Donald Trump. Something similar happened in 2020. Some of Donald Trump’s most
vocal supporters, even after the attack on the US Capitol building, comes from
that community. Why is that? What is driving such loyalty to a person who has
not demonstrated any true Christian commitment or values? That raises the
question of how religion and politics relate to each other. Questions of power
and influence, of course, are always in play. Although the Constitution
guarantees freedom from religion and bans religious tests for government offices,
many believe that the United States is a Christian nation, and that
Christianity should have a favored position in public life. Indeed, Christians
(of the proper perspective) should control the government. For those who hold
that belief, the growing diversity of the nation is a problem, as you might
expect. There are others in the Christian community that affirm the separation
of religion and government, with some calling for complete withdrawal from
public life. Most of us live between the two poles of control and withdrawal.
That’s where I find myself, as does the author of Scandalous Witness. Though,
I should note that the author, Lee Camp, places himself closer to those who
advocate withdrawal than do I. So, how should Christians relate to the public
square?
Lee
Camp’s book Scandalous Witness is subtitled A Little Political Manifesto
for Christians. The keyword here is manifesto as it gives us a sense of
what the author is up to with this book. As a manifesto, the book draws a line
in the sand. In it, the author critiques Christian partisans on both the left
and the right. He strongly rejects the idea that the United States is the last
great hope for the world, a vision that among others Abraham Lincoln espoused.
Instead of America, Camp offers Christianity as the world’s last best hope. Unfortunately,
as the author makes clear in this book, things have gone awry within the
Christian community, which undermines its witness.
Before
we get to the heart of the book, I need to introduce the author. Lee Camp is a professor
of theology and ethics at Lipscomb University, a university affiliated with the
Churches of Christ, a branch of the Stone-Campbell Movement of which I'm a
part. I should note that the university at which he teaches is named after a
religious leader who did argue for complete withdrawal from public life,
including voting. I see a bit of David Lipscomb in Camp’s manifesto, along with
some anabaptist leanings.
Camp
roots his manifesto in the proposition that Christianity is not a religion.
That is, Christianity is not a private commitment, like joining a service club
or fraternal organization. Rather than being a religion, Christianity is an
alternative politic. It is a political system in its own right. In making this
proposal we see similarities to the positions of people such as Stanley
Hauerwas, who endorses the book. In making this declaration, he responds to those
who insist that the United States is a Christian nation, by saying that this is
an impossibility. He argues that the United States can’t be a Christian nation because
nation-states are geographically bounded, and Christianity is not. Nation-states
also have citizenship requirements that are different from Christianity.
Nations build walls, while the church welcomes all. Nations use military might
to maintain their existence, and they seek their own partisan agendas.
Christianity is a different entity from this. That is because Christians are
called to offer a faithful witness to a way of life that is different from that
of the world and which extends beyond national and ethnic boundaries. In making this argument he seeks to place
himself between those who would withdraw and those who would control.
Camp
offers us fifteen propositions that define how he believes Christians should participate
in life as we know it (remember this is a political manifesto). He begins by outlining
his understanding of history, reminding us that "History Is Not One Damn
Thing After Another." He offers an eschatological vision that suggests
history has an end and a purpose. This vision of history as something is moving
toward a destination should guide Christian engagement in the world. From here he moves through such propositions as
making sure we understand that the United States Is not the great hope for the
World. In other words, he rejects the idea of American exceptionalism. Having made
that declaration he moves on to the idea of the United States being a Christian
Nation, arguing instead that Christianity is not a religion but a politic. The
final proposition argues that "Christian Engagement Must Always be Ad
Hoc." That is because until the Kingdom of God comes in its fullness
"there is no ideologically pure or utopian social arrangement among the
nations for which we should strive." (p. 164). Therefore, we must take
each issue as it comes. It also requires us to understand where our allegiance
lies. Our allegiance should be to Christ and not a party, whether that be
Republican, Democratic, or something else. I’m not sure whether he rejects
party participation in general, but he does argue strongly that party
allegiance must come after allegiance to Christ.
I agree
with much of what Camp writes here, especially regarding matters of allegiance.
I have argued that the Lord’s Prayer is itself a pledge of ultimate allegiance
to Christ. His message does resonate at
a time when Christians have gotten themselves so caught up in partisanship that
they have betrayed the allegiance to Christ. I agree strongly with that argument
that as Christians, our allegiance transcends national boundaries. However, despite
my agreement here, I will confess that I’ve struggled with figuring out how to
implement my values in a national context without joining the political system,
and that includes joining a political party (confession here—I’m a registered
Democrat and vote accordingly. I have my reasons, which I think are sound, but
the confession needs to be made). I will note that Camp takes a stronger view regarding
nonviolence than do I, though I will note that he offers a strong critique of
my Niebuhrian realism that has guided my mature engagement with the political
systems. That said, he does remind me why I am at times uncomfortable with the
idea of a Christian Left that stands in opposition to the Christian Right. The
question always centers around which pole has the upper hand, my faith, or my
political allegiance? In other words, can
liberal/progressive Christians easily slip into the posture of being the religious
arm of the Democratic Party?
I have
my concerns and I do quibble with some of what Lee Camp argues in this
manifesto. Part of my concern here has to do with living in a religiously pluralistic
country. If Christianity is an alternative politics, how does that relate to my
partnerships with non-Christian friends who themselves are committed to their
faith positions? I know from reading other pieces from Camp that he understands
this reality. Nevertheless, his manifesto serves as an appropriate warning to Christians
who live on both the Left and the Right. He critiques both extremes, arguing
that he's not staking out a middle position. He’s not arguing for a moderate
politic. He’s arguing for an alternative that is defined by Christ, and in
doing so places Christianity in a different position regarding the way in which
the world turns. Thus, when it comes to matters such as race and justice, we
can’t simply adopt the views of the reigning political ideologies. I agree, and
yet I struggle with how this gets implemented. But Lee Camp’s Scandalous Witness is a book that speaks to the church in the Age of Trump.
Comments