Amish at the White House — Matt Landis

Lesson Transcript

Hello everybody, welcome back to another episode of Anabaptist Perspectives. I'm here with Matt Landis, not obviously in the same location. We're doing something a little different this time. This is a, um, I guess you could say a bonus episode where I'm not able to be in Matt's area, but we wanted to put out this content pretty quickly because it's, um, a little more relevant and, um, current day about things that are happening right now, um, around us and what our response should be as an Anabaptist.

So I'm going to read a few things here, um, and I want to get your, um, initial response. So recently, um, just a couple weeks ago, Washington Times reported that a group of Amish, um, visited President Trump in the White House. And here's a part of that article. It says, "President Trump began the holiday break by hosting an Amish delegation to the Oval Office. The first-time members of the reclusive community have received that honor.

They might have been an odd pairing, the brash and extravagant billionaire president and the humble Amish, but they enjoy a kinship in their Christian faith and work ethic." The Amish visitors told the Washington Times. He is a com—this is quoting—"He is a common man just like me and everyone else. Very common, very friendly. He called us friends when we walked in there," said Levi Miller, 56, an Amish farmer from Ohio.

"It gets people excited that we have someone in there who is not afraid to talk about Jesus Christ." The Amish men described themselves as strong supporters of Mr. Trump and each denounced the House Democrats' impeachment of the president as a waste of taxpayers' money. Um, and apparently this is the first time Amish had been to the White House since an Amish bishop, um, visited President, uh, President Wilson back in World War I. Um, yeah, it's very interesting.

It goes on to say, um, the article, uh, goes on to say, "The Amish men said that they did not harbor any misconception that Mr. Trump is an overtly religious man, but they said he shared their Christian, um, values basically and was moving the country in the right direction." Um, it is so much easier to pray for a government that is doing something in, in the right direction was their point.

So my initial question, first of all, this really surprised me when I saw this, um, but initial question is basically, the Amish would hold to the New Testament doctrine of non-resistance. Um, is there a conflict between their words and their belief, um, in non-resistance, like by going to the White House? What would you say? Mm-hmm. Yes. Well, is there a conflict with non-resistance and visiting the White House? I would say not necessarily.

Uh, but maybe, maybe to answer this question and maybe to set, set a little context for everything that we say, uh, in this, in this pod or in this episode, I'd like to set the stage a little bit. Um, so, you know, Christians talk about politics from a very specific place. Uh, you know, we understand that everyone's coming from somewhere and, and Christians are coming from a very Christians, Amish, Mennonites, uh, coming from a very specific place. And that place is that Jesus is Lord of the world.

Uh, he's Lord, he's Messiah, he's king. And this idea, this, this is, this is not just an Amish idea. It's not just a Mennonite idea. This, this is a Christian idea. And in fact, it's one of the most repeated ideas in the New Testament. So if you look at the New Testament and see when the apostles were quoted in the Old Testament, they—one of the most quoted passages in the Old Testament is Psalm 110. And what Psalm 110 says is that Jesus is sitting at the right hand of God. He's enthroned. He's king of the world.

So when anything we say about, uh, the kings of the world, we are coming from the perspective that Jesus is Lord. And that's not just some generic thing that Jesus is a really great guy. He's, you know, he's almost as high as the other famous people in the world. No, Jesus is king of the world. Um, that, that's what animated the apostles. Uh, Jesus is enthroned, uh, and every human needs to obey Jesus. And Jesus has told us what we need to obey. Uh, and this is the good news.

You know, we often talk about what's the good news. The good news is Jesus is on the throne. So he's king. And number two, uh, no allegiance due to Jesus should be siphoned off to someone else. If Jesus is sitting at the right hand of God and he's ruling the world, um, no tiny amount of allegiance that's due to Jesus should get siphoned off to anybody else. Uh, we could look at Philippians 2. Every knee is going to bow because Jesus is so amazing.

Um, and this is why the New Testament apostles could confidently say that we ought to obey God rather than men because Jesus is on the throne. He's king. Um, why, why would we obey anyone else if it contradicts Jesus? Uh, and number three, this allegiance is not just some generic thing where I feel good because, you know, Jesus is vaguely king somewhere and I'm, you know, vaguely have allegiance. No, allegiance causes a very specific kind of life.

It's a love, a life of loving those, uh, even those who oppose the way of Jesus. It's a life of humility. It's a life of sexuality that really shows respect and love for other people. Um, it's, it's a life, a modest lifestyle, uh, that has interest in caring for others. Christians don't sit on golden commodes. You know, it's Christians are different.

Uh, it respects and doesn't look, uh, to forcefully and violently overthrow an order achieved, even if that order is achieved by a means that is opposed to Jesus as king. Don't, don't do that. Um, even while recognizing that the, the state and humans that operate on principles that odds with Jesus, uh, you know, that is the case. Uh, and, and a last item that I would say in, in setting the stage to get to that question of, you know, are, are Amish visiting, is that, is that in conflict with non-resistance?

The last one is politics is in essence resolving conflicts among individuals or groups of people. And the state and Jesus at heart have very contradictory ways of going about this. Uh, they, they don't go about this the same. And the question is which will be muted by the other when they clash? You know, when the, when the, when the, when the apostles said, "We ought to obey God rather than men," that, that was the question. When they clash, who gets obeyed? Well, of course, Jesus, who's king of the world.

Why would I do some little provincial, why would I, why would I bow and give my allegiance to some little provincial fellow that has a little postage stamp part of the world under his control when we can, we can worship and be, have allegiance to the king of the whole world? Um, and, uh, you know, will blind allegiance, uh, to a party make us blind to our single-hearted allegiance to Jesus? That, that, I think that's what's at stake here.

So coming back to that question, are Amish visiting the president in conflict with non-resistance or loving your enemy? And I would say not necessarily. Um, but saying, you know, can you, can you visit the president? Sure. But many serious conservative Anabaptists today would have serious reservations about visiting a president to communicate that they're politically supporting him. Um, you know, you might notice that these were, these Amish were business people and not necessarily ministers.

I don't know if Amish ministers would have had a different, uh, take on this. Um, and we also, another thing, um, you know, we don't know everything they said. You know, maybe they said things that they didn't tell the newspaper they said. I, I don't know. Um, why could it be okay? You know, one of the things that they did is, um, they focused on the positive traits of the state. They focused on freedom of conscience.

And my thinking is that that is one of the kingdom-like characteristics of the United States and other countries for that matter. When they give freedom of conscience, they are acting in a way that is consistent with Jesus. So, uh, you know, that the Amish agreed with that is, is, is, is not inconsistent with non-resistance because it's actually, you know, allowing people to, uh, maybe even in counter to your own best interest.

In other words, letting Amish not go to war in when that's not in the best interest of the United States during a war, that's kind of a con, a kingdom-like, um, characteristic, I would say. I want to be generous. Why not grant it when you can? Um, uh, professing to be a Christian, that is a kingdom, that that's a fine thing. And that's another thing they called out. Um, talking about Jesus, that's a great thing.

Um, you know, all of those things, I mean, a bunch of those things that they mentioned were, were fine and perfect things, good things. Um, I have an idea that in some ways they might have been used a bit in that they were likely chosen for their out, out, outspoken political support of, of Trump.

Um, which once again, many conservative Anabaptists would not approve of, whether it was Trump or Obama, you know, that outspoken, um, they, they, they wouldn't, um, which if, if you think about it, is a non-essential of Amish faith. I think I can say that even though I'm not Amish, um, being an outspoken supporter of Trump is not an essential of any political party for that matter.

Uh, and they did not, it very specifically, they did not talk about what they believe to be an essential part of Amish or Christian faith. They talked about some things around the edges, but they didn't talk about some of the core things that they would believe Amish themselves would believe, uh, designates a, a, a Christian who is being faithful, namely that you love your enemies. So I would have interest in what would have happened had they got on that subject with Donald Trump.

Uh, that, that could have been interesting. That probably would have been more interesting than, um, you know, just saying that we, you know, vaguely, generically, um, agree. Their visit did not give a complete or even a rounded view of who Anabaptists or Amish are. It, it was not a faithful view, um, because the comments or what they discussed never, you know, got to the real hardcore things. Um, so those are some thoughts I had. Yeah. Yeah. That's, that's good.

It, it's, um, I, I read something like that, this article, and I'm torn because I'm just like, I don't even know how to look at this. You know, it's hard to un, unpack it, but I agree with your statement. It does feel like they were used slightly, um, as if this was a, a grab to try to get a, a voting block, um, in the upcoming election. I don't know, but it seems interesting.

So the next question segues into that, and it basically is, can we affirm that Donald Trump's values as a quote Christian or whatever is somehow in alignment with our Anabaptist values? Um, and how does that look? Mm-hmm. Well, I guess we already started a little bit to talk about that just a little bit. And, and I'm going to preface this by saying that, that, um, Amish, like most other Christians, do not relish judging individuals.

You know, we don't like, wow, we got the opportunity to, to, to really, you know, go down and just slice this person into little pieces. Um, but Christians, you know, and I often, I often hear that actually, oh, well, don't say anything, um, because that would be kind of judging. And let me grant that, whether, you know, whatever I think about that, let's grant that for the moment. But let's say Christians do believe it is necessary to outline what faithful Christian life looks like.

So whether or not we like, you know, judging an individual, we can put that aside. Um, let's get this light back on. I have a, if I don't wave my hands enough, my light's goes off. So I have to snip that. Sure. So maybe once again, you know, we might not. F49, a tooth for a tooth should be a Christian's favorite Bible verse. Um, you know, when I look at those things and I don't, I don't, I don't care who it would be.

If someone told me that list of things, I would think that's a parody of Christian life rather than an example of it. Mm-hmm. And Christians shouldn't feel at all, you know, guilty or sheepish for just saying that clearly. Um, maybe talking more specifically about Amish, you know, you know, you know, is it, are they compatible? Well, you know, Amish do not have a central conference who can make statements on behalf of all Amish.

There's just unlike Mennonite, you know, Mennonites have conferences and, you know, maybe a, you know, a chairman of the conference could kind of speak on behalf of the conference at some level. Amish don't have that. So, you know, you can get, if you ask one question, you could get, you know, 500 answers. You go to every, you know, um, but one of the issues that led to the founding of the Amish, uh, was an issue of Jacob, Jacob Ammon's rejection of good-hearted Christians.

And good-hearted Christians were those, uh, were those Protestant people in the countryside in Switzerland, um, who were sympathetic to the Anabaptists, but were not willing to do all the sacrifice it takes to love your enemies, not lie, not divorce. Um, and, and Jacob Ammon did not accept them as Christians.

And as a matter of fact, in a letter he wrote this, Jacob Ammon wrote in a letter, or either he dictated, we don't know if he could write, but he, uh, somehow it got in a letter, if a miser does not turn from his fornication and a drunkard from his drunkenness, um, or other immoralities, they are thereby separated from the kingdom of God. And if he does not improve himself through a pious, penitent life, such a person is no Christian and will not inherit the kingdom of God.

Um, so, so Jacob Ammon, who founded the Amish, was very clear that becoming a Christian, uh, means, uh, a new life. You can't just persist in the old things. Um, and he was even more, uh, probably more adamant than some of the other Anabaptists. I think it was, was it Rist who was kind of the other side of the disagreement?

They were feeling, well, we could be a little more, you know, those people that are sympathetic to us and they help us out when there's persecution, you know, maybe we can just not comment on them. But Jacob Ammon said, no, we got to comment and they're not in the kingdom. So he's basically saying, I mean, this is something that's wrong and I'm not going to stand by and just not call it. Yeah.

And just say, you know, well, because, you know, this magistrate in Zurich is a, you know, because he talks about Jesus sometimes and he makes the economy good, I'm going to support the fella. No, they would say, sorry, you need to join the kingdom of God. That's what it sounds like to me. Wow. Wow.

That's, that's an interesting when, when you step it back and think in a historical perspective, you know, go back a few hundred years and think about how this sounds, that really changes, changes things a bit, you know? So I have to ask you, um, if Donald Trump had invited you to come to the White House as a representative of Mennonites, kind of like what happened with the Amish here, what would your response be? Yeah. Well, um, number one, I, I don't see why you wouldn't, uh, take an invitation to talk to a king.

Um, and actually I've been thinking for some time, um, what is a good witness to a king? So if you've got the opportunity, uh, to talk to a king, what, what should you say? Um, what did other faithful Christians throughout history, what did they do when they had the opportunity to talk to a king? Um, you know, did they just say, you know, focus on, uh, supporting them politically? You know, when John the Baptist got an opportunity to chat with, with Herod, did he say, you know, I'm all for you.

I'm going to try to keep you in office? Or did he say something different? Um, Paul, when he got an opportunity to be in front of Agrippa, uh, did he say that, um, you know, keeping the economy going good, Agrippa? Or did he say that, Agrippa, I wish that you were exactly like me, except being in prison? And what does exactly like me mean? Does that mean that he, you know, that Paul had, you know, we could list all kinds of things. Well, we know Paul, you know, love your enemy, just the whole list.

You can look in Romans 12, Romans 12 and 13, I don't know many things, but the love, um, and Paul was saying, he was pointing at Agrippa and he was saying, I wish you were just like me. It just sold out, you know, what if Agrippa would have been charging around the Roman Empire trying to convince people? Um, and then, so we have other people who've had opportunities to speak to a king, uh, in more recent history.

Uh, the CAM director, David Troyer, when he was young, recently in a CAM communicator, there was a story, uh, and he got an opportunity to talk to the president. Or he, he made an attempt to talk to the president when he was, if I'm thinking right, still a teenager. Uh, and he's, and what it said in the article says, I badgered when I was a teenager, President Nixon occupied the White House and I badgered him with questions such as, can I visit you? And are you a Christian?

And, uh, Richard Nixon's, uh, assistant, Dwight Chapin, uh, it sounded like, like, I don't know how often David Troyer sent things, but he was corresponding with, with, uh, his press secretary. And the press secretary sent David a large envelope of pictures about the good deeds of Richard Nixon. And there were pictures like, uh, what were the pictures? It was, uh, inviting the elderly to the White House and a Thanksgiving meal.

Um, and I had to think this young fella was making a press secretary of the president of the United States answer for his goodness. I mean, there's nothing wrong with that. Mm-hmm. And David said he, he later felt sorry for Chapin when he saw his name among those that went to prison for the Watergate, the Watergate crimes. Wow. So notice how ironic that was. When he had an opportunity, he was asking, are you a Christian? Are you doing what you should be doing?

And the fact of the matter is he needed that, that question asked him. So what, you know, what when you get an opportunity to visit, I mean, sure we can be encouraging. We, we should be praying for the president. Um, but can we ask those kinds of questions? Menno Simons also, um, he also, you know, like, what did he say? Now, I don't know if he, you know, if he got a chance to visit the magistrates and the kings, but he had a few things to say to them.

Um, and he said this, this is in the complete writings of Menno Simons. Yes, beloved lords, can you thus convert yourselves with all your hearts? Can you change your hearts and humble yourselves before God? Deny yourselves, seek and follow Christ and his righteousness, renounce the world and, and the flesh with all its lusts as ye have heard. He's kind of challenging them. Can you, can you do this?

Not, you know, um, you know, you're Christian, so I'm, I'm going to try to keep you here so we, you know, everything goes good. No, challenging them to go on and, and be more, even more faithful. Um, another thing he said is, uh, Menno Simons, and sometimes this might resonate with it just a little bit. When I look to find a magistrate who fears God, rightly performs his office and uses authority properly, I find as a general rule, nothing but a wine soddened Lucifer. Hmm. Ouch. Wow. Um, wow. Here's another one.

Christians would reasonably expect it to point the magistrate who have as a general thing high and proud minds and are quite carnal in their life to true. So Christians would reasonably expect it to point them to the true and serious repentance, which avails before God and to teach them spirit, mind, nature, uh, and word of the Lord. So that's what he's, you know, if we get an opportunity, we encourage them to, you know, be faithful, be obedient and, and, and amend your way if you're not where you should be.

Um, one of the things, even, even in our statement of faith, we have this statement. Uh, it's as we have an opportunity, we should witness by word and deed to all men, including government leaders, concerning principles of righteousness and justice. And I don't know if they pulled that directly from Menno Simons, because clearly he thought they should do that. But those are some examples of what people in the past have done. What would I do? I tend to believe I'd probably be a little too nice.

I don't think I'd be talking about wine soddened Lucifers. And, you know, would I, would I have the gumption to talk about Ronald Reagan or Donald Trump's adultery? Uh, I don't know if I would, but I would hope that, that, that, that I could be encouraging, you know, reinforce where things are being done right, but encourage and, and challenge where, um, there's something that's not right. Mm-hmm. Yeah. That's a good response. That makes a lot of sense. Feels, feels well balanced. Okay.

So, so taking all of that that we just packaged up. So there's something else that's been happening recently that's caused a firestorm on the internet. And that is Christianity Today, the magazine publishing an article about Donald Trump. And I'm just going to read a section of that, um, to you here and we're going to analyze this a little. Um, so this is quoting Christianity Today. To the many evangelicals who continue to support Mr.

Trump in spite of his blackened moral record, we might say this: remember who you are and whom you serve. Consider how your justification of Mr. Trump's influences, no, your justification of Mr. Trump influences your witness to your Lord and Savior. Consider what an unbelieving world will say if you continue to brush off Mr. Trump's immoral words and behavior in the cause of political expediency.

If we don't reverse course now, will anyone take anything we say about justice and righteousness with any seriousness for decades to come? Can we say with a straight face that abortion is a great evil that cannot be tolerated and with the same straight face say that the bent and crooked character of our nation's leader doesn't really matter in the end? They didn't spare any punches in this article.

Uh, they basically came out on the side saying that, um, the president should be impeached because of his, um, poor character and Christians should cease to support him. Um, and this is a big deal that I'm sure the dust will be settling for probably years, um, over this article. But out of that, I have this question.

So how can Jesus' teachings about the kingdom of God, as opposed to the kingdoms of this world, inform the way we think about supporting the president, particularly when we think about what Christianity Today released in that article? Mm-hmm. Yeah. Well, let's change, uh, the president, um, which really points it at, at, at, at the current president and change it to a president. And I think everything that, that I will say will apply to them all.

Um, once again, we're kind of, we're kind of, you know, abstracting a little or backing away a little from this. And, um, you know, one of, one of the things that we noticed and when a president who was not the right party displayed these kinds of characteristics, um, there was a lot of Christians who said that's great reason for concern. If we're not captured by partisan blindness, I think it's very easy to see that neither will we justify it, um, for a president who happens to be the right party.

Um, as Christians who take the Sermon on the Mount, uh, as our marching orders, meekness, uh, expect opposition, loving our enemies, saying truth, no oaths, um, the lack of divorce at great personal cost, love and great investment in personal relationships is what we see as the way people should live. We don't justify those things. Um, and I don't think there's a need to in this case either.

You know, whether you, whether you agree or disagree with whatever might happen in relation to impeachment, um, it seems to me there's no need for Christians to justify. I think that's where, um, is it Galley the name of the author? Yeah. Mark Galley. Yeah. I think that's where he's strong. Um, you know, throughout history, throughout the 20th century, um, Christians have always had concerns when people did not demonstrate, uh, Christian character as they expected. And they're always quick to say that.

Um, I'm not sure why that should change. I think that was, that was being faithful. Now, maybe, maybe sometimes we're too judgmental, um, but there is, there's, you know, Christians may say what they think it means to be a Christian. And don't you, you don't need to embrace something else or, or justify that kind of behavior. Mm-hmm. Um, it's, it's almost like, um, there's this, uh, ignoring of these failures, um, almost selling out that part so we can gain a little piece of, of political power.

Is that a fair way of saying it maybe? It seems like it. It seems like there is, um, you know, maybe we can accept a little, um, we can accept a bit of, uh, inconsistency in the hope that in the future, uh, we can, we can accept unfaithful now, so hopefully we can be more faithful in the future. Well, that's a, that's a trick that never happens. Just kind of tend to keep accepting more and more and kind of go down the, which Christians have always said.

I mean, uh, even, even, even those maybe a little more captured by partisan politics. Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Um, yeah. Yeah. So what's, what's a proper way we can respond then when, when we keep seeing in the news and just around about the moral failures of, of the current presidency and, and the way the country is being run? What, what's a way we can respond to that as Anabaptists? Yeah. Well, I think as Christians, as Anabaptists, um, I think that we should be really interested in truth.

And, um, you know, whether we should not easily accept things that might just be, um, might just be politically motivated, you know, smears. I don't think, I think we should be really searching for, is this true or not? Maybe it's not. You know, maybe some of these things, um, are no longer true. Uh, my understanding, you know, if I'm thinking right, you know, uh, the president was asked, you know, does he need to, you know, does he need forgiveness?

You know, I think, I think his first answer was, no, I, you know, why would I, you know, I never asked for forgiveness. I don't need forgiveness. Um, I think someone asked him a month later and he kind of said the same thing. And now maybe more recently he said, well, I hope I don't have to ask for forgiveness. Wow. So maybe softening that up a little, you know, maybe, you know, and, and, and just be upfront.

Maybe he's, you know, maybe he's learning, maybe he's changing, you know, maybe we can give a benefit of the doubt. Um, are we allowing partisan political propaganda to fuel our thinking? You know, are we so trapped in this that we're, you know, quick to believe something that's not true? Now, I don't think anybody disagrees that, uh, you know, that as, as, as Anabaptists, we would believe that he, you know, has committed multiple adulteries.

I don't think anybody's disagreeing, you know, so that thing is like a standing truth that no one's disagreeing with. Yeah. Yeah. If it is true, um, maybe we could ask, you know, how, how do we think about the president's misdeeds? If it is true, if someone at our church was doing this, what would we say about it? Mm-hmm. Is that a way to test, you know, why are we justifying it?

Someone distant and nearby was like, wait a minute, if someone would be standing up every Sunday and saying how, you know, they are just the best and they're just the most wonderful and they're everything about them is the best and they only listen to people that say good things about them, we would have some concerns about that. Um, in the New Testament, um, you know, this, this kind of arrogance about yourself is not something that we would be real comfortable. The New Testament is not comfortable with that.

You know, if I'm thinking right, Herod demonstrated some of that and the New Testament, you know, with relish, noticed the judgment that came on him. So I think this is something where you would warn someone, don't act like that. Not that we'd embrace him and say, well, this is, you know, the man of the hour. I think, I think there'd be more of a feeling like, you know, pray that God would not, you know, not strike him down and that he would see the error, that error and correct it.

Um, respect for the king, something Christians absolutely need. We need respect for the king. But respect does not mean justifying a lifestyle that's at odds with Jesus in the name of political being relevant or having some kind of influence. Um, you know, respect, uh, means Christians calling men into the kingdom. Wow. Yeah. And I think that's a, that's a really important thing to remember is respect, whichever side of the issue you're on. It feels like there's just not a whole lot of that.

Um, respect, but still calling people to a higher standard. I, yeah, it makes a lot of sense. And talking about the thing of which side you're on, I, I, you know, let's remember that the Mennonite, uh, the Mennonite experience of participating in American politics began with them with being, being absolutely supporting anti-war government. Uh, okay. An anti-war government, the Quakers, you know, the Quakers were against war.

And that's one of the reasons Mennonites got so involved because they knew that they would support them not getting involved in war as well. Wow. So that was, so they, it's a lot. Goodness. Well, there's also something else very ironic, you know, now, so, so Mennonites started out supporting an anti-war government. Um, they started, you know, an anti-war, uh, party, uh, you know, no oaths, live like Jesus in, in radical ways.

Um, and now we've gotten to the point where Christians somehow, uh, we, we need to support, you're so tied to supporting a party that's everything that's the antithesis to that. But just because they say, you know, they talk about Jesus and they are a professing Christian, then you ought to support them. Well, think about it. In Switzerland, all the magistrates were professing Christians.

Did Anabaptists think that because they were professing Christians, they need to ignore everything they're doing wrong and never challenge them? Absolutely not. The early, uh, the early Anabaptists, they had Christian magistrates, um, and that did not lead them to excitedly supporting them because, you know, well, these guys are Christians too. But what it led them to is saying, you guys ought to stop using the sword and join us.

That's, whether it's Mennonite, whether it's Mennonite Simons or Mons or Grebel, like, and, and, and by the way, Grebel, you know, you know, money was another thing, you know, you know, just getting as rich as you can, not, not cool. Anyhow, not unquestionably cool. Well, okay. So I have, um, another quote here from that article, um, from Mark Galley, um, Christianity Today. So should we, um, should we agree with him? This is the question.

So should we agree with him that the president has erred, um, and support his opponents, or should we call for his pardon since he, we believe, may have been ordained by God? Um, and then in a follow-up article, um, just to kind of set the tone, um, the editor there at Christianity Today, um, said, quote, the alliance of American evangelicalism with this presidency has wrought enormous damage to the Christian witness. So now should we take the other side?

Should we support, uh, so we have this kind of a zero-sum game. You have to support the opponents or you have to support him. I think a Christian should resist becoming entrapped by false political, the false partisan political alternatives. Either you got to be against him, you got to be against, uh, you know, against Trump or for, uh, the other side.

There's a, you know, a perfect legitimate prayer for a Christian who takes the Sermon on the Mount, uh, at face value is that the president would decide to obey Jesus carefully and give up his decision, uh, voluntarily apart from any impeachment proceeding and on the basis that it's inconsistent with Christ to have a role, uh, that is responsible for killing others. And this is not just Mennonites and Anabaptists, it's Hippolytus and 200s. He said that if you're a magistrate, you, you, you have to lead that.

So a perfectly, so do we have to be, you know, for the Democrats who want to bomb Iran or the Republicans who want to bomb Iran, perhaps neither. Mm-hmm. Perhaps it's none of the above. So in partisan politics, there's never a checkbox, none of the above. And what Kingdom Christians say, none of the above. Yeah. You know, a less radical view, um, could, could hold that there's wrong on both sides. Mm-hmm. You know, do you have to be like, you know, totally against Trump or totally for the other side?

Well, maybe there's something in be, you know, let's, let's grant maybe that you're not an Anabaptist and you believe that you should, you know, maybe there's something in between. There's always this, it just seems like, you know, in the climate, there's like this sharp, you have to, you know, one or the other. And in some senses, it felt to me a little like Galley did that. He kind of got sucked in the vortex a little bit.

And, and, and you know, it's, it's, it's one or you got to choose, you know, choose one or, um, I'm just going to draw a circle and, and nothing outside that's really allowed. Mm-hmm. I think maybe if I had to think that'd be probably one thing I was a little uncomfortable with. It almost seemed like it's, you know, um, it could feel that way. That was, I will say that's not really the way I feel about it. That's not the spirit of what we're trying to portray here, basically. Yeah. Yeah.

I don't, oh, well, he's clearly done some bad things. Therefore, the other side is, you know, that, that attitude doesn't, that doesn't seem to make sense in my mind. So just be like, this is bad. So now we're going to this. Yeah. And then on the comment about ordained by God, uh, thinking we know, uh, what's God's will is in relation to the, you know, to kings rising and falling is usually overestimated. Mm-hmm.

You know, you know, we, we, we think we know, um, uh, and then it kind of has this, you know, there's another association that, you know, what is God's will is supported by what happens if that happens to support what we want. Mm-hmm. It's like this, you know, it's almost like you're going to come out where you want no matter what. And yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. That makes sense. You know, I, yeah. Hmm. Well, one last closing question here to kind of wrap this all up for those that are listening.

Uh, so how do you see this in the context of Anabaptists? Are we susceptible to the same damage or are future undesirable consequences somehow exempt from our political opinions and loyalties? Yeah. Political opinions and loyalties. Uh, on that thing of our political opinions, um, and loyalties, political opinions and political loyalties are our loyalties and opinions. Where our passion is, there will our heart be also. If we're on the internet vigorously, uh, arguing that we bomb Iran, that's where our heart is.

Somehow there's this kind of this idea, and I suspect that maybe Luther gave it a little or contributed to it. Some acted like, act like there's the political me and the kingdom me. The political me is usually advising non-Christians and, and perhaps even worse Christians, how to best disobey Jesus if they're going to do it. Oh. Yeah. That's, that's a really good way of thinking about it. It's like, um, uh, the sacred secular divide in our lives almost.

We got this little box that's the sacred part where we go to church and our nice Christians, but then here's the secular part where we can justify something wrong. Mm-hmm. And then we, you know, I so often I see people just passionately arguing the least bad way to disobey Jesus. Like, why are you so excited about that? I'm just not excited about it at all.

Like, um, you know, when, you know, what if there was a discussion about how to address marriage conflict and that discussion only allowed, um, beating as the solution? Would you be passionately arguing for the 10 beating, the 10 hits option versus the 20 hits option? No. I mean, like this discussion is insanity. Let me out of it. What I would like to talk about is Jesus option.

You know, when people discuss, uh, resolving conflicts among individuals or groups of people, namely when they talk about politics, in other words, resolving conflicts among individuals or groups, I see it as my first duty to try to think what Jesus taught and recommend that. How, how, how shocking. And not the least bad alternative. Go ahead. Yeah. When it, but it, that's, it's so simple. It's like, here's what Jesus said to do. Let's try that. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

You know, so I'd really like people to think, don't think there's, you know, and I even heard, I heard a Mennonite bishop say, you know, not, well, you give me a little slack. Now I'm going to talk politics. Mm-hmm. And I just, I think it's really dangerous. Why are we stepping outside ourselves and talking from the point of view that we disbelieve? Why would we be doing that? You know, your, your, your political loyalties and your political allegiances, that is your allegiance.

If you're, if you're saying it with any intensity or any, that's you. And let that shock you, uh, and be concerned about it. Wow. So maybe a way to end this is for people listening to step back and look at how they're coming, how they're approaching these things. Yeah. And how was that again? Just think about it. Yeah. Like, yeah, like step back and just, whoa, see yourself from outside of yourself. Does this actually match up with what Jesus wants? Um, you know, maybe not.

And it's especially, especially, um, it brings up especially poignant questions. When we claim to believe that Jesus is king and that, that Matthew 5, 6, and 7 is the constitution for his kingdom, you know, it really drives, it drills questions into us. Mm-hmm. Wow. I like that. The Sermon on the Mount being the constitution for God's kingdom. Maybe that should, that should be our guiding star through all this. Wow.

Let's be as passionate, a passionate about Matthew 5, 6, and 7 and the whole New Testament, um, as some are about amendments of the American constitution. Yeah. That's what I would like to call people to. Yeah. And that, yeah, absolutely. I agree. Yeah. Wow. Wow. Thank you so much, Matt. Is there anything else you would like to share? That's the last of the questions I had. Yeah. I don't think so. I might only, if I was going to, maybe, you know, to circle back to what, or where we started. Mm-hmm.

You know, um, what is important? Well, to the apostles, the most important thing, uh, you know, Peter on the day of Pentecost, he ended his sermon on the day of Pentecost with Psalm 110. Uh, his great sermon, his clinching point was not that you could die tonight. His clinching point is Jesus is on the throne. The whole world's a different place. And everyone in Jerusalem said, what must we do? What must we do? Because Jesus is on the throne. Um, and clearly it's, it's not hard.

If Jesus is king of the world, no allegiance that belongs to him should be siphoned off to anybody else. And allegiance to him means a really certain kind of life. A very, you know, it's a, it means a certain kind of life. Yeah. Yeah. Wow. That's powerful. That's really good. And yeah, I just thank you for coming on and sharing this. I think this is going to be powerful for our audience and for all of you listening or watching. Um, yeah, we'd love to hear your feedback. What did you think?

Uh, do you have questions for us, especially questions about anything, uh, Matt shared? And, uh, we'd love to hear from you and, uh, and your feedback is, is always helpful. Um, so thank you everyone for listening to this episode and we will catch you next week on Thursday.