Kakule Molo


AND POLITICAL ENGAGEMENT By Kakule Molo


The separation between church and politics is a basic principle deriving from the very beginning of the Anabaptist movement in the course of the Reformation of the 16th


century initiated by


Martin Luther. While many Baptist churches are still committed to that tradition, others have developed alternative approaches in the light of political developments that have occurred in their respective countries. Increasingly Baptist lay leaders and to a lesser extent clergy, are engaged in the political sphere. The rationale often heard in some circles is that: “if we do not take care of politics, politics will take care of us.” This means that if politics is left in the hands of people who are not enlightened by the Word of God, there should be little surprise when things go wrong in society.


Another approach from many Baptist churches and individuals


is that they should limit their role to reminding those in power to faithfully carry out their political duties and to educating citizens to keep those in politics in check. But such an exercise hardly bears immediate fruit, especially in societies where the culture of democracy has not yet taken root and corruption is widely practiced. Therefore, it appears that given a diversity of political contexts, no single approach seems to be applicable in all cases. The principle of the separation between church and state needs


to be kept in balance. Irresponsible politicians should not take this to mean that the church is to have no say with regard to their political duties. Being part of society, the church has the right to speak to issues that may have an impact on it. Conversely, the state should not interfere in ordinary church matters that have no implication on the national legal system or on public order. The context of the 16th


century that led Baptists to distance


themselves from any political engagement has changed. In several countries where people are still experiencing political instability, more and more voices are encouraging Christians to enter into politics. At the same time, they are aware that in many countries, a number of those in power recognize themselves as Christians. But what they mean is that people with good Christian testimony should be engaged in politics as an active witness to the truth and the justice of the Gospel as expressed in John 8:32: “Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free,” and in Proverb 14:34: “Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a disgrace to any people.” Baptists need to understand that they have such a calling to witness to the truth and justice in the political arena. Baptists’ engagement in politics is to be seen as both an opportunity and a challenge. It is an opportunity because it is a calling from the very people Baptists serve daily, both spiritually and physically. At the same time, it proves to be a challenge


6 BAPTIST WORLD MAGAZINE


who have no fear of God. They felt that political changes in the Congo have more chance to occur if true believers would come to power or at least would be present in political structures. I was left with the understanding that despite the embarrassment


and disappointment Christians may experience in their political engagement, average citizens, who are mostly the victims of evil political structures, set their hopes for a better future on these Christian politicians. Baptists should consider heeding such calling without compromising the essentials of their Baptist identity.


Kakule Molo is president of the Baptist Church in Central


Africa in the Democratic Republic of Congo and a former elected Member of Parliament in that country.


because politics is a realm where danger lurks, where power and some practices contradict an authentic Christian life. In my own experience in the parliament of the Democratic


Republic of the Congo, I felt very often that some plans of the ruling majority to which my party belonged were in contradiction with my Christian belief. This put me in an awkward position against my own party which I was supposed to defend. But the most painful experience was that when the promises of the government were not fulfilled, the members of the parliament who had the obligation to visit regularly their voters were held responsible and even taken for liars. Such a situation was embarrassing to me as a Christian and pastor to the point that I ended up by deciding not to run for a second term. Surprisingly many people saw in my decision, the risk of leaving political affairs in the hands of people


Given a diversity of political contexts, no single approach seems to be applicable in all cases. . . . Being part of society, the church has the right to speak to issues that may have an impact on it.

Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32