As Christians, we know that God is sovereign. He rules over the
world, and all people are subject to Him as their maker and owner. Every human
being is under a huge moral obligation to submit to and acknowledge Him.
In the light of God’s sovereignty, I am very concerned that large
numbers of Christians seem not to have grasped that the worldview of mainstream,
modern Western society is very different from a Christian worldview. Even many
who are devout and mature in the faith seem not to have understood this.
Whereas a Christian worldview sees God as in authority and human
beings as under that authority, it seems clear that in reality – if not
necessarily always in theory – the mainstream Western worldview sees humans
existing and acting as if they are the highest authority. The authority of God
is essentially nowhere to be found.
It is troubling, then, that in Western countries loud Christian
voices are often heard supporting the values and aims of those countries apparently
without stopping to ask if these values and aims are pleasing to God.
Failure to recognize the big differences between a Western
worldview and a Christian worldview can often be seen in what is said. There
are a number of signs that all is not well. The attitude of believers to the
will of the people is one of the clearest of these, and this is what I will say
something about in what follows.
Actually, there are two things I will discuss in this article.
First and most importantly, I want to think generally about attitudes to the
will of the people of a country. And second, I will say a little about democracy
as a system of government.
THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE
First, then, let’s turn our attention to the will of the people of
a country.
Those who see the will
of the majority as special
It seems clear that in Western society today, the average man or
woman regards the will of the majority of the people in a country as something
that is very special. Even if he or she personally disagrees with the majority
view on something, the typical Westerner believes that there is something
special about the majority viewpoint. In situations where the will of the majority
is denied, there is usually a feeling of injustice, that something right and proper
has been prevented. Even in moral issues, people often seem to think that the
will of the majority is the most important thing to take into account.
Nor is it just non-Christians who take this view. It seems clear
that many Christians in Western countries see things similarly.
My main aim in this article is simply to oppose this viewpoint. The
idea that the majority will of the people is something profound and special is
completely wrong, and I want to explain why this is so.
Human sinfulness
To begin with, we need to understand clearly that we humans are
all sinners. There are many biblical passages that teach this. An especially
important one is Romans 1:18-3:20, where the apostle Paul outlines at length
the depths of human sinfulness. In this passage it is striking just how negatively
the moral condition of people is described as being. The rest of Scripture
agrees with Paul’s assessment, even if there is not often the same amount of
detail given.
We need to recognize too that the people who have repented of
their sins are relatively few in number. We only have to look at how those
around us live to see that this is true. It is noteworthy too that in Matthew
7:13-14 Jesus tells us in no uncertain terms that there are many on the road to
destruction but only few on the road to life. Matthew’s Gospel has a strong
emphasis on the importance of doing good deeds, and Jesus’ words in 7:13 -14 surely imply that the many on the road to hell are
unrepentant sinners.
Importantly, given that all humans are sinners and that most of
these are unrepentant of serious sins, there are bound to be many situations
where the will of the majority of the people in a country is opposed to the
will of God. It would be very surprising if this were not the case.
A limit to human evil
On the other hand, however, it is certainly also true that humans
are not as bad as bad can be. No human is as evil as Satan or evil spirits. And
many situations arise where the will of the majority of the people is clearly
something that is in line with the will of God.
A mixture of good and
bad
Basically, in each country in the world, at times the will of the majority
of people is in line with God’s will, and at other times it is against His will.
This is true of attitudes in general, and it is also true of laws that are
passed.
The whole idea that there is something deep, profound, meaningful,
noble, upright, even quasi-sacred about the majority will of the people is
completely mistaken. This is what I want to encourage Christians to recognize.
Clear examples of the
majority wanting something bad
Just thinking about some examples shows how wrong it is for Christians
to view the will of the people as something special.
Take, for instance, those Muslim countries where it is the will of
the majority for Christians to be persecuted, and for evangelizing to be a
criminal offence. Obviously, the will of the majority is a bad thing in a case
like this.
Or take countries where it is the will of the majority for women in
the first so many weeks of pregnancy to be allowed to have abortions. Again,
the will of the people is a bad thing in this case.
Choosing not to
idolize the will of the people
Christians, then, must not follow mainstream Western society by
idolizing the will of the people as something profound and even quasi-sacred. There
is nothing special about the will of the majority. It is simply a mixture of
good and bad desires and choices, and no more profound than that. Christians
need to understand this clearly.
DEMOCRACY
My second, and less important, aim in this article is to say a
little about democracy as a political institution.
Practicality
If we reject, as we should do, the idea that the will of the
people is a special thing, we are then free to look at democracy without any
emotional baggage clouding our judgment.
The key factor in thinking about systems of government should be
practicality. Do forms of government work or not? Do they please God more or
less than other forms of government? Questions like these should be at the
forefront in considering democracy as a system of government.
Democracy has a good
track record
When we think practically about how useful democracy is as a form
of government, it is surely true that it has a good track record. There should
be no doubt that in many countries democracy has made things more pleasing to
God than they would have been under alternative forms of government. When
individuals or small groups of people gain power, abuses often occur that are
prevented in democracies.
I like Winston Churchill’s attitude to democracy. At least as I
understand his view, he was in favour of democracy, not because the will of the
people was in any way special, but simply because human nature is so corrupt
that no one person, or small group of people, should be trusted to have sole
charge.
Sometimes democracy is
not best
I am not sure if Churchill believed there are exceptional situations
when it would be better not to have a democratic government. If he believed
that there should be no exceptions, then I would disagree. History, both recent
and more distant, provides us with examples of where democracy seems to have
made things worse than they would otherwise have been.
Take the recent history of Egypt
In 2012 Mohammed Morsi, the Muslim Brotherhood candidate in the
Egyptian presidential election, was voted into power. Electoral monitors agreed
that the election was basically free and fair, and no one should doubt that it
was the will of the Egyptian people to choose Mr Morsi as their president.
Even under the previous undemocratic regime of Hosni Mubarak, Egypt Egypt Egypt
In 2013 President Morsi was deposed in what was obviously a
military coup. It may well be true that most Egyptians had become so
disillusioned with the Morsi regime that they supported the coup. But even so, it
was still a coup that removed a democratically elected government.
It is striking that even most Western countries, which are usually
second to none in their support of democracy, refused to condemn this coup. The
democratically elected government was ruling Egypt
What happened in Egypt
When democratic governments do bad things, it is the result of one
or both of two things. First, the will of the majority of the people can be for
something bad that is then put into practice by the government. Second, the
elected government can do bad things against the will of the majority. I think
in Egypt
Nazi Germany
Another example of democracy seemingly making things worse than
they would otherwise have been concerns Nazi Germany.
The evils of the Nazis are well known. What is not so well known
is that they first came to power in a free and fair, democratic election in
1932, when the Nazi party received far more votes than any other German
political party.
It seems reasonable to think that in that election most of those
who voted for the Nazis had no desire that they would then abolish the
democratic form of government. So I admit that in a real sense democracy is not
to blame for what later happened.
Nevertheless, it is still true that the existence of a democracy
allowed terrible things to happen that would very probably have been prevented
if there had been no democracy. If there had been an autocratic ruler in Germany
Avoiding simplistic
attitudes to democracy
In view of examples like the recent history of Egypt
In situations where we think that it would be an improvement for a
democratic form of government to be introduced, by all means let us speak and
act accordingly. If, however, we think that introducing democracy might make
things worse, let us be unafraid to voice concern or even oppose its
introduction.
FINAL COMMENTS
In this article I have tried to make two basic points.
First and most importantly, I have attempted to expose as false
the idea that the will of the majority of the people of a country is a special,
noble, even quasi-sacred thing. Since humans are sinful and most have not
repented of their sins, there is nothing special about this at all. The will of
the majority is simply a mixture of good and bad desires and choices, and no
more special than that.
Second, I have tried to caution Christians against always
supporting the introduction of democratic government in those countries where
it does not exist. It is true that democracy usually makes things better than
they would otherwise be. But there are exceptions to this.
See also:
