The Drama of Power and the Discipline of Faith
Initial Understanding and Beliefs
My approach to politics and faith has always been shaped by curiosity, caution, and formative experiences. Early exposure to politics came through American Legion Boys State, where high school students simulate state government, and Boys Nation, a national-level continuation of it. These programs introduced me to the drama, strategy, and performative aspects of politics. At the time, I mistook this for governance itself. Over time, I came to appreciate the complexity of policy, civic responsibility, and leadership, all of which developed alongside a growing theological awareness. Wright and Bird’s concept of kingdom-vocation reminds me that the Church’s work is both for and in the world, embodied through communal obedience, mercy, and justice.[1] Political engagement, then, must always be measured against Christ’s lordship. I aim to cultivate discernment, humility, and obedience so that loyalty to ideology never eclipses loyalty to the gospel. This tension shapes both my understanding and my leadership.
Christian Nationalism, Evangelical Complicity, and Public Faith
The rise of Christian nationalism underscores how easily faith can be captured by political identity. Moore frames it not as religiously informed patriotism but as secularism cloaked in faith, fueled by nostalgia, resentment, and the desire to fuse cultural power with religious authority.[2] I have seen how some evangelicals become complicit, prioritizing influence over theological integrity, allowing partisan allegiance to displace gospel faithfulness. Faithful public witness is rooted in kingdom-vocation: loving the marginalized, speaking truth to power, and practicing communal justice. Requiring spiritual wisdom and discernment to distinguish authentic biblical advocacy from ideological conformity. This demands humility, reflection, slow thinking, and pastoral care. I seek to guide communities in navigating these pressures faithfully, modeling and mapping an engagement that prioritizes obedience to Christ over cultural or political approval.
Progressive Christianity, Secular Ideologies, and Post-Church Culture
I am attentive to how progressive Christianity and post-church movements risk uncritically adopting secular ideologies, even when aligned with gospel-adjacent concerns such as justice, inclusion, or progress. Wright and Bird remind me that the Church’s kingdom-vocation is defined not by culture but by faithful, communal engagement in God’s work in the world.[3] When Jesus is functionally absent, public theology risks slogans, consumer preferences, or moral posturing instead of transformative witness. Leadership in this context requires cultivating discernment that enables faithful engagement while remaining obedient to Christ, embodying the kingdom in both word and deed. The Church must neither withdraw from culture nor conform to its idols but remain committed to the gospel’s communal and transformative vocation. Teaching communities to discern where culture aligns with or diverges from Christ’s lordship is absolutely central to this work.
Leadership in an Age of Polarization and Idolatry
Leading today requires navigating social media, partisan politics, and identity movements that often shape moral imagination more than Scripture. I see the importance of modeling humility, discernment, and theological clarity, equipping communities to resist ideological idolatry while engaging culture faithfully. Wright and Bird’s metaphor of the Church in God’s “grand theatre” reminds me that our vocation is to perform truth and justice corporately, rather than to play roles dictated by partisan expectation.[4] This resonates with a quote to which I frequently return:
The disciple’s vocation is not to play-act but to tear off the masks that occlude one’s true identity in Christ. Those who play their parts well are witnesses to reality, to the word of promise and truth fulfilled in Jesus Christ. To play our part well, however, we need to play with others. Our calling in Christ is ultimately a corporate vocation…The drama of doctrine reaches its appropriate conclusion, then, only when it is performed by the whole church.[5]
Moore’s critique of evangelical complicity reinforces the danger of unexamined allegiance to political power.[6] My aim is to cultivate both individual and communal discernment, helping believers understand their kingdom-vocation and engage society without succumbing to ideological tribalism. Faithful leadership equips communities to embody Christ’s justice and mercy courageously, practicing obedience even when it conflicts with cultural approval.
What You Believe Now and Why
Reflecting on these questions, I am convinced that politics must never replace the gospel as the Church’s central mission. Moore, Wright & and Bird have sharpened my awareness of ideological seduction from nationalist impulses on the right to uncritical adoption of secular ideologies on the left. The Church must cultivate discernment, courage, and robust allegiance to Christ above country. I want to guide communities toward a politics shaped by the kingdom of God, where faithfulness is measured by obedience to Christ rather than cultural approval or partisan success. Tensions remain regarding how to teach discernment without fostering cynicism, and how to lead in an age dominated by social media and polarization. Ultimately, kingdom-centered leadership calls us to embody Christ’s truth, justice, and mercy, to witness corporately and faithfully, and to cultivate communities resilient against ideological idolatry. My hope is that, in doing so, Christ’s kingdom becomes visible both inside and outside the Church in a fractured and divided world.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
[1] N.T. Wright and Michael Bird, Jesus and the Powers: Christian Political Witness in an Age of Totalitarian Terror and Dysfunctional Democracies, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2022), 15–17.
[2] Russell Moore, Losing Our Religion: An Altar Call for Evangelical America, (New York: Sentinel, 2023), 117–120.
[3] Wright and Bird, Jesus and the Powers, 23–25.
[4] Ibid., 6.
[5] Kevin J. Vanhoozer, The Drama of Doctrine: A Canonical Linguistic Approach to Christian Theology, (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2005), 397.
[6] Moore, Losing Our Religion, 86–87.
About the Author
Chad Warren
A husband, father, pastor, teacher, and student seeking to help others flourish.10 responses to “The Drama of Power and the Discipline of Faith”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Chad,
My God grant you and other pastors the wisdom and discernment on how to be a voice, heard by your congregation, that resonates louder than the voices heard on social media. May your voice be one that mirrors Christ’s love and is filled with Scripture and guide your community in obedience to Christ rather than cultural approval or partisan success.
I appreciate the passion for Christ above anything else found in this post.
Since you brought up Boys State, what was your job/position while at Boys State?
Jeff, thank you for the prayer. My role at Boys State was that of a U.S. Senator. I was elected by the entire Boys State, which sent me to Boys Nation, where I wrote legislation and served as Chaplain of the Senate.
Good analysis of a difficult topic Chad.
You write, “Faithful public witness is rooted in kingdom-vocation: loving the marginalized, speaking truth to power, and practicing communal justice.” I wonder what sort of witness you are presenting in the political sphere of life right now?
[Chad for Presidenct!]
Debbie, thank you for that thoughtful question. I think my witness in the political sphere right now is less about public activism and more about formation, helping people in my congregation and spheres of influence think Christianly about political realities without being shaped or defined by them.
Practically, this sometimes includes serving as an informal advisor to a couple of state senators on social issues. I have an opportunity to bring theological reflection, moral clarity, and pastoral insights into conversations. My goal in those settings is the same as it is in the pulpit: to bear faithful witness to the kingdom of God by speaking truthfully, listening carefully, and seeking the common good in ways that reflect the character of Christ.
Hi Chad,
I enjoyed reading your post.
In a culture shaped by social media and partisan narratives, what practices can help the Church embody its kingdom vocation with humility, clarity, and communal witness?
Shela, I think in a culture shaped by social media and partisan narratives, the Church embodies its kingdom vocation by rooting itself in Scripture, prayer, and communal discernment, cultivating humility and clarity. By listening well, practicing accountability, and engaging in sacrificial service within the community, the Church models a faithful witness that transcends online division.
Hey Chad. Another standout post. My question comes from a pastoral perspective. What makes you cringe the most about the loss of theological integrity?
Daren, one of the most cringe-inducing aspects of the loss of theological integrity is when truth becomes negotiable for convenience, popularity, or cultural approval. When Scripture and historic faith are bent to fit what “feels right” rather than what is faithful to God’s character (2 Timothy 4:3).
Hi Chad, you are so wise and I appreciate your post. As both the right and the left claim moral authority, how would you encourage Christian political leaders to anchor their public engagement in the kingdom of God rather than in the approval of a partisan tribe?
Christy, thank you for your kind words. For Christian political leaders, anchoring public engagement in the kingdom of God comes down to clarity on the character of Christ, the nature of truth, the authority of Scripture, and sound interpretation. It also requires courage to resist the fear of man and the lure of partisan approval, choosing instead to act faithfully and sacrificially in ways that reflect God’s justice, mercy, and wisdom. It’s risky; there are elements of all tribes that get it right, but also get it wrong. And neither are likely to admit the latter.