One of the dovetail reactions I had to Dr. Veith’s book was in regard to our calling as citizens of the country we live in. I wanted to separate the following ideas from God At Work to make it clear that I’m not representing what Veith says in his book.

Recall that vocation is God’s way of serving us. We are to love and serve our neighbor. As a citizen, we love and serve our neighbor by following the rules of the state. The state, revealed as authority instituted by God in Romans 13, has the responsibility to punish those who do evil and praise those who do good (1 Peter 2:13-15). We pray that our rulers perform their roles in such a way “that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way” (1 Tim 2:2).

Veith points that that in representative governments (we are not a democracy :) ), we are ultimately our rulers. This imbues in us a lot of power and responsibility, which manifests itself in several ways.

First, that we participate in our representative government. God has placed American citizens in a country where they are allowed to vote. If you are able to, do so. I have joked in the past that when you don’t vote, my vote means more. Given some of the options that we vote for, the temptation is to be very cynical and not vote at all. The U.S. Census reported that 64% of U.S. citizens age 18 and up voted in 2004, up from 60% in 2000. These people are exercising a right, given by God not through biblical law but through his working all things for good. These people are fulfilling a vocation.

Secondly, that we run for elections as we are able. This is a particular criticism for Lutherans, whom, when you ask a conscientious one to name a Lutheran in civil government, they would say Justice William Rehnquist — oops. Now we have Senator Tim Johnson (D-SD). Indeed, I had to look him up, too. :)

Thirdly, that we discuss political issues sanely without hating people who don’t share our views. Whole web sites on the left and right rack up tons of hits fueled on hate and personal attacks. Some even get New York Times discounts. This kind of behavior can’t fall within the realm of loving our neighbor. It’s frustrating debating with someone who doesn’t agree with you. Even more so when their ideas are obviously foolish. We have to remind ourselves that it’s OK to disagree, and that goes double for me.

Fourth, that when we do discuss what is best for our neighbor, that we open that to mean all of our neighbors. Robbing Peter to pay Paul an entitlement is not loving our neighbor. Allowing abortion is not loving 1.3 million per year of our smallest American neighbors.

Finally, that we do not carve out special exemptions for us for the laws that we put ourselves under. If it’s not a good idea for you, it’s probably not a good idea for your neighbor, either. A legislator needs to feel the effect of the laws he or she writes.

As citizen-rulers, we are to do what is best for our neighbor. A government that oppresses its citizens is not fulfilling its vocation, as well as a government that lets its citizens do evil. All governments have a scarcity of resources, so we ought to do what is best for everyone with the limited resources we have. Sometimes a desired behavioral change may require not more legislation, but more self-awareness about what is godly and dignified behavior. Government force is not the only way a citizen can love one’s neighbor.