**Author:** [[3. Resources/Authors/Justin Giboney, Michael Wear, Chris Butler|Justin Giboney, Michael Wear, Chris Butler]] # Book Overview ![[Compassion and Conviction Visual.excalidraw]] --- ### About the Authors **Justin Giboney** is an attorney and political strategist based in Atlanta. He's served as a delegate to the Democratic National Convention and co-founded the AND Campaign, an organization that trains Christians for faithful civic engagement. His work straddles the worlds of progressive policy and orthodox Christian conviction, giving him a rare ability to speak credibly across partisan lines. **Michael Wear** serves as chief strategist for the AND Campaign. He worked in the Obama White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships and directed faith outreach for Obama's 2012 re-election campaign. He's also the author of *Reclaiming Hope: Lessons Learned in the Obama White House About the Future of Faith in America*, which explored the complicated relationship between faith communities and political power from inside the machine. **Chris Butler** is a senior leader in the Embassy Church Network in Chicago and a longtime advocate for education equity. His pastoral and community organizing background grounds the book's arguments in the lived reality of urban ministry, racial justice work, and the daily challenge of holding together a diverse congregation in a politically fractured city. ### Central Thesis American Christians have been handed a false choice. The two-party system says you can care about social justice OR moral order, compassion OR conviction. Pick a side. The left says downplay your traditional beliefs if you want to fight poverty and racism. The right says ignore systemic injustice if you want to uphold biblical sexual ethics and the sanctity of life. The authors reject both deals. Drawing on Ephesians 4:15 -- "speaking the truth in love" -- they argue that mature Christian engagement holds both truth and love simultaneously, without trading one for the other. The gospel itself, not the Republican or Democratic platform, should serve as the framework for evaluating every political question. Both progressivism and conservatism fall short of the biblical vision, and any Christian who agrees with one party on every single issue has likely been shaped more by that party than by Scripture. The book offers a practical "both-and" framework: social justice AND moral order, compassion AND conviction, partnership AND independence from partisan identity. It's a guide for Christians who feel politically homeless -- too conservative for the left, too justice-oriented for the right -- and who want a way to engage without selling out their faith. ### Why This Book Matters The American church has spent decades sorting itself into partisan camps, and the damage shows. Progressive Christians have often muted their convictions on issues of sexual ethics and life to maintain coalition with the secular left. Conservative Christians have often dismissed racial justice, immigration reform, and poverty as "liberal" concerns. Both sides end up with a truncated gospel that's more shaped by political strategy than by Jesus. Giboney, Wear, and Butler bring genuine bipartisan credibility to this conversation. They're not armchair theorists -- they've worked inside political campaigns, led churches in divided cities, and organized advocacy efforts that didn't fit neatly into either party's agenda. The book arrived in 2020, right before a presidential election that would test every assumption about faith and politics in America, and its arguments have only grown more relevant since. It's also designed for practical use. Each chapter ends with discussion questions suitable for church small groups, making it one of the few books on faith and politics that's accessible enough for a Sunday school class but substantive enough for a seminary reading list. --- ## Chapter Summaries ### Chapter 1: Christians and Politics The book opens by grounding political engagement in the Great Commandment: love God and love your neighbor. The authors argue that politics is simply one arena where Christians live out that command. Withdrawing from politics doesn't protect your faith; it abandons your neighbors to whatever forces happen to be shaping policy. They walk through biblical examples of political engagement -- Joseph in Egypt, Daniel in Babylon, Esther in Persia, Nehemiah rebuilding Jerusalem's walls -- to demonstrate that God's people have always operated within political systems without being defined by them. The early church didn't retreat from the Roman Empire; it engaged it with a different set of values. The same call applies today. The chapter also addresses the common objection that politics is too dirty for Christians. Giboney, Wear, and Butler counter that the dirtiness of politics is exactly why Christians need to be present. Leaving the public square to those with no commitment to justice, mercy, or truth doesn't make the square cleaner. It just removes voices that might have made a difference. ### Chapter 2: Church and State This chapter provides civic education that many Christians lack. The authors walk through the basic structure of American government -- the separation of powers, federalism, the role of the courts -- and explain how the church-state relationship actually works. They push back against two distortions: the theocratic impulse that wants the government to enforce Christian belief, and the secularist impulse that wants to strip all religious conviction from public life. The founders' vision, they argue, wasn't a government purged of religious influence but a government that couldn't establish a state religion or coerce religious practice. Christians have every right to bring their values into public debate. What they don't have is the right to impose those values through government force without persuading their fellow citizens. The chapter also addresses the practical mechanics of civic engagement: how bills become law, how courts work, how local government often matters more than federal politics. This is foundational material, but the authors include it because many Christians who feel strongly about political issues have never learned how the system actually functions. ### Chapter 3: Compassion and Conviction This is the book's core chapter, and the one that gives it its title. The authors lay out their both-and framework using Ephesians 4:14-15 as the anchor text. Paul warns against being "tossed back and forth by the waves, and blown here and there by every wind of teaching" and calls believers to "speak the truth in love." Truth without love becomes harsh, judgmental, and alienating. Love without truth becomes sentimental, spineless, and ultimately unhelpful. The authors argue that American Christianity has split along exactly this fault line. Progressive Christians emphasize love (compassion) but often shrink from hard truths about personal morality. Conservative Christians emphasize truth (conviction) but often lack compassion for the marginalized and oppressed. The gospel doesn't split this way. Jesus healed the sick and told them to sin no more. He welcomed outcasts and called them to repentance. He denounced the powerful and wept over Jerusalem. The both-and framework says that Christians should advocate for the poor AND uphold the sanctity of life. They should fight racism AND defend religious liberty. They should welcome the immigrant AND call for personal responsibility. Splitting these into opposing camps is a political invention, not a biblical one. The chapter introduces the AND Campaign's core conviction: if you agree with one political party on every issue, it's a sign you've been politically discipled rather than biblically formed. The gospel will make you uncomfortable in every political coalition, because no party fully reflects the kingdom of God. ### Chapter 4: Partnerships and Partisanship How do you work within the political system without being captured by it? The authors draw on Francis Schaeffer's concept of "cobelligerency" -- partnering with people on specific issues without adopting their entire worldview. You can march alongside someone for criminal justice reform on Tuesday without endorsing their position on abortion on Wednesday. Frederick Douglass serves as the chapter's primary historical example. Douglass worked with the Republican Party when it served the cause of abolition, but he never surrendered his independent judgment. He supported Lincoln when Lincoln earned it and criticized him when he dragged his feet. Douglass maintained his moral independence even while operating within a partisan system. The authors outline seven practical steps for political engagement that avoids identity surrender: (1) ground your positions in Scripture, not in party platforms; (2) build relationships across partisan lines; (3) speak prophetically to your own side, not just the other; (4) refuse to demonize political opponents; (5) accept that faithfulness sometimes means political ineffectiveness; (6) evaluate candidates on a full range of issues, not just one; (7) remember that your primary identity is in Christ, not in any party. They also address the seduction of access. When political leaders invite you into the inner circle, the temptation is to soften your message to keep that access. The authors warn that access without prophetic voice is worse than no access at all, because it creates the illusion that Christian concerns are being heard when they're actually being managed. ### Chapter 5: Messaging and Rhetoric Drawing on George Orwell's rules for clear writing, the authors examine how Christians communicate about political issues. They argue that much Christian political speech has become indistinguishable from partisan talking points -- the same slogans, the same demonization of opponents, the same reduction of complex issues to bumper-sticker slogans. The chapter offers guidelines for faithful communication. First, don't adopt the language frames of either party uncritically. When the left says "reproductive rights" and the right says "baby killing," both phrases are designed to foreclose thought, not encourage it. Christians should find language that's honest about the complexity of issues without retreating into mushy neutrality. Second, resist the outrage economy. Social media rewards the most extreme versions of every position. Christians who build their public voice around outrage are being discipled by algorithms, not by the Spirit. The authors call for communication marked by clarity, honesty, humility, and a willingness to acknowledge the strongest version of opposing arguments. Third, speak to people as image-bearers, not as enemies. Even when you disagree sharply with someone's position, your rhetoric should reflect the belief that they're created in God's image and capable of being persuaded. This doesn't mean you can't be forceful or direct. It means your goal is persuasion, not domination. ### Chapter 6: Politics and Race The longest and most emotionally charged chapter in the book. The authors trace the history of racism in America -- from slavery through Reconstruction, Jim Crow, the Civil Rights movement, and into the present -- and argue that racial reconciliation isn't a peripheral concern for Christians. It's a gospel imperative. They push back against the common conservative claim that racism is primarily an individual sin problem (just stop being racist and it'll go away) and the common progressive claim that it's primarily a systemic problem (change the structures and individuals will follow). Both dimensions are real, and addressing only one leaves the other intact. Individual hearts need transformation AND unjust systems need reform. The chapter presents a four-step process for racial reconciliation. First, acknowledgment: honestly reckoning with the historical facts of racial injustice, without minimizing or deflecting. Second, lament: sitting with the grief and anger that injustice produces, rather than rushing past it to solutions. Third, repentance: turning away from the attitudes, assumptions, and structures that perpetuate racial harm. Fourth, repair: taking concrete action to address the ongoing effects of historical injustice, including but not limited to policy change. The authors are careful to distinguish their approach from both "color-blind" theology (which ignores real disparities) and Critical Race Theory (which they see as having insights but ultimately resting on assumptions incompatible with the gospel). They want a third way grounded in biblical anthropology: every person is made in God's image, sin has corrupted human systems as well as individual hearts, and the church is called to model the reconciled community that politics alone can't create. ### Chapter 7: Advocacy and Protest How should Christians actually push for change? The chapter examines biblical examples of advocacy -- Moses before Pharaoh, the prophets before Israel's kings, Esther before Xerxes, Paul appealing to Caesar -- and extracts principles for faithful political action. The authors present a strategic framework with four tactics: (1) education and awareness, building public understanding of an issue before demanding action; (2) relationship-building with decision-makers, investing in trust before making asks; (3) direct advocacy, including lobbying, public testimony, and organized campaigns; and (4) protest, used strategically when other channels have been exhausted or when the urgency of an issue demands public witness. They emphasize that protest without preparation is theater. Effective advocacy requires understanding the policy landscape, building coalitions, knowing who has the power to make change, and presenting actionable solutions -- not just grievances. The chapter warns against performative activism that makes the activist feel righteous but doesn't move the needle on actual policy. At the same time, the authors affirm the legitimacy and sometimes the necessity of protest. When normal channels of change are blocked, when injustice is acute, and when public witness is needed to shift the moral imagination of a community, protest is a legitimate Christian practice rooted in the prophetic tradition. ### Chapter 8: Civility and Political Culture The final chapter addresses the poisoned political culture that makes all the preceding chapters harder to implement. Drawing on Howard Thurman's analysis of hatred in *Jesus and the Disinherited*, the authors trace how hatred develops in stages: first contact with injustice or perceived threat, then withdrawal from the threatening other, then resentment that hardens into contempt, and finally active hatred that dehumanizes the opponent. The authors observe that American political culture has advanced through these stages at alarming speed. Cable news, social media, and political tribalism have moved millions of people from disagreement to contempt. Christians aren't immune -- many have adopted the same contempt for political opponents that characterizes the broader culture. The chapter offers four guidelines for cultivating a different political culture. First, assume good faith until proven otherwise. Most people who disagree with you aren't evil; they're working from different assumptions, experiences, and information. Second, practice intellectual humility. You might be wrong, and even when you're right, you probably don't have the whole picture. Third, prioritize your witness over your wins. How you engage politically communicates as much about the gospel as what positions you hold. A Christian who wins every political battle but does so with contempt and cruelty has undermined their own message. Fourth, invest in face-to-face relationships with people who think differently. It's easy to demonize abstractions. It's much harder to demonize someone you've shared a meal with. --- ## Key Themes and Highlights ### The Both-And Framework The book's spine is the refusal to accept the either-or framing that partisan politics demands. Social justice AND moral order. Compassion AND conviction. Partnership AND prophetic independence. The authors return to this framework in every chapter, applying it to race, rhetoric, protest, and political culture. The framework isn't centrism or moderation -- it's the claim that the gospel makes demands that neither party fully honors, and faithfulness means holding both sides of the tension even when it costs you allies. ### Cobelligerency Without Identity Surrender Drawn from Schaeffer and illustrated through Douglass, this concept addresses the practical challenge of political engagement: How do you work with people you don't fully agree with? The answer isn't isolation (refusing to partner with anyone) or assimilation (adopting your partner's entire platform). It's strategic, issue-by-issue collaboration that preserves your independent judgment. You can lock arms on Monday and part ways on Tuesday without betraying anyone. What you can't do is let your partnership become your identity. ### The Indoctrination Test One of the book's most memorable formulations: if you agree with one political party on every issue, you've been politically indoctrinated. The gospel doesn't map neatly onto any party platform. It should make you uncomfortable in every political coalition. If it doesn't, the party is shaping your faith more than your faith is shaping your politics. ### Witness Before the Win Throughout the book, the authors argue that how Christians engage politically matters as much as what they advocate for. A Christian who wins a policy battle but does so through deception, contempt, or dehumanization has undermined the very gospel they claim to represent. The means are part of the message. Civility isn't weakness; it's a form of witness. ### Racial Reconciliation as Gospel Imperative The authors don't treat race as one political issue among many. They frame it as a gospel issue -- a test case for whether the church actually believes that all people are made in God's image and that Christ has broken down the dividing wall of hostility. The four-step process (acknowledgment, lament, repentance, repair) provides a practical pathway that avoids both the conservative tendency to minimize and the progressive tendency to reduce everything to power dynamics. --- ## Analytical Reading ### Main Arguments 1. **The gospel, not any party, is the framework** -- Christians should evaluate every political question through Scripture, not through Republican or Democratic lenses. Both parties get some things right and some things wrong. 2. **Both-and, not either-or** -- The church is called to hold together what politics tears apart: justice and righteousness, mercy and truth, systemic reform and personal holiness. 3. **Cobelligerency preserves independence** -- You can partner with any group on shared concerns without surrendering your distinct identity or adopting their entire worldview. 4. **Agreement with one party on everything signals indoctrination** -- If the gospel never puts you in tension with your political tribe, your tribe has become your functional authority. 5. **How you engage is part of your witness** -- Contempt, dishonesty, and dehumanization in political engagement contradict the gospel regardless of which policies you're advancing. 6. **Racial reconciliation isn't optional** -- It's a direct application of the gospel to America's original and ongoing sin, requiring both individual transformation and structural reform. 7. **Preparation precedes effective advocacy** -- Protest without policy knowledge, coalition-building, and strategic planning is performative rather than transformative. ### Methodology The authors build their case through: - Biblical exegesis (Ephesians 4:15 as anchor, supplemented by examples from Joseph to Paul) - Historical case studies (Douglass, the Civil Rights movement, church-state development) - Political theory (Schaeffer's cobelligerency, Orwell's communication rules, Thurman's hatred stages) - Personal experience across the political spectrum (Obama White House, Democratic delegate, urban pastoral leadership) - Practical frameworks (seven steps for engagement, four-step reconciliation process, four advocacy tactics) ### Strengths - **Genuine bipartisan credibility** -- These aren't conservative authors scolding the left or vice versa. Their resumes cross partisan lines, which gives weight to their claim of a "third way." - **Practically accessible** -- The book is designed for church groups, with discussion questions and clear frameworks that small group leaders can work with immediately. - **Theologically grounded without being narrow** -- The Ephesians 4:15 framework is broadly Christian rather than denominationally specific, making it accessible across traditions. - **Historically informed** -- The race chapter especially demonstrates real engagement with American history, not sanitized versions. - **Honest about costs** -- The authors don't pretend the both-and framework is easy. They acknowledge it will cost you allies on both sides. ### Limitations - **Limited policy specificity by design** -- The book is a framework, not a policy guide. Readers who want to know exactly what the both-and framework means for immigration policy or healthcare won't find detailed answers here. - **Uneven treatment of contentious issues** -- Some issues (racial justice, poverty) receive extended treatment while others (abortion, sexuality) are addressed more briefly. This may reflect the authors' own areas of emphasis or a strategic choice to avoid the most polarizing debates, but it leaves gaps. - **Assumes good faith** -- The framework works best when all parties are operating in good faith. It offers less guidance for situations where political opponents are actively arguing in bad faith or where institutions have been captured by genuinely malicious actors. - **American-centric** -- The analysis is deeply rooted in American political structures, two-party dynamics, and racial history. It doesn't translate directly to other national contexts, though the theological principles are more portable. - **Coalition politics underexplored** -- The cobelligerency concept is powerful, but the book doesn't deeply engage with the practical messiness of coalition politics, where trade-offs and compromises are constant. --- ## Personal Reflection ### Key Takeaways 1. **The gospel as political filter, not the party platform** -- Every political position should be tested against Scripture, not against what your tribe expects you to believe. This sounds obvious, but it's genuinely hard to practice when your entire social environment reinforces partisan loyalty. 2. **Preparation before passion** -- The advocacy chapter's emphasis on understanding policy, building relationships, and developing strategy before taking to the streets challenges the activist impulse to prioritize emotional urgency over practical effectiveness. Good intentions without strategic thinking don't change policy. 3. **Racial reconciliation as gospel imperative, not political preference** -- The four-step framework (acknowledgment, lament, repentance, repair) provides a pathway that's both theologically grounded and practically actionable. It avoids the trap of reducing reconciliation to either "just be nice" or "just change the system." 4. **The indoctrination test is clarifying** -- Simply asking "Is there any issue where I disagree with my party?" is a quick diagnostic for whether you're thinking independently or absorbing a party line. The discomfort of the question is itself instructive. 5. **Civility isn't the same as passivity** -- The authors make a strong case that you can be forceful, direct, and prophetic while still treating opponents as image-bearers. Civility is a strategic and theological choice, not a sign of weak convictions. ### Questions Raised - How does the both-and framework function when one party is actively hostile to a core conviction? At what point does cobelligerency become complicity? - The book was written before January 6, 2021. How does the framework hold up when democratic norms themselves are under threat? - What does "repair" look like in concrete policy terms? The authors name it as the fourth step of racial reconciliation but leave significant room for debate about what it entails. - How do you practice intellectual humility about your political positions while maintaining prophetic clarity about moral non-negotiables? ### Connections to Other Works - **"Jesus and the Disinherited" by Howard Thurman** -- Thurman's analysis of hatred as a progressive disease directly shapes the final chapter. His framework for how the oppressed can resist without becoming oppressors is foundational to the book's vision. - **"Confident Pluralism" by John Inazu** -- Inazu's legal and philosophical case for civic engagement amid deep disagreement complements the theological case the authors make here. - **"City of Man" by Michael Gerson and Peter Wehner** -- Another attempt to articulate a Christian political theology that transcends partisanship, though from a more explicitly conservative starting point. - **"Reclaiming Hope" by Michael Wear** -- Wear's earlier book provides the personal narrative behind many of the principles articulated here, especially the tension of serving in a White House that didn't share all his convictions. - **"The Color of Compromise" by Jemar Tisby** -- Tisby's historical account of the American church's complicity in racism provides the detailed evidence that Chapter 6's argument assumes. --- ## Reading Notes Read in February 2026 as: - Framework for thinking about faith and politics without partisan captivity - Practical guide for civic engagement in church community contexts - Resource for navigating racial reconciliation conversations in mixed-politics settings Particularly relevant sections for frequent reference: - Chapter 3: The both-and framework -- the core theological argument - Chapter 4: Cobelligerency and the seven steps -- practical engagement model - Chapter 6: Four-step racial reconciliation process -- applicable beyond politics - Chapter 7: Four advocacy tactics -- strategic framework for any cause - Chapter 8: Thurman's hatred stages and the four civility guidelines -- diagnostic tools for political culture The book's lasting contribution is the framing device itself: if your political engagement doesn't create tension with every party, something has gone wrong with your discipleship. That single insight, applied consistently, would transform the American church's relationship to politics. The both-and framework isn't a centrist dodge -- it's the claim that the gospel is bigger than any party, and that faithfulness requires holding together what the political system insists you must split apart.