Pastors Shouldn’t Forget That Political and Moral Are Nearly Synonymous
And make no mistake: every political question is, at root, a moral issue. — Alan Sears
Across the nearly 60 years since then U.S. Senator Lyndon Johnson pushed through an amendment to the IRS code threatening any church or pastor who gets involved in politics with IRS reprisals – specifically, the loss of the church’s tax-exempt status – conventional wisdom has congealed around the idea that pastors must stay out of politics. As extraordinary as that assertion is to anyone with even a cursory knowledge of our nation’s history, it’s a theme that’s been hammered home unrelentingly for decades by groups like the American Civil Liberties Union and Americans United for Separation of Church and State.
As a result, pastors have been tacitly forbidden from saying in their pulpit what they’d be perfectly within their rights to say 50 feet away, in a church aisle or out on the sidewalk. What’s worse, they’ve been banned from expressing their opinion specifically because they are pastors.
Consider what happens when an issue such as, say, abortion, comes up for community debate, as the voting public considers a bill or assesses a candidate whose feelings on the subject are well known. Doctors will address their local medical gatherings, lawyers will argue at their bar associations, social workers will write op-eds, politicians will give speeches, and the news media will interview representatives of each of those professions, since some aspect of the abortion question impacts each of those professional areas.
In each case, the qualified professional is legally allowed, and even publicly encouraged, to address specifics of the issue, urge his peers to share his point of view, and advocate for or against a given candidate and his views.
And yet, while no sane person could suggest that abortion is an issue without a profound spiritual dimension, any effort by a local pastor to shine a biblical or theological spotlight on the issue in his professional setting, before an audience interested in that specific dimension, is met with outrage, tax threats, and the assertion that the Constitution forbids preachers from talking “politics.”
Pastors have the responsibility to declare the word of God. They can remind believers to vote in accordance with that word. But often in politics, multiple considerations impinge on the decision to support or oppose a particular candidate and the decision is not based on unrighteousness, but on a different prioritization of these multiple considerations.
For instance, it is righteous to care for the poor, the orphan, the alien, and the widow. The Bible clearly calls us to do so. Which of these, if any, should we do through the medium of government? If so, which particular branch or level of government should have the primary responsibility? What kinds of government actions will best meet this righteous objective? These are not questions you can answer on the basis of Scripture.
Each candidate comes to the voters with a different mix of priorities and objectives, too. The preference for one over another might not be based on their relative righteousness, but on the different priorities they ascribe to these tasks. Within broad outlines, one can provide a priority of sorts, but even here there are caveats. The Bible does not give us an absolute prioritization after you get past blasphemy. In many instances, it flatly refuses to allow for it – break one, you’ve broken them all, for instance.
As a pastor, I can lay out the moral principles, challenge people to live out their faith – including in the way they participate in the political debates and contests of the day – but I should be extremely wary of declaring some particular candidate more righteous than the others. I should avoid putting forth some mere human theory of government or economics as if it is the voice of God. There are only 66 books in my Bible – the Constitution of the United States and the Declaration of Independence aren’t in there. Nor is the Magna Carta, nor Das Kapita, nor The Wealth of Nations.
Pastor, I am not advocating that a pastor impose his or her personal preference for a candidate or an issue. At issue here is a candidate’s position on a matter of moral significance. Consider the candidacy of a pro-choice person versus a pro-life person or a pro-same sex marriage candidate versus a candidate who affirms that marriage is between one man and one woman only. Will you not agree that a pastor must speak out against the sinful behaviour he or she condones and supports? Will you not agree that a pastor has the responsibility to speak out against the murder of unborn children and the effect of abortion on the parents of the child?
The initial post asserts that all political issues are moral issues, not just marriage and abortion. This would include tax policy, agricultural supports, trade agreements, speed limits, legal drinking age…
Politics is, by its very nature, a compromising profession. It requires a prioritization of objectives. Sometimes, I can provide biblical guidance as regards to those priorities – ending the slaughter of millions is more important than a flat tax. But when we get into the details of whether a flat tax is better than a graduated tax, or what the rates should be, or whether protecting the traditional definition of marriage is more important than opposition to abortion, or even what the best strategy for ending abortion might be, then I am hesitant to speak in my capacity as pastor.
So I stick to laying out moral principles that I can base on Scripture. I refrain from the details of policy and electoral politics – from the pulpit, anyway. And in many instances, that does make it clear which candidates I think acceptable and which not, but I can do that without even mentioning their names, much less advocating for one or another of them.
Christ did not shy away from the politics of the day. Christ wasn’t hesitant in His “capacity” as rabbi.I would encourage you to pray for the discernment of God’s will on any issue or electoral decision. He is interested and wants to be involved in all issues in our lives. I will pray for you as well.
Yes, but I’m not Christ.
Laying out moral principles that should guide us in our political actions is hardly being uninvolved.
I appreciate the prayers.
I’d amend that to read, “White pastors”. Democrats campaigning in Black churches is pretty common, as are blatantly partisan political statements from the pastors of those churches – often disguised as “sermons”.
I would encourage pastors to stick to the moral principles when in the pulpit and allow their congregants to work out the practical application of those principles within the political arena. I would also say that the congregants might need a little help in prioritizing those principles. But we should be extremely wary of allowing the Church to be seen as a tool of some transient political faction.
PNR, would you limit the public statements of an attorney, a physician or a banker as to their support of the written law, medical practice or fiscal policy? God has worked out the details of His expectation of morality in His world. His church (the church congregants, as you put it) must be reminded of the sovreignty of God and the message of Holy Scripture and how it must drive their lives. There is empirical right and wrong and pastors must accept their responsibility to speak out and require obedience to the word of God. God’s church is His tool in that each of us are His servants.and corporately the body of His church is His servant as well. God is not transient nor are His words.
I would place no formal, legal limits on any. But neither would I presume to know, from the Bible, how that attorney should argue a case, where the banker should invest money, or whether a particular medication is appropriate or not – at least, not beyond the general moral principles and teachings of the Bible.
For instance, while I am fond of saying that if 10% is good enough for God it should be good enough for government, I cannot point to a passage of Scripture that provides details on the optimum tax policy. What I can point to are the various moral factors impinging on that – the need to pay for what we get, to allow people the fruits of their labors, to encourage diligence and frugality, to not unduly burden the poor, to protect liberty, etc. But that doesn’t tell me whether there should be a flat tax or a 9-9-9 plan or a graduated tax, or any of these specifics.
Similarly, I can point to the scriptures and say this is how they describe a just ruler. I cannot point to a passage of scripture that says “vote for Rick Perry in 2012”. To pretend otherwise is to tie the eternal word to the ephemeral present, in addition to being somewhat dishonest – and I believe there is an eternal word written somewhere in regards to honesty.
Sorry PNR, I’m not following your point. But my point is simple. Pastors should accept and embrace their responsibility to clearly and unequivocally remind God’s church to vote for candidates that support and defend righteousness as revealed in Holy Scripture and to support righteous legislation.