Politics in the Pulpit?

Beloved,

This Sunday is Sanctity of Human Life Sunday, a national “holiday” established during the Raegan administration on the 11th anniversary of Roe v. Wade (40 years ago now). It is a day to remember and reckon with the God-given dignity, value, and rights of every human person from the womb to the tomb, and a day to lament our failure to reckon with this as a nation. I will be preaching a special sermon in the AM titled, “Mr. President, Pro-Life Is Not Optional!” My desire is to help us to think through our current moment from a biblical worldview as we find ourselves in an election year wherein abortion is arguably the issue and neither of the primary presidential candidates (i.e., Biden and Trump) hold to an uncompromising pro-life position. How are we to think as Christians about the role of civil authorities in relation to abortion? How are we to vote in a culture of death? Or should we vote at all? We will be thinking through these and other pressing questions as we come to God’s word on Sunday. 

But that gives rise to a really important question, perhaps one that is arising in your mind and heart: Is it really appropriate to talk about politics and voting from the pulpit? There are certainly some in our circles who would say it is not. But I think they are woefully mistaken. If God’s word cannot speak to the civil sphere or provide guidance to us as to our responsibilities as citizens living in a representative democracy, then by what standard are we to hold our civil authorities accountable and carry out of calling as citizens? God’s word does speak to these matters, and so the pulpit must too. 

This has been the conviction of our forefathers throughout church history, but here I want to share two voices with you that have been particularly instrumental in our own denominational history–John Murray and Ed Clowney. I’m quoting them at length because their words are so vital for us to grasp as a church. Please take the time to thoughtfully read through them.

John Murray, in an article entitled “The Relation of Church and State” (Collected Writings, 1:253-259), writes, “When the civil magistrate fails to exercise his God-given authority in the protection and promotion of the obligations, rights, and liberties of the citizens, the church has the right and duty to condemn such inaction, and by its proclamation of the counsel of God to confront the civil magistrate with his responsibility and promote the correction of such neglect….When it is maintained that the church is concerned with civic affairs, is under obligation to examine political measures in the light of the Word of God, and is required to declare its judgments accordingly, the distinction between this activity on the part of the church and political activity must be recognized. To put the matter bluntly, the church is not to engage in politics. Its members must do so, but only in their capacity as citizens of the state, not as members of the church. The church is not to create or foster political parties or blocs. The proclamation of the church may indeed induce the members of the church and others to affiliate themselves, in their capacity as citizens, with one party rather than with another or, perhaps, to form a political party for the promotion of good politics. If the proclamation of the church is sound, the church has no need to be ashamed of the influence its proclamation exerts in this direction, nor does it need to be troubled by the charge that may be leveled against it to the effect that it is engaged in politics. In such circumstances the church must be prepared to pay the price for its faithful witness to the political implications of the message committed to it.”

He goes on later in the article to state, “The question remains: how is the church to proclaim the counsel of God as it bears upon civil affairs? It is obvious that there are two means, in particular, of proclaiming the Word of God, namely the pulpit and the press. The church lives in the world and it lives within the domain of political entities. If it is to be faithful to its commission it must make its voice heard and felt in reference to public questions. The church may not supinely stand aside and ignore political corruption, for example, on the ground that to pronounce judgment on such issues is to intermeddle in politics. Political corruption is sin, it is public sin, and the church denies its vocation if it does not reprove it.”

Listen to Ed Clowney as he wrestles with similar matters in his book The Church (192-193): “Zeal for the righteousness of the kingdom will witness to the values that society must hold. If Paul insisted on honoring the pagan totalitarian state of his day, he would find the democratic state, leavened by centuries of Christian influence, no less worthy of respect and support. Since democracy gives its citizens a voice in government, Christians have the responsibility of their privilege to participate. There is every reason for the general office of the church (‘laity’) to consult together on political issues. So, too, the special officers of the church must provide biblical guidance and wisdom to assist in Christian analysis of political questions. The church has a prophetic role to perceive and expose ethical questions that underlie political issues. Where God has spoken in condemning sin, whether sodomy or financial exploitation, the church cannot be silent. Under Communist and Fascist rule, the church of Christ has repeatedly paid the price for applying Christian doctrine to political wrongs. In democratic regimes also that price has been–and will yet be–exacted. Yet Christian involvement in political life does not cancel out the spiritual form of Christ’s kingdom. Calling the state to righteousness does not mean calling it to promote the gospel with political power or to usher in the last judgment with the sword.”

Reflecting on the words of Murray and Clowney in light of the biblical witness evidences that they held a robustly biblical and balanced approach to these matters. In the words of Murray, there are “political implications” that flow from God’s law and gospel, and the church has a responsibility to proclaim them.

I do this fairly regularly, but Sunday’s sermon will perhaps be the most robust drawing out of political implications from the Scriptures of any sermon I have ever preached. So I thought it might be helpful to prepare you for it with the thoughts of two of the greatest theological minds the OPC has ever known. 

I’m very eager to open up God’s word to you and to wrestle through these life-and-death matters together!

Yours in Christ,
Pastor Nick