"I really believe that preaching and politics are synonymous.  Several years ago, Hard Copy interviewed me and asked this question.  “How can you preach on Sunday when on Monday you are at the City Council?"  My answer was: “Any individual who cannot say the same thing on Monday that they say on Sunday does not deserve either office.”

Vice-Mayor Rev. Henry Hearns, Lancaster, CA; also pastor of the First Missionary Baptist Church in Sun Village, CA

Preaching is probably never completely devoid of political undertones.  Even though preachers may avoid overt statements concerning hotly debated issues such as the Iraq crisis or the recent cloning issue, as soon as they draw comparisons between the Scriptures and current issues, political statements are inevitably made.  One important question religious leaders should ask themselves is whether they are aware of the political content and bias of their preaching.

There are a multitude of factors religious leaders should be aware of, ranging from their own political bias to the political landscape of their congregation and community. Foremost, there must be an awareness that when religious leaders speak they represent the voice of a congregation, a community, a denomination, a tradition, and--in the minds of many people--they even represent the voice of God. Once religious leaders have become aware of the political content and bias of their preaching, they might benefit from adopting a conscious approach to preaching and politics.

Three Approaches to Preaching  Politics:

What approach to adopt with regard to preaching and politics is difficult to decide, not least because of the complexity of factors. How can a religious leader preach on political issues with personal and professional integrity while being true to Scripture, theology, traditions, as well as the various political sensitivities of their congregants? Here are three possible approaches to consider:

1) The Silence Approach -- Avoiding Political Preaching

As pointed out earlier, preaching is probably never completely devoid of political statements.  However, one may aim to avoid overt political statements and allusions as much as possible.  This approach has certain advantages, but also some weaknesses:

Pro:

• little to no risk for criticism from congregants, the public, or the government (what comes to mind is the recent IRS withdrawal of non-profit status from a congregation whose preacher encouraged congregants to vote a certain way).
• encourages a comfortable separation between Religion and State; it largely eliminates the challenge to be an interpreter between the two worlds.
• discourages discord or disputes over controversial issues within the congregation.

Con:

• missed opportunities to address issues and concerns that may preoccupy people's minds.
• deepens attitudes of elitism and isolationism (theological dichotomy between the physical and the spiritual, the world and the church, etc).
• missed opportunity to challenge the status quo and work toward socio-economic/racial  justice.

2) The Liberation Theology Approach -- Preaching Politics in the Face of Socio-Economic/Political/Racial Injustice

This approach to preaching is most effective when there are dynamics at work in the local faith community that are oppressive, such as poverty, racial discrimination, government corruption, etc.  Preaching in this approach concentrates on clear social injustices which can be identified easily as evils by Scripture.  This approach works best when the congregation is largely affected by a concrete social wrong, but can also work well for a social-justice sensitive congregation that has declared solidarity with those victimized.

An example to this approach is the civil rights movement of the 1960s in North America which was strongly supported by organized Christianity--especially the black faith community.  Modern-day examples may include the fight against socio-economic injustice, political oppression, human rights violations (including discrimination against our homosexual brothers and sisters?).

3) The Democratic Duty Approach--Preaching Politics in Non-Partisan Terms

"Non-partisan" preaching on political issues should not endorse or vilify specific political parties or candidates. It should concentrate on the issues (like every good political campaign should do as well).  This approach aims at promoting an active involvement in the democratic process of the community on the part of the local church and its religious leaders.  One of its most important objectives is to get people away from mindlessly following partisan lines and to think about and act upon political issues from a theological perspective.

Religious leaders must be careful to maintain a credible voice.  Here are a few suggestions that may be helpful in this regard:

• Put yourself in the shoes of your congregants that have a political position that differs from your own; remember that you must be a spiritual guide for them too.
• Start with the interpretation of the scriptures instead of looking for scriptural support for personal views on political issues.
• Religious leaders speaking on political issues need to speak from a well informed position.  Reading articles on an issue from various sources helps look at an issue from different angles.
• Speak on political issues from a spiritual care perspective rather than from that of a  political or economic analyst (this is advisable, too, for religious leaders who also hold a political office).  For instance, speak about how cloning human beings could raise very difficult spiritual questions for those cloned, such as: do I share a soul with my DNA counterpart?  Am I created by God?   Am I a person in God's image? etc.
• Use language that encourages people to think on their own, to study the scriptures and to engage in dialogue.  Raising questions is a great tool to accomplish this.

Do you have any insights or advice on this topic?
Please share with us (scroll down further)

Select Quotes on this Topic:

• "Voices of clergy speaking from beemas, pulpits, lecterns, and altars in houses of worship have influenced significantly the direction of politics in this nation since its inception. Indeed, a lively dialogue between the pulpit and politicians has pervaded many of the most critical periods in our national history. Some historians contend that no other form of discourse has held the place of importance in this nation's life than that of preaching . . . By all means, address important issues of the day, but don't cross the line into partisanship." Rev. Dr. C. Welton Gaddy, The Interfaith Alliance Foundation
  

• Religious Expression at Election Time: "The Becket Fund stands firmly for the proposition that the First Amendment should protect the freedom of any religious minister (whether rabbi or reverend, imam or shaman) to preach about anything at all (including politics of the left, right or center) without the threat of fines or other government sanctions.  In our view, such penalties would represent both a grave offense to the free expression of religious and political views, and an impermissible government preference for politically docile religious groups over politically outspoken ones." Kevin J. Hasson, Esq, The Becket Fund (read the entire open letter to religious leaders)

• Christian Education versus Humanism: "And what of the Church during this time [of proliferation of humanistic ideas]? There were a limited number of Protestant and Catholic voices fighting the war, but generally the Church droned on mechanically with its disconnected Biblical or catechistic studies as the humanist juggernaut rolled forward." John Loeffler, Worldview Wars in Paradigms, Preaching and Politics

Links

• Worldview Wars -- John Loeffler, in Paradigms, Preaching and Politics   (Christian Education versus Humanism)

• Open Letter to Religious Leaders Kevin J. Hasson, Esq, The Becket Fund

• Interview with Vice-Mayor Rev. Henry Hearns, Lancaster, CA; also pastor of the First Missionary Baptist Church in Sun Village, CA

• Preaching and Politics, Rev. Dr. C. Welton Gaddy, The Interfaith Alliance Foundation--a Worship Leader's Guide

Do you have any insights or advice on this topic?
Please share with us:

Your Thoughts:

Date: 02 Jan 2003

Contribution

I believe no sermon is devoid of politics and one must be able to identify one's own perspective. I believe politics must be addressed in a sermon, isn't that what preaching is about? We must offer the Christian perspective to for people today especially regarding today's difficult issues, such as war, and cloning. If we do not, then we have missed a big part of what it means to preach.

Date: 02 Jan 2003

Contribution

It would seem to me appropriate for the ministry to help apply theological issues to our everyday world. To me, the problem is more in the application. I'm very worried that there are some people like Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell with political agendas who are trying to make Christian theology apply to their politics.

Date: 03 Jan 2003

Contribution

The problem I have seen with preaching and politics is that most preachers on the right and the left start with a particular political agenda or worldview and then shape their scriptural exegesis to meet the ends they want to achieve rather than as you suggest starting with the interpretation of the scriptures and trying to understand how God could be speaking to us today about this particular issue. Your politics should grow out of your theological worldview,not the other way around.

Date: 07 Jan 2003

Contribution

This is a useful article that makes some helpful points. Church leaders face a real danger of entering into political debates with an inadequate grasp of the issues on either side. However any reader of the bible would be struck by the biblical God concern with our lives. Since the Enlightenment mainstream culture has caricatured Christianity as concerned with some ethereal realm after death and consequently irrelevant to the issues we face here and now. At least some Christians are called to be the salt and yeast - engaging with the often complex political issues of their day, as politicians, leaders and as citizens. The preacher can equip the Christian for this task by opening the scriptures but it will not often be appropriate for the preacher to advocate particular policies. Where this is contemplated the preacher would do well to consult with Christians of different views first.

Brian Coutanche, Jersey, Channel Islands

Date: 08 Jan 2003

Contribution

The Bible contains many examples of political preaching.

"Hear this word, you cows of Bashan who are on Mount Samaria, who oppress the poor, who crush the needy, who say to their husbands, 'Bring something to drink!' The Lord GOD has sworn by his holiness: The time is surely coming upon you, when they shall take you away with hooks, even the last of you with fishhooks" (Am 4.1-2).

Micah focuses on the crimes of the corrupt officials, both religious and political, whom he attacks scathingly for their exploitation of people. Priests, prophets, and judges were self-serving and corrupt.

The prophets claim to have received revelations from God which offer a radical alternative to existing beliefs, ethical standards or established structures, whether religious, societal or political. Prophets are not interested in forecasting doom; they are endowed with the Spirit to see through, to disclose the future impact of present evils in order to call people to conversion. Therefore, prophecy has always a salvific dimension.

Jesus placed his ministry in the line of the great prophets before him, such as Moses, Elijah, and Isaiah (Lk 4.17-21; Mt 17.2). Jesus was crucified by the political authorities for speaking out against oppression and injustice, for suggesting that God wills freedom for all.

As preachers of the Gospel, Good News, we are called to proclaim God's grace and mercy and God's will for the freedom of humanity against the bad news that people live with every day.

The Gospel demands solidarity with the oppressed, whether in terms of class, race, gender, or other cultural definitions. Action in the form of engagement on the right side of social conflict must be the test of faith and thr form of Christian obedience. Gustavo Gutierrez wrote "The historical-political liberating event is the growth of the kingdom and is a salvific event; but it is not the coming of the kingdom, not all of salvation. It is the historical realization of the kingdom and therefore it also proclaims its fullness" so there is continuity between the human struggle for liberation and the saving work of God in Jesus Christ.

We are called to be paracletes, to comfort and counsel one another. We are called to be beside each other, helping, exhorting, consoling, strengthening. That is what communion within our congregations and churches and between the churches around the world is all about.

Date: 10 Jan 2003

Contribution

In the ordination vows I made was the phrase, "preach nothing as necessary to salvation except that which can be proven from scripture." I think we risk heresy if our own political leanings take over. I think we risk faithlessness if we fail to stand under scriptures as we preach. I think we risk divine derision if we stand under scriptures and haven't the courage to allow them to speak God's truth and righteousness to real national and international issues.

Date: 11 Jan 2003

Contribution

Re: January 10 posting

I agree that we might fall into heresy if our preaching leans on any political party's platform. Our preaching ought to be biblical but that doesn't preclude it from being political. I think we run into problems when we decide that Republican policy or Democrat policy is Christian and the other party's policy isn't. The church body that I belong to has an "Office for Public Policy" that lobbies our various governments, of whatever persuasion, advocating for justice from the standpoint of biblical perspectives. In Canada we have a coalition of churches in a body called Kairos that speaks on behalf of many churches on social justice issues.

In preaching what is necessary to salvation from the scriptures (salvation meaning healing) I think our society and political structures need salvation, not only individual souls. So, I agree that our political leanings ought not to take over our biblical preaching but our biblical preaching ought to influence our politics.

Date: 20 Jan 2003

Contribution

You've omitted one of the most obvious approaches. For lack of a better term, call it the "Religious Right" approach. In this case, one preaches political messages in which the government is to be a tool for enforcing Christian values.

Date: 21 Jan 2003

Contribution

Religious Right? One could say the same for a "religious left." It would all depend on how one defines Christian values. Each would prefer the tool of government to enforce its own interpretation.

As a conservative, I would prefer the government to get out of the and allow the churches function as the body of Christ.

Jerry in Jax

Date: 26 Jan 2003

Contribution

In the Lutheran tradition we feel very uncomfortable preaching about politics (although sometimes the world calls out for it). Our understanding of our call to preach however is that we are to proclaim Gospel to the people--iow, we are to proclaim the complete forgiveness of sin for the through the substitutionary death and resurrection of Jesus. If we spend our time in the pulpit telling people how to vote are we not encouraging a sort of work righteousness that violates the 1st commandment? No, politics is ephemeral, Christ is eternal. Terry C.

Date: 27 Jan 2003

Contribution

Terry, I'm a Lutheran too and I totally believe that we're called to proclaim the Gospel of God's love and grace in Jesus Christ. I believe that good news is for all people in all circumstances. Unfortunately our political systems tend to deny good news to many, and if we ignore that in the pulpit then we're giving bad news to some. I'm not saying we tell people how to vote. I'm saying we tell people what the good news of the living Word of God is for all people, that we can try to influence our politicians to be vehicles of good news as well, and that we encourage people to look at a party or a candidate's platform and decide which come closest to biblical principles for ALL rather than what is best for the pocketbooks of a few. I think that's Gospel too. Shalom

Date: 2/11/2003

Contribution

The US Constitution notwithstanding, (do we not answer to a higher authority?) This so-called "Separation of Church and State" was originally designed to prevent the government from enforcing allegiance to any particular religious viewpoint as a requirement for full participation in the political landscape (and in community life in general.)

I fear that the original intent has been distorted to coerce religious people to obstain from political discourse. Was it not the pulpits of the American Colonies that helped to preach the need for independence? Have not God's prophets and preachers throughout history braved the storm of political and societal oppression in order to proclaim Jesus' radical call to full allegiance to God and complete transformation of soul and society alike? Many of our brothers and sisters suffered greatly over the ages to do just that.

However, as has been said, our "inspiration" must come from the scriptures, the Holy Sspirit, and our sense of compassion for God's people, NOT from our allegiance to any particular polital party or philosophy. Would not that constitute idolatry?

Whether from the left or from the right, anytime we seek to replace our Savior Jesus Christ with a new savior, called Democrat, Republican, Green Party, Communist, Socialist, or other-ist, we commit the gravest offense against the Faith and the Savior.

pastorkenw@pastors.com

Date: 3/5/2003

Contribution

04 MAR 03

Another Lutheran who won't claim to speak for all Lutherans! The First Amendment does indeed proscribe (our) government "establishing" (i.e., favoring, promoting) any one religion over another (though we're having a good debate on whether or not Christians do indeed get preferential treatment). The other half of the amendment is the "free exercise" clause, which really expects every tradition to exercise the principles of their traditions and make the best possible case in the public forum. All of us--whatever our specific callings, including ordained ministry--must take the risks of using the prophetic voice in the public arena of ethics and action. We must discern our "mission" and we all have our "canon within the canon" upon which we base our principles and norms. I love Jesus' inaugeral address in Luke 4:18-19 which states a practical, "earthy" and political message of care for (what Matthew calls) "the least of these." The Spirit of the Lord is upon us in baptism, inspiring us to be agents of Christ's "abundant life" (Jn. 10:10) for all. Peter in WI

Date: 3/6/2003

Contribution

"...I [God] make you [priests] despised and abased before all people, inasmuch as you have not kept my ways but have shown partiality in your instruction." Malachi 2:9 Political discourse in contemporary culture has become so vitriolic and hateful that just speaking in favor of peace from the pulpit has had certain segments of the population branding me unpatriotic, unChristian and a mouthpiece for the party that the Bush administration does not belong to. Whereas my failure to embrace Palestinian terrorist's viewpoints has found me branded a rightwinger fundie. As a wise retired pastor once told me, if you don't have somebody mad at you, you aren't doing your job. Another Lutheran