Much has now been written about the ways that avoiding politics and “only preaching the gospel” has become a cop-out for churches fearful of calling sinners to repentance and Christians to maturity. On the other hand, pietistic preaching has created a vacuum, and the vacuum a market. People have questions. Where does the Bible intersect with policy? Does God have anything to say about our cultural decline? What is the ideal foundation for society and government? Folks are perceiving that things have gone awry, and they wonder if there is a way back. Many are wanting for biblical answers. While a handful of faithful pastors are meeting this need pastorally, another group is capitalizing on the need in a way that overshoots the target of gospel ministry. We are all too aware of pulpits silent when they should speak, but we are now witnessing a reaction: pulpits speaking where they should be silent. To help us hit the pastoral sweet spot between too little political engagement and too much political engagement, I’ll reflect on three recent examples from our church’s experience in Canada, before offering some principles for public commentary from the pulpit.
Colossians 1:28 exemplifies the target of pastoral ministry: “Him we proclaim, warning everyone and teaching everyone with all wisdom, that we may present everyone mature in Christ.” With every public word a pastor speaks, his goal must be to present his congregation mature in Christ. The public teaching ministry is for the strategic sanctification of the people. There is a great deal to be said and a great deal to not be said in public ministry. The filter is whether it will contribute to the congregation’s sanctification. It takes skill and experience to hone words in that way, but some of the application for a pastor should be obvious. Hopefully, my church’s experience in the media and government’s crosshairs will provide fruitful reflection for your ministry.
Three Examples
Covid-19
My primary foray into the realm of speaking to public issues was during the COVID-19 lockdowns. Thankfully, we have moved beyond those times, but they can still serve as a touchstone for the intersection of public policy and pastoral ministry. Government policy converged directly with church polity and gospel ministry, so the issue was impossible to avoid—at least if a pastor desired to uphold a faithful Christian testimony. My own congregation bore the brunt of government and media attacks, being featured regularly on national news for publicly worshipping. We were subjected to millions of dollars in fines, along with the court-ordered confiscation of our church facility. Our persecution for the gospel caused us hardship on several levels. At the same time, the spotlight placed on us provided an opportunity for clear teaching to the congregation and a watching world. I seized the chance to preach on the role of the state, the limits of state powers, the doctrine of the lesser magistrate, the autonomy of the local church, the nature of the local church, the priority of congregational worship, and individual personal rights as delineated in Scripture. The government had plainly intruded into personal and ecclesiastical matters, and our public resistance offered us a moment to speak to a captive audience. More than that, our people needed the teaching, because they were suffering and the government’s actions had direct implications for our church life. Because of all this, I preached multiple sermons, wrote multiple blogs, and gave several comments to the media on political issues related to COVID-19. on political issues related to COVID-19. I even produced a full-length documentary, titled “Antichrist and His Ruin,” named after John Bunyan’s book, which he wrote in response to the tyranny of King James II.
Conversion Therapy
The COVID-19 crisis was not the last political issue I needed to address to shepherd our church. In early 2022, Canada’s federal government passed Bill C-4. It was the state’s effort to outlaw “conversion therapy,” which they defined as, among other things, attempts to “change a person’s sexual orientation to heterosexuality” and “change a person’s gender expression so that it conforms to the sex assigned at birth.”1 Those found in violation of the law would be “guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than five years.”
1. Department of Justice Canada, “Bill C-4: An Act to Amend the Criminal Code (Conversion Therapy),” Charter Statement, December 6, 2021.
On the first Sunday that it was law, I, along with several other Canadian pastors, preached sermons defying and challenging the legislation. I chose to preach a pointed sermon, which I entitled “Conversion to Christ: The Sodomite’s Only Hope.”2 I explained that the bill is an attempt to legislate a perverted and sinister fantasyland. I asserted, as the sermon title suggests, that conversion to Jesus Christ is the only hope for homosexuals and transgenders, and conversion includes conforming to God’s pattern of sexuality. I did not feel that the moment necessitated the sermon as much as the COVID-19 moment did, because the issue was not being forced upon my congregation specifically to the same degree. I did, however, believe that the protest sermon would serve the sanctification of my congregation. The moment was an opportunity to speak with clarity on a very important Scriptural issue and it also offered the opportunity to model courage before our people. Members of our congregation would face these issues in their families and workplaces, so seeing their pastor bravely, with risk of repercussions, speak clearly would serve as a model for them. So, I chose to speak.
2. Jacob Reaume, “Conversion to Christ: The Sodomite’s Only Hope” (sermon, Trinity Bible Chapel, Waterloo, ON, January 16, 2022).
The Russia-Ukraine War
Also, on the tail of the COVID-19 crisis, Russia launched a military invasion on Ukraine. Vladmir Zelynsky, the Ukrainian president, rose to instant fame, splashed across the Internet in military fatigue sporting automatic weapons, seemingly as the underdog bulwark against Russian aggression. Instead of specific commentary on the war itself, I offered high level commentary to help our people evaluate it. I explained that the same media and government who had attempted to whip us up with fear of COVID-19 were now clearly attempting to whip us up against Russia in support of Ukraine. Similar uses of propaganda were obvious. Because of how untrustworthy the media and government had proven themselves, I advised the church to be cautious in developing strong sentiments about the war. I also explained Just War Theory, indicating that yes indeed Ukraine has a right to defend itself from aggression. I had no desire to delve further into the geopolitical scene, because frankly I felt that fetching all the information necessary to form specific judgments was likely impossible, but even more importantly a poor use of my time. It would contribute nothing to the people’s sanctification, maybe even distracting from it. So, I settled with quietly cautioning against being taken by the hysteria, while offering Scriptural principles of war. Then I moved on. I didn’t preach a full sermon on the issue—my objective in teaching our people to be sober-minded was accomplished in just a few minutes.
Learning Restraint
The COVD-19 lockdowns, Bill C-4, and the War in Ukraine are three cultural and political events that I chose to publicly comment on in a short window of time. I commented on them in different ways, and I offered distinct emphases in each case. But I felt they each deserved commentary because the comments served the sanctification of my congregation.
There needs to be some caution to the public commentary. It is possible to crave the thrill of public controversy, especially after having tasted it. A dog that develops a craving for blood should be put down, and a pastor that lusts for the thrill of conflict should repent. General Robert E. Lee is reported to have once quipped, “It is well that war is so terrible, otherwise we should grow too fond of it.” Conflict can be a thrill. While barnburners and bruhahas might be an aspect of ministry, they can quickly become a distraction. The focus of ministry is the sanctification of the people. If the conflict of public policy serves that end, then we should engage it. Otherwise, bow out. If the sheer thrill of controversy impels you towards engagement there is a good chance your example may have deleterious implications on your congregation’s sanctification. A man obsessed with throwing haymakers will produce similar tendencies in his sheep, but if his sheep see him exercise restraint they too will learn to do the same.
I have also observed online pundits, pastors included, offering commentary on public issues of which they likely have little knowledge. Pastors are not talking heads. If we are to engage, we must come well prepared with thoughtful insight. We have our areas of expertise, and often, because we deal with so many personalities and situations, we can become general practitioners on multiple fronts. So, a good pastor has a great deal of wisdom to offer in many spheres. But a good pastor will be able to temper his insights with a humble awareness of his own depth. Some men assert historical revisions about Winston Churchill with the same force to which they ought to preach the resurrection—only they speak of the resurrection less. Comments about Israel’s sway on foreign policy, state intrigue, and various other machinations likely are not areas of expertise for men with theological degrees and no record of experience in the CIA. Men who are often wrong but never in doubt will produce the same tendencies in their churches, and the results will be detrimental in the long-term. It is a foolish abandonment of the pastoral call.
The pastoral ministry is a ministry of Word and prayer. Focus on those areas. The amount of time that some pastors spend on social media has left me wondering whether they give any attention to their churches, never mind their families and their own souls. If a pastor comments online more than the productive carpenters or accountants or engineers in his church, it might be a sign that he is distracted from the main business of ministry. While such practices may gain an online following, how will they earn and keep the respect of industrious parishioners in the long run? If you struggle with this in your ministry, let your fellow elders help you refocus on the main things: the Word and prayer.
Ultimately, commenting on public policy is an important but secondary aspect of pastoral ministry. Sometimes it must be done. In our times, it perhaps must be done more often than in our parents generation. Wise and timely political speech serves the specific end of helping the people become mature in Christ. The volume and targets of the commentary is somewhat contingent on one’s context, but it always advances the same objective: the holiness of the church. But be wary of losing sight of that target and wandering into vain thrills through needless melees. While an earlier group of pastors may have eclipsed faithful discipleship with their pietistic preaching, a newer generation could easily run amok by eclipsing the Gospel with political commentary.
Every generation will seek pastors to “tickle their ears.” Do not give them that. Give them the gospel and biblical teaching unto maturity. Let Scripture determine when you should speak and when you should be silent—not the will of the crowds. A people craving news cycles like entertainment need to be awoken with the clear message of a bloody cross, not by tryhard pundits with theological degrees.
