In three weeks, we’ll have a presidential election. While many of us wish the outcome would resolve the partisan divide in our country, we also know better. As an electorate, we are as polarized and at odds with each other as we’ve ever been. The intensity and fervor with which we hold our political opinions—and with which many of us demonize those on the other side—is extraordinary.
Unfortunately, this breakdown between people of differing political opinions has, in many places, invaded the local church. While we may be civil towards each other in public, the factional nature of our society has created a very volatile atmosphere in many congregations. When people can retrieve their news from websites and tune in to 24-hour news channels that serve only to reinforce their bias and confirm their leanings, the end result is, in most cases, the temperature is further raised. When people can post opinions on social media and make inflammatory statements about those on the other side of the debate without having to look them square in the eye, it serves only to amp up the intensity of the situation. All this makes the job of being a pastor extremely risky and hazardous. It’s like walking through a mine field that hasn’t been preemptively swept.
I recently had a pastor friend, who doesn’t affiliate with either political party and considers himself an independent, share with me something that was relayed to him by a member of his church board. This board member overheard a few congregants talking and one of them said, “It greatly concerns me that our pastor is far left of where our church is politically.” That’s an alarming statement for a couple of reasons. First—this pastor friend is not by any stretch of the imagination a screaming liberal; he merely tries to allow his faith to inform his political opinions to where he doesn’t fit comfortably into either political party. This congregant’s assessment only serves to illuminate how far right on the political spectrum he is (or how far right the peer group, which he believes is characteristic of everybody in the congregation, is). But second, and perhaps more disquieting, this statement means that a certain segment of folks see their church as a politically homogenous entity with a specific identity. While I’d hope the church of Jesus Christ would never exclude someone on the basis of their skin color or socioeconomic status, to imply that a congregation has a particular political identity means that those who fail to conform to that identity don’t, and never will, fully belong. It means that congregation is basing its solidarity on a particular ideology and not on the unity that comes through Jesus—a unity that rises above, and stands in judgment of, every political ideology on the planet.
As I survey the landscape it seems to me churches fall into one of three categories as it relates to how they deal with political issues:
(1) Some churches avoid anything with a political overtone in an attempt to offend no one. In order not to offend, large chunks of Scripture are overlooked and a number of key themes are neglected. The problem, however, is that churches that seek not to offend also fail to provide comfort or clarity about many of the relevant issues that people are living with. Ignoring the pain people are feeling and the real-life questions that are circling in their heads leads to the church being perceived as out of touch and irrelevant.
(2) Some churches offend those on one side or the other. These churches will rally people from one camp to where anyone who votes, or even leans, in the other direction will feel out of place. I recall many times receiving a phone call about getting non-partisan voting guides that could be distributed to the congregation in advance of an election. I got to the place where I said, “Thanks but no thanks” simply because the issues that were highlighted in those publications were extremely biased. It was as if the people who assembled those guides concluded, “These are the only issues people of faith ought to really care about” and I knew full well there were folks in my congregation who cared greatly about other issues that weren’t included. I eventually concluded it was better not to distribute the flyers than to send a biased, partisan message. (I also remember the Sunday they were placed on the windshield of every car in the parking lot without any prior awareness. I was not a happy camper! We issued a carefully worded email that went out to the entire congregation that afternoon.)
(3) Some churches graciously offend everyone at some point. If the Bible came from God and isn’t the product of any particular culture or bias, then it’s going to offend each of us at some point. As I mentioned in a previous post, when a pastor is accused of “being political” it’s typically because in his/her being faithful to the biblical text he/she confronted, rather than affirmed, the person’s position. But the reality is the only way we are more fully formed into the image of Christ is if we are periodically challenged and offended by the truth of Scripture. The person who reads the Bible and is never provoked or aggravated is a person who believes—falsely—that he/she is fully formed and requires no further growth or improvement. And that is typically the most unsafe and dangerous person in the church.
I always strived, as a pastor, to fall into the third camp. And I realized, for that reason, we would always lose some people. After three-plus decades in ministry, here’s what I’ve learned: Losing people always feels personal. Somebody once said that a pastor needs to have the heart of a child, the mind of a scholar, and the hide of a rhinoceros. I know, for myself, the last one was the hardest of the three to maintain. Whenever people left, it always felt personal. I came away feeling like I’d disappointed them or failed in some regard. And when they weren’t willing to have a conversation where I could learn from my shortcomings or clear up any misunderstandings, it only reinforced the hurt.
If people leave because of reasons I caused—because I made a boneheaded leadership decision … or created conflict that didn’t need to happen … or drove someone away because I was being autocratic and dictatorial—then I need to own it and grow from it. But if people leave because I spoke out regarding a cultural issue in a biblically faithful manner and they didn’t like it … or I addressed an important issue in a way that conformed to the truth of the Bible but wasn’t politically correct … or taught the full counsel of Scripture but didn’t reinforce someone’s specific hobby horse and they got upset, then that’s OK.
If someone leaves because I did something ill-considered or unwise, then I need to own it and grow from it. But if they leave because they ran headlong into the transcendent truth of God and got a headache as a result, then so be it. Because the church is not a business and the customer is not always right. Nor is my credibility and integrity as a pastor for sale.