Do a person's political beliefs flow from their religious convictions? Probably, at least in part; but that shouldn't keep us from acknowledging the faith of persons with whom we disagree politically. That is the theme of a letter below that I sent to the elders of my local congregation of the churches of Christ.
Good evening, [redacted]]!
Nan and I look forward to hearing you, [redacted], and others speak from the pulpit on Sundays. We know that this means opening our hearts to the occasional need for our persuasion on matters of disagreement, and sometimes of our own personal failings. Today, we’d like to turn the tables on you, to see whether we can persuade you on a matter that has recently touched our hearts.
Within mere hours after Charlie Kirk’s assassination, we were seeing a groundswell of unsolicited commitments by people on social media to attend church, to purchase Bibles, and to rededicate themselves to Christ. I was not a careful observer of Kirk until these past few days, but I have been moved by this response. I’m sixty years old and have never seen, read, or heard anything like it before. On the drive to worship last Sunday, Nan and I speculated whether you would mention anything about it in your sermon that day. We thought it less than likely that you would do so.
It turned out that you did mention Charlie in a passing remark of about six seconds, though not by name. As we vaguely recall, you portrayed him as saying some things that were right, and other things that were “very wrong.” Correct us if we’re misstating what you said, but it seemed that you implied that people were following Charlie instead of Jesus.
If we may, we’d like to suggest three things by this letter. First, we gently urge you to set aside whatever you might have heard or read about Mr. Kirk in the popular press. Instead, please listen to Charlie’s statements and arguments in his own words. There are an abundance of clips available in context, and people are sharing more of them every day. If you do, we think you’ll soon find that many of the more controversial opinions attributed to him are misstatements or remarks out of context. To simply repeat others’ misrepresentations seems to us an enabling of false witness.
Secondly, we wish to assuage any concerns that Charlie Kirk is or was a competitor with the elders and preachers among congregations of the churches of Christ; and worse, that he presented a different gospel that that found in the New Testament. I have not yet found any statement of Charlie’s with which anyone in our fellowship would or could disagree. Charlie did not profess to be a prophet or an evangelist. He simply visited campus after college campus, engaging with young people on matters of interest to them, and swaying millions of them with a Christ-centered message. If only we had young men in our Lord’s churches who would do the same!
Thirdly and most importantly, we beg you to open the doors of the church to any who were motivated to visit us by Charlie Kirk. These people aren’t looking for Charlie, they’re seeking Christ as Charlie directed them. Not all may be ready for discipleship, but many will be. As for Charlie himself, we might think of him as Luke recorded of Apollos in Acts 18:24-36. “He was an eloquent man, well versed in the scriptures. He had been instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in spirit, he spoke and taught accurately the things concerning Jesus … When he arrived, he greatly helped those who through grace had believed.”
We can say similar things about Charlie apart from any differences among our political convictions. We are able to do so, even if Charlie himself considered our nation’s political challenges to be downstream from matters of faith: "Spiritual problems manifest themselves into cultural problems that then become political problems."
We pray that this letter has moved you in such a way as to reconcile any differences of opinion that there might be among us.
Friendly regards,
William and Nan Hillis
[The elder replies:]
William and Nan,
[R]egarding the intent of my sermon, I’m very grateful for the godly and respectful way in which you’ve expressed your concerns, and I receive it with the understanding that you have a love for me and the leadership here at Montwood. As frustrating as it can be, I know all too well how difficult it can be to express myself in the way I intend, and this issue is certainly an example of such.
Hopefully I can express more clearly the point I was making Sunday. The context of my statement was around the difference between the apostles’ perspective of an earthly kingdom juxtaposed with Jesus’ eternal perspective, and how that should affect our behaviors and outlook. I referenced Ephesians 3:20-21, and how God can do far more than we can imagine. Then, I said this:
See, sometimes we get hung up on political things. It’s a tragedy what happened this past week. It’s a tragedy. God’s work isn’t done! There’s no political leader that you can set up to fulfill what God has to do. God is greater than what you can imagine! His power is greater than what you think you can do. It’s not about getting up and just saying some bold things, sometimes some wrongheaded things, sometimes some right things. It’s not about that! It’s about trusting in the power of God. God changes our expectations. What you thought it was about may not be what God thinks it’s about.
My point here is that sometimes we get deflated when someone we think is doing great things in the name of God is taken away. And I also think it’s important during these times that I make sure people don’t get the sense that I believe any political leader or public persona is always right in everything they say or do (hence the comment about “sometimes wrongheaded things". I may agree with many or even most of what they say, but they can and do still say things that either themselves are wrong or are said in a divisive or hurtful way. These personas tend to cause division, and if we align ourselves too closely with anyone other than Christ, we could be aligning ourselves with things that are not god-honoring (even if unintentionally). Instead, we are called to trust in God and what he can do, and continue focusing on serving in his kingdom just as Jesus called us to—humbly, lovingly, and faithfully.
I hope it’s clear that I don’t believe Kirk is a competitor to the church, but rather my concern is that we can get caught up in these events to the detriment of the gospel message, and we could become discouraged thinking that evil is winning. In fact, we have the victory in Christ, and we are simply called to be devoted to his kingdom and not any earthly authority or political or religious leader.
I also hope that what I’ve said makes it clear that we would never turn away anyone that walks into our doors with the intent of learning more about Jesus, whatever it was that first prompted them to do so.
If I’ve failed to clarify the message satisfactorily, please reach out again via email, phone, or in person. Much like my statement earlier about the imperfections of public communication, I fully recognize my inadequacies in that regard, and I pray that God’s word still changes hearts anyway while he works in me to bring about those changes that would make me more like Jesus.
May God continue blessing you and your family, and may we all "be strengthened with power through his Spirit in [our] inner being, so that Christ may dwell in [our] hearts through faith—that [we], being rooted and grounded in love, may have strength to comprehend with all the saints what is the breadth and length and height and depth, and to know the love of Christ that surpasses knowledge, that [we] may be filled with all the fullness of God” (Eph. 3:16-19).
Thank you, brother and sister!