SHOULD CHURCHES DISCUSS POLITICS?

[wikey321]

Not sure an appropriate question but if yes, please provide Bible quote and explain or supporting facts.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

Not sure an appropriate question but if yes, please provide Bible quote and explain or supporting facts.

Welcome to CF!
Discussing issues or politics should never be part of teaching or preaching the Gospel. As a matter of fact, it is illegal in the United States, as a 501c3 non profit to discuss any politics or support any candidate. This could bring the corporation's status to an end. But alas! The IRS does not persue offenders.
Blessings!

 

[High Fidelity]

It's very seldom a compatible mix. As you can see in much of the United States, the two become synonymous and it creates issues, unnecessary divisions and falling further from Christ.

The politicisation of faith in the U.S. has undoubtedly ushered millions more through the wide gate.

 

[Hammster]

Not sure an appropriate question but if yes, please provide Bible quote and explain or supporting facts.

Definitely.


And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.”
— Matthew 28:18-20


And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.”
— Matthew 28:18-20

We are called to take dominion over creation, the same creation that Christ has all authority over. Politics is very much a part of that.

 

[childeye 2]

Not sure an appropriate question but if yes, please provide Bible quote and explain or supporting facts.

Titus 1:5, For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee...

The church appointed elders to entrust with certain responsibilities in a community. The delegation of power (Politics) is inevitable in all households.

 

[Blade]

well if we look out in the USA today one would cry "no never". Yet Washington, Congress etc I am thinking God is all over that. Kinda helps where the rest of this nation goes. So might be wise to talk (allot make it personal) and that way we "pray" about this nation and pray for its leaders who ever they are be it GOD put in there or man did. So be wise

 

[St. Helens]

ADMIN HAT ON

This is a non debate area. Political debate, especially, is not appropriate. Just answer the OP's question from scripture.
ADMIN HAT OFF​

 

[SavedByGrace3]

Thank you Mod for the reminder...

 

[SavedByGrace3]

Matt 5:15
MSG
“Here’s another way to put it: You’re here to be light, bringing out the God-colors in the world. God is not a secret to be kept. We’re going public with this, as public as a city on a hill. If I make you light-bearers, you don’t think I’m going to hide you under a bucket, do you? I’m putting you on a light stand. Now that I’ve put you there on a hilltop, on a light stand—shine! Keep open house; be generous with your lives. By opening up to others, you’ll prompt people to open up with God, this generous Father in heaven.

 

[RileyG]

Welcome to CF!
Discussing issues or politics should never be part of teaching or preaching the Gospel. As a matter of fact, it is illegal in the United States, as a 501c3 non profit to discuss any politics or support any candidate. This could bring the corporation's status to an end. But alas! The IRS does not persue offenders.
Blessings!

I agree.

 

[DragonFox91]

I find churches that tend to avoid discussing politics tend to be wishy-washy on sin.

But you don’t want to pick & choose which topics to be hard on & which ones to ignore, either.

 

[SavedByGrace3]

I find churches that tend to avoid discussing politics tend to be wishy-washy on sin.

But you don’t want to pick & choose which topics to be hard on & which ones to ignore, either.

I recall what happened to John the Baptist when he decided to speak out again a politician by name. I imagine there was fear there. But he feared God and loved righteousness more than he feared the wrath of men. It cost him his life. When Jesus was informed that Herod was going to kill him, He openly called Herod a fox. By name! He essentially said, "I am on my way, you fox; I will be in Jerusalem in a few days. Kill me, then. I will do the will and work of God. I am not afraid of you! You and your ilk have killed the prophets. Why should I be any different?"
That is a stark contrast to many preachers today who, first, hide in their churches so as not to upset the powers that be, and then, when comfortably hidden in their churches, are silenced for fear of losing their tax-exempt status! So YES, if we follow Jesus' actions and John's example... we should discuss the politicians, their sins, and sinful policies, even by name!
Thank you for listening.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Pastor Dietrich Bonhoeffer's essay "The Church and the Jewish Question" is one of the more interesting works I've read on this subject. For some historical context, Bonhoeffer was addressing a tremendous issue of his day, where the Nazi State had come to power and was now seeking to force itself on the German churches. The Deutchechristen or "German Christian" movement had taken root and come to occupy many of the positions of leadership in the German Protestant Church. And it was declared that members of the Church who were of Jewish ancestry were to be rejected, regardless of the fact that they were baptized, believing Christians, followers of Jesus. Bonhoeffer and others referred to this situation as the "Church Struggle", for the very identity and foundations of the Church in Germany were being shaken and violently attacked by Nazi ideology. The cross was being replaced with the swastika, often literally.

Bonhoeffer, a good Lutheran theologian held to the Lutheran confessional teaching on the "Two Kingdoms". A kind of precursor to later ideas concerning the separation of Church and State, (James Madison actually partly credited Luther and the Lutheran tradition as an inspiration for the Non-Establishment Clause in the First Amendment to the US Constitution). The doctrine of the Two Kingdoms is, in a sense, an outgrowth of St. Augustine's work in The City of God: That we cannot and should not confuse God's City with Man's City. The doctrine of the Two Kingdoms is a theology about the distinction between temporal, earthly power (i.e. the State) and the spiritual power and authority of the Church.

The Church operates by the Gospel to preach salvation to the world.
The State operates by civil laws to curb evil and lawlessness.

In this context, Bonhoeffer writes that the Church, therefore cannot dictate how the State should be run. The Church is not master over the State, and the State is not subject to the Church. Likewise, however, the Church is not subservient to the State, and the State has no business telling the Church how and what to believe.

And thus Bonhoeffer wrestles with the question: While the Church has not been sanctioned to tell the State what to do, what happens when the actions of the State become so abhorrently barbaric that it becomes unconscionable to act? It is one thing, for example, for Christians to suffer persecution under Caesar; but what happens when we see the total slaughter of our neighbors? What happens when we see our neighbors rounded up by the Gestapo and forced onto trains to their certain demise? What is the Church to do? Can the Christian simply accept the State's actions and not do something? Should the Christian "stay out of politics" even then? When must the Christian finally not merely try and slow the wheel of death, but put a spanner and bring the machine to a standstill?

That is where this quote, from the essay, shows up:
"The third possibility is not just to bind up the wounds of the victims beneath the wheel but to seize the wheel itself. Such an action would be direct political action on the part of the church. This is only possible and called for if the church sees the state to be failing in its function of creating law and order, that is, if the church perceives that the state, without any scruples, has created either too much or too little law and order. It must see in either eventuality a threat to the existence of the state and thus to its own existence as well. There would be too little if any one group of citizens is deprived of its rights. There would be too much in the case of an attack, coming from the state, on the nature of the church and its proclamation, such as the obligatory exclusion of baptized Jews from our Christian congregations or a ban on missions to the Jews. In such a case, the church would find itself in statu confessionis, and the state would find itself in the act of self-negation."

That is to say, when the State becomes lawless through either "too much law" or "too little law" that the result is the suffering of our neighbor, it becomes necessary for the Church to no more simply act as sanctuary and to bandage the wounded--but to step up and take action to stop such injustice. The Christian, in such circumstance, must make their stand in bold confession (in statu confessionis, "in a state of confession") against the State.

Politics for the sake of politicking is worthless. The Church has no business telling people to vote Republican or Democrat, or to fund political campaigns, or to engage in political machinations and attain status and power.

But when the State negates its own reason for existence--to maintain peace, to ensure the welfare of the people, to curb evil--and becomes itself the instrument of evil, there must be a bold stand which the Church takes, to speak up, to not merely bandage the victims, but to say enough is enough.

These same principles became the very principles which influenced the work of Dr. King and his work, and we can see an echo of Bonhoeffer when he says in his sermon, A Knock at Midnight,

"The church must be reminded that it is not the master or the servant of the state, but rather the conscience of the state. It must be the guide and the critic of the state, and never its tool. If the church does not recapture its prophetic zeal, it will become an irrelevant social club without moral or spiritual authority. If the church does not participate actively in the struggle for peace and for economic and racial justice, it will forfeit the loyalty of millions and cause men everywhere to say that it has atrophied its will. But if the church will free itself from the shackles of a deadening status quo, and, recovering its great historic mission, will speak and act fearlessly and insistently in terms of justice and peace, it will enkindle the imagination of mankind and fire the souls of men, imbuing them with a glowing and ardent love for truth, justice, and peace. Men far and near will know the church as a great fellowship of love that provides light and bread for lonely travelers at midnight."

The Church is neither lord nor servant of the State, but a voice that always must speak truth to power.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Reasonable Christian]

That depends on what you mean by politics. Pretty much everything is political at this point. Advocating for a certain candidate or political party is absolutely not what a church should be doing (and is illegal for a non-profit). That said, churches should discuss issues that are discussed in the Bible (abortion, homosexuality, etc.), not because they are not-button political issues, but because the Bible addresses them.

 

[Hawkins]

Politics basically means governmental stuff. It belongs to Caesar. More often it is employed by Satan to divide people and to cause human conflicts and even wars. It is one of the most convenient tools for the devil to do so.

 

[drich0150]

Not sure an appropriate question but if yes, please provide Bible quote and explain or supporting facts.

why wouldn't they be able to discuss politics? As the political in an open election sets or revokes religious freedoms.