How can the church be apolitical?
Being political can chase people away. But so can not being political.
US comedian Jimmy Kimmel (right), shown with sidekick Guillermo Rodriguez, got a lot of free publicity by getting kicked off his show for one week.
When I was in high school, my father was fired from his evening radio talk show. We were short on money for a while. My private high school gave me a scholarship so I could complete my senior year.
About 18 months later, the radio station changed managers and rehired my father. On his first night back, he began, “As I was saying when I was so rudely interrupted … .”
So it was nostalgic for me when US late-night TV comedian Jimmy Kimmel walked on stage Tuesday night and began his monologue in the same way.
Kimmel lost his show on the ABC television network for one week because of threats by the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission. Like all major US late-night comedians today, Kimmel espouses left-leaning politics and frequently uses his laugh lines to criticize Donald Trump and Republican politicians. However, even some conservatives were appalled by the US government’s use of coercion against private companies so as to limit free speech.
Facing popular pressure and a growing boycott, Disney, ABC’s parent company, backtracked. Conveniently for his comedy repertoire, Kimmel returned to the airwaves on the same day when Donald Trump, given a 15-minute time allocation at the United Nations General Assembly, instead spoke for 57 minutes. Among other things, Trump again recommended himself for a Nobel Peace Prize, complained that the UN did not hire his company to put marble floors in its building, and claimed that London was considering the introduction of sharia law under its Muslim mayor.
A Washington Post reporter who covers the UN posted online during Trump’s speech, “A senior foreign diplomat posted at the UN texts me: ‘This man is stark, raving mad. Do Americans not see how embarrassing this is?’”
Polls suggest that about 55 percent of Americans are embarrassed, but the US Congress and Supreme Court are not yet restraining him.
Meanwhile, the US role as beacon of democracy and leader of the post–Cold War world order appears to have ended. I never expected to see the day when the president of Indonesia would say with reference to the US, “No one country can bully the whole of the human family,” or when the leaders of Spain, Brazil, and Chile would come together to defend the rule of law against US actions.
These events remind me of a question I’ve visited previously: when the church should be political or apolitical. Subscriber John Bugay raised this question thoughtfully in response to Palestinian Fares Abraham’s September 15 post, questioning whether the life-giving gospel of Jesus Christ has ever not been entangled with politics.
I will attempt a two-pronged answer here. First, because the gospel should be open to all, the church should generally be apolitical. When a church allies closely with a particular political stance, or especially with a political party, it implies that someone who thinks differently is not welcome or is ineligible to receive the gospel. (Contrary to widespread perceptions, the great majority of US congregations avoid explicit discussion of politics.)
But in another sense, the gospel is unavoidably political. By insisting that God alone receives our first allegiance, it stands in judgment over and threatens to defy political leaders (Matt 22:21; Acts 5:29). In this way, the call to total commitment to God risks direct conflict with government, particularly totalitarian governments (Dan 3:18).
The hard part, of course, is to decide what issues or situations call the church to be overtly political. At various times in the last two centuries, Christians have called for political action in opposition to slavery, alcoholic beverages, racial segregation, and abortion or in favor of humanitarian aid, equitable tax systems, religious freedom, and environmental protection. In many of those instances, other groups of Christians have been on the opposite side of the issue.
If we speak up, some will accuse us of tying the gospel to a political agenda; if we don’t speak up, some will accuse us of hypocrisy. We can never keep everyone happy. But we can determine our positions prayerfully, in community with fellow Christians, and articulate them with consistency and integrity while showing respect to others.
I’ll conclude with a few observations on Kimmel’s Tuesday monologue.
1. I appreciate Kimmel’s defense of free speech, and his acknowledgment of conservatives who defended him. I hope he will do the same when liberals try to silence conservatives, as has frequently happened on US university campuses.
2. Kimmel’s reaction to Erika Kirk forgiving her husband’s assassin displayed the powerful impact of forgiveness (which Trump felt unable to echo in his own remarks). Kimmel stated (at 17:35 of the video), “That is an example we should follow. If you believe in the teachings of Jesus as I do, there it was. A selfless act of grace.”
3. I was surprised that among the issues on which Kimmel suggested that we can come together, he listed reproductive rights (at 16:44 of the video). Mother Teresa would have been surprised too.