At this point, some will understandably contend that a person’s distinct Christian witness in the public square will impede evangelistic efforts because his or her message will offend others.  Using same-sex marriage as an example, some may argue that “we shouldn’t speak out against same-sex marriage.  We should be more concerned about people’s salvation than government legislation.”  John MacArthur voiced similar concern when he wrote, “When the church takes a stance that emphasizes political activism and social moralizing, it always diverts energy and resources away from evangelization” (Why the Government Can’t Save You, pg. 14).

But does our participation in the political process in America impede the churches evangelistic efforts?  Does participating divert energy and resources away from evangelization?  In Biblical Ethics and Social Change, Stephen Mott shares the following example to illustrate this point:

Jimmy Allen was chided for a strong statement on racial injustice:  “When you as a Baptist preacher get into that kind of controversy, you cut off my chance as a Baptist to win my neighbor who has racial prejudice.”  Allen’s response is appropriate.   “Evangelism is not tricking people into signing the policy and then letting them read the small print” (pg. 125).

We cannot balk at proclaiming injustices within the social and political sphere.   If the governing authorities are committing injustices then we are obligated to speak out against them.   The very nature of our Christian message is antagonistic towards the world and will be offensive, irrespective of how we dress it up in flowery poetic language. 

Although our message will be repulsive to some, and although it may be the truth, this does not mean that our message is to be mean-spirited.  In relating his own personal experience with Focus on the Family, Tom Minnery shared, 

I have given speeches and presentations and have been a participant in panel discussions in a multitude of secular, hostile environments.  Many times these have   provided wonderful opportunities for explaining not only the position at hand but also what lies behind it – that is, the Christian faith from which our moral standard flows.  I found that one’s demeanor in such situations often determines the secularist’s response. (Tom Minnery, , pg. 52).

It is important to keep in mind that as self-identified Christians we engage the political process as representatives of the Christ of Christianity.  Yes, the message of the Cross is and will be offensive, but this does not mean that we say it in an offensive way.  This is best expressed by the Apostle Paul, who said that we are to speak the truth in love (Ephesians 4.15)

Even though our social and political involvement will not impede our evangelistic efforts, Stephen Mott was right in saying that they “may hurt certain narrowly conceived attempts at making disciples” (pg. 125).

Enjoy this post?  Get more like them by subscribing to Reformed and Reforming by E-mail or RSS.

Related posts:

1. Christianity and Democracy: Understanding their Relationship I have been working on a book for nearly...
2. Why and How Christians Should Be Involved in the U.S. Political Process The last two weeks we discovered from Romans 13.5...
3. Compromising in the Political Realm: How Christians can Learn to Rightfully Compromise in Policy, not Conviction It has been alluded to that faith and government...
4. The Churches Involvement with Non-Christians is Essential to Fulfilling Its Mission The churches level of involvement with the community is...
5. Political Leaders do not have the Final Say: The Limited Role of the Government is Affirmed in both the Old and New Testament’s In my last post, I ended by saying: Not...

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Tags: Christianity and Democracy, political involvement, social responsibility, Stephen Mott, tom minnery