Is Your Pastor MIA in the Cultural War?
I am deeply concerned we are losing Western Civilization (and its faith-based freedoms) because of fearful pastors who are not preaching the whole Gospel.
I shared those qualms recently at a pastors gathering. There was mostly silence.
Then I ran across two articles that confirmed my fears.
Is your pastor MIA in the cultural war?
Is Your Pastor MIA in the Cultural War?
I will let Eric Wallace and Michael Clary state why we desperately need pastor/prophets in the 21st century.
When the Church Refuses to Engage in Politics, This Happens
By Eric Wallace
It’s one of the great paradoxes of our time. Many conservative pastors courageously preach a biblical worldview from their pulpits — defending life, marriage, and religious freedom — yet when it comes to the political process, they retreat into silence. They will preach about righteousness, but when Christian candidates who share their values ask for help — something as simple as gathering signatures to get on the ballot — they often decline.
This reluctance doesn’t just hurt individual candidates; it weakens the Church’s ability to influence culture. It leaves the field open for those whose values are hostile to the faith.
Pastors on the Left have no such reservations. As The Heart of Apostasy points out, churches aligned with progressive movements openly support initiatives like the Black Church PAC, mobilizing voters and resources for liberal causes. They see politics as an extension of their theology — a vehicle for advancing what they believe is justice. Meanwhile, too many conservative pastors treat the political process as “unspiritual,” as if God’s sovereignty ends at the voting booth.
This is more than perplexing — it’s tragic.
The political cycle should be one of the greatest opportunities for discipleship in the Church. Elections force us to confront moral questions about life, family, stewardship, and truth. They reveal whether we truly believe that Christ is Lord over all of life — including government. When pastors avoid this arena, they fail to teach their congregations how to live out their faith in the public square.
It’s not about partisanship It’s about principle. Pastors should help their people discern candidates who uphold biblical truth, not shrink back out of fear of “dividing the congregation.” Division is not caused by truth — it’s caused by the refusal to stand on it. If a member of the congregation runs for office but holds values contrary to Scripture, that should not silence the Church; it should sharpen its teaching on what righteousness in leadership looks like.
When churches disengage, they unwittingly empower the very ideologies they preach against. Silence in the face of moral decay is not neutrality — it’s complicity.
Our faith compels us to act. Elections are not distractions from the Gospel; they are moments when the Gospel’s implications are tested in public life. Helping a godly candidate get on the ballot is not “political.” It’s obedience to Christ’s call to be salt and light in every sphere.
It’s time for pastors to rediscover their prophetic role — not as political operatives, but as shepherds who guide their flocks to think biblically about everything, including the ballot box. The Church must stop viewing civic engagement as optional. It is, in fact, one of the most spiritual acts a believer can perform: applying biblical truth to the stewardship of freedom.
Charlie Kirk and he Cognitive Dissonance of Christian Elites
When I think about many of the Christian leaders I once looked up to, I wonder how many of them are experiencing some serious cognitive dissonance right now as they survey the cultural and political landscape in America. One month after the assassination of Christian martyr Charlie Kirk I can only imagine that they are.
Everything they thought and taught about “effective ministry methods” in a “postmodern” world has been turned upside down by the life, death, and testimony of a young man who never went to college and never coddled the Left.
In my seminary and early church planting days, I was taught a model of cultural engagement that emphasized “non-offensiveness” as a ministry non-negotiable. Of course, my teachers acknowledged the offense of the cross, but students were told to keep political discussions and condemnation of cultural sins to a minimum.
In theory, I found these methods compelling. Who could argue that we should avoid giving unnecessary offense? Preach the gospel. Preach the cross.
In practice, however, I found it stifling. I planted an inner city church near the University of Cincinnati in 2010, and found this methodology wholly inadequate for the challenges of real ministry. I felt that my preaching lacked power. My messages had no teeth.
So I made a deliberate choice to reject that approach. It took me a couple of years to fully deprogram my ministry instincts and retrain myself to be bolder and more outspoken. I suspect a number of my seminary peers are constrained in similar ways — and still are.
Then I think of men like Charlie Kirk. He didn’t go to college or seminary. Kirk spoke with a powerful combination of grace towards those who were receptive, but did not shrink from prophetically denouncing with crystal clarity the fashionable moral evils of our day.
If Kirk had gone to a typical evangelical seminary, he likely would have lost his edge. He would have learned to be more careful. He would have learned to be more measured. There’s a good chance he would have had his prophetic voice “educated” right out of him. My point is that our theological institutions are far more adept at producing academics when the need of the hour is more prophets.
The man who arguably had the most significant gospel impact in a generation did not go through their credentialing process. He didn’t wait for the gatekeepers to stamp his preaching passport. In fact, he did the opposite of what they would have trained him to do.
One thing is clear: Going forward, the status quo is not going to cut it. Everyone senses it. The way forward for the church is more voices in the mold of Charlie Kirk, not less.
That will be part of Charlie Kirk’s legacy. He did the opposite of everything Christian leaders are taught to do, and ended up building a ministry platform that produced the largest single gospel preaching event in human history.
***
All true.
Pastors (and Christian leaders) set the moral tone of each generation by their words. They either trumpet us toward freedom and right in all areas of life or their silence invites an invasion of darkness.
Revivalist Charles Finney diagnosed the problem years ago: (I will substitute “pastors” in the quote for “the pulpit” to modernize it.)
If immorality prevails in the land, the fault is ours [pastors] in a great degree. If there is a decay of conscience, pastors are responsible for it. If the public press lacks moral discrimination, pastors are responsible for it. If the Church is degenerate and worldly, pastors are responsible for it. If the world loses its interest in religion, pastors are responsible for it. If Satan rules in our halls of legislation, pastors are responsible for it. If our politics become so corrupt that the very foundations of our government are ready to fall away, pastors are responsible for it. Let us not ignore this fact, my dear brethren; but let us lay it to heart, and be thoroughly awake to our responsibility in respect to the morals of this nation.
Pastors–we need you to preach the whole Good News to our nation and world.
Your courage will help ignite cultural transformation.
