Partisan Politics Don't Belong in Pulpits

As a cradle Episcopalian, I grew up hearing some version of one of the above statements start sermons nearly every Sunday. To some extent, these words are comforting. As a congregant, they remind me that the priest standing in the pulpit is preparing to explain what we have just heard in one of the scriptures. They are a reminder that our leader is preparing to use this sacred space to further our gaze into God’s most holy kingdom and provide insight into the teachings of His word so that maybe — even for a moment — we find ourselves ever closer to being able to reach out a touch the hem of Christ’s robes.

Yet, as a society, we are not being educated about the Word from the pulpits of our churches. Instead, we are scolded or lectured about political events within our secular world. For some reason, clergy have decided that the pulpit is now the best platform to deliver partisan insight and guidance rather than spiritual guidance, and quite frankly, it is disrespectful.

My professional life has been deeply intertwined with politics. I've spent nearly two decades managing campaigns at all levels, from city council to president. I continue to work within our nation’s political system, running a government relations and political affairs company, teaching the next generation of campaign operatives, and providing political commentary through various media sources.

By all accounts, I am an expert on partisan politics, its consequences, and the methodology used to identify, persuade, and turn out voters.

While I may be well-versed in politics, I am not an expert in matters of faith. I do not presume to guide others in their spiritual journey, and I am grateful no one looks to me for such guidance.

So, why do members of the clergy — who have no political expertise and no background to provide such guidance — believe it to be their role and responsibility to insert themselves, their congregation, and ultimately the Church as a whole into the partisan politics of modern-day society instead of focusing on their mandate and their mission?

Now, there is a pattern that we see when it comes to this topic . . . and it nearly always revolves around presidential elections in the United States. The air is thick with anticipation, debate, and—unfortunately — division. In times such as these, the sanctity of our church pulpits becomes more precious than ever. These hallowed spaces, designed for spiritual fulfillment and moral guidance, are not supposed to risk overshadowing the cacophony of partisan political rhetoric and ideology. Rather than engaging in the common, our clergy should provide a safe harbor in our houses of worship so that there remains an escape from the political arena that has become part of our everyday lives.

An excellent example of partisan politics influencing the message from the pulpit can be seen in the sermons of Reverend Jeremiah Wright, the pastor of Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago. This is where then-Senator Barack Obama was a congregant, and Reverend Wright’s preaching made headlines. His sermons, which included strong political statements and criticisms of American policies, were widely broadcast during the 2008 presidential election. Critics argued that Wright’s sermons were divisive and inappropriate for a religious setting. Supporters, however, defended his approach as a legitimate exercise of prophetic voice within the tradition of black liberation theology.

Similarly, in the 2016 presidential elections, evangelical leaders like Jerry Falwell, Jr. openly endorsed Donald J. Trump, blending political activism with their spiritual leadership. This led to significant division within their congregations.

Both examples illustrate the profound impact that partisan politics from the pulpit can have. They distract from the mission of the Church, remove focus from the spiritual aspects of the clergy’s message, and have the potential to deeply divide congregants through their perception of their spiritual leaders and their place within the religious community.

However, this is more than just an issue for congregation members. Clergy face significant ethical dilemmas when incorporating politics into their sermons. On the one hand, they may feel a moral imperative to speak out on social justice issues — seeing this as part of their prophetic role to challenge injustice and advocate for the marginalized. Such actions are seen in the teachings of many religious traditions that call for justice and compassion for the poor and oppressed. However, overt political discourse often alienates more significant swaths of congregations, dividing communities and detracting from the Church's spiritual mission.

The ethical challenge is compounded by the legal implications in the United States, where the Johnson Amendment prohibits non-profit organizations (including churches) from engaging in partisan political activities. While seldom enforced, recent governmental behavior has led many Americans to believe that the federal government has become weaponized against particular political viewpoints, which throws such behavior into a legal gray area that adds complexity to the ethical landscape of clergy.

Navigating these treacherous waters required thoughtful and purposeful consideration of religious communities' spiritual mission and social responsibilities, especially the clergy's leadership. It involved a delicate balance between guiding congregants in their ethical, moral, and spiritual lives and respecting diverse political beliefs within the congregation.

If the trend of politicizing the pulpit continues, the church's role in society could have significant long-term implications. Firstly, the potential for increased polarization within congregations could lead to fractures in church communities, as members may choose to leave or switch congregations based on the political leanings of their clergy. This could weaken the traditional role of churches as unifying spaces that bring together individuals from diverse backgrounds.

Furthermore, the church's credibility as a spiritual and moral voice might be compromised. When religious leaders are seen as extensions of political parties, their ability to speak on moral issues with authority and impartiality can be diminished. This could reduce their effectiveness in advocating for ethical issues and social justice, where religious voices have historically had a significant impact.

Lastly, there is a risk that churches might become increasingly targeted in political campaigns, further entrenching them in partisan battles. This could lead to more direct political manipulation and influence religious doctrines and practices.

Addressing these challenges will require a concerted effort from religious leaders to clearly define political engagement's boundaries and maintain their missions' spiritual integrity.