It’s always better to teach congregations to think biblically about issues than it is to simply give them answers. So also w/political choices.
But as for “tacitly approve every action of a politician”… I would hope people are smarter than that. I would certainly never endorse a candidate with the intention of communicating that, tacitly or otherwise.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
It strikes me that endorsing a politician from the pulpit is really the political equivalent of acting as if the current spiritual leader, local or national or whatever, is indispensable for God’s work—maybe we could call it “Pastorolatry” or something like that. Both of these need to go, as they are opposed to the process of making disciples and the necessary “handoffs” of responsibility in doing so.
Discussion
NewPrinciples
It’s always better to teach congregations to think biblically about issues than it is to simply give them answers. So also w/political choices.
But as for “tacitly approve every action of a politician”… I would hope people are smarter than that. I would certainly never endorse a candidate with the intention of communicating that, tacitly or otherwise.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
NewAnalogous to "Pastorolatry"
It strikes me that endorsing a politician from the pulpit is really the political equivalent of acting as if the current spiritual leader, local or national or whatever, is indispensable for God’s work—maybe we could call it “Pastorolatry” or something like that. Both of these need to go, as they are opposed to the process of making disciples and the necessary “handoffs” of responsibility in doing so.
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.