Matthew Anderson has an interesting take on the reaction of Christians to the news that President Obamas’s inauguration committee disinvited Louie Giglio. You would do well to read the whole article, but what struck me was this paragraph toward the end of the piece:
In fact, I specifically mentioned continuing to give sermons because the pulpit should be the locus of evangelical political engagement. The lack of deep, substantive political theological reflection from our pastors (sometimes justified with theological reasons!) has left evangelicals without their main tool for shaping our political affections. A depoliticized pulpit leads to a sacralized politics, you might say. The formula needs a great deal more nuancing, as I’m not expecting policy pronouncements on obscure sections of the law (necessarily). But if Jesus standing before Pilate not saying anything is a form of political engagement, then certainly pastors preaching the word of God to the church and the world is as well. I am only a quietist if the church’s pronouncement happens somewhere else than “in the world,” but last I checked our churches were still made from concrete and our pastors still have flesh and blood.
In effect, one of the problems Christians (especially orthodox conservative ones) have in getting their points-of-view taken seriously in the public square is the notion that the clergy are largely ambivalent about political engagement. As I recommended above, whether you agree or not you should read the article and judge for yourself whether Christians are properly engaged in policy questions that affect our obligation to walk with God in Jesus’ footprints.