“My Church of Scotland background, then, has inoculated me with the conviction that the Church has a mission to address those public issues that clearly contain ethical judgments, and that the preacher is not to be solely concerned with nurturing a private piety in his flock.”
— Rev. Dr. David H. C. Read, cofounder of The Living Pulpit

        Over the years, The Living Pulpit has addressed a broad spectrum of themes.  We have looked at the foundations of our faith including such highly-charged topics as atonement and the Trinity.  With issues dedicated to wealth, ageing, healing, and the child; we have acknowledged the challenges we all confront each day as wage-earners, church members, parents, spouses, and citizens.  We have examined topics of public morality with issues about war, poverty, and hunger.

        However, I freely confess that editing this issue of The Living Pulpit has presented some of the most vexing editorial challenges I have had to face.  Just as soon as we shift the conversation about ethics away from the purely theoretical, we hit raw nerves and painfully polarizing topics.  Our authors — just like our congregations — are deeply concerned with real-world issues of health care, job security, racial justice, the economy, and the war in Iraq.  The quotation from Jane Addams on our cover, “Action indeed is the sole medium of expression for ethics,” cuts to the heart of the matter.  If we look at ethics with any seriousness at all, we are immediately confronted with the questions about our own actions — in the voting booth, in the marketplace, in our homes, on the job, everywhere.  It is impossible to abdicate ethical decision making because even abdication and inaction have moral and ethical dimensions.

        Author after author has chosen to illustrate his or her points with actual issues, named political figures, and specific pieces of legislation.  I have attempted deliberately to ratchet down the tone and specificity of some of the articles to avoid the sense of a partisan political blog rather than a journal “dedicated to the art of the sermon.”  In the process of trying to edit the journal so that it speaks to the theme of thoughtful preaching rather than political activism, I am cast in the same position that I find myself every Sunday as I stand in the pulpit before my own congregation.  How do I balance a sincere desire to be prophetic, to speak truth unto power, and to encourage my listeners to put their faith into action without becoming just one more opinionated and partisan voice?

        In the recent media frenzy over Jeremiah Wright, reporters peppered John Thomas, General Minister and President of the United Church of Christ, with a barrage of questions.  Dr. Thomas did a superb job of handling the media feeding frenzy, demonstrating fairness to Reverend Wright and Senator Obama and consistently stepping carefully through the minefield which is at the intersection of public faith and public policy.  At a recent church conference, Dr. Thomas spoke about what it was like to be thrust into the media spotlight.  He observed that as a pastor and denominational executive, he has deliberately honed his ability to give nuanced, thoroughly-reasoned, and always respectful responses to complex questions of faith, ethics, and morals.  He pointed out that, overwhelmingly, the best preachers and pastors resist offering superficial, glib, or sweeping answers because of their abiding respect for the depth and breadth of Scripture, their appreciation for the genuine diversity within their congregations, and their profound sense of the complexity and ambiguity of many of the issues we face.  Although Dr. Thomas did not add it to his list, we suggest that yet another factor dissuades faithful preachers from proffering facile answers and the sweeping generalities and that is the personal humility that marks the true servant.

        Dr. Thomas pointed out that in sharp contrast with these valued traits of church men and women, the media prizes the sharp, the glib, the sensational, the edgy, the simple, and the shrill.  It is, of course, impossible to do justice to the complex issues of politics, ethics, and morality with sensational headlines and sound bites ripped out of any meaningful context.  Nonetheless, the vital issues of the day demand responses that are thoughtful, that are courageous, and perhaps most importantly of all, that reflect the sense of justice that undergirds the Gospels.

        This presents a daunting challenge to those of us who receive the undivided attention of our congregations on Sunday mornings.  We must use these precious moments to provide thoughtful, Scripturally-based insights as a desperately-needed alternative to the political posturing and sound-bite media of our culture.  We dare not abdicate the task of helping our congregations make their own ethical choices about how to be responsible citizens in light of the words, life, and example of Jesus.

        If this task seems too overwhelming, we can be both comforted and encouraged by the knowledge that every great preacher has faced the same challenges that we face.  We are not the first preachers to respond to the invitation to preach prophetically on the complex ethical issues of the day.  David H. C. Read summed up the situation decades ago, but his words are just as applicable today:

        But I became increasingly aware that the policy of avoiding reference to current ethical controversies and political events was wrong for at least two reasons.  One is that such preaching is never truly ‘neutral.’  It inevitably leaves the impression that one is supporting the status quo.  A preacher in the sixties who said nothing about civil rights would be assumed to be on the side of leaving things alone.  If he ignored the Vietnam War, he was really making a political statement in its support.
        The second reason for rejecting a policy of silence is theological. The doctrine of the Incarnation insists that ‘the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us.’  This Word must then address every aspect of our common life ‘in the flesh,’ and not be isolated in some spiritual realm.  In the Old Testament, the prophets continually invaded the political realm by pronouncing judgments on both domestic conditions, such as the plight of the poor, and foreign policy.  Jesus seems to have avoided aligning himself with any political movement, but he did not hesitate to attack corruption and oppression.