Like many people, both in the Church and out, I have spent the last week pondering the life and message of Charlie Kirk, and what it means for the Church. I have put my thoughts together into a couple of different posts, because I think there are several ways of discussing him and the church issues that have arisen.
But the main question I am asking myself is this: Should I?
Does it matter what I think or write here? Will it change people’s minds? Will it draw people closer to Jesus in any way? Am I strengthening the church? Is it necessary? Why even write or post on the interwebs at all?
I didn’t love Charlie Kirk or hate him. People sent me his videos frequently, and I generally dismissed them. I knew who he was, particularly because of his conservative political work, and people sent me his “Prove Me Wrong” videos. I wasn’t especially impressed, and I generally just saw him as another right-wing white Christian nationalist.
But then so many other people have been treating him as a great speaker and apologist, a representative of a new spiritual movement in the church, and maybe there needs to be another voice from a Christian that DIDN’T think that about him. I see people saying “see, this is who Christians revere,” and I think maybe there’s some good in presenting a voice from a Christian who is trying to live biblically, but didn’t necessarily feel the same way about Kirk and his views.
On the other hand, I see so many people for who it’s so personal, people close to me, who feel as if they’ve lost a friend or brother. The outpouring of grief is very powerful, and I don’t want to hurt them, or our relationships. Or (if I am wrong) do something to speak against what God is doing. How do I decide? Am I helping or hurting? What is the answer if I ask, “why bother sharing my opinion?”
My Internal Debate
My first answer to that is to look at myself, and I have to admit part of the reason is quite selfish. As immature as it sounds, I want to be seen as an insightful thinker and an adequate writer. I want people to say “wow, you are really getting to the heart of this matter,” or “you put into words what I was thinking,” or I want to get a post shared a million times. I like the dopamine hit, and I have to admit that part of me is motivated by that.
Since that’s not a very good reason, maybe I should just skip writing? Maybe.
My second answer is that writing things out is beneficial to me, personally. I have thoughts that bounce around my head, and I’m always thinking “oh, that was a good thing; I should write that down so I don’t forget.”
Then I forget and spend hours wasting my time trying to remember. So, writing it down helps me organize my thoughts, and then I can move on.
It’s also beneficial to me when I’m wrestling with something like Kirk’s death. Why do I react the way I do? Why do others react differently? Is it something Biblical, or just personality differences? Is there something that can help others grow here, or just something to acknowledge and move on? If I write it down, then when someone posts something or says something, I can organize it into one of my written buckets, and I don’t have to think myself in circles over and over again.
My third answer is that people have asked me. What do I think about Charlie Kirk? Don’t I think he’s a martyr? Don’t I think he was a cultist? Don’t I think he is a great apologist? And so forth. I was once pastor-adjacent, and I was a teacher for almost a decade, so I still have the impulse to figure out events and filter them through the Bible as best I can and share them with others.
Some of my former students or contacts seem to find that helpful on occasion, and sometimes even ask me for my thoughts. So I can rationalize that I’m writing just for that reason. Gotta give the people what they want.
My fourth answer is similar to the third, except that this is for people who DON’T ask me. Every once in a while, I’ll decide I’m going to leave social media. It’s stressful, and maybe for my own mental health it’d be good to bow out.
But then inevitably someone will send me a private message and say “hey, thanks for sharing that. I was going to say the same thing, but I thought no one else agreed.” I think that’s helpful for the church. To know that we aren’t alone. I know it helped me in the past, when I thought I must be the one going crazy. And so I’m motivated to speak when others can’t or won’t. Maybe that’s pride. I know it’ll make some people angry, but is that reason not to do it? I’m torn, but I lean toward giving it a go.
My fifth one is the one that finally did it for me this time: I think it needs to be said. There have been a lot of things written about Charlie Kirk in the last few days, and I think a lot of them have been just plain harmful for the church, and for people viewing the church from the outside. I think it’s important to have a witness to the world, and if my small writing can help that, then I feel that I must.
In the end, that’s my motivation. I am driven by the desire to stand before God and say “I did what I could.” Maybe it will do no good; but at least I won’t say I was afraid or lazy. I did what I could to tell people about Jesus, and to be a faithful representative of His Kingdom. I hope it is helpful and not hurtful to His people.
So, off we go.
Like I said, I broke this up a little, and I might add more later. But for now:
Charlie Kirk: Part 2: Hero or Heretic?
Charlie Kirk: Part 3: Is the Church Better or Worse?
Charlie Kirk: Part 4: Was He a Great Christian Debater?
Charlie Kirk: Part 5: Is He a Martyr?
Charlie Kirk: Part 6: Did He Represent the Church?