Charlie Kirk: Part 8: Conclusion

So what now? If you’ve read this far, you know where I stand on much of Charlie Kirk’s work. How do we move forward? How do we think and talk about Kirk in the coming days and years?

In my opinion, Charlie Kirk did not represent a faithful vision of what I believe the Church should be. Over this last week, every time he’s identified in press releases, it’s “a conservative activist.” That is not the same as “Christian activist” and the fact that so many people think they are synonyms is exactly why Kirk was so divisive.

He spoke about partisanship as a matter of morality, that his side (the Right) had a moral duty to defeat the evils of the other (the Left). And that is not faithful to the teaching of Scripture, not in line with the historic witness of the church, and not faithful to the diverse faith in America and around the world. It is putting the church at the service of politics, rather at the service of Jesus Christ.

I know some people will hate me for this, and I’m already prepping for the “how could you”s and the “you don’t know what God was doing”s, and all that. It’s possibly true. Maybe I don’t. I’m not omniscient. But when people ask me why I don’t revere Charlie Kirk, why I think he may have done more harm to the Church and the Christian Witness to the world; why I think he did more to set back the unity of the Church bring it together; why I think the problems outweigh the good he did. I hope these essays give a little background and hopefully something to think about.

I don’t expect to change anyone’s mind. I’ve long since given up on that. But I do hope that you will at least understand why the whole church is not grieving. Why some people in our pews don’t think he should be honored. Why some people have concerns about the legacy he leaves behind.

I believe he promoted and fostered some of the greatest dangers I see in my branch of the American church right now – confusing adherence to conservatism as equivalent to the faithfulness to Christ; seeking victory rather than submission, an emphasis on prophetic voices saying what we want to hear instead of calling us to greater depth of love.

We have become so concerned about the symbols of God (church/temple, behavior) that we forget about the heart of God (care for the poor, the stranger, justice). We idolize secular values, like financial success, freedom, temporal power, and legal victories. But that is not the way of Jesus. We are poor, servants, fools to this world, and willing to lose our rights in order to benefit others.

Yes, Charlie Kirk said some very Biblical and Christlike things. I think he was saved. To my understanding, he claimed Jesus was the most important thing in his life, and the majority of his Prove Me Wrong events touched on the gospel in some way. And I think that’s good.

But in some ways it almost makes it worse, because it mixes the world and Christ. It’s putting new wine in old wineskins. It’s adding to the words Jesus taught to include what we think He “should” have said.

It doesn’t mean Charlie Kirk wasn’t a Christian. The disciples were still saved – they still did miracles, they still were following Jesus – but they had missed the heart of his teaching. They wanted him to save their nation, they wanted to part of ruling with him, they wanted to use force to protect him, they wanted to call down fire on their enemies. And Jesus constantly corrects them – “my kingdom is not of this world.” That is not our goal. Defeating “them” is not our focus.

It’s the confusion between the two, the willingness to be like the world, to see success in the same way as the world, to protect myself and my stuff more than give it up for others – these are the issues I see in Peter, in the Sons of Thunder, and in the Pharisees. And I see them in the Church today.

Charlie Kirk may have been drawing closer to the Lord as time went on. Peter went from fighting Romans to rejoicing when he was beaten and imprisoned. Time changes us, and we are all working out our salvation. Perhaps in time, we would have seen a more mature, a more fully rounded witness of Christ in him, I don’t know.

But my hope is that we see Charlie Kirk not just as an inspiration, but also as a warning. That we don’t confuse our political victories with Christian faithfulness. That we might become known for turning the other cheek, rather than fighting for our rights.

That we see the world through the eyes of the Sermon on the Mount rather than the Constitution.