“A Benediction At The Republican National
Convention – Pr. Jim Roemke”
issuesetc.org
Podcast 1983 – July 16, 2024
Rev. Roemke, an LCMS pastor, who did an impersonation of Trump and then had a prayer and benediction to open the Republican National Convention has been on Issues, etc. quite a few times, dating back to 2008, but not since 2014, according to the online search on issuesetc.org. His interview the day after his attention-grabbing opening dealt with the theological ramifications of sharing a microphone at the convention with a woman doing Sikh prayers.
Rev. Roemke comes across as serious, reasonable, and articulate. He says that he doesn’t exactly know how he got invited. But he claims he stated clearly at the outset that he did not want his prayer edited and also gave the condition: “I cannot say a prayer with anyone else.” He submitted a prayer (that was well done, apart from the context) and was “told I would be the only one.”
He said he did have qualms about being involved in the convention and stated there are “some things I disagree with [in the Republican Party].” It is weak on certain sins accepted by the world and cannot be accepted as Christian blindly. He mentioned the varying opinions “on president Trump as a person.”
Yet despite the mostly positive attention from the secular media, he relates that “maybe I shouldn’t have done it.” The impersonation of Pres. Trump was widely shared and he describes it as an attempt to cheer up a somber man, still shaken up from the shooting and injury. The use of politically-tinged humor right before the use of God’s name is debatable, but that is not unexpected in many churches either. Doing it wearing the pastor’s uniform and then going right into a reverent prayer may have given some a bit of whiplash.
Regarding the invocation, prayer, and benediction Rev. Roemke gave, he reflects: “looking back on it, I think it worked out ok.” He is not defiant and does not defend his participation too much.
The hard question is asked of him, since “some have criticized your participation,” due to the Sikh prayers to a false god that came after his prayer to the true God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. It certainly gives shades of the 9/11 and Sandy Hook prayer services that were rife with sinful unionism and syncretism—giving the impression that our faith in Christ is not the only true salvation, but that other religions give access to God, apart from the cross of Jesus.
The situation is different—context matters a lot here. It was a secular convention, not a prayer or worship service. Yet, he says he did it with the understanding that he alone would be praying and received confirmation of that request. Whether a political group, that does not follow God’s Word as an authority, should be opened with a Christian prayer is another issue entirely, but giving prayers to a false god equal footing gives a terrible confession of the uniqueness of the Christ and His Gospel.
Here is the rub—he did know before he went out that a woman would be praying after him. He says in the interview it was about 20 minutes beforehand that he found out. He relays that he responded: “I can’t do that” and admits “I may have made the wrong choice.” His last-minute compromise was that he had to be completely off the stage before the idolatrous prayer.
“Things happen” Rev. Roemke admits, which is true. But we can’t control all things—only our reaction to them. He makes a very good confession for Christ, in abstract, and says there is no salvation or truth in other religions which deny our Lord in the flesh. But this good confession on a podcast is basically private compared to the tens of millions seeing a worshipper of demons follow him who is given the same respect and deference. That is not the best confession, far from it, I think even he would agree.
But Rev. Roemke rationalized that “sharing the stage together” is the line in the sand. I don’t think a few inches of shared stage either way would have swayed the average Joe watching on TV. The confession must be what the general viewer takes from it—and the “here I stand” principle of simultaneously sharing some area of square footage seems strained and arbitrary.
The tough question is asked of him: “How do you respond to the charge of syncretism – of mixing different religions,” which was heavily leveled at Rev. Benke in 2001. Here Rev. Roemke contradicts himself a bit. He says: “I didn’t know going into it,” which is not precisely true. He did know before he went on the stage by about 20 minutes, by his own admission. I think what he means is that he didn’t have enough notice or his plans were to difficult to change.
He did, however, know enough in advance to not go up there, but perhaps not enough to thorough lyplan his actions in a thoughtful and care-free way. The question becomes one of timing—how much notice is enough, since he did not like how it played out in actuality. To change one’s position is tough and most do not react well on the fly. But he either communicated his wish about praying alone poorly or was mislead—which would put the onus on the organizers. But interestingly enough Rev. Roemke does not place any blame or show ill-will to those who invited him. I would be furious if I was put in that position and lied to.
The analogy he used to explain his action is quite weak, and I would argue very misleading. He speaks of a layperson coming to worship in his church and praying, though they are possibly of a different denomination or religion. But leading and speaking as equals (from the exact same place of authority) is nothing like a layperson coming to participate as a non-leading visitor. These are quite different things. This comparison weakens his case and sounds like a strained justification. We do not have “hearing” or “pew” doctrines of fellowship, though we do take pulpit fellowship quite seriously, as confessional Lutherans—the name for the traditional place one stands while preaching God’s Word.
Rev. Roemke does clearly confess that a faithful Sikh is not saved or forgiven in his explanation of the previous days’ events. But his very obvious and loud public visible confession at the Convention was not as clear and may be seen by some to be contradictory to his much better and less noticeable podcast confession. —ed.
Christian News 