Faith, politics, and race shape clashing tributes
The fatal shooting of controversial political influencer Charlie Kirk has triggered a stark divide between Black and white leaders—particularly among clergy—over how he is remembered, praised, or condemned.
While some conservatives have hailed Kirk as a modern-day Christian martyr, others have questioned the widespread glorification of a man whose rhetoric often polarized communities. Reverend Stephen J. Thurston, pastor of New Covenant Missionary Baptist Church, pointed to religion as a key factor behind the disagreement.
“The chasm you are witnessing isn’t about Charlie Kirk’s humanity. It’s about which version of Christianity we’re willing to follow,” Thurston told the Chicago Crusader.
“When some elevate a man who weaponized faith to divide and marginalize the vulnerable, they reveal they’ve confused nationalism with the Gospel,” he said. “We who follow the Jesus of justice—the one who liberated the oppressed and challenged empire—refuse to canonize those who used His name to crucify His message.”
“For us, Jesus is not a mascot for power, but our Messiah of liberation. Violence should never be celebrated, but let’s not mistake martyrdom for accountability,” said Thurston. “History will judge not just who pulled that trigger, but who pulled the triggers of hatred that preceded it.”
Reverend Dr. Marshall Hatch, pastor of New Mount Pilgrim Missionary Baptist Church, said he regretted that Kirk became a victim of political violence, but he also questioned the level of adulation.
“I think some of the praise was over the top given the many things that he said,” Hatch said, describing Kirk as more of a “shock jock” than a saint.
Hatch also criticized former President Donald Trump’s attempts to retain Kirk’s influential base of young voters.
“I don’t think anybody should be using that for a political advantage. That’s distasteful,” Hatch said. “People need to remember that Kirk’s wife is still in mourning. This will probably pass over—a flash in the pan. I think we should be organizing for the midterm elections.”
Congressman Danny K. Davis (D-7th) also weighed in, calling Kirk’s killing “terrible.”
“I don’t believe in that. I don’t think violence should occur—especially political violence or any kind of violence,” Davis said. “We have to keep seeking the truth, which will set you free.”
Davis also criticized Trump’s vow to posthumously award Kirk the Presidential Medal of Freedom. He called the gesture part of Trump’s continued pattern of divisiveness.
“This is a pattern of Trump to seek to divide, separate, and draw apart people as opposed to bringing them together,” Davis said. “The country is more divided than I’ve ever known it to be—since I was a little boy or before then. It is terrible when oppression is attempted to be used to spread hate. Oppression causes division. We have to take the bitter with the sweet and keep on fighting.”
Cardinal Timothy Dolan, Archbishop of New York, drew national criticism after he publicly praised Kirk as a “modern-day Saint Paul, a missionary, evangelist, and a hero.”
His remarks drew swift backlash from Reverend Leo F. Armbrust, a founding member of GRACE in the USA, a nonpartisan group of clergy and civic leaders.
Armbrust warned that Dolan’s spiritual accolades could be misinterpreted as an official endorsement from the Catholic Church. “It risks lending credence to bigotry, ridicule, and the denigration of those on the margins of society,” he said.
Kent College of Law Professor Harold Krent also voiced concern about the political climate that followed Kirk’s death.
“The way this administration is going, we are headed toward a fascist state,” Krent said. “Look at the soldiers in the street, the crackdown on public speech, and the attack on the media when Trump doesn’t like what is said about him.”
