In April of 1968, Rev Dr Martin Luther King Jr was assassinated in Memphis TN. He led the nonviolent movement for civil rights and against poverty. Today, we honor him and his work with a national holiday and a memorial on the national mall. In addition, millions of people engage in community service projects in honor of Dr King.
Now we have another assassination, of Mr. Charlie Kirk, in Utah. It is unclear whether it can be classified as a political act or a religious act. What is clear is that many describe Kirk as a martyr. And the public response has been strong in that direction.
The President is scheduled to attend the funeral on Sunday, in a stadium that holds 63,000 people. I expect it to be full. And I expect the rhetoric to be full of martyrdom language. Last Sunday, many football games were paused for a moment of silence, and since then, some communities (like Hendersonville NC) held public prayer vigils on government property. These are odd events for a private citizen who never held public office and never served in the military.
Kirk was a powerful and public spokesman for the movement that emerged in resistance to the work of King. Kirk never championed on behalf of blacks, women, gays, immigrants, or the accused. In fact, he pushed back on all of them. He spoke a version of Christian faith and practice that, unfortunately, denigrated all these groups and also defended the availability of guns, the very implement that took his own life.
In other words, Kirk led a counter movement to the one led by Dr King. Is he, therefore, the martyr hero of this religious and social movement?
If so, what other honors is he to receive? Already the President has announced that he will present Kirk, posthumously, the Presidential Medal of Freedom. I expect that to happen at the funeral. Does Kirk need a holiday? Will he get a postage stamp? Will streets be named for Kirk? Will the plaza at Utah State University become a National Park? Will Congress pass a Charlie Kirk Bill to provide scholarships, to fund free speech events, or organize a national Kirk Free Speech essay competition? Will the Department of Education require textbooks to teach the Charlie Kirk story to students?
Yes, Dr King was not universally popular. Large white populations, especially in the South, pushed back against King’s vision and against the legal movements of liberty that followed in his wake. Likewise, Kirk is not universally embraced. Kirk consistently denounced the very groups that have receive new freedoms and opportunities since Dr King’s death. Some, including it seems, his killer described his rhetoric as hate speech.
In addition, Kirk discouraged people from pursuing higher education because American universities, he said, are not trustworthy centers of learning and discovery. Dr King, you recall, earned a PhD degree from Boston University while Kirk was a first-year community college dropout.
Is Kirk worthy of service as a movement martyr? Is his movement content with Kirk as their martyr? Does the wider nation want Kirk as a martyr, similar to King? Or would it be better to release Charlie Kirk to his religious community and let them honor him as they deem appropriate. Like Elizabeth Eliot or Detrick Bonhoeffer? Churches that wish can designate a day of prayer, as for a Protestant saint; seminaries can name scholarships or lectureships; studios can create, produce, and distribute films; ministers can tell stories in their sermons. Are not these ways of remembering more appropriate to the life and work of Charlie Kirk?
All of this will be sorted out in the days and years ahead. What I can say now is that Charlie Kirk’s death was an unnecessary and entirely preventable tragedy, like the children at church in Minneapolis the week before, or the lawmen gunned down in Pennsylvania this week, or the thousands of people who died by the gun in America this year.
I think of what might have been, had the parents of Tyler Robinson (Amber and Matt Robinson), twenty years ago heard and heeded the Spirit in an invitation to lay their guns on the altar of God as an act of Christian discipleship. Charlie would still be alive today. If the death of Charlie Kirk were to provoke a response like that, a nation-wide movement to put down our guns, we all would say, “He did not die in vain.” It would be one good way to make him a hero to us all.
Subscribe today to Dr. Moody’s weekly newsletter featuring his commentary on religion in American life.
In April of 1968, Rev Dr Martin Luther King Jr was assassinated in Memphis TN. He led the nonviolent movement for civil rights and against poverty. Today, we honor him and his work with a national holiday and a memorial on the national mall. In addition, millions of people engage in community service projects in honor of Dr King.
Now we have another assassination, of Mr. Charlie Kirk, in Utah. It is unclear whether it can be classified as a political act or a religious act. What is clear is that many describe Kirk as a martyr. And the public response has been strong in that direction.
The President is scheduled to attend the funeral on Sunday, in a stadium that holds 63,000 people. I expect it to be full. And I expect the rhetoric to be full of martyrdom language. Last Sunday, many football games were paused for a moment of silence, and since then, some communities (like Hendersonville NC) held public prayer vigils on government property. These are odd events for a private citizen who never held public office and never served in the military.
Kirk was a powerful and public spokesman for the movement that emerged in resistance to the work of King. Kirk never championed on behalf of blacks, women, gays, immigrants, or the accused. In fact, he pushed back on all of them. He spoke a version of Christian faith and practice that, unfortunately, denigrated all these groups and also defended the availability of guns, the very implement that took his own life.
In other words, Kirk led a counter movement to the one led by Dr King. Is he, therefore, the martyr hero of this religious and social movement?
If so, what other honors is he to receive? Already the President has announced that he will present Kirk, posthumously, the Presidential Medal of Freedom. I expect that to happen at the funeral. Does Kirk need a holiday? Will he get a postage stamp? Will streets be named for Kirk? Will the plaza at Utah State University become a National Park? Will Congress pass a Charlie Kirk Bill to provide scholarships, to fund free speech events, or organize a national Kirk Free Speech essay competition? Will the Department of Education require textbooks to teach the Charlie Kirk story to students?
Yes, Dr King was not universally popular. Large white populations, especially in the South, pushed back against King’s vision and against the legal movements of liberty that followed in his wake. Likewise, Kirk is not universally embraced. Kirk consistently denounced the very groups that have receive new freedoms and opportunities since Dr King’s death. Some, including it seems, his killer described his rhetoric as hate speech.
In addition, Kirk discouraged people from pursuing higher education because American universities, he said, are not trustworthy centers of learning and discovery. Dr King, you recall, earned a PhD degree from Boston University while Kirk was a first-year community college dropout.
Is Kirk worthy of service as a movement martyr? Is his movement content with Kirk as their martyr? Does the wider nation want Kirk as a martyr, similar to King? Or would it be better to release Charlie Kirk to his religious community and let them honor him as they deem appropriate. Like Elizabeth Eliot or Detrick Bonhoeffer? Churches that wish can designate a day of prayer, as for a Protestant saint; seminaries can name scholarships or lectureships; studios can create, produce, and distribute films; ministers can tell stories in their sermons. Are not these ways of remembering more appropriate to the life and work of Charlie Kirk?
All of this will be sorted out in the days and years ahead. What I can say now is that Charlie Kirk’s death was an unnecessary and entirely preventable tragedy, like the children at church in Minneapolis the week before, or the lawmen gunned down in Pennsylvania this week, or the thousands of people who died by the gun in America this year.
I think of what might have been, had the parents of Tyler Robinson (Amber and Matt Robinson), twenty years ago heard and heeded the Spirit in an invitation to lay their guns on the altar of God as an act of Christian discipleship. Charlie would still be alive today. If the death of Charlie Kirk were to provoke a response like that, a nation-wide movement to put down our guns, we all would say, “He did not die in vain.” It would be one good way to make him a hero to us all.
Subscribe today to Dr. Moody’s weekly newsletter featuring his commentary on religion in American life.
Recent Posts
Related Posts
In Praise of Joe Biden
The Flood of 2026
Following the Wrong Leader
Derby Day 2026