Pastor, just tell me how to vote.”
As Election Day approaches, many faith leaders hear this request. Behind it may be trust, uncertainty, exhaustion or a desire to vote in keeping with their faith.
The request presents a profound conundrum. We must teach and influence people whose political convictions and life experiences differ while honoring their conscience and judgment.
Our influence is real. It should be. The question is not whether we should exercise it, but how.
We cannot confuse honoring individual conscience with abandoning our responsibility to lead. Nor can we confuse leadership with demanding agreement.
Missouri’s Amendment 3 brings this tension into sharp focus. It would repeal reproductive freedom protections voters approved in 2024 and prohibit most abortions, with limited exceptions. It would also place restrictions on gender transition treatments for minors in the Constitution, although Missouri law has restricted those treatments since 2023.
This distinction matters. Political messaging can emphasize a provision without explaining what is already law or what would change. Critics have challenged the use of gender-related provisions in the campaign for this reason. Voters deserve to understand the full consequences — not simply claims designed to capture their attention and manipulate their emotions.
Some people we shepherd have studied the issues and arrived at deeply held convictions. Others are ill-informed, holding firmly to incomplete, misleading or untrue claims. Still others are uninformed or underinformed, lacking the time, access or trusted spaces to understand what is before them.
The ill-informed need opportunities to examine assumptions and test claims against credible evidence. The underinformed need accessible information, patient teaching and room to ask questions without judgment.
Neither needs our contempt. And neither should be confused with someone who is informed and simply disagrees with us.
And we must not overlook the exhausted.
People navigate work, caregiving and financial pressures while deciphering ballot language and competing political messages. For those who have repeatedly experienced exclusion, invisibility or disappointment, disengagement can feel like the only reasonable response.
We call it apathy too quickly. What if this moment calls us to reconsider?
The experiences of people affected by Amendment 3 are complex and deeply personal. We cannot presume that everyone’s circumstances fit neatly into our preferred narrative.
Reconsidering a position is not necessarily a compromise of faith or integrity. It may be evidence of growth, grace, wisdom, evolution and maturity.
Romans 12:2 calls us to be transformed by the renewing of our minds. How can we embrace transformation as a spiritual imperative while treating reconsideration as a civic weakness?
Are we holding fast to what is true, or simply holding tightly to what is familiar? Moral clarity does not require intellectual rigidity. Nor does humility require us to become morally ambiguous.
We could tell people how to vote. But have we strengthened their ability to discern, decide and act next time?
Faith leaders must teach with moral clarity about justice, human dignity, truth, compassion and our responsibility to one another. We should explain our beliefs and invite people to wrestle with the implications.
But we must also equip people to read beyond political slogans, understand ballot measures, examine competing claims and consider whose lives will be affected. Our responsibility includes confronting barriers that make civic participation difficult, intimidating or inaccessible.
Nov. 3 matters deeply. But the next two years matter equally. Our communities will continue to face decisions about public resources, health, education, housing and justice. We must help people understand how decisions are made and power is exercised, hold public officials accountable and organize with others to shape their futures.
Let us not retreat into the safety of ambiguity. Let us teach what we believe, tell the truth, confront misinformation, make room for complexity and model the humility we ask of others.
And let us never mistake our authority for the conscience of those we lead.
The highest expression of our influence is not producing people who think like us. It is cultivating people who have the conviction, capacity and courage to think deeply, choose wisely and act responsibly for themselves.
That is the shepherd’s responsibility. And in this moment, we must rise to meet it.
Bethany A. Johnson-Javois is the pastor of Monument of Faith in Jennings and president and CEO of Deaconess Foundation.