What Does the Matador Defense Produce?

by Andrew Collins

In basketball and football, there is a wonderfully descriptive phrase for a defense that really is not much of a defense at all: the matador defense.

The picture comes from the bullring. The bull charges. The matador waits until the last possible moment, then gracefully steps aside and allows the bull to thunder past.

In bullfighting, that is the point.

In football, it gets you beaten.

In basketball, if a defender continually steps aside and lets his opponent drive unhindered to the basket, nobody praises his tolerance, civility, or restraint. The coach does not congratulate him for avoiding confrontation. The crowd understands exactly what has happened: the defender has surrendered the ground he was assigned to protect.

For generations, much of American Christianity has been persuaded to play something remarkably similar to the matador defense in public life.

Government? Step aside.

The courts? Step aside.

Public education? Step aside.

Universities? Step aside.

Entertainment and media? Step aside.

The town square? Step aside.

Politics? Certainly step aside.

Christians were repeatedly told that serious involvement in these arenas was somehow beneath the dignity of the gospel. Pastors were warned that addressing public questions would “politicize the church.” Believers were encouraged to keep their faith private, their convictions personal, and their Christianity safely inside the sanctuary.

Meanwhile, the people advancing very different visions of morality, family, sexuality, education, justice, and human nature were under no corresponding obligation to withdraw.

They did not step aside.

They stepped forward.

And that distinction matters.

The public square does not remain empty simply because Christians leave it. Government does not stop governing. Schools do not stop teaching. Courts do not stop deciding. Legislatures do not stop making laws. Universities do not stop forming minds. Entertainment does not stop shaping values.

When one worldview retreats, another takes its place.

That is what the matador defense produces.

Vacating the Field Is Not Neutrality

Some Christians speak as though withdrawing from public life creates a kind of neutral territory where everyone can simply live and let live.

But there is no morally neutral public square.

Every law reflects a judgment about what society should encourage, permit, discourage, or prohibit. Every educational system rests upon assumptions about truth, human nature, morality, authority, and the purpose of life. Every court operates from some conception of justice.

Someone's values will shape those institutions.

The question is not whether morality will influence government.

The question is whose morality will influence government.

The question is not whether children will be taught a worldview.

Christians therefore accomplish nothing by pretending that withdrawal represents neutrality. They merely surrender influence to those who have no intention of being neutral themselves.

Scripture gives us no model for such passivity.

Joseph served at the highest levels of Egyptian government.

Daniel served kings in Babylon and Persia without surrendering his allegiance to God.

Nehemiah served in the court of Artaxerxes and later governed Jerusalem.

Proverbs repeatedly speaks of kings, rulers, justice, courts, civic order, and the consequences of righteous and wicked leadership.

“When the righteous flourish, the people rejoice, but when the wicked rule, the people groan.” — Proverbs 29:2

Apparently, who governs matters.

Salt That Never Leaves the Shaker

Jesus called His followers the salt of the earth and the light of the world.

Salt does very little good if it remains permanently inside the saltshaker.

Light accomplishes little if it is carefully concealed from every dark place.

Christian influence was never intended to be confined to an hour on Sunday morning.

The gospel transforms individual hearts, certainly. But transformed people then become fathers and mothers, teachers and judges, business owners and legislators, pastors and school board members, journalists and governors.

Their faith inevitably affects how they live.

And it should.

The notion that Christians may possess convictions but must carefully prevent those convictions from affecting their public conduct is an extraordinary demand—one we rarely make of anyone else.

Environmentalists are allowed to bring their convictions into public policy.

Labor advocates are allowed to do so.

Secular humanists are allowed to do so.

Progressives are allowed to do so.

Conservatives are allowed to do so.

Every citizen enters the public arena carrying beliefs about what is true and good.

Why, then, should Christians alone be expected to approach the city gate apologetically, as though biblical conviction were a contaminant from which public life must be protected?

Engagement Is Not Domination

There is, however, an important distinction.

Rejecting the matador defense does not mean Christians should become angry, coercive, or obsessed with political power.

Biblical engagement is not a license for arrogance.

Christians are commanded to speak the truth in love. We are to treat opponents with dignity. We are to pray for those in authority. We are to pursue justice, love mercy, and walk humbly with God.

Our goal is not to replace one form of tyranny with another.

Nor should the church become merely an auxiliary of a political party. No party deserves the allegiance that belongs to Christ.

But humility is not retreat.

Kindness is not capitulation.

Love is not silence.

And civility does not require Christians to surrender every institution in which consequential decisions are made.

Daniel was respectful toward pagan kings, but he did not become morally compliant.

When commanded to cease praying, he prayed.

When his friends were ordered to worship an idol, they refused.

Their faithfulness was simultaneously humble and immovable.

That combination is badly needed again.

What Happens After We Step Aside?

The consequences of Christian withdrawal are now becoming increasingly difficult to ignore.

If Christians abandon education, they should not be surprised when education reflects assumptions contrary to Christianity.

If Christians abandon the courts, they should not be surprised when legal philosophy develops without Christian moral reasoning.

If Christians abandon government, they should not be surprised when government is shaped by people who reject Christian understandings of human dignity, family, liberty, and justice.

And if pastors teach generations of believers that involvement in civic life is somehow spiritually suspect, they should not be surprised when those believers become politically passive while activists with entirely different convictions organize, vote, litigate, teach, run for office, and govern.

Ideas have consequences.

So does absence.

There are moments when refusing to act is itself an action.

The Assignment Is Faithfulness

Christians are not promised that faithful engagement will always produce immediate victory.

That is not the standard.

The standard is faithfulness.

We are not responsible to control every outcome. We are responsible for what God has placed within our stewardship.

A pastor cannot determine the direction of a nation, but he can prepare his congregation to think biblically about citizenship, justice, authority, courage, and public responsibility.

A parent cannot reform an entire educational system, but he can take responsibility for what his children are being taught.

A citizen cannot control Congress, but she can vote, speak, organize, serve, persuade, and perhaps even run for office.

A Christian attorney can pursue justice.

A Christian teacher can teach with excellence.

A Christian businessman can conduct his affairs with integrity.

A Christian legislator can govern according to conscience and wisdom.

None of that replaces evangelism.

It is one of the fruits of discipleship.

Stop Stepping Aside

There is a time in the bullring to step aside.

There is also a time to stand your ground.

For too long, Christians have sometimes mistaken surrender for spirituality and withdrawal for faithfulness.

The results should cause us to reconsider.

The answer is not rage.

It is not panic.

It is not political idolatry.

It is courageous, intelligent, gracious Christian engagement.

The public square belongs to our neighbors, and Christians are among those neighbors. We have both the right and the responsibility to participate in its life.

So perhaps the question for pastors and churches is no longer simply, “What might happen if we become involved?”

A better question may be:

What has happened because we were not?

The matador defense may look graceful for a moment.

But eventually the scoreboard tells the story.