evangelical 360°

Ep. 40 / Balancing Christian Values and Public Service ► John McKay

• Host Brian Stiller • Season 1 • Episode 40

Share episode

What does it take to serve faithfully for 27 years in politics while maintaining your Christian convictions? John McKay's remarkable journey through nine successful elections as a Liberal Member of Parliament provides a masterclass in navigating the often turbulent waters where faith and politics intersect.

McKay's career demonstrates the delicate balance of standing firm on core principles while engaging constructively with colleagues across the political spectrum. When asked what sustained him through nearly three decades in Parliament, he points to the opportunity to directly influence pressing issues: "If you open the front page of any newspaper, you're likely going to be involved in whatever that discussion might be." For those drawn to public discourse and policy formation, this connection to current affairs provides powerful motivation. 

Throughout the conversation, McKay tackles the challenging question of being a Christian in an increasingly secular political environment. Rather than forcing "Christian ideals" or conflating faith with nationalism, he advocates making space in the marketplace of ideas for religious expression of all kinds. This approach stands in stark contrast to what he calls "the pernicious influence of secularism," which attempts to relegate faith exclusively to worship spaces rather than allowing it to inform public discourse.

Perhaps most compelling is McKay's willingness to stand for his pro-life convictions within a party that explicitly requires a pro-choice stance from its members. "Mr. Trudeau and I do not see eye to eye on this issue," he acknowledges, but rather than abandoning his principles or his party, he accepted the political consequences of his position. The result? "At the end of the day, people respect you for how you stood up and said whatever it is you said." His successful passage of five private member's bills—addressing issues from preventing house fires to combating modern slavery in supply chains—demonstrates how faith-informed values can be translated into effective policy that benefits society broadly.

For those contemplating their own journey into public service, McKay offers both encouragement and caution: "I don't expect it to be easy... but do get yourself involved." His story reminds us that Christian engagement in politics isn't about imposing religious doctrine, but rather allowing faith-informed wisdom to contribute thoughtfully to the common good. 

You can learn more about John McKay's public service through Facebook, Instagram and the Modern Slavery Act website. 

And you can share this episode using hashtag #Evangelical360 and join the conversation online! 

____________________

▶ Watch Interviews on YouTube

▶ Sign Up for FREE Dispatches From the Global Village

▶ Free Downloadable eBook "Here's Hope"

▶ More Info: evangelical360.com

#evangelical360


Brian Stiller:

Hello and welcome to Evangelical 360.

Brian Stiller:

I'm your host, brian Stiller, and I'm pleased to share with you another conversation with leaders, changemakers and influencers those impacting Christian life around the world. We'd love for you to be a part of the podcast by sharing this episode using hashtag Evangelical360 and by joining the conversation on YouTube in the comments below. My guest today is Honorable John McKay, a politician with the Liberal Party of Canada and elected member of Parliament for over 27 years. As a follower of Jesus and a public figure, john has sought to serve his country and constituency while speaking his mind with candor, clarity and conviction. Evangelicals have lived through decades of uncertainty, confusion and chaos when it comes to combining our faith with public service, which is what makes the life and legacy of John McKay so very interesting. John has served his constituency in East Toronto with great integrity and has remained clear through all his years of service about his intent to serve his Lord and Sav within the wild and woolly world of national politics. Join me as we learn from John McKay. John McKay, thank you for joining us on Evangelical 360.

John McKay:

Well, thanks for the invitation, Brian, it's good to see you,

Brian Stiller:

john.

Brian Stiller:

You have served as Member of Parliament for 27 years in the Canadian federal system. That's remarkable, but how did this come about? What were the driving factors, the motivational issues that brought you to the place where you say I'm going to run and you've succeeded every election? How many elections has it been?

John McKay:

A mere nine elections,

Brian Stiller:

and you've never lost one.

John McKay:

No, it came close. A couple of times.

Brian Stiller:

How did that begin?

John McKay:

Well, I've always had an interest in politics and political affairs and things of that nature.

Brian Stiller:

Where did that come from? What was his family.

John McKay:

Probably my father. My father was an opinionated individual, shall we say, and so we followed politics and in university I studied political sociology, and then on to law school and I've always maintained kind of a finger in the pie. I was in the local liberal association and became the president and went all to these tedious conferences et cetera, et cetera. And then the opportunity came up in late 96, 1996. And so I said to my wife it's now or never. And she says well, I guess it's now, and bear in mind the sacrifice by the family is quite considerable, because none of us actually know what we're getting into. So I won the nomination and then won the election in 97 and became part of the Kretschens Caucus.

Brian Stiller:

You're a lawyer, that's how you were trained, and it seems so many people in politics start out that way. What is there about the study of law, the practice of law that lends itself to the work of being a senior politician? How do those match up, or do they?

John McKay:

It's not a perfect match by any means, but it is a useful training in two respects. Well, three respects. First of all, you're running a small business. So you've got a small business in your constituency, you've got a small business in Ottawa, and they need to be run. Second of all, law teaches you how to think, and sorting out the material and sorting what is material, what is relevant and what is not is a very useful skill. And thirdly, reading a statue is not intimidating because they have a logical flow to them as well. So it is advantageous. It is not a prerequisite, and I guess maybe I'd just add one more If you're going to be in the public realm, it's better to be able to speak with full, coherent sentences than not, and to organize what it is you have to say.

Brian Stiller:

So 27 years, that's a good part of a lifetime. You've had different governments, you've been in government, you've been out of government as a member of the Liberal Party, but what sustained, what has sustained you during that those 27 years? You and Carolyn have five children, so you have that as a part of your life. Your writing is in the Toronto area and Ottawa, a few hours away, is where the seat of the government is, so you've got all those factors at play, what keeps you at the task and motivated to achieve.

John McKay:

Well, if you open the front page of the Globe and Mail or the Toronto Star or whatever newspaper you're reading that day, you're likely going to be in some manner or another involved in whatever that discussion might be. So for those of us who like to engage in the politics of the day, this is the perfect job. The interesting thing about being a sitting member of parliament is that you can have influence on whatever that issue might be and you will know who the players might be. So if it's a, say it's a business issue on the front pages of the report on business in the Globe and Mail, well, you know the ministers.

John McKay:

And if you're in government, you can go to the finance minister and say well, how is this one of the other example capital gains tax going to affect my constituents? Well, that's going to affect them quite dramatically and I find that it's kind of useful to be able to go to that minister and say you realize that this is going to have x, y and z effect. Did you think about that when you proposed it in the budget? And many times times it will have. But sometimes it won't, and they certainly won't have appreciated necessarily the blowback that you're going to get, and so it's me, as a caucus member, who's going to have to face up and square up to that blowback. So that's the beauty of the position. It's also the curse.

Brian Stiller:

So you have this concern over how this might affect your local constituency, but do politicians have a grander view of their country, concern over where it's going or where it's not going? The issues that are at stake, that are being addressed or are not being addressed, where we fit in the grand narrative of the world, do those things take hold, or is it your constituent issues that dominate?

John McKay:

Yeah, that's not an answerable question. You basically have three jobs You've got your local constituency job, you've got your national job and you've got your international job. Constituency job you've got your national job and you've got your international job. My interest was more national and international, and so the roles that I took on were, you know, chair of the defense committee and chair of the Canada-US parliamentary group, etc. Etc. Which gave more of an international perspective. So that's what was animating me, and I quite enjoyed those opportunities. Having said that, you better keep an eye on what's going on back home, otherwise you won't have this job for very long. So I've been very fortunate to have had people in my constituency office who are just superb people, and I'm very blessed that way.

Brian Stiller:

So you come to this as a Christian and self-defined evangelical. Was that a shaping of your desire and your ongoing activity within politics, or was there interfacing between what you believe and what you did? Interfacing between what you believe and what you did?

John McKay:

Well, the word evangelical is a bit bad bad word these days, and so I would prefer to style myself as a Christian or follower of Jesus, things of that nature because there's a politics to the word that have become toxic, particularly south of the border and toxic in my party became with you because of the aggressiveness in some issues.

John McKay:

How does it affect you? I, you know you get asked that question quite a number of times and I used to sit with my friend Irwin Kotler, and Irwin is Jewish, so how does you know it affect him? My, the MP next door is Gary Anand Sanghri, hindu. How does it affect him? My Muslim colleagues, how do they? So I think it's the same question orientated. You will be affected in your thinking and in your actions by what you believe to be the core elements of your faith, and I would put myself as no exception to that understanding. So when you get down to it, what is it I believe and how are my actions motivated by those beliefs? And so I kind of track to the core beliefs of choose life and thou shalt love the Lord, thy God, and love thy neighbor as thyself, and those sorts of core principles of the faith. And if you stay somewhat close to those core principles then you'll probably have an easier life in politics.

Brian Stiller:

Was there some overarching biblical text that gave you gravity in the various issues and debates that you?

John McKay:

I like Jesus' summary. You know Thou shalt love the Lord, thy God, with all thy heart and all thy soul and all thy mind and thy neighbor is like unto it, and thereon hang all the law and the prophets, and that's good enough for me. It kind of covers the waterfront.

Brian Stiller:

There has been discussion, not just in the US but in Canada and globally, where one would wish and hope for that their country be much more Christian in its policy and its orientation than being secular. How do you come to that and how do you deal with the issue of secularity as a Christian? And probably, if I could assume, you would have some aspiration that this country would manifest Christian ideals as well.

John McKay:

Yeah, I would, but I don't know, forcing Christian ideals or conflating it with nationalism is actually useful or helpful. It has been kind of in your face Christianity in the country that we're talking about and surprise, surprise, there's been pushback on that to the point where you're seeing gross infractions of core elements of the society belief in the Constitution, belief in the rule of law. You know, treat your neighbor as yourself, and so I think when you push that kind of stuff down the throats of people who might believe differently than you do, you're actually being counterproductive. So I'm actually influenced by the legendary Brian Stiller on this file, because prior to my times in politics I would occasionally read a Brian Stiller book, and your argument, your core argument, was to make space in the marketplace of ideas for Christian expression, which I think was, if you will pre-my political life, influential on me, and I think that's the way you go about it. You try to make sure that there is space available for the expression of Christianity, just as for others who may wish to express their faith, because, as is fairly said, you know, rights are not exclusive to you and I and the Christian faith, but our rights are only as strong as the rights for other groups as well.

John McKay:

Having said that, I think the pernicious influence of secularism is, I think, particularly devastating to religious communities Because in its core, it believes that religious expression should not take place in the marketplace of ideas. You know, do whatever you're going to do on Friday, saturday or Sunday. Expression should not take place in the marketplace of ideas. Do whatever you're going to do on Friday, saturday or Sunday, but for the rest of the time you have to express yourself in a secular sort of way, which we see playing out in real time in Quebec, and my correct colleagues are puzzled by why that is even an issue, and I'm puzzled that they should think that their particular religious belief and I'm using religion in quotes should be the prevailing ethos for the decision with respect to everything, ethos for the decision with respect to everything. And so we have probably, if I have conflict, intellectual conflict, at least it's more with the non-religious, militant secularism than it is with my people who actually express themselves and their faith.

Brian Stiller:

How do you serve in the political enterprise when you have this predisposition of the political enterprise to secularity or the diminishing of faith in the marketplace of ideas? You're sitting there, you're working with your colleagues, you're writing your speeches, you're pushing back or you're advocating some particular policy. How do you fit into that?

John McKay:

Not comfortably. It's never a comfortable day to be candid about it, but I have to on behalf of my faith. And my faith, colleagues, is assert ourselves that we have every right, every right to express ourselves in whatever way we wish to in order to advance, whatever the idea might be, and that's easier to articulate than it is to practice. But having said that, I think we have. You know, I don't know, have we had some successes? I don't really know. But you know, you're called to be faithful. You're not necessarily called to success.

Brian Stiller:

Let me raise the issue of the pro-life, pro-choice issue. You are a member of the Liberal Party of Canada and the prime Minister under whom you generally served through your time, at least for 10 years, was pretty articulate that no member of the House in the Liberal Party could be anything other but pro-choice, but you stood out as remarkably as one that didn't hew the party line. How did that come about and how did you survive and make your point?

John McKay:

Yes, and I have the political career to show for it. Mr Trudeau and I have known each other for prior to his becoming the prime minister. We do not see eye to eye on this issue, I think essentially I was grandfathered into the Liberal Party notwithstanding that everyone knew where I stood on the issue. But that also had its limitations. But I adopt the Martin Luther King approach, which is that you know, if you're going to disobey the law, be prepared to suffer the consequences and I would not analogize myself to Martin Luther King by any means. But you have to suffer the consequences, and there were consequences. That's life.

John McKay:

Having said that, there's also wonderful opportunities that you continue to have in a caucus that, and as particularly in the government caucus. I've done a complete circuit of the House of Commons, from government caucus to opposition caucus, to third party status caucus, back to government caucus and, as the late Herb Bray used to say, there's no bad seats in the House of Commons. And the interesting thing is that at the end of the day which is where we all arrive at mine coming very quickly people respect you for how you stood up and said whatever it is you said and how you said it. I have not had a happy run, necessarily in terms of you would see a regular career flow in the Liberal Party, but on the other hand I've been treated very generously and we've had a few successes along the way.

Brian Stiller:

OK, but this is a very contentious issue. Yeah, and you've got a Canadian government and we have no bill with respect to the unborn, the Morgenthaler Supreme Court decision, the attempt in 1990, bill C-43, to try and bring some kind of amelioration to the issue by way of policy, that died in the Senate. So we live in a country that has nothing on its books respecting the protection of the unborn. You serve for 27 years in a liberal party that espouses that same kind of. For 27 years you lived in a liberal party that espouses a full pro-choice Right. So all of that, how did you go about living with that group, living with the contentious ideas? Can you be specific about things that you would do or say?

John McKay:

Well, my first. As you say, I'm going back to 97. In 1997, I had a good friend named Jerry Van De Zandt you may or may not know him from Citizens for Public Justice and Jerry was in that.

John McKay:

One of my prime mentors there you are, and Jerry was in that One of my prime mentors. There you are, and Jerry, to the day he died, said the evangelical community is so stupid as to have not managed the Senate vote. Well, they could have made a compromise which would have provided there would have been a law about abortion in this country, probably having to do with trimester, and I always kind of kept that in the back of the mind that we could have had something. But that ship sailed and there is no possibility in the current configuration of Parliament, or probably the previous five or six configurations of Parliament, of ever getting any law passed with respect to abortion. And so it speaks to an issue as to when you decide that I've got as much as I can possibly get.

John McKay:

And there I would track to Wilberforce again. So Wilberforce, as you know, was adamant about slavery in the British Commonwealth, british Empire, for years, 30 odd years. But at the end of the day he compromised and he said OK, we'll go with an abolition of the British slave. Trade was abolished, then the value of slaves became worthless and then for slavery, the abolition of slavery happened after that. So you have to make some strategic compromises in politics You're not always going to get your way, and you have to be wise Take what you can get, because you may not get anything at all.

Brian Stiller:

Let me just bring clarification to 1990 Bill C-43, the attempt by the Mulroney government to bring forth a bill. That was a third way. The Evangelical Fellowship of Canada supported that as an approach. But it was campaign life, a fundamentalist Christian grouping, that persuaded a couple of senators to vote no and we lost it on the basis of one vote. But the evangelical community by and large supported that third way. It was this fundamentalism that was driven mainly within the Roman Catholic church that brought the, the, the bill down. So just just for clarification.

Brian Stiller:

You were there, you were there.

John McKay:

Yeah, and and so so you can appreciate, jerry's position was, I take it largely your position as well, that it was there for the, for the taking, and we got blown, we got blown.

Brian Stiller:

Yeah, it was a sad, sad day. Yeah, yeah, it was as grievous a moment as I can remember, jacob, who was a senior member of the cabinet. I think we were tearful as we talked by phone when we your vision and insistence and your political skills in managing the House Talk to me about that as at least one of your moments of good memory.

John McKay:

Well, basically, for the benefit of your listeners, bills divide into two categories government bills and private members bills. So people who are not in government, like myself, they can propose private members bills. So I propose five. One on fire safe cigarettes so don't burn the house down when you fall asleep smoking. One on better aid bill, which meant that you know you had to actually put your aid money and give it to poor people. What an idea that was.

John McKay:

And then the one which was a glorious failure and you learn more from your failures than you learn from your successes was a bill called C-300, the better mining bill, which essentially said that if you're going to mine in somebody else's country, then you have to comply with international human rights law and don't degrade their environment. Otherwise don't come to the government for consular financial support. What an idea that was. We're not going to pay you to abuse people's human rights. And then a fourth one was you have to disclose any bribes you've given. That went down to glorious failure but ended up in a year later in an omnibus bill in the Harper government, which was fine that's after they crushed me in a vote. And then the final one was a supply chain slavery bill which essentially requires companies of a certain size to disclose whether they feel that they have any slave products in their supply chains, which is ongoing right now and is actually still quite controversial. But I think we're well, it is the law and so let's see how that. So those are successes.

John McKay:

I would say Even the failures were successes, because the mining bill ultimately ended up in the Canadian Office of Responsible Enterprise, and that's an office. So they on the floor of the house. You have these successes and but you have to kind of keep worrying the things to death because they go back into the bureaucracy. And this is this great morass of of people who may not be quite as motivated as you are to see that the bills have some success. It's been quite an interesting journey and I and you know you said well, you know you weren't in government, you never ended up in cabinet. Well, what other cabinet minister has five bills to their credit?

John McKay:

administrators five bills to their credit.

Brian Stiller:

What?

Brian Stiller:

was the kernel idea or situation that gave rise to this bill respecting slavery.

John McKay:

So finger your garment here. Yes, Do you know?

John McKay:

whether that garment is made by a slave?

Brian Stiller:

No,

John McKay:

no, nor does anybody else who's listening to this podcast, and I think that when no had a starter, if you will, a starter bill, which I thought was a good idea. Why does it appeal to me specifically? Because you know all of the injunctions in the Bible talk about slavery and how you're supposed to treat people, and that you know there's an appeal to freedom and things of that nature, and so it's kind of like it seeps into your pores in church and elsewhere. And it also matches up with my interest in human rights. And you have to be able to state to a post-Christian citizenry why this is good for them citizenry, why this is good for them, and you frame it in human rights rather than, if you will, a biblical framing, and so whether it's in human rights or just is it good for business, these are the kinds of arguments that you have to make in order to be able to say to people we shouldn't be buying slave products from anywhere and this is the way that we can purge our supply chains of slave products.

Brian Stiller:

Speaking to younger people, gen Z, others, who look at their country, look at the world, have concerns and interests and wonder about public service in the political realm, as you have had. What would you say to them? What advice would you ask them to consider as they look to this as a possible future for them?

John McKay:

I don't expect it to be easy. It is fraught with various twists and turns that you can never otherwise anticipate, and it's startling to get involved. You know I don't really pick it. If it's going to be partisan politics, we'll pick your party.

Brian Stiller:

But how do you know at what stage the party is? Is it because you have friendship with people in that party, or is it is an ideological value based decision?

John McKay:

For some people to be ideological, a value based decision. Some of them just got fall into it. Some it's electoral practicality. You know, if I run as a liberal in Alberta I'm going to have a very frustrated political career. So you know, it's all of the above, but do get yourself involved. Knock on a few doors, see whether you like this stuff. You better be prepared to handle what people will say to you at the doors, but also be involved with the local executive. Most writing associations are very keen on younger people. I've got a few in my writing association and I swear one day. Well, one I think, is going to be the next prime minister of Canada and the other, I think, is going to make a pretty fine MP. But they've picked up a lot of seasoning over the last few years that would not otherwise be available to them. And then be literate, keep up on what's going on around the world. So that would be my general advice.

Brian Stiller:

You've had a remarkable career, John, 27 years with high credibility. People may not agree with your policies, but the enormous respect right across the political spectrum and through that time you've maintained a marriage with a family and a faith with a family and a faith. What are the kinds of things that have nurtured you in your relationship and family relationship and in your walk with the Lord?

John McKay:

Well, I'm very fortunate to be married to a woman who is an extraordinary woman, and Carolyn is the love of my life and she has kept our family glue together. It's tough at the best of times and she's done a marvelous job at keeping us together. So I feel blessed. I know that word gets kind of batted around a little too frequently, but I do feel blessed. It's interesting in terms of faith expression.

John McKay:

I chaired the National Prayer Breakfast for a couple of years and had the good fortune of meeting Romeo Dallaire as one of my guest speakers. His expression of his faith was the kind of the National Bird Breakfast when 9-11 happened and in the US. So I got to know the US ambassador quite well. Again, these are just remarkable experiences that you don't otherwise have. And then there's always that kind of tingly, spider sense or whatever, that you're kind of doing the right thing or spider sense or whatever that you're kind of doing the right thing. It doesn't happen in my case all that often, but every once in a while you do have that feeling Okay, well, that was an interesting thing. And so, like a lot of faith journeys, you don't know actually where you're going, but when you look over your shoulder. You've probably been somewhere and maybe you actually did something that was useful,

Brian Stiller:

john.

Brian Stiller:

Thank you so much for joining us today on Evangelical 360.

John McKay:

Thank you, brian,

Brian Stiller:

and thank you for being a part of the podcast. Be sure to share this episode using hashtag Evangelical360 and join the conversation on YouTube. If you'd like to learn more about today's guest, be sure to check the show notes for links and info, and if you haven't already received my free ebook and newsletter, please go to brianstillercom. Thanks again, until next time. Don't miss the next interview. Be sure to subscribe to Evangelical 360 on YouTube.