One of the fundamental and important
principles of our country’s founders was the separation of church and state.
That stance has been largely accepted and followed throughout most of our
history and is wise. Unfortunately such is no longer the case.
We can see the beginning of that change in
the election campaign of Ronal Reagan who found willing political allies among
the religious right, the more extreme religious right and made use of them.
In the many years I served as a pastor I
always encouraged members of my congregations to be politically active as
members of this country. I also encouraged them to use their religious values
in determining who they voted for. These were privileges, rights and obligations
they had both as Christians and as citizens. With that said, I never ever once
said who they should vote for in a sermon or in my role as pastor. I looked
upon that as an absolute abuse of a sacred office and unethical for a pastor to
do. I still believe that. It is one of joys I have as a retired pastor is that
I no longer have to worry about the public role I had as a working pastor and
now have the freedom to express my political views along with my religious
views; thus the reason for this blog.
I wish my brothers and sisters of the cloth
on the religious right had a similar stance. I find their use of the pulpit as
a bully pulpit for a particular candidate repugnant, unethical, and an abuse of
their office and often reflecting incredibly poor biblical understanding.
In the years since Reagan we have seen more
and more of the religious right pursuing this unethical behavior in their
pulpits. The Republicans have accepted and embraced this support to their shame
as it stands counter the constitution and reflects a mix of religion and
politics that was honored by politicians of character.
The type of pandering to these vested
interests by political candidates (Rick Santorum is an example of one of the worst of these) I find
revolting. There have been great leaders such as President Kennedy and others
when pressed responded with integrity to both their religious beliefs and the
political beliefs while affirming the belief in the separation of church and
state.
The presidency has been used and used
properly as a bully pulpit for national issues by many presidents and they used
their office to push forward ideas and legislation that would benefit the
nation and educated the nation; Teddy Roosevelt was a master of this and as a
result we have the many protected national parks we have today for all to
enjoy.
I repeat again that I find it incongruent
and morally wrong for folk attempting to push the religious values upon others
in national law when those issues clearly belong to the church. It is counter
the teachings of both parties but the conservatives have shown over and over
again this inconsistency in their political platforms and stances. If you
cannot see the difference between protecting individual freedom and the
inflicting of moral practices upon others you reflect muddy logic and inconsistent
beliefs, and reflect badly upon both your religion and our civic duty.
"I repeat again that I find it incongruent and morally wrong for folk attempting to push the religious values upon others in national law when those issues clearly belong to the church."
ReplyDeleteThis is no less true for leftist denominations who favor and push for, for example, more abortions.
"If you cannot see the difference between protecting individual freedom and the inflicting of moral practices upon others "
All laws involve the rulers inflicting moral practices upon others. That is the nature of legislation and law enforcement.
"This is no less true for leftist denominations who favor and push for, for example, more abortions."
Delete...I've never heard THAT pushed every Sunday from
the pulpit. Perhaps the conundrum is best exemplified by the Catholic Church: their dogma
forbids abortion/birth control, yet they decry
the removal of government social aid and wealth distribution ...thus voting demographics for
those adherants are more typical of the general
50/50 electorate. The evangelical is a southern
phenomenon, empowered by the 'southern strategy' and march lock-step with what they are told: science is evil, academics is evil, public education is evil. Best exemplified by the smirking schemer Ralph Reed. The irony is that
they wish to return to the founding age. We note
that the founding age had only 17% of folks attached to a church.....
I find your logic most curious dmarks. Apparently you do not believe in the separation of church and state and we should return to the religious dominance of religion over government as in the middle ages. And, I should have promoted my political beliefs upon my congregants. Well, perhaps that is unfair.
DeleteWould you be so kind as to point out any “leftist” denominations that favor and push for more abortions. I know of none!
Yes customs can become folkways can become mores which can become in due time become laws; that is basic sociology. And the origins of such often do that the origin in the moral teachings of religion. With that said, it is not the same as a religious institutions seeking to enforce their particular interpretation of their morality upon others. Again, that is an abuse of office and a rejection of the constitution’s separation of church and state’ you do believe in the separation of church and state don’t you?
History is rift with the immorality of church practices over the ages as are political and governmental institutions. We should seek to improve both rather than promote their mistakes.
"Apparently you do not believe in the separation of church and state"
DeleteI believe actually in the Constitutional principle by which government can not get involved in religion. That is pretty close to, but is not identical to the "separation of church and state", which itself is more of a folk tradition actually.
"and we should return to the religious dominance of religion over government as in the middle ages."
Actually, I oppose the gay marriage restrictions. I oppose abortion on secular grounds also.
"Would you be so kind as to point out any “leftist” denominations that favor and push for more abortions. I know of none!"
The Quakers are one. No quotes needed around 'leftist'. I am sure I can find others.
"Again, that is an abuse of office and a rejection of the constitution’s separation of church and state’ you do believe in the separation of church and state don’t you?"
Again, I believe in something pretty close to it, and that is the principle that is in the US Constitition. As a result I happen to be leery of "Faith based" welfare initiatives of spending by government.
Quakers are liberals. What an interesting comment. I would be most curious as to how you reached that conclusion.
DeleteNow if you really want to know what a liberal church is check out the Unitarians.
To me it's entirely beside the point what the political leanings of various conservative/liberal denominations or religions are.
ReplyDeleteCommingling church and state never does anything good for either. Eventually it just gets you a government that no one can dare to question (see: Iran, Ayatollahs, Taliban). It is an inevitable result of blurring the line between government's terrestrial lawkeeping functions with implied cosmic-level authority.
This is why politicians are so keen to invoke God's name and speak for Him. If you speak for God, then no one can question you or your position. By hiding behind God you can avoid a lot of criticism for your positions.
Pretty good point there, PK.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIt is confounding, but interesting, that the bible can be
ReplyDeleteinterpeted in a manner to produce such diametrically opposed views. ..and perhaps instructive that the Koran
gives rise to gunmen shooting a schoolgirl to this .
Very interesting article, BB.
Delete