Saturday, May 10, 2008

The Religious-Political Dilemma

I am often pulled by two competing forces. Sometimes these exertions seem to run on parallel tracks, and sometimes they are dramatically separate. My first loyalty is to the church, its history, its place in society and the Christ whose vision it serves. But I am also up to my neck in the political process, and particularly what I believe are the ethics which form its base. So, as a Christian, I work for a flat-out Christian organization, Progressive Christians Uniting, and I helped found another one, Disciples Justice Action Network. But, as an individual and a citizen, I am also deeply involved in the local Democratic party, and am passionate about the implications of the current political campaign.

Clearly my party affiliation is not simply an extension of the ethic implicit in the gospel. I have been a municipal politician and know from experience that there is enough stench in any partisan organization to temper one's loyalty. What is more, the wall of separation between church and state is both tall and solid.

Recently a spate of books has focused on the dilemma many of us confront as we try to reconcile these two powerful forces. By far the most incisive is Souled Out, by E. J. Dionne, Jr, a theologically conservative Catholic layman and a political columnist for The Washington Post. Dionne sketches what he believes to be the ethical imperatives of authentic religion including citations from Augustine to Barth and the Niebuhrs. He suggests that inherent in Jesus' teachings are ethical imperatives concerning justice, peace, non-violence, equity, and humility. Dionne insists that the religious right, captured by a political cabal, has seriously distorted both authentic faith and the American vision by reducing the Christian witness to sexual issues, abortion, homosexuality and stem-cell research.

Here is where I need help--dear readers. For the life of me I cannot understand how anyone dealing seriously with what Jesus had to say, could politically support preemptive war, torture as a national policy, an economic system in which the rich grow fabulously richer at the expense of the economic under-classes, a national policy based on our capacity to destroy anyone in our way----on and on and on. If one political party seems to affirm these things, and an alternate party is clear in opposing them, how can I maintain political neutrality and still affirm my commitment to the way of Jesus? On the other hand, how can I fully commit myself to the victory of a particular political party because of my Christian faith without implicitly baptizing it as "the Christian party"?

There are obviously areas in which each party has a positive contribution to make, and areas where each may flat out be wrong. Nevertheless as both a Christian and a citizen when I find religion and politics with parallel goals I realize that I must have a foot clearly planted in each camp.

Politics is very seductive, but so is religion. As a citizen and a churchman I need help in keeping these two loyalties in touch with each other but not hopelessly intertwined. Any advice?
Charles Bayer

4 comments:

boblog said...

Charles, its not clear to me from your post where the conflict lies. A positions of a political party are not be dogma; one may support a party because that party's positions align most closely with one's beliefs. As a party supporter, however, one can attempt to move that party's positions, just as other groups within the party will do the same.

There are only two parties, however, and a multitude of faiths and interest groups. The fact that a party can claim to represent members of a religion (and in fact both parties can represent some) means that party "loyalties" are in fact marriages of convenience.

So I don't see how such a group could command loyalties that rise to those of your faith.

Your loyalty is to your faith, your party must earn it. The parallelism only exists to the extent that your party continues to value the tenets of your faith...

Anonymous said...

Charles, You raise good questions and some which I have reflected on for some time, because I observe many "nice" ministers afraid to take prophetic stands informed by the gospel by opting for the position of being inclusive and embracing both parties. If one position is more defined by a thematic sweep of the sacred text, such as peace or justice, then that should be what we communicate. I entertain this discussion in a newly released book.

I invite you to take a look at the book GAPS which has a penname, Mac Keyes, and
you can catch some excerpts on wwwXlibris.com/gaps.html. You can order many ways and its
safe and secure by that process...

You can order the book by telephone, fax, mail, or e-mail.

To order Xlibris books by telephone, please call us at: 1-888-795-4274
To order by fax, send your order to: 1-610-915-0294 or 1-610-915-0293
To order by e-mail, send your order to: orders@xlibris.com
To order by mail, send your order to:
Book Orders
Xlibris Corporation
International Plaza II, Suite 340
Philadelphia, PA 19113-1513
USA

There is much I like about this novel, it's erotic, yes, but it has some profound
insights on sacred texts, in the search for values.

Peace, Ron Faust

is64ff said...

Hi Charles
I understand your conflict, but perhaps you over-think it. You cannot baptize the Democratic Party any more than Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell can baptize the GOP. Some less discerning folk may think that parties can be baptized, but their lack does not impact the truth. All Christians should work within political organizations to shape their policies, but that will still not Christianize the parties.
Baptism is not for organizations, but one person at a time.
Don't worry - - follow the Lord.

Go with God

Dennis said...

It's pretty clear to me that neither party lives up to the gospel; I'm with you that the Democratic party better represents what I think government ought to do, and that my opinions about government are shaped by my faith. I'm a Democrat, not because I feel loyalty to the Democratic Party Platform, but because the Party conforms more closely to MY platform than the GOP does. If a party were to show up that more closely resembled my own (faith-shaped) values, I'd be sympathetic, although I'm not sure I'd vote for 3rd party candidates...that always seems like throwing my vote away.