Sunday, February 3, 2008

the journey begins

The relationship between faith and politics, both in general and in the upcoming election, continues to amaze and surprise me. I was intrigued tonight (Thursday, 1/31) at the CNN Democratic debate when I heard Hilary compare the threats against people who help illegal immigrants to a threat against the Good Samaritan, or Jesus Christ himself. Unlike more conservative candidates, who actually seem to be on the defensive about the relationship between their religion and their politics, Hilary was not afraid to mention Jesus as a figure who not only deserves respect, but, perhaps, should serve as a model for us. One could argue that she did not go this far, but the fact that she used Jesus Christ as an example says something about this dichotomy between faith and politics, and how it will play out in these months to come.

As I mentioned in the first class, I find it difficult, at times, to reconcile these two points: my faith and my politics (or any interaction with the secular world). In a class discussion today, when I used the word “sinfulness” to explain myself, the teacher smiled and called me the theologian, perhaps discounting my comment as somehow less valid, as it was not a theology class. I found myself regretting the use of the word, because it somehow took away from the point I was trying to make, rather than highlighting a part of human nature, as I intended.


But this regret is ridiculous. Why should we, as devout Catholics, have to compartmentalize our lives in this way? We infuse our faith, and with that our moral judgment, into our everyday actions, unable to imagine a life that has not been shaped in this way. The reconciliation of this worldview with a completely “secular” mindset is difficult, to say the least, so the degree to which candidates can openly talk about their faith, address the clearly faith-related issues, and meanwhile respect the Constitution will be interesting to see.


Huckabee, who is beyond his Iowa days, became well-known as the “religious” candidate—and often this was an insult, something to be defended. In “God on the American campaign trail,” an editorial on newsday.com*, the writer comments on the candidates use of faith on the trail:


“Mike Huckabee, a Baptist preacher and former governor, raises eyebrows with the style and the symbolism of his Christmas-themed ad and his promise to amend the Constitution to bring it into conformity with God's laws. But he also makes good points about the care for the poor that permeates Scripture.”


Huckabee, according to this quotation, goes so far as to argue that God’s laws are the laws that America should be following, which, although I also would like America to be a Kingdom of God, seems to me to be contrary to the separation of church and state. Is this an extreme case?


The article continues, citing "Keeping Faith: Principles to Protect Religion on the Campaign Trail,” which says:


“Religion forms virtues vital to democratic citizenship. Religion calls citizens to transcend self-interest in service to others - to those in need, to neighbor, to community, to country and to the world. Religion promotes fundamental moral values necessary for civilized public life - honor and honesty, charity and justice.”


This hits my heart in all the right places; like so many others, I want to live a life formed in virtue and grounded in religion, and I want to live in a morally upright country that seeks constantly to serve. However, the real question is, and I don’t ask this rhetorically: Without the imposition of any religion on anybody else, of course, and keeping in mind all the suffering Americans experience, is this kind of country possible?



* Thanks, Meg, for sending us the link to Catholic information online!

2 comments:

Becko said...

How do I "edit" so there are spaces between paragraphs?

AngelMyst said...

I've spent a lot of time reading the bible and considering this issue myself and have learned much in the process.

Hopefully sharing this will help you in your questions regarding this issue.

If you read the bible from beginning to end..Old Testiment to New Testiment you will find that in the Old Testiment God provides his believers with laws and rules to abide by.

During this time God was at times terrifying and merciless in his punishment of sinners, and also mandated that those faithful to him mete out punishment in his name on sinners. It's important to keep in mind that during this stage of the Bible not only was humanity in it's youth, God was also building a nation for his people.

In the new testiment God in the form of Jesus guides us down a different path. While his disciples are still bound by the laws and commandments handed down before in their personal lives, the laws of the old testiment were handed down by God to form and maintain order in his newly formed Nation of Israel, and with the coming of Jesus this was no longer needed nor desired as part of his new Kingdom.

From this point on Jesus instructs us that it is not for us to judge others, in Matthew 7 he refers to the person finding fault in another as a hypocrit, he teaches against condemnation, persecution, and so on. Instead he teaches us to reach out to people, with love, compassion. He does not teach us to avoid sinners, or turn our backs on them. He instructs his followers to follow these teachings and his example, to gently lead those who have not yet accepted him, as he himeself lead them, to him and his kingdom.

His instructions to his followers in the New Testiment are very clear in regards to their own behavior, their interactions with others including non-believers and sinners, and how they are to share his message amongst others by following his examples.

When he was crucified he died to take away our sins and offer us salvation, but to receive these gifts one must first accept HIM.

He has granted each and everyone of us our entire physical life here to find our way to him and accept him and be saved.

Now while I am sure you already know all of this, but I found that in following the progression it's easier to see what he wanted us to learn.

Now you asked

"This hits my heart in all the right places; like so many others, I want to live a life formed in virtue and grounded in religion, and I want to live in a morally upright country that seeks constantly to serve. However, the real question is, and I don’t ask this rhetorically: Without the imposition of any religion on anybody else, of course, and keeping in mind all the suffering Americans experience, is this kind of country possible? *"

Two points that you asked I feel were answered what he taught us.

First you said "I want to live in a morally upright country that seeks constantly to serve."

Although in the Old Testiment God expected his children to avoid sin and sinners. In the New Testiment Jesus taught us not to avoid them or turn our backs on them.

In fact in Mark he shows this:

Mark 2:15 - 17
15 And it came to pass, that, as Jesus sat at meat in his house, many publicans and sinners sat also together with Jesus and his disciples: for there were many, and they followed him.

16 And when the scribes and Pharisees saw him eat with publicans and sinners, they said unto his disciples, How is it that he eateth and drinketh with publicans and sinners?

17 When Jesus heard it, he saith unto them, They that are whole have no need of the physician, but they that are sick: I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

He wanted his followers to reach out to those who had not yet accepted him and guide them gently to finding and accepting him. One cannot do that if one surrounds themselves with only those who have already found their way.

The second point I wanted to answer was this "Without the imposition of any religion on anybody else, of course, and keeping in mind all the suffering Americans experience, is this kind of country possible? "

As Jesus taught his deciples how to spread his word and guide those who had not found their way to him through compassion and love. He did not instruct his deciples to force those who did not yet believe to behave as believers. He wanted everyone to willingly find their way to him and thier salvation.

Jesus knew that while one can force anothers behavior, one cannot force anothers feelings or beliefs to conform to ones will, that in fact the use of force is more likely to raise resistance than acceptance.

With this information in mind, the type of country you would like to see this become has a better chance if we remember what he taught us about guiding those who have not found their way yet, than it would have if we simply forced them to behave as believers to create an illusion of peace.

I hope the many hours of studying and musing over this has offered you some of the answers you were seeking