A Christian Liberal is NOT an oxymoron.

Posted by XT on June 15th, 2008 in Progressive Faith

Timothy Egan writes that Rick Warren’s church will be breaking ground by opening its doors to a group of homosexual dads on Father’s Day. Of course, the postscript makes it clear that Egan didn’t even get the topic of his article right, so why worry about the rest of it? Rick Warren won’t even be present on Father’s Day and he is making it clear that he didn’t invite this group to visit. So much for broken grounds.

What we are left with is a typical factually-challenged screed against faith in the public sphere. There is even the obligatory reference to Secular God John Lennon (the least talented and most over-rated Beatle) and the invocation of Thomas Jefferson. I’d have much more respect for the author if he just came out and said that religion offends him and there is no need to discuss it with respect to politics. As it is, he just appears to be afraid of speaking his mind in favor of making a popular punching-bag of Marion Gordon Robertson (“Pat” Robertson) and John Hagee.

There’s a big problem with using those two for Egan’s purpose. The remarks identified by Egan as being evidence of too much political interaction with politics were comments not made by politicians nor at political gatherings. Robertson’s comments were made on his televangelist show, The 700 Club, and Hagee’s comments were actually part of a sermon that he was questioned about after he endorsed John McCain. They may go towards undermining the credibility of these two men, but they are not examples of the entrance of religion into politics. They are simply examples of religious fundamentalists reading their faith into the world - and discussing it as such among similiarly minded people.

Egan is much more on-point when he compares JFK with Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee. Unfortunately, you lose that in the fuss over Rick Warren. Egan doesn’t explain to us why Romney and Huckabee’s use of faith is offensive, he just compares them to JFK and leaves it at that. I suppose they are offensive for not being JFK - which would mean that everyone alive today would be equally offensive.

Not so long ago, politicians could talk about national defense or currency fluctuations without having to mention Him. But since 1980, the total number of references to God in major presidential speeches has jumped 120 percent over the preceding half-century, Domke and Coe found.

I’m not saying that the statistics are wrong, but Egan gives not a single shred of evidence of it. I don’t know of Barack Obama invoking God during a discussion of national defense nor of John McCain saying anything about faith when discussing economics. I’ve heard both of them mention the place of God and faith in their personal life and how it relates to the American persona.

Because, like it or not, faith has always been prevalent in the American persona. Whether or not a politician believes a particular creed or whether or not they articulate their beliefs in the language of faith, it has always been there. Want to invoke Jefferson? Explain his phrase “endowed by their Creator” without referring to something outside of the natural world that can be seen, felt, and smelt. As a Deist, he disavowed the supernatural and he abhorred structured religion - but he still believed (if I can borrow from Twelve Steps) in a “power greater than myself”. He even attended non-denominational services held inside the Congressional building.

When Marion Gordon Robertson tells his viewers that a meteor will hit Orlando, he is simply acting as a legitimate man of God speaking to his flock. That his words have political impact is a function solely of his ability to utilize media and the fact that, in this country, people can base their vote on any dumb idea they want. The purpose of a church is to address the world outside the church - so even as I disagree with every interpretation Marion Gordon Robertson speaks, I have to admit that he is merely doing what he should be doing.

When Marion Gordon Robertson and his brethren have tried to legislate their agenda, they have strayed from that job. It is not the job of the church to dictate to society what must be done. It is the job of the church to reach out to society and show it what can be done. It is the job of society to speak up and be the conscience of society - not in the legalistic manner that Robertson seeks to do, but in the manner of giving voice to those that society refuses to see (groups that Robertson, by the way, is too quick to blame for all of society’s ills).

Yes, religion plays a part in politics in this country - because politics in this country is where we fight out those things in which we believe and the direction in which we will travel. Those two are intrinsically linked. Only a fool would want to lead a nation blindly without considering what our shared values might be. In fact, I would argue that the biggest failures of the last eight years have been a false understanding of those values and a blind adherence to the ideology that created that failing.

As a way of ending, I’d simply ask Mr. Egan this - was the inclusion of only right-wing Christians intentional, or are you unfamiliar enough with the topic upon which you have chosen to write than you didn’t have any names to provide balance? If it is the former, then the screed should be re-written to address specifically “right-wing” religion in politics. If it’s the second, then the article should just be pulled until full mastery of the subject matter can be attained.

Technorati Tags: Timothy Egan, “Pat” Robertson, John Hagee