Religious rhetoric isn’t bad; hypocrisy is

[lilithu]

I had wanted to respond to pah's "just what faith needs" thread but didn't have the energy. This oped article, written by a student at the University of Chicago (see below), touches on the issue and puts my position better than I could have:

President Bush’s inaugural speech was like all of his other presidential speeches: It was filled with religious rhetoric. Bush’s speechwriter, Michael Gerson, has unabashedly admitted to intentionally employing that tradition in presidential addresses.

Many liberals believe that this practice is disrespectful to those Americans who are not part of a particular religious affiliation. They believe that it is one more example that Bush is pandering to the religious right, that he is making a distinction between Christians and non-Christians, and they believe that he should stop. I disagree.

Bush probably is pandering to his base, but couching his words in religious symbolism is not morally reprehensible and doing so is certainly not new. Kennedy and Clinton used religious rhetoric in their speeches. So did FDR. Lincoln’s speeches were heavily influenced by the cadence of the King James’ Bible. In his second inaugural speech, arguably his best speech, Lincoln declared: “With malice towards none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive to finish the work we are in.” Religious rhetoric in presidential speech extends far back into history and across the spectrum of ideology.

What is morally reprehensible is when the religious right tries to codify their faith so that it is favored under our law. Efforts to write any religion into our laws are without question unconstitutional. Speaking of your faith is fine, but legislating your faith is not. Americans are comfortable enough in their own beliefs that they can make that distinction.

We liberals need to make a distinction between attacking politicians who see their faith as a necessary part of them and those who want to see that their faith becomes a necessary part of us. While politicians can be both those things, it is important that we are accurate in our attacks or we might miss our mark.

Conservatives need to recognize that distinction as well. The whole campaign of saving Christmas for Christ by demanding that public institutions display nativity scenes and other Christian images was quixotic. It is honorable to try and return to the spirit of the holidays as a season of goodwill, but one’s faith is not diminished when a public place does not have a specific religious symbol. But if that public place were to have a specific religious symbol, it would most certainly be damaging to citizens not of that faith.

rest of the article continued at:
http://maroon.uchicago.edu/viewpoints/articles/2005/01/20/religious_rhetoric_i.php

 

[michel]

lilith, namaste.
It seems like you are not the only ones!

The release of 1,000 yellow and purple balloons, to the accompaniment of a Haitian band, made a cheerful splash in the centre of Leeds. This was politicking church-style.
The balloons were each marked with the word "hope" but they carried a harder-nosed message, aimed squarely at a political party - the British National Party.
A coalition of churches in West Yorkshire is calling on voters to shun the BNP in the June elections.
Recently Anglican and Roman Catholic leaders in Birmingham said voting for the BNP would be like spitting in the face of God.
Bishops in other parts of the country - even rural Shrewsbury - have been issuing what sound like instructions to voters, and they're making sure voters get the message.
Christian groups are delivering leaflets accusing the BNP of trying to divide society over the issues of race and asylum in West Yorkshire.
The BNP says the question of how inclusive society is should be up to voters. It says the churches have misrepresented its policies, and that they should stay out of politics.
But the Anglican Bishop of Pontefract Tony Robinson, who has been on the streets himself canvassing voters, says Christians have a duty to speak out.
"Jesus himself was a political figure," said Bishop Robinson.
"He challenged the political authorities of the day. He's a model for us today, because of our concern to uphold the commandment 'love thy neighbour'."
Church intervention in political life is not restricted to concern about the BNP.
John Packer, the Anglican Bishop of Ripon and Leeds said that when he participated in the campaign against the BNP he had been taking his lead partly from the Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams.
Dr Williams - who has made frequent criticism of the war in Iraq - recently accused the government of damaging people's trust in politics.
Christians are also engaged in trying to influence the political process in the Palace of Westminster itself.
A group called Care - set up to promote Christian values in political life - lobbies MPs on a wide range of issues, including marriage and bioethics.
It works in partnership with a network of advisory centres for women with unplanned pregnancies.
Its head of policy, Roger Smith, says Christians are increasingly willing to use the political process to make their influence felt.
"Historically there's been a division between people who say the Church should only deal with things like the gospel, and proclaiming the good news about salvation," he says.
"But increasingly Christians are waking up to their responsibility for the community and that means getting involved in politics."
Then on Wednesday came an unambiguous appeal to voters from the Roman Catholic Church.
In a document it presented as a moral audit of Britain, the Church warned of a slide into what it called a culture of death.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

lilithu-- Great article! I agree wholeheartedly.

 

[Feathers in Hair]

That was an incredible article. Thank you for posting it! I especially loved the quote from Lincoln, and how it illustrates the differences between using rhetoric versus hypocrisy.

 

[No*s]

Thank you for the article Lilithu...it certainly hit a sweet-spot .

 

[TranceAm]

Good Articles.. Worthwhile the time to read.
Thanks for giving us a chance to read them.