Religious Belief Shapes Political Destiny

As Christians, how are we to respond to our culture? Support? Resistance? Or a little of each. Go with Caesar here and God there? Some would say politics and religion shouldn’t mix at all. It may depend on how you see the nature of our faith.
In his classic book, The World’s Religions, Huston Smith argues that all religions tend to divide into camps over several basic questions. One is whether we see ourselves as interconnected in our achievements, or masters of our own destiny. Those who believe in individual achievement prefer a strong system of order that protects them and their property. Those who believe in a common destiny are more likely to see the wisdom in God’s admonition to the people of Israel that they not come proudly into the Promised Land, drinking from wells they did not dig, harvesting vineyards they did not plant and then sit back self satisfied and say, “Look at all I’ve accomplished.”
It’s easy to see how this difference plays out on the modern Christian landscape as we separate into opposing views: order vs. freedom of expression, judgment vs. compassion, individualism and free will vs. collective responsibility for each other. Each side seems to find ample justification in their reading of the Bible.
Because Christianity holds such strong sway in American culture, these differences form a battleground in the debate over what kind of America we want. If we are masters of our own destiny it’s easier to dismiss the suffering as getting their just deserts. In his farewell to his disciples Jesus said they would be known as his followers by the way they treated each other—not by their individual achievements. If we apply this belief to the social compact of our political structure, aren’t we required to choose a system that answers “yes” to the question, “Am I my brother’s keeper?”

Plan B Reduces Abortion. What's Not to Like?

Annual sales of the morning after pill “Plan B” have increased eightfold since gaining FDA approval for over the counter distribution. According to its manufacturer Barr Pharmaceuticals, the pill can lower the risk of pregnancy in 89 percent of cases if taken within 72 hours of unprotected sex.
Since unwanted pregnancy often leads to abortion, that should be good news for anyone who would like to see abortions reduced--which I believe includes most Christians. Or so you would think. A coalition of groups with strong ties to the evangelical Christian movement have filed suit to force the government to return Plan B to prescription only status. These are the same groups that fought a bitter battle to keep Plan B off the market completely, and finally succeeded in limiting access to women 18 and over. Those younger must get a doctor’s prescription or find someone old enough to buy it for them.
Since we know these groups are strongly anti-abortion, you have to wonder what motivates them. Every explanation I can imagine seems cynical. Could it be that abortion has been such a successful political issue for them that they don’t want to lose it? Maybe they are all closet liberals who really love big government and want nothing more than federal intrusion in private lives. Well, maybe on this issue only.
Most likely, the real answer has to do with sex. This also explains the connection to the church and Christians. The Catholic Church and conservative Christians in general have long suffered an aversion to sex as pleasure—especially sex outside of marriage—whether or not it leads to pregnancy. Why else would anti-abortion leaders change the definition of pregnancy to the moment of fertilization—rather than implantation in the uterus—and then argue “the pill” should be banned because it might cause abortion by preventing implantation? Surely they must know that criminalizing birth control would mean even more abortions.
No one likes abortion. We all want the numbers reduced. Maybe some day reduced to almost nothing. Plan B is helping. Many Christians also want to enjoy one of God’s greatest gifts—strong, healthy sex lives—without intrusion from government or anyone else who thinks it’s their right to take control.

Covering "Religion" Sickens Christian Reporter

When Los Angeles Times staff writer William Lobdell got his wish and was named the paper’s religion writer he believed God had answered his prayers. But after just a few years on the faith beat his dream felt more like a nightmare. Now he rather write about almost anything else.
Lobdell described himself as a “serious Christian” in a recent LA Times story that details his disillusionment with the Catholic Church and other Christian institutions, specifically the Trinity Broadcast Network (TBN). He explained that before taking over the Times’ religion post he often “cringed” at how the mainstream media covered faith and Christianity, making them look like a “circus,” or worse yet, “a freak show.” But the closer he came to seeing how these Christian insiders really worked, the more disillusioned he became with them.
“I understood that I was witnessing the failure of humans, not God,” Lobdell said. “But in a way that was the point. I didn’t see these institutions drenched in God’s spirit.”
The one-two combination that knocked Lobdell to the canvas began with his assignment to cover the sex abuse scandals that engulfed so many Catholic priests. Before he was finished with the abuse scandals, he understood the degree to which the priests and bishops involved had betrayed God and the children entrusted to them. And in the case of Trinity Broadcast Network, Lobdell’s inside view revealed nothing more than a pit of greedy vipers with no motivation beyond their own material enrichment. Worse yet, respected Christian leaders like Billy Graham and Robert Schuller appeared as guests on TBN, helping to convince viewers the network is something better than what it is—an elaborate confidence game.Lobdell managed to keep his faith, but he asked the Times to assign him to a new beat. Maybe the mainstream media is right: many of our Christian institutions are freak shows. Many, but not all. And that’s why we must insist that those which remain genuine and authentic act and speak with courage on the great questions like war and economic injustice. Here on earth we are all God has to accomplish good. When we fail, God fails.

Rove's Departure Bittersweet for this Christian

Karl Rove left the White House this week, bringing a sigh of relief from fellow Republicans. But for many Christians on the left it was a bittersweet moment. For me it brought back to life memories of the days after the 2004 election. After 2000, despite anger over dirty play by the Bush team, most Christians, left and right, continued to work together on the church’s business , which hopefully is the same as God’s business. The days following 2004 were different. This past Sunday morning on the Chris Matthews show, Dan Rather said winning the 2004 election was Rove’s crowning achievement. For Christians on the left it was a blow to the solar plexus. Not only were we more convinced than ever that Leo Durocher was right, “Nice guys finish last,” but we as Christians began questioning whether we could continue embracing brothers and sisters who didn’t see the overwhelming immorality in using America’s power to deal so much death. Instead of concern over the great questions of war and peace, life and death, they had railed on about whether God would vomit at the thought of two men making love.
In the days following the election, I read online how the suspended bombing of Fallujah had resumed and of two families caught unawares who tried to escape the city. The first, a family of three were killed when their car was struck. The second, a mother and teenaged girl, escaped alive, but bomb shrapnel tore into them, ripping off the girl’s leg. I made the mistake of picturing the scene: The mother and daughter looking down at where the leg had been, the horror in their faces. In my mind’s eye I saw the girl’s face and she looked like one of the girls in our youth group. I couldn’t get over it and day after day, when I saw Bush or Cheney, or Rove on TV that horrified girl came back to me looking just like one of our own children.
I had recently been elected one of the co-lay leaders of our church. After about a week of suffering with the wounded teenager I decided to make a statement by resigning as lay leader. I just couldn’t make common cause with people from whom I now felt so estranged. We are a large church and have 70 people on our executive committee. Our pastor, who had been criticized himself for not waving the flag enough from the pulpit, circulated my letter of resignation to all 70 church leaders. In the letter I talked about my feelings and how I was haunted by the girl’s broken image. Some called me arrogant or were angry that I questioned them, but we’ve come together again these few years later to find common ground where we can share God’s love and work.
I didn’t change the world with what I did. I took a small step to let my brothers and sisters in Christ know how strongly I believed that God’s will on this is unmistakable. And I believe if we Christians ever do mend our broken culture that’s how it will happen: from the ground up, one small step at a time. Don’t ignore your opportunities, small or large, no matter whom it may offend.