The Church and Politics: What I learned today. . .
September 6, 2009
Some of you won’t be surprised to learn that I am a Baptist. You may be surprised to learn that I have been frustrated with the Republican party for its close association with ‘Christianity’. Personally, I like to keep my church out of my politics and my politics out of my church. This morning I was surprised to hear my beloved pastor suggest that those of you who oppose the President’s health reform plan or his plan to speak directly to our children, specifically those of you who express that dissent in the town square, are to be scorned.
Michele, my wife, and I were shocked to hear our pastor speak out against those who express dissent. He suggested there was something wrong with the people who opposed Obama’s plan publicly. Of course he is not alone. Our friends on the left: Congressmen, commentators, bloggers and educators have all suggested that there is something fundamentally wrong with the sort of protests that you are seeing across the country. Their opposition to the dissent shouldn’t be surprising or upsetting; however, some of our leaders are suggesting that something should be done to stop the protests. This sort of muzzling of speech we don’t like is just the sort of slippery slope that should worry all of us.
If my pastor were simply pointing out that the tenor and tone of the dissent were the problem I don’t know if we would have responded as negatively to his message. Of course there are nuts, nuts on both sides of the issue who are bringing guns to events, biting the fingers off of their opponents and generally acting stupid. Despite that, I would still argue with him that to whitewash us all with the same brush is offensive and perhaps narrow-minded. My biggest problem with his message was his implication that to oppose Obama’s health care reform package was somehow wrong. Not just the method of the dissent – but the actual dissent was wrong.
The fact that there is a problem doesn’t necessarily mean that your solution, or even Obama’s solution, is the right solution. Opposing your solution doesn’t necessarily mean that I support the status quo – it could simply mean that I don’t support the plan. Our pastor seemed to suggest that those of us who opposed Obama’s health reform plan were somehow happy to let those of us without health insurance suffer. That somehow to safeguard my happiness I am willing to ensure the misery of others. George, if you are reading this, I can assure you that is certainly not my intent. I believe in the Constitution. I believe in the rights of man. I believe that dissent and discourse will make us a stronger nation and a stronger people. It is okay to disagree. Of course, I have proposed a plan for health care reform – I am not arrogant enough to assume that if you oppose my plan you somehow want people to die. Give me the same benefit of the doubt.
P.S. Personally, I don’t have a problem with Obama talking to our children (Reagan and Bush did). I think his message can be positive if it is non-partisan. I don’t have a problem with those parents who DO NOT want Obama to speak to their children. Our son’s school, a private Episcopal school, was not invited to participate making the decision very simple.
7 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Andrew,
It’s a shame to me that anyone, religious leader or otherwise would find the exercise of free speech anything other than an exercise of Constitutional rights. Your pastor apparently needs a refresher course in history . . .beginning with the founding of this great nation in the 1700’s. Maybe you could loan him a couple of your history books! Amazing! Simply amazing!
Comment by Steve Combs — September 6, 2009 @ 1:41 pm
I find it very hard to separate church from politics. I believe it’s my understanding of Scripture that helped develop my conservative political philosophy. I don’t believe the church should try to exert political will on the government, but it should take a stand for Biblical morality. It should be God first, country and family next. The Republicans don’t have exclusivity with God, and the Democrats have no right to hold a mass phone conference with the nation’s religious leaders telling them it’s a sin to oppose Obama-care.
That being said, I think it was wrong for your pastor to infuse his sermon with politics. What you witnessed today was post-modernism; a trend that has more and more Christians using their emotions instead of their common sense. If I were there, I would have walked out. There’s no “right” to health care mentioned in the Bible, either.
Comment by Michael Clark — September 6, 2009 @ 1:50 pm
Steve, you seem to be conveniently forgetting that the pastor has the same right to free speech as you, and you have the right to follow what he says or not. Although I would counsel you to follow the Biblical teachings.
I’m not really enthusiastic about pastors talking about political issues, and health care is a political, not a doctrinal, issue. I do believe, however, that a pastor should teach respect for our leaders, and civility in our dealings with all people. We are called to carefully consider what comes from our mouth. “From the same mouth come blessing and cursing. My brothers, these things ought not to be so.” (James 3:10). We should hold ourselves to a higher standard, and not worry too much about what others say.
After all, we’re just passing through.
Comment by Jerry Brown — September 6, 2009 @ 2:03 pm
Pastors, preach Christ crucified exclusively and you won’t keep putting your foot in your mouth. The church has no business in the political arena.
Comment by rwren — September 6, 2009 @ 3:32 pm
I think Alex’s point is well made. Pastors are looked to as compasses for moral guidance. Support of the health care bill (and support for President Obama in general) is not a moral issue.
Too many Christians I know seem to hear Jesus’ teaching that we should help the poor and confuse the “we” with “our government”. Unfortunately, by saying that “our government” should help the poor, what they are often saying is “Well, someone should help the poor and I would except that I’m really busy. So what I’m really saying is that YOU should help the poor. I vote that we use your money to do things I think are moral.”
This would be my challenge to Christians who think this way: How much did you give to help your friend who is drowning in medical debt? Did you offer to take care of his or her kids? Did you make them meals? Or do you think it would be nice if someone did this… but it sure does seem like a lot of hassle for you to do it.
This is the EXACT OPPOSITE of what the Bible teaches. We Christians cannot outsource compassion to our government. We need to do it ourselves.
Comment by Matthias — September 6, 2009 @ 4:25 pm
People forget where the government gets its money from. It rakes it, by force if needed. This is why it is so critical that government is limitted. Jesus says to care for others, not to compel someone else to. Is it Christian to point a gun a someone and force them to pay for others’ health care?
Comment by Steve Brewer — September 7, 2009 @ 1:31 am
[...] post titled, “The Church and Politics” caused quite a stir on Facebook and my blog for that matter. One of the comments by [...]
Pingback by Compassion isn’t a Government Program | Conservative Dallas — September 7, 2009 @ 12:00 pm