Religion & Politics...

John Danforth, former Senator and an Episcopal minister, has an interesting OpEd in the NYT. The premise of his OpEd is that the rise of "conservative Christianity" has coincided with, and in his opinion is the cause of, the loss of collegiality in Congress.

Mr. Danforth ignores several factors in coming to his conclusion. First, that "conservative Christianity" is responsible for the loss of collegiality in Congress. There certainly has been a rise in conservative Christianity in the last couple of decades. There has also been a rise in what one might call "liberal humanism" on the other side of the political and spiritual divide. There is an eternal conflict between those two positions because their proponents see not only different methods to achieve the ends they perfer, but see different ends. Both sides of the argument provide a "slippery slope" for the other making moderation and compromise the tools of surrender.

I would submit that the most obvious reason for a loss of collegiality is the practice of creating "safe" seats in the House of Representatives. The number of competitive races in the "people's chamber" drops with every redistricting cycle. Technology has given us the ability to create congressional districts where even I could get elected. (Perish the thought!) The result is that "representatives" do not have to worry about upsetting the folks back home. They all want red meat, served raw. Human nature being what it is, if we don't have to compromise we won't. That's why we see the farce that passes for congress on CSPAN. Never miss an opportunity to serve up what the folks back home want. Just look at the last Representatives who were defeated and you'll get the idea just how far out of the mainstream you have to get.

The Senate is only slightly less safe than the House. One reason is that they serve for six years so they only have to think about the folks at home for about two years. Right Arlen? The other reason is still redistricting. Because House races aren't competitive and because the same people who set the House districts also set the state legislature districts there is really no "farm system" for politicians. That's why typically only governors are successful senate candidates. They have name recognition.

The final paragraph highlights the difference between Mr. Danforth's understanding of scripture and those he refers to as "conservative Christians". "For us [moderate Christians], religion should be inclusive, and it should seek to bridge the differences that separate people. We do not exclude from worship those whose opinions differ from ours. Following a Lord who sat at the table with tax collectors and sinners, we welcome to the Lord's table all who would come. Following a Lord who cited love of God and love of neighbor as encompassing all the commandments, we reject a political agenda that displaces that love. Christians who hold these convictions ought to add their clear voice of moderation to the debate on religion in politics. "

I've messed with politics, now I'll mess with religion. Mr. Danforth has a basic misunderstanding (or I do). Jesus came not to promote inclusiveness, but specifically to promote exclusivity. That exclusivity comes in the form of being a sinner forgiven by God, who's life changes because he understands that the only way to that forgiveness is by believing that Jesus is the Messiah. Christianity is inclusive only to the extent that we believe that God's forgiveness is open to all, without regard to how good or bad we've been up to the point of believing. And also without regard to what we may do after believing. Salvation comes by faith, not by works.

Because of our belief in, and experience with, God's grace we exclude no man or woman from worship. And we understand "worship" to mean that we live a life to please God, it's not something we do for a while on Sunday morning. We don't require the proper clothes or the right attitude or even a shower to worship God. Only a heart willing to be humble.

Yes, Jesus ate with tax collectors and sinners. But He didn't just eat and run as you might think reading Mr. Danforth's final paragraph. Love, as Jesus taught, isn't leaving people in their misery. It's offering people forgiveness and the opportunity to live a changed life. That's why Levi the tax collector became Matthew and who Saul of Tarsis became the apostile Paul. Jesus gave them the opportunity to experience forgiveness, we call that grace, and then He gave them the power to live a changed life to glorify God.

No political agenda, neither liberal or conservative, will bring grace or forgiveness. No political agenda will bring freedom to the soul. No political agenda will express real love for or to people. Political agendas, by their very nature, are tools of control and are designed to keep those who wrote them in power. Could they and will they help some people. Sure. But they won't bring forgiveness, freedom, peace or purpose to any man, woman or child.

So, moderate away Mr. Danforth. Your political aims will always fall short of your desire to help people, which I truely believe you want to do. Politics will never get you there.