God and Caesar
EE HOW THEY Love one another?
OK. Follow this:
1) Tax Law prohibits a pulpit from being used to espouse partisan politics.
2) Last election cycle a group of liberal churches filed suit against a group of conservative churches for violation of this law. The suit failed.
3) This election cycle a group of conservative churches filed suit against a group of liberal churches for violation of this law. The suit failed.
4) Now a group of conservative churches are attempting a mass protest of this law in the hopes of getting it over turned.
5) A group of liberal churches is filing suit against them.
In all cases, following the Synod of Nicea, the Church has appealed to Caesar to stomp on her enemies.
And Caesar, of course, has said yea, or nay, according to his own whim and benefit.
And in the last item: the churches are asking for more freedom under Caesar – more, instead of less!!!! “Yet an opposing collection of Christian and Jewish clergy will petition the IRS today to stop the protest before it starts, calling the ADF’s “Pulpit Initiative” an assault on the rule of law and the separation of church and state.”
In other word, there are Christians on all sides willing to sell their brothers and sisters to Caesar for the support of their own poltical points of view.
Is it any wonder the world looks at us in mockery and derision?
Tags: church, conservatives, liberals, love, state, taxes | Category: leftwingers, politics, rightwingers
Discussion: You came too late to this party
Share:
Hiya Huw,
Just in case you’re down south later this month…
I’m making the rounds just in case you didn’t get an email invitation. Our email database is spotty at best.
The Extravablogiversapaloozathon 2008 is September 27th, and we’re hoping every area blogger will come!
Party Info here.
BlogAsheville awards nomination thread here.
RSVP thread here.
Okay, so I’m torn on this issue. Because as I see it, we only have so many different structures of authority that we hold in common that might mediate, arbitrate, legislate or execute a decision in such a matter.
I mean, we have a basic disagreement: From our religions we get a set or a multiplicity of sets of principles that we try to live out in our lives, and encourage others to live out in theirs. As citizens, it is our civic duty to help forge different portions of our common life, utilizing different levels of government. And while our religion may inform our civic life, it may not dictate the civic life of others – this is, as I understand it, what we have agreed on in the separation of church and state. Perhaps I’ve got the nuances wrong, but this is the premise I’m working off of.
So in the pulpit, I cannot say ‘Vote for Obama’, or ‘Sarah Palin might be the AntiChrist, if ever there were one’. Okay, I’m totally down with that. I’ve got better things to preach about. But when does the collar come off, if it ever does?
At some point, I suppose, I am a priest and a citizen. Better to say, I am always a priest (and maybe more pertinent: I am always a Christian), and I am always a citizen of this country.
But unlike my Citizenship, which has a clear and common recourse for any disputes and disagreements I might have with my fellow citizens, my Christian fellowship has no clear recourse for disputes and disagreements that I might have with any fellow Christians -outside of my own very particular and select denomination.
So saying, it strikes me that what liberal Christians (of which I am one) could be doing instead of crossing the church-state line, is to appeal directly to whatever conservative Christians whose behavior is in question, and visa versa. Now, I recognize that this might not actually work, either immediately, or perhaps at all. But it strikes me that:
a) no gesture is entirely futile, and no gesture, whether positive or negative, peaceful or violent, passive or active, is without consequence, though the consequence might be unseen at the time to the direct participants,
b) we’re not here for the short term, we’re here for the long haul anyway,
c) it reminds me vaguely of the prescription for dealing with disagreement found in Matthew,
d) you get more with honey than with vinegar (thanks, Mom),
e) an increase in dialogue has a direct relationship with compassion (or so I’ve noticed)
f) we’d probably all be better people for it (those who extend their hand in friendship and dialogue perhaps more so than those who receive or refuse to receive it, or so says a very wise Muslim professor I once met)
g) this action would uphold our own integrity (and thus be incredibly good PR)
Sare
We started to get into this discussion one Wednesday at LTQ2 when you were not there. I think the revolutionary thing about the Way of Jesus is that he says, essentially, “Do this right and everyone will want in.”
I shouldn’t worry about the Gov’t feeding – or not – the poor, unless I’m selling everything I have to give it to them first. I shouldn’t worry about “making peace” unless I’m living it. 50 people from rich to poor, of all races, living together in Buffalo and sharing all things, turning the other cheek, serving the poor: that is Gospel – and it is politics. Doesn’t matter who’s in power. It’s the whole meaning of “Jesus is Lord” (ie, Caesar is not). Doesn’t matter who is Caesar this week (or the next 4 years) or whatever. What matters is how you care for the weake
The whole “Church-State line” is an illusion. From the Christian side of that line it’s a “Kingdom of God”/Secular ruler” division. Let the state run amuck: we’re building a kingdom here. The state will pass away (as many have in the last 2K years) but we’ll still have a kingdom. The Church is the Kingdom – the state is the chrysalis out of which the Kingdom will burst – a decaying, dead shell of what should have been. SHould we be wasting our energy trying to “fix” the Empire or should we be doing our thing? If the Gospel tells me to X should I worry that the law says “Don’t X”?
(This is when I pull out the amusing illustration of Protest Marches in Ancient Rome, placards and singing “Free-ee-eee Paul of Tar-ar-sus!”)
You can say “Vote for…” or “Don’t vote for…” You should, I think, if you feel that the Gospel calls you to it – and you shouldn’t worry about your tax exemption in the face of a Gospel call.