Preaching politics from the pulpit
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
| Anyone see the Wall Street Journal article on this? I don't think it's anything new, though I prefer that religious leaders not push their political beliefs on anyone even if I agree with their beliefs. Do you think it's OK? Political leaders have been meeting with religious leaders for many years. Where do we draw the line? Curious to hear what others think. |
takoma
Member Offline
Member Offline
|
Very interesting subject. Trevi Troy starts his article with your point that it's nothing new, noting that it goes at least back to Nixon. Before that was Father Coughlin, and I think I recall some examples in the TV series about John Adams.
I think mixing religion and politics is a bad idea (but you can't trust me since I think religion is a bad idea), but I also think the First Amendment assures preachers the right to freedom of speech and to the practice of religion as they see it. So, as I stand up for their rights, let me exercise my own right to say that I hope church- and synagogue- (as well as mosque-) goers will be wise enough to remember that their clergy's study of their religion does not necessarily make them experts on politics. In fact, by bringing politics into their houses of worship, they risk polluting both. |
Anonymous
|
OP here. I agree with everything you wrote, especially the last paragraph.
I would be interested to hear what exactly goes on during these phone conferences with the President. Wish there was a transcript! I also wonder if there are official guidenlines for where to draw the line between politics and preaching or if is it just left to the discretion of each religious leader? |
Anonymous
|
An age old custom. Dates back to the Pharoes
The king was God and supreme ruler. Then the Catholic church practiced the same thing. It is not good. A priest is supposed to be a humble servant of God. But they become self righteous and get vast amounts of money etc |
Anonymous
|
Ministers have political views and the right to express them. Plus, where would we be without Dr. King and the SCLC?
I only have two gripes. One is the practice of campaigns giving "walking around money" to ministers. The other is that I dislike religions that command a certain vote or state that you are sinning for voting a certain way. But that is an issue with religion, not politics. |
Anonymous
| My mother complained about this in the Episcopal Church during Vietnam. Too liberal for her and she stopped going to church for a long time. Lucky me. |
Anonymous
|
Ministers are not politicians
At church they should preach what is in the bible |
Anonymous
|
While I'm all for free speech, I do agree with the late, great George Carlin: If churches want to play the game of politics, let them pay admission like everyone else.
That's paraphrase - I'm sure the language he used was a bit more earthy. |
Anonymous
|
One reasoning is that religious leaders are more in touch with the people than politicians. or so the theory goes. I can more readily call my priest or email him and get a response than I can my congressman.
That said, I cannot stand it when my priest preaches politics from the pulpit... |
TheManWithAUsername
Member Offline
Member Offline
|
Looks like I'm in the minority here.
Most religions prescribe and proscribe action, often fairly specifically. Since governments do the same, the two often overlap. I think it would be insincere in many cases for a religious leader to pretend that the religion did not suggest certain things politically. It gets more complicated if the religion's tenets push in different directions, like with abortion vs. every other aspect of Christianity.* Then the leader is picking which is more important, but it's the leader's job to interpret, so that still seems appropriate to me. Note that I'm agnostic born and raised, so I don't have personal experience. * Had to get that in there. |
Anonymous
| In most cases I think politics is too specific for religious leaders to weigh in on. A priest can say that I have a moral obligation to my fellow man, he can counsel charity, but should he say that the Lord prefers universal health care as the proper form of Christian obligation? |
TheManWithAUsername
Member Offline
Member Offline
Usually they're not taking a stand on something that specific, are they? I think pursuant to a religion they could certainly say, "Vote for these guys b/c they try to help the poor," or "Vote for these guys b/c they try to protect the unborn." |
Anonymous
As a Catholic, this is the kind of thing that I was told: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/oct/27/new-cardinal-warns-pro-abortion-voters/ http://www.priestsforlife.org/vote/votingwithclearconscience.htm#reject http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive/ldn/2004/jun/04062102 http://www.ewtn.com/vote/voting_faq.htm Priests are giving us far more specific instructions than a moral obligation to my fellow man. They don't say "Vote John McCain", but they say that you cannot vote for a pro-choice candidate. |
TheManWithAUsername
Member Offline
Member Offline
I find that perfectly reasonable, within the context of religion. The Church opposes abortion, some priests put that issue above various others, and the Pope has done nothing to discourage that, AFAIK. Makes sense to me that those priests would consider it disobedient to the Church and God to vote for a pro-choice candidate, and would see it as their duty to inform the flock. I happen to think that putting that much emphasis on abortion versus many other religious issues is strange, but that's more an issue of that priest's interpretation of things, and I assume that you can priest shop to some degree. |
Anonymous
| St. Columba's in Tenleytown (Episcopal) has become very political--each Sunday's sermon is a tiresome dirge about the importance of gay/marriage/rights. I support gay marriage 100%--but really find the constant referencing of it in church each Sunday to be incredibly irritating and distracting. |