The debate about the separation of church and state is indeed a public policy debate. No one is asserting that there is a constitutional right to not have to hear political discourse in church; rather the issue is that at my church, St. Columba's, political issue are overly intrusive to the point where a greater spiritual message is obscured. The pastors really do not seem to know or care about their audience at all.

I am indeed relieved to see the Bishop-elect Budde has a husband and 2 children. Maybe she can guide the church back to issues that really matter to Washington families. http://search.edow.org/article.php?id=114 After all it is the families that fill the pews and make the donations and offerings that allow the church to continue. Not the occasional appearance of a wealthy gay couple that considers themselves Episcopal. If there are gay families at St. Columba's I honestly do not see them, ever.

Thank God St. C isn't afraid to tackle important issues of our time. These issues are political, yes, but they are also profound MORAL problems that the church ought to tackle and take a stance on. If you don't think that Jesus was concerned with inequality, which is what the tax code and gay right are fundamentally about, then you know a different Jesus than me. If all you want is liturgy without sermon, then leave. IMO, liberal churches should be as vocal about these issues as conservative ones.

Equality - in spirit, in law, in practice - is EXACTLY what the church should espouse, loudly and firmly.

Actually, the church should espouse the teachings in the Bible, not your ideas on social justice.

Well, I believe denying one group of people the rights freely given to another (ie gay marriage) IS a spiritual issue. Equality - in spirit, in law, in practice - is EXACTLY what the church should espouse, loudly and firmly. How, OP, do you think you can talk about love without addressing the obvious lack of in the wider American society?

People who live their faith tend to take those beliefs into the voting booth.

Thank you 5:30 for the much needed history lesson. People tend to throw around terms without a full understanding of their meanings. It gets old after awhile.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sound like most people responding are sunday christians

Sounds like you're an a$$hole who hasn't read the thread.

Sounds like you are a fake sunday christian . Some of us actually believe and practice put beliefs not just pretend.

Because only people who agree with you can be Real Christians.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sound like most people responding are sunday christians

If you're an example of an everyday Christian, I'm glad I'm not in your camp.

Yes because from my extremely long post you can discern alot about me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sound like most people responding are sunday christians

Sounds like you're an a$$hole who hasn't read the thread.

Sounds like you are a fake sunday christian . Some of us actually believe and practice put beliefs not just pretend.

Anonymous wrote:Sound like most people responding are sunday christians

If you're an example of an everyday Christian, I'm glad I'm not in your camp.

Anonymous wrote:Sound like most people responding are sunday christians

Sounds like you're an a$$hole who hasn't read the thread.

It is a shame that this has to be repeated so often: "separation of church and state" appears nowhere in our Constitution, folks. What our Constitution says is that the government cannot establish a state religion (or favor a particular religion, as the Court has interpreted it) and it cannot prohibit You from practicing your religion. Obviously this is a simplistic summary of First Amendment law, but that's the gist. The idea that faith has no place in the public forum or, conversely, that "public" issues are separable from faith is simply not part of our history. The phrase "separation of church and state" comes from a letter that Thomas Jefferson wrote and is a shorthand for this principle of non-interference that the Court sometimes uses.
If you are getting too heavy a dose of politics from the pulpit for your tastes, OP, there are plenty of other churches. But I don't see how people can say there is anything inherently wrong with what you say is happening. And BTW, anyone who thinks tax-exempt and government supported institutions never express opinions on matters of public concern (think universities and public radio) is living in la-la land!

Sound like most people responding are sunday christians

Interesting that there are people here who want politics in church--when the far right fundamentalist churches inflame their parishes with bigotry and fear of the "other" are the the politics in church posters ok with that? Does separation of church and state only extend to political views that you don't agree with? It is completely inappropriate! We are a captive audience--FWIW I do want to read the bible--and I do--I don't need to hear "everything's fine" I really just do not need to be badgered about the political issues of the day in church. Really, St. Columba's should have their tax exempt status challenged because of this. It has gone too far.

There is a thread about this very thing in the politics section that was sparked by a Wall Street journal article on preaching from the pulpit. I think the thread went around in early Oct or September.

oops-- isn't just a one hour commitment