Archive for the ‘Live from the Conventions’ Category

« Older Entries

Who thinks the Republicans have become a “religious party”?

Monday, April 20th, 2009

The race for the White House may have ended months ago, but the campaign is still reverberating. See for example this story from the Huffington Post about John McCain’s campaign manager:

Speaking publicly for one of the first times since the end of the presidential campaign, John McCain’s campaign manager Steve Schmidt painted a dire portrait of the state of the Republican Party, arguing that the GOP has largely been co-opted by its religious elements.

“If you put public policy issues to a religious test, you risk becoming a religious party,” Schmidt declared. “And in a free country, a political party cannot be viable in the long term if it is seen as a sectarian party.”

We agree. Sectarian parties (whether liberal or conservative in ideology) are harmful to the sanctity of religion and the integrity of government. And it’s refreshing to hear that some Republicans feel the same way.

But at the same time, I can’t help but notice that Mr. Schmidt used religion as a campaign tactic, much like past political campaigns. Remember the campaign commercial called The One? But to be fair, President Obama’s campaign also used religion as a political tool as well. He printed campaign brochure describing himself as a Committed Christian, as if that were a constitutional requirement for someone running for the White House.

There is plenty of blame to go around. I just hope that the next campaign that Steve Schmidt works on he makes a genuine commitment to changing the way religion is used (or abused) in the political process. But we can’t change the political process without frank admissions of uncomfortable truths such as what Schmidt just said. This is a great first step.

Posted in Live from the Conventions, State of Belief, The Lighter Side, Uncategorized | No Comments »

Concerning presidents and privacy

Monday, April 13th, 2009

After getting up very early yesterday for Easter services, I was a little groggy on my Metro ride into work today. As I flipped through my Washington Post, I found this headline in the Metro Section:

For Easter, Obamas Pick A Safe Bet

That’s right, the Obama family went to St. John’s Episcopal Church (located across the street from the White House) for services yesterday. It’s a sad reflection on American society that even a president’s choice of a church should be calculated in terms of political risk, but President Obama made his faith an issue during the campaign, a tactic we at the Interfaith Alliance warned against. So I don’t disparage the Washington Post for writing this story. For better or worse, it has some news value.

Where I do take issue with the Washington Post was covering one detail of the Obama’s visit to St. John’s:

All four family members took communion at the Episcopal church yesterday.

I have a number of problems with this revelation.

  1. It is irrelevant information for the public because it has no bearing over the president’s ability to do his job.
  2. It makes the Washington Post look more like People Magazine when they report on what food Angelina Jolie orders at a L.A. restaurant.
  3. It is a violation of privacy for the Obama family.

Look I know presidents and their families have to sacrifice some privacy in order to live at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. It comes with the territory. But the decision to take communion is a very personal choice. I know first-hand: I have helped serve communion at a local church for the past five years. Many of the people I served were taking communion for the very first time. In the Christian tradition, this is one the most important sacraments that Christians partake in to feel more connected with God. So I asked myself how I would feel if my communion habits were printed in the Washington Post. I would be outraged.

Look, I realize that communion has been used as a political weapon in the past. I understand why the Washington Post printed that detail – the president’s religion is a political issue. I am merely arguing that the private religious expression of the president and his family ought not to be a political issue. If the Post had not printed the communion choices made by the First Family, they still would be able to cover the story fully, but still leave the Obamas a modicum of privacy. That would have been a better outcome.

Posted in In the Field, Live from the Conventions, The Lighter Side, Uncategorized | No Comments »

Easter and the Religious Right

Wednesday, April 8th, 2009

Have you ever wondered where the term Easter comes from? I’m a Christian, and I honestly did not know. It comes from a Anglo-Saxon goddess called Eostra with roots going all the way back possibly to Bablyonia and ancient Egypt. Eostra is a pagan goddess of fertility whose festival is to be celebrated near the vernal equinox. Hence the Easter eggs. Eostra is also the “dawn goddess” which may explain why many Christian Easter services begin at sunrise. Legend has it Eostra turned a bird into a rabbit, and voila – the Easter bunny.

These facts are interesting cultural and historical footnotes for this time of year. But to the Religious Right, they portend of the coming of the anti-Christ. Richard Reves over at the far-right website WorldNetDaily writes: “Easter has nothing to do with Jesus and everything to do with pagan abominations condemned by the Bible.” He concludes: “Theologians are well aware of the pagan nature of Easter. So are modern day anti-Christs. Non-biblical aspects of traditional Christianity are now being legitimately challenged by those who would turn us away from Christ, and many are falling for their deception.”

So now there is a War on Easter (a la the War on Christmas)? This is just ridiculous. Pagans did not co-opt Easter away from Christians. Christians co-opted Easter away from the pagans.

And it is the Religious Right who have attempted to secularize Christianity in order get more Christian symbols and text to be publicly displayed. Many Religious Right organizations told the Supreme Court that the Ten Commandments could be constitutionally displayed on public land because of the secular meaning behind that religious text. By making this argument, the Religious Right was actually attempting to strip the Ten Commandments of their religious meaning. And the Supreme Court bought that argument, but Justice Antonin Scalia called it a “Pyrrhic victory.”

Now the Religious Right is complaining about the non-Christian influences of Easter. That is a little ironic.

Posted in Live from the Conventions, State of Belief, The Lighter Side, Uncategorized | 1 Comment »

Quote of the day

Monday, April 6th, 2009

If people who call themselves Christians want to see any influence in the culture, then they ought to start following the commands of Jesus and people will be so amazed that they will be attracted to Him. The problem isn’t political. The problem is moral and spiritual.

I bet you can’t guess who said this…It was actually Cal Thomas, a frequent commentator on the Religious Right. It’s part of a column in the Washington Post written by Kathleen Parker. Apparently some on the Religious Right believe fighting the culture wars through the political process is a lost cause.

The reason why some Religious Right leaders have lost their faith in politics is because they “too often settle for lesser evils in exchange for electing Republicans.” That’s right – the Republican Party takes the Religious Right for granted and doesn’t act on their agenda.

This leaves me scratching my head. It’s hard to imagine how the Bush Administration could have been more aligned with the Religious Right. From a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, to the Terri Schiavo fiasco, to teaching creationism in public schools, the Religious Right had the White House on speed dial. And the 2008 election? Don’t even get me started. The Republican candidates pandering to the Religious Right was constant and frightening (and so was the pandering done by Democrats, too).

But I have to applaud Cal Thomas and his like minded compatriots. There is absolutely nothing wrong with attempting to improve society’s moral compass through non-governmental means. I may not agree with the heading on that particular moral compass, but America was founded as a free and open marketplace of religious ideas.

The problems arise when one religious viewpoint is imposed on the people through the coercive power of government. Thus the only way for any of us to be free to practice our religious beliefs (or non-beliefs) is if the government stays out of the business of forcing one religion on a diverse society.

Posted in Live from the Conventions, Uncategorized | 1 Comment »

Evaluating the Democratic Convention

Friday, August 29th, 2008

How did the Democrats do? What did you think of the way that they incorporated faith into their convention? These have been the most frequent questions posed to me over the past few days. And they deserve honest answers.

The so-called Faith Forums in Denver attracted a lot of pre-convention attention. To their credit, convention planners did not turn the daily faith-gatherings into partisan rallies adorned in religious trappings. To be sure, speakers here and there used these venues to endorse Senator Obama and Senator Biden. However, most of the speakers in these sessions focused on pertinent, but sometimes difficult, questions about what is appropriate and what is not regarding religion on the campaign trail or in the White House. Appropriately, panelists reflected diversity in their opinions and suggestions.

So, look what happened. The Democrats adopted a smart strategy that undoubtedly helped their party.

From the platform in the plenary sessions of the convention, few more references to religion than usual were to be seen or heard. Indeed, most delegates who attended only general sessions of the convention likely did not notice any increased emphasis on religion on the part of convention leaders. Even when religious language was used, it was the vocabulary of a kind of American civil religion more than an elaboration of denominational doctrines or sectarian values from only a few segments of the diverse religious communities in the nation.

However, having determined no longer to allow Republicans to claim exclusive rights to an emphasis on religion, Obama-led Democrats provided space, encouragement, and assistance in programming for people wanting a more visible presence for religion in their national convention. These religion-oriented programs offered something for everybody in attendance and presented no tirades against people who do not embrace the beliefs of a particular religious tradition.

In a sense, everybody got what they wanted. Religion-based discussions were available in special venues for all who sought them while political discussions, with only a dash of religion in them, resounded from the main stage.

If there were an award for best practices on how to speak about religion in a political address, I would give it to Senator Joseph Biden. In a non-assuming but moving manner, the Democrats’ nominee for Vice President spoke eloquently of how his religious faith strengthened and sustained him in a time of horrific personal trials. But, Senator Biden related his personal experience in a matter-of-fact manner that informed listeners of his identity and values while not suggesting, even implicitly, that this was a reason to vote for him or that everybody in the room should follow his example.

And I would also be remiss if I did not compliment Senator Obama’s speech last night. The Interfaith Alliance has been urging both candidates to stop using their faith backgrounds as a source of division during this election. Last night Senator Obama delivered on that call. His speech touched on many religious themes, but he did so in an inclusive and non-sectarian fashion. He appealed to the American people to find common ground on difficult moral issues and to find healing on racial and gender fault lines. He talked about moral issues without being moralistic, and I hope this message will be echoed from pulpits, lecterns, and bemas across our diverse country.

Honestly, I must give the Democrats higher marks than I had anticipated would be possible. During this past week, they handled the relationship between politics and religion well. Stay tuned, though; it’s a long way until November and pitfalls are plentiful.

Tags: , ,
Posted in Elections, Live from the Conventions | 1 Comment »

A Benediction to Remember

Friday, August 29th, 2008

It has been interesting to watch the role of faith at the Democratic Convention. Their have been examples that I hope others will look to as a guide, and others that completely missed the mark. Joe Biden’s acceptance speech showed that it is possible to talk about faith as part of your biography without suggesting that you want to impose it on others. On the other hand, as my colleague William Blake blogged about earlier this week, the Donald Miller offered a benediction on Monday night in the name of “your son Jesus, who gave his own life against the forces of injustice.”

On Thursday night following Senator Obama’s acceptance speech, Pastor Joel Hunter, an evangelical minister offered a benediction unlike anything I have seen before. He started by saying that “we are all here to devote ourselves to the improvement of this country we love,” and then went on to invite “those who are people of faith to join me in asking for God’s help.” It was an interesting and well meaning way to acknowledge that everyone shared a common belief, but not necessarily the same belief system.

Before he ended his benediction he paused to give the audience an instruction. He said, “I want to personalize this. I want this to be a participatory prayer. Therefore, because we are in a country that is welcoming of all faiths, I would like all of us to close this prayer in the way your faith tradition would close your prayer. So on the count of three, I would like all of you to end this prayer, your prayer, the way you usually end prayer.”

Here you have an evangelical minister that at the beginning of his benediction acknowledged that not everyone will find meaning in the prayer and at the end goes a step further and acknowledges that even for those who do find meaning in it, it may not be in the same way he does.

He then ended the benediction by saying “in Jesus’ name” as thousands of people around him closed the prayer according to their own beliefs and traditions. Unlike Rev. Miller’s benediction On Monday, Pastor Hunter did not make any assumptions about his audience. What makes it more interesting is that Joel Hunter was at one point a few years back chosen to lead the Christian Coalition, a post he ultimately did not take.

Watch the entire benediction here and share your thoughts on how you think Pastor Hunter did.

Tags: , ,
Posted in Elections, Live from the Conventions | 1 Comment »

The Race for Pastor-in-Chief

Thursday, August 28th, 2008

I was fortunate enough to be invited to the Democratic National Convention to share my concerns about the misuse of religion during this election – from both parties. The following is remarks I shared at a Faith Caucus meeting just this afternoon:

An electoral process that culminates on Election Day with a high percentage of voter turn-out is to a celebration of democracy what observances of Rosh Hashanah, Eid al-Fitr, Diwali, and Christmas are to Jews, Muslims, Hindus, and Christians respectively.

Voting is a sacred act in our civic religion.

But the grand promise of an American presidential campaign is fulfilled by the election not of a religious-leader-in-chief of the nation, but of the commander-in-chief who is the chief executive of our country.

The leader we choose may have a faith of his own, but he must lead members of all faiths present in the nation – as well as those with no faith at all. The Constitution forbids the legal enshrinement of anyone’s religious beliefs, so voters need to know how candidates are prepared to translate their beliefs into policy statements based on universal values.

Those of us who speak of electoral guidelines and advocate adherence to boundaries between institutional religion and partisan politics do so not as stuffy legalists wishing to mute all religious language or pour cold water on the white hot excitement of devotees of a particular candidate.

We call for attentiveness to the proper role of religion in campaigns as thankful citizens who know the importance of religion in a society and recognize in democracy our best hope as a nation.

Insistence on the proper role of religion in the life of the nation is essential–a non-negotiable–for the good of religion, for the constitutional protection of non-religious people, and for the vitality of democracy.

American civil law governing relations between clergy and candidate is uneven. A candidate can turn the pulpit or bema of a house of worship into a political stump – ignoring the non-partisan nature of prayer, faith, worship, meditation, and religious identity – without incurring even as much as a civil reprimand.  The house of worship, however, could be threatened with the loss of tax-exempt status for allowing the candidate to campaign there.
Some of the rules that houses of worship must follow to keep their tax exempt status are clear:

  • A member of the clergy cannot endorse a candidate in his or her official capacity.
  • No institutional money or resources can be used for partisan work.
  • Any benefit offered to one candidate – such as the chance to speak at an event – must be available to all candidates.

Wherever they campaign, candidates have certain responsibilities – more subtle, but equally important.  Candidates should:

  • Provide evidence of their respect for people of all religions or no religion.
  • Be sure people understand that they intend to serve all citizens, not just those who are committed to a religious tradition similar to their own.
  • Candidates don’t have to speak of their religion, but if they choose to do so, they have an obligation to let voters know how their religion will influence their decision-making and actions in their elected office.  Today, many people fear a politician’s use of public office to promote private faith.  Tomorrow such fear should be gone.

My desire for the remainder of this election season is rather simple: houses of worship used for worship and meditation, campaign speeches that reflect appreciation for religion as they sketch a secular vision that embraces all Americans; religious leaders’ examinations of sacred texts that interact with critical issues of our day not for the purpose of promoting a particular candidate but for seeking a discovery of truth and a dissemination of hope; candidates honest about their public policy priorities and strategic in their descriptions of how to alter our nation for the better; and neither candidates nor religious leaders wrongly manipulating religion, wrongly assuming that religious faith is a prerequisite for office, wrongly claiming that the concepts of “good, right and moral” are exclusive possessions of a few rather than values that all our nation shares.  I long for the backbone of our civil government to be strengthened by candidates who engage each other in civil debates, leave the electorate more informed than divided, and promise, as did John F. Kennedy before them, that they will resign the office of the presidency before they will place the teachings of any religion over the authority of the constitution.

Though no law governs the words and actions of those entrusted with this precious balance between appreciation for religion and devotion to a secular government and no regulation punishes their misdeeds, let us demand that candidates mute their wrongheaded appeals to the misguided notion and theological heresy of “a Christian nation” and turn up the volume of rhetoric sensitive to the glorious complexity of the American faith picture and resolutely dedicated to freedom, rights, liberty and justice for all.

The Interfaith Alliance counsels houses of worship on how to “obey the rules”, but we also challenge political candidates to meet the highest standard of what is right, not simply what is legal.

Winning an election is not worth weakening our constitution or threatening the dynamic of the so far peaceful relationship that has characterized institutional relations between religion and government in this nation.

Religion is strong in our nation, a reason for gratitude, a friend of freedom.

People of faith and goodwill should be among the most avid defenders of the constitution, especially during a national election, demanding that the relationship between religion, government, and politics not be altered so as to compromise religion’s integrity or blunt democracy’s vitality.

My colleagues and I will work tirelessly toward that end and we long to be involved in that work alongside all of you.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Elections, Live from the Conventions | 1 Comment »

Interfaith Alliance’s Jack Moline Panelist at DNC Faith-Caucus

Wednesday, August 27th, 2008


Interfaith Alliance’s Jack Moline was on hand in Denver this week as a DNC Faith-Caucus panelist, for a panel focused towards “Common Ground on Common Good.”

The DNC Press Release on the Faith-Caucuses describes:

“National leaders from a range of denominations will host the Convention’s first-ever Faith Caucus meetings during the week where they will discuss bringing people of faith together to address some of the most pressing issues of our time.

On Tuesday, August 26, the Faith Caucus will hold two panel discussions – “Common Ground on Common Good,” an opportunity to discuss finding common ground on the moral issues of the day”

In their coverage of the event, Christianity Today wrote “Rabbi Jack Moline of the Interfaith Alliance spoke on strengthening education.”

The Faith-Caucus also got attention from Faith In Public Life, which recapped:

“Each speaker touched on different aspects of the faith community’s common good, common ground agenda. They tackled high-profile compassion issues such as immigration reform and abortion reduction (from both pro-choice and pro-life perspectives) but also spoke about economic justice, criminal justice reform and education from a faith perspective.”

Interfaith Alliance’s educational efforts promote an inclusive voice for religious pluralism that respects individual rights, protects the boundaries between religion and politics, and unites diverse voices to challenge extremism and build common ground.

Our LEADD summer program, held just weeks ago in Washington, D.C., brought an interfaith group of high school students together from across America to the nation’s capital for a week of learning, activism, and exploration. Learn more about LEADD and how you can help support Interfaith Alliance’s educational programming at www.weleadd.org.

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in Live from the Conventions | No Comments »

More on the Dem’s Interfaith Gathering

Tuesday, August 26th, 2008
Governor Bill Ritter (D)

Governor Bill Ritter (D)

You’ve probably already heard about the Democrats’ opening night interfaith festivities which featured speakers like Bishop Charles Blake, of the Church of God in Christ, Rabbi Tzvi Hersh Weinreb, executive vice president of the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America, and Ingrid Mattson, the president of the Islamic Society of North America. Our own Donna Redwing was on hand at the event where she caught up with two Interfaith Alliance members from Colorado.

DNC Chief of Staff (and Pentecostal Minister) Leah Daughtry

DNC Chief of Staff (and Pentecostal Minister) Leah Daughtry

They share their thoughts on the interfaith service:

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Stay tuned for more updates from the convention floor….

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Elections, Live from the Conventions | No Comments »

Deconstructing the Benediction at the Democratic Convention

Tuesday, August 26th, 2008

In case you missed it last night, the Democratic Convention ended with a benediction delivered by Donald Miller, an evangelical Christian author.  Miller prayed for better education, healthcare for all and a living wage – all prayer-worthy topics.  Near the end of the benediction, Miller prayed for unity, acknowledging the vast divsersity in America.

But then Miller followed up a call to unity with this line: “I make this request in the name of your son Jesus, who gave his own life against the forces of injustice.  Let him be our example.”

Here’s the YouTube footage so you can see the prayer in its full context:

The closing of this prayer is somewhat unsettling.  On the one hand, Miller emphasized, “I make this request…”

But prayers need to be reflective of the audience, not just the person leading the prayer.  In that convention hall there were Christians, yes, but also Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Sikhs, Unitarians, and many others who do not have a faith tradition. Closing a prayer in such a sectarian fashion sends the wrong message to those who are different.

The Democratic National Committee is a private organization, so there are no legal ramifications to this prayer (unlike, say, when an Air Force chaplain prays in Jesus’ name).  But there should be a higher moral and ethical standard of conduct, especially when a national party is attempting to unify the American people in such an important election.

But I fully understand and appreciate that there is more than one way to look at this prayer.  What do you think?  Leave us a comment!

Tags: , ,
Posted in Elections, Live from the Conventions | No Comments »

« Older Entries

Listen Now