Progressive faith did not lose this election (Jim Wallis)

[pelagius]

www.sojo.net

Religion was a big factor in this election, and "moral values" were named as a key issue for voters in the exit polls. On the Republican side, George W. Bush talked comfortably and frequently about his personal faith and ran on what his conservative religious base called the "moral issues." On the Democratic side, Senator John Kerry invoked the New Testament story of the Good Samaritan, talked about the importance of loving our neighbors, and said that faith without works is dead - but only began talking that way at the very end of his campaign.

We've now begun a real debate in this country over what the most important "religious issues" are in politics, and that discussion will continue far beyond this election. The Religious Right fought to keep the focus on gay marriage and abortion and even said that good Christians and Jews could only vote for the president. But many moderate and progressive Christians disagreed. We insisted that poverty is also a religious issue, pointing to thousands of verses in the Bible on the poor. The environment - protection of God's creation - is also one of our religious concerns. And millions of Christians in America believe the war in Iraq was not a "just war."

So in this election, one side talked about the number of unborn lives lost each year, while the other pointed to the 100,000 civilian casualties in Iraq. But both are life issues - according to the Pope, for example, who opposes both John Kerry's views on abortion and George Bush's war policy. Some church leaders challenged both candidates on whether just killing terrorists would really end terrorism and called for a deeper approach. And 200 theologians, many from leading evangelical institutions, warned that a "theology of war emanating from the highest circles of government is also seeping into our churches."

Clearly, God is not a Republican or a Democrat, as we sought to point out, and the best contribution of religion is precisely not to be ideologically predictable or loyally partisan but to maintain the moral independence to critique both the left and the right.

It is now key to remember that our vision - a progressive and prophetic vision of faith and politics - was not running in this election. John Kerry was, and he lost. Kerry did not strongly champion the poor as a religious issue and "moral value," or make the war in Iraq a clearly religious matter. In his debates with George Bush, Kerry should have challenged the war in Iraq as an unjust war, as many religious leaders did - including Evangelicals and Catholics. And John Kerry certainly did not advocate a consistent ethic of human life as we do - opposing all the ways that life is threatened in our violent world.

We didn't lose the election, John Kerry did, and the ways in which both his vision and the Democratic Party's are morally and politically incomplete should continue to be taken up by progressive people of faith.

In a deeply polarized country, commentators reported that either political outcome would "crush" the hopes of almost half the population. So perhaps the most important role for the religious community will come now, when the need for some kind of political healing and reconciliation has become painfully clear. In the spirit of America's greatest religious leader, the Reverend Martin Luther King Jr., the religious community could help a divided nation find common ground by moving to higher ground. And we should hold ourselves and both political parties accountable to the challenge of the biblical prophet Micah to "do justice, love kindness, and walk humbly with your God."

[bcingu]

1. Polarized Churches

I re-read this piece three seperate times whilst nodding my head in agreement, especially with this sentence in the last paragraph: "In the spirit of America's greatest religious leader, the Reverend Martin Luther King Jr., the religious community could help a divided nation find common ground by moving to higher ground."

The problem seems to be that the religious community is as divided as the community in general and that moving to higher ground keeps getting more difficult.

As an Episcopalian, I feel particularly affected by this polarization. I do have a good idea from whence it came. The Episcopal Church is sharply divided over last year's ordination of Gene Robinson. Certain Parishes and Diocese have elected to effectively leave the Church in protest, joining what has been called "The Network". The Parish I used to attend, nay, the entire Diocese of Dallas, has elected to join "The Network". The last time I attended was the day that the Parish voted to join. Those supporting the split were happily quoting preachers Falwell, Robertson and Dobson in support of their decision. Seemingly this unholy trio had entered my church through the back door and had taken it away. I have no doubt that similar scenarios are being played out in other Churches, Mainstream Protestant and Catholic alike.

I would dearly love to move to 'Higher Ground'. Unfortunately, Falwell, Robertson and Dobson have succeeded in dumbing down our Churches in much the same way that Karl Rove has succeeded in dumbing down a portion of our electorate.

Be Seeing You.

[pelagius]

2. I'm Episcopalian, too, but in "liberal" California

There is big right-wing money behind the Network. It's funded in not small part by Howard Ahmanson, Jr. He's described in this article:

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2004/01/06/ahmanson/index_np.html

So, yes, there are retrograde ideas out there, but they have clout because they're backed by cash.

Here's a voice for progressive Episcopalians that has resources for "the rest of us":

www.everyvoice.net

[tokenlib]

3. In defense of John Kerry, sort of....

When he did speak of the economic issues in religious/faith terms--I thought he did a damn great job. He brought tears to my eyes when he did and those were in my view some of his best moments. Kerry had the power and capability to speak of our positions in terms of faith--and he did it well. Sadly he should have done it over and over again and hammered it home...

But it is hard to do that without appearing preachy and overbearing like the Christian Right--so it is a dilemna.

[pelagius]

4. We don't have to win over the entire Christian Right...

...all we need to do is neutralize their claim to the moral high ground. One in four people voting for Bush were white evangelicals. If we can change that ratio to 1 in 5, we will win and have a mandate.

I myself think we have a wonderful opportunity to be "preachy" in a way that appeals to the core beliefs of Americans. I still believe that Americans are a moral people who want to do what's right. That ignorance and fear sometimes blind them -- hell, us! -- to what is right in unfortunate. But we are not beyond redemption!