"Anybody here today who has not accepted Jesus Christ as their savior, I'm telling you, you're not my brother and you're not my sister, and I want to be your brother,"Speaking to a mixed-race crowd at Dexter Avenue King Memorial Church, Bentley, a Republican, said he considered anyone who believed in Christ to be a brother regardless of color, but people who were not Christian could not have as close a relationship to him. The gov. has taken a lot of backlash on this incident. While I believe his remarks were ill timed, coming after his inauguration, I do not believe them to be entirely inappropriate.
The first admendment reads, "Congress shall make no law respecting or establishing a religion or preventing the free exercise of." I'm paraphrasing. What that one statement means is that United States will not establish a country sanctioned religion, has nothing to do with whether or not this country is a Christian nation, but it has to do with the idea that the US was not going to follow the pattern of England and the Church of England in which the Church of England was the predominate and state sponsored religion in England. Thomas Jefferson and Baptists insisted on the establishment and free exercise clause to be in the consititution in order to protect everyone's right to freedom of religion. Therefore, the government will not prevent any free exercise of religion nor will the government get behind and push a specific religion to the forefront.
The amendment is not a clear amendment as many of the amendments are not (argument of the right to bear arms being a good example). We can see the struggle with the removal of prayer in public schools, though prayer can still take place, it cannot be lead by a teacher since a teacher is paid by the state. The law also prohibts churches that wish to keep their tax free status from endorsing any particular candidate during an election. The church may talk about issued but they cannot talk endorse politicians. I could continue with more of the murky examples of this amendment; however, you'd stop reading (if you're still reading).
Public officials reside on a blurred line of the public and private sectors. Many believe once you are elected to office, you are no longer a private citizen. Others believe you should maintain some form of the later. Personally, I fall more into the former category. I would argue this also applies to ministers, politicians, police chiefs, etc. I believe in the separation of church and state; it's the main reason I am a baptist. However, that is not what I wish to focus on.
I believe we are reaching a point in our complexed society where the word political has become a term that only refers to politics and those politics of our politicians. I agrue that in fact everything we do in the church is political. When you preach on the poor, we preach a political message. When you preach on the salvation of Jesus, you preach a political message. When Christian take part in communion, we take part in a political action. I believe we are coming to a time of understanding that separation of church and state is not separation in terms of leaving each alone. Instead it is the church being free to speak politically and the state free to act as it sees fit without permission from either party.
The church has a right to preach whatever political agenda it wishes (as long as it does not endorse a candidate). The church should realize that we are preaching, worshiping, and living out a political agenda. If you do not believe Jesus was political then I would suggest a rereading of the gospels. If subscribe to the subsititionary atonement theory, you will need to reconcile the political action Jesus takes.
I find it fascinating that this "incident" happened on MLK weekend. Martin Luther King Jr. was a baptist minister first and foremost. He believed the gospel message was a political message and it inspired him to become a leader of civil rights, a proponent for nonviolence, stood for organized labor, end to war, and social justice. King understood the message of Christ to be political. I understand the message of Christ to be political and I do not need Brian McLaren to tell me why nor the six other politics of Jesus books on my book shelf.
Bentley is guilty of nothing more than bad timing, misinterpretation, and an over sensitive culture. Because if we are going to continue to be a culture that reacts to any religious statement made by a politician, we will need to either admit that the first amendment only goes one way or that Christians should not hold political office. If it's the latter, then my Senate/Presidental run is going to be put on ice.
No comments:
Post a Comment