?

Log in

No account? Create an account
entries friends calendar profile Previous Previous Next Next
This was in this week's issue of Time, and I thought I would post it… - Vox Audita Perrit, Literra Scripta Manet....
The heard word is lost, the written letter remains...
normandie_m
normandie_m
This was in this week's issue of Time, and I thought I would post it here for posterity, at the very least. I don't like to discuss religion or politics on my journal much, but I swear this man has read my thoughts on both and put them down on paper. I'm tempted to e-mail him and thank him for writing this.



Are you a Christian who doesn't feel represented by the religious right? I know the feeling. When the discourse about faith is dominated by political fundamentalists and social conservatives, many others begin to feel as if their religion has been taken away from them.

The number of Christians misrepresented by the Christian right is many. There are evangelical Protestants who believe strongly that Christianity should not get too close to the corrupting allure of government power. There are lay Catholics who, while personally devout, are socially liberal on issues like contraception, gay rights, women's equality and multi-faith society. There are very orthodox believers who nontheless respect the freedom and conscience of others as part of their core understanding of what being a Christian is. They have no problem living next to an atheist or a gay couple or a single mother or people whose views on the meaning of life are utterly alien to them- and respecting their neighbours' choices. That doesn't threaten their faith. Sometimes the contrast helps them understand their own faith better.

And there are those who simply believe that, by definition, God is unknowable to our limited, fallible human minds and souls. If God is ultimately unknowable, then how can we be so certain of what God's real position is on, say, the fate of Terri Schiavo? Or the morality of contraception? Or the role of women? Or the love of a gay couple? Also, faith for many of us is interwoven with doubt, a doubt that can strengthen faith and give it perspective and shadow. That doubt means having great humility in the face of God and an enormous reluctance to impose one's beliefs, through civil law, on someone else.

I would say a clear majority of Christians in the US fall into one or many of those camps. Yet the term 'people of faith' has been co-opted almost entirely in our discourse by those who see Christianity as compatible with only one political party, the Republicans, and believe that their religious doctrines should determine public policy for everyone. 'Sides are being chosen,' Tom DeLay recently told his supporters, 'and the future of man hangs in the balance! The enemies of virtue may be on the march, but they have not won, and if we put our trust in Christ, they never will.' So Christ is a conservative Republican?

Rush Limbaugh recently called the Democrats the 'party of death' because of many Democrats' view that some moral decisions, like the choice to have a first trimester abortion, should be left to the individual, not the cops. Ann Coulter, with her usual subtlety, simply calls her political opponents 'godless', the title of her new book. And largely nonreligious media have taken the bait. The 'Christian' vote has become shorthand in journalism for the Republican base.

What to do about it? The worst response, I think, would be to construct something called the religious left. Many of us who are Christians and not supportive of the religious right are not on the left either. In fact, we are opposed to any politicization of the Gospels by any party, Democratic or Republican, by partisan black churches or partisan white ones. 'My kingdom is not of this world,' Jesus insisted. What part of that do we not understand?

So let me suggest that we take back the word Christian while giving the religious right a new adjective:Christianist. Christianity, in this view, is simply a faith. Christianism is an ideology, politics, an ism. The distinction between Christian and Christianist echoes the distinction we make between Muslim and Islamist. Muslims are those who follow Islam. Islamists are those who want to wield Islam as a political force and conflate state and mosque. Not all Islamists are violent. Only a tiny few are terrorists. And I should underline that the term Chrstianist is in no way designed to label people on the religious right as favouring any violence at all. I mean merely by the term Christianist the view that religious faith is so important that it must also have a precise political agenda. It is the belief that religion dictates politics and that politics should dictate the laws for everyone, Christian and non-Christian alike.

That's what I dissent from, and I dissent from it as a Christian. I dissent from the political pollution of sincere, personal faith. I dissent most strongly from the attempt to argue that one party represents God and that the other doesn't. I dissent from having my faith co-opted and wielded by people whose politics I do not share and whose intolerance I abhor. The word Christian belongs to no political party. It's time the quiet majority of believers took it back.

Current Mood: thankful thankful
Current Music: Simon and Garfunkel- The Sound of Silence

2 comments or Leave a comment
Comments
catdraco From: catdraco Date: May 10th, 2006 07:17 am (UTC) (Link)
Yep. I agree both with the distinction, and the terminology.

In fact, I think I shall adopt it.
kapitankraut From: kapitankraut Date: May 10th, 2006 07:37 am (UTC) (Link)
Sullivan is one smart cookie, and this is yet more proof of that. He's a person who should be heard a lot more than he is.
2 comments or Leave a comment