|
National Catholic Reporter, February
18, 2005
Is this kind
of Christianity Christian?
By Joan Chittister, OSB
The problem with the political agenda of the
Radical Right is not that they're wrong. Who
isn't concerned about the so-called "moral
values" on which this last presidential
election is said to have hinged.
Each of those concerns surely merits attention.
Abortion, for instance, is indeed a major issue.
Hitler did it and called it eugenics; the Chinese
did it in Tibet and called it population control.
Obviously, the whole question of the morality
of abortion is a serious and an imperative
one, as is birth control for some denominations
and alcohol for others, for instance. Just
as obvious, however, is the question of whether
or not the government of a pluralistic state
ought to be legislating for any of those things
according to the tenets of any one particular
religious tradition. Those are questions of
faith, not of politics. That's how we got the
Taliban in the first place. Someone somewhere
decided that their religion had to be everybody's
religion.
The question for the state, then, is not whether
or not abortion is morally wrong. That is for
religions to decide. The question for the state
to determine in its responsibility to assure
"life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness"
is, What is life? When we know that answer,
we'll all know, each of us from a different
religious perspective, the political answer
to abortion.
This is not the first time in U.S. history, however,
that politics began to look like religion and
single-issue religion tried to drive politics.
It was religion that fostered prohibition on
moral grounds and its notoriously ineffective
decline into the speakeasies operated by organized
crime syndicates.
It was also religion that supported slavery and
segregation and the argument that God made
the white man (sic) superior.
It was religion that fueled the fire or provided
the basis for many a war or Crusade.
It was religion that inveighed against dissection
and all the medical information that came from
it.
Religion -- including Christianity--however sincere,
has often been proven wrong as time went by.
It may be prudent then, while we insist that
it was God's will that we invade Iraq, and
that it is murder to engage in stem cell research,
that we approach all our questions with political
respect for different religious sensitivities
everywhere.
I understand the so-called "conservative"
agenda. I even share its concerns. They are
real and they are important. But they are also
incomplete -- which is why I doubt that, as
they are being framed right now, that they
are either "right" or "religious."
The agenda is simply too narrow, too concentrated
on issues around human sexuality alone, and
too self-centered to be the agenda that drove
Jesus from Galilee to Jerusalem curing lepers,
feeding the hungry and raising the dead to
life.
Anyone has the right, of course, to privatize
religion and call that "Christianity."
But no one has the right in a nation based
on the separation of church and state to impose
it on everyone else. After all, while some
people are getting a patent on their definition
of Christianity, the rest of the Christian
agenda may well pass us by. If we're going
to create a party platform on "Christian"
values, we ought to at least ask whose Christianity
we are selling -- and how.
There are many Christian churches, for instance,
that oppose to abortion on demand but leave
room in their moral pantheon for therapeutic
abortions. Some religions, in some circumstances,
would even require it.
School prayer, one of the icons of the movement,
sounds very good in principle. But in a nation
now decisively pluralistic, whose population
is now more Buddhist, more Hindu, more Muslim,
more Jewish than ever before in history --
and each of them getting larger every day --
whose prayers shall it be?
From 1990-2000 devotees of Islam in the United
States rose 109 percent, of Buddhism 170 percent,
of Hinduism 273 percent and of Christianity
5 percent.
Do Christians of the radical right really want
their grandchildren reading from the Koran
or the Vedas or the Flower Sutras for morning
prayer? And if not, what will those same Christians
do when school boards under different ethnic
influences require them? Will they declare
that minority schools in ethnic areas must
use the Christian scriptures to satisfy our
definition of God because this nation was settled,
founded, incorporated by Christians over 200
years ago?
Obviously, there is a difference between questions
of personal faith and questions of public politics.
But politics do touch on the rest of the Christian
value system, if not in its speeches, certainly
in its budget. Here politics and morals become
one, are public, are universal, are not amenable
to individual choice.
This month we saw "compassionate conservatism"
-- all that concern we're told this government
has for moral values and life and Christian
identity -- show its real face. Now that the
election is over, abortion and school prayer
have suddenly disappeared from this administration's
agenda, but the release of the Bush White House
budget makes the administration's values clear.
Furthermore, because the budget impinges on
every citizen in this society, the values cannot
be dismissed on grounds of personal moral commitment.
National budgets are a nation's theology walking.
In an era in which we call poverty "low-income"
and hunger "lack of food security,"
the number of poor, according to the U.S Census
Bureau, is increasing and the number of hungry
in the richest country in the world has been
rising steadily for four years. To pay for
a war we should never have fought -- at least
not for the reasons they gave us -- this budget
is slashing domestic programs.
The budget of this Christian presidency cuts
food stamps. It reduces support for subsidized
housing. It suggests pillaging social security.
It reduces environmental enforcement programs
and scientific research in a scientific age.
It even reduces veteran's health benefits.
Clearly, the country is in danger of going the
way of all oligarchies; power and wealth are
sucked to the top, while those on the bottom
bleed. We can call it "Christian"
as it collapses.
And all the while, we watch more food lines forming,
more homeless on the streets, more environmental
degradation and more of the elderly living
destitute lives.
More than that, according to the budget analysis
done by Bread for the World, (www.bread.org)
while we honor our tax breaks to the rich in
this country, we are not keeping our promise
to fight HIV/AIDS around the world or to support
the Third World development programs that might
really make us secure in the future.
From where I stand, it seems that the poor who
will be most affected by these budget cuts
have no political voice with which to protest
them and the rich can hardly be expected to
object since they are benefiting from them
That leaves only the Christians -- the pastors
and the bishops and the Religious Right --
who worked so hard to put this administration
into office, to require that the rest of the
Christian agenda finally be faced. Otherwise,
forget the prayer in schools, the definition
of marriage, or the fight against abortion.
We lost the Christianity of this Christian
nation a long time ago.
Send this page to a
friend!
Home About
Us Newsletters News
Archives Donate
|