"The IRS Works in Mysterious Ways" opines the Los Angeles Times on the federal investigation into the subtext of a sermon preached at the Pasadena, CA, All Saints Episcopal Church.

The sermon, "What If Jesus Debated Senator Kerry and President Bush", was delivered by the Rev. George F. Regas two days before the '04 election. Now the IRS has annouced that it will investigate to see if the church violated its tax status.

But the issue is more complicated. In fact, recently US Representative Adam Schiff wrote a letter to the IRS and the Secretary of the Treasury in which he expresses serious concern over the fact that the IRS said that they would drop the case if All Saints admits that it did wrong. That part of the case is espeically chilling for those familiar with the logic of 17th century convictions and the House Un-American Activities Committee.

Many in the blogopshere - on the left and right - wonder: is the IRS being even-handed?

Conservative Riddleblog announces:

"While I don't agree with this church on virtually anything--it is far-left both theologically and politically speaking--good on them for standing up to the IRS and for refusing to turn over documents, sermons, newsletters, etc, as demanded! . . . God will deal with this church's rejection of orthodox theology and the gospel in his own time and way. But what they preach is none of Uncle Sam's business."

Irenic Thoughts says,"The sermon was critical of both candidates for their views on war and poverty yet the IRS noted the statements against the President as politicking on behalf of John Kerry.

Below a commentor wrote:

. . ."I remember the reputation of the old Episcopal Church as one with old families with old money sipping single malt Scotch and bridge clubs. There was even a joke about using the wrong fork at dinner and going you know where since it was a sin to to be an Episcopalian and not know proper etiquette. Now I look at the church and I'm proud. TEC has really become a church that wants to build the Kingdom of God right here, right now. We stand up and say war is wrong, social injustice is a sin, discrimination is clearly against the teachings of the Gospel, Etc...I'd be proud to be a member of All Saints."

Socially conservative Thoughts and News writes: I and most Evangelical Christians would not agree with them doctrinally on many issues. . .such as acceptance of homosexual lifestyles. . . but the [ IRS investigation of All Saints] affects both equally, as well as those who attend synagogues, mosques and other religious worship centers."

On the question of equality, the Los Angeles Daily News notes, "In Los Angeles alone, 39 churches, synagogues and Buddhist temples were identified by political candidates as contributing more than $15,000 to their election campaigns since 1998, according to city Ethics Commission records. . While the federal tax agency has taken on All Saints, some say it may be overlooking others' political donations as well as whether churches are using federal funds solely for intended social programs. . .the Rev. Ed Bacon of All Saints notes his church has never violated federal law by contributing to a political candidate."

Here's the rector's sermon: The IRS Goes to Church. And here's a recent Los Angeles Times article and a NPR story on the situation.

Julie writing on her blog, Truth, Justice and the American Way points out: "The summons even requests utility bills to establish costs associated with hosting Regas' speech . . .from the very beginning of our constitutional republic, America's pastors and ministers have courageously engaged the culture. We must not allow the IRS, or any other government agency, to now trample this heritage.

Over at Street Prophets, Pastor Dan writes:

"Apparently, they're trying to shake loose evidence that All Saints has been supporting partisan candidates. The request for utility bills matches a similar demand for 'overhead expenses,' which the church takes to be a reference to staff salaries. That seems like nitpicking to me, especially since Regas didn't endorse or oppose any candidates in his sermon. But I don't know the first thing about the IRS' calculus."

Always helpful, the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life provides a Guide on Internal Revenue Code Restrictions on the Political Activity of Religious Organizations.

In light of All Saints, Talk to Action explores the problems surrounding the IRS and church policking.

ReligioNews blog notes: "Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. said, 'The church must be reminded that it is not the master or the servant of the state, but rather the conscience of the state.' It would be mighty hard to be the conscience of the country if clergy could not speak about the country's rights and wrongs."

Smells like Snapper writes: "When I heard the most recent report on NPR this morning, I had to scramble to find my blood pressure medication before I blew a cardiovascular gasket. . .All Saints' is one of my favorite haunts. I really love the place--who wouldn't love a rector from Mississippi making it big in LA?"

Hollywood pastor Ryan Bell posts photos from the Sep 22, press conference in which the church leaders announced that they would resist the IRS and go to court.

And finally, a former member of All Saints, the Rev. Anne Howard writes in the Beatitudes Society newsletter:

"I first learned about courageous preaching as a member of Regas’ church back in the 1970s. It was his preaching that caused me to leave my job as a newspaper reporter and come to work at All Saints as the Director of the Interfaith Center to Reverse the Arms Race. It was his preaching that helped me connect that anti-nuclear work with faith, and eventually led me to seminary. And it is the legacy of his preaching that has stayed with me through my years as a parish priest, prodding me to speak the truth when I might otherwise stay silent. . . ."

Posted by Alex Carpenter at 06:40 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (1)

A regular Wednesday feature here at Faith Public Life, here's what's happening around the neighborhood thus far this week.

On Street Prophets, Pastor Dan gives  you all you need to know about our do-nothing Congress. Oh wait, yesterday it did pass a bill that would "cut off financial awards to plaintiffs who bring successful lawsuits against expressions of religion like Christmas displays on government grounds. The aim of the measure, approved 244 to 173, is to discourage
lawsuits against local, state and federal governments over issues of separation of church and state."

If you missed your morning coffee induced heart-pounding visit Talk to Action where court stripping looks evan more exciting than you think. Joan points out that the main Representative (Hostettler R-IN) behind this act said this:

"When the courts make unconstitutional decisions, we should not enforce them. Federal courts have no army or navy. The court can opine, decide, talk about, sing, whatever it wants to do. We're not saying they can't do that. At the end of the day, we're saying the court can't enforce its opinions."

JSpot posts Stephen Colbert's Days of Repentence for Jews clip and also features Nathan Newman on how California taxpayers won't have to subsidize anti-union campaigns.

Chuck Currie speaks up on torture:

"President Bush is pressuring the Senate to act on the compromise agreement this week, citing the need for intelligence gathering to maintain strong national security.  As people of faith, we are called to stand against policies and practices that violate fundamental human dignity."

TAKE ACTION AGAINST THE TORTURE COMPROMISE HERE.

Philadelphia-based Leming writes on CrossLeft about the evangelical School for Social Change at Eastern University.

Muslim Wake Up wonders about the reaction within Isreal over the recent war with Hezbollah.

City of Brass writes: "among the reasoned responses to the Pope is Tariq Ramadan's essay, which argues that the real context of the Pope's address was to emphatically place Islam within the category of Other with which no true dialog can be undertaken."

Christo Lumen tells the Parable of the Good Homosexual.

Jim, over at Disples from the Left, provides a short ethical reflection on the recent Values Voters Conference.

Mainstream Baptist notes the growing discontent with the Iraq war. Where? Among retired military leadership. Why? Because Iran is looming and they don't want to go through another Rummy mess.

Answering the Rev. Deb Haffner's questions about sex on the edges of the public discussion, the Rev. Meg Riley writes about the importance of coalition building within the progressive movement. She states:

"Over the years, in coalitions, I have watched a number of areas of disagreement--notably about the Middle East, abortion, and gay rights, take down too many good efforts. I think it is key to leave room for disagreement on some issues while moving forward on others."

Even the Devils Believe posts "via Lutheran Zephyr, Beliefnet has a story about a Muslim group in Florida that is sending $5000 in seed money to Palestine to help rebuild Christian churches that were burned there. The group's spokesperson points out that the churches should be protected under the tenets of Islam. Allahu Akbar, and many prayers that we Christians can return to our Muslim brothers and sisters the love expressed in this gesture."

Johnny points out: "The enormity of what is happening in Utah cannot be understated.  They are embracing the future in a way no other state has - this truly is a progressive policy from one of our most religiously devout states."

Finally, listen to Provoke Radio! This week "don't miss this fascinating story of one man's awakening to the social justice message of the Gospels. Guest: Mr. Brian McLaren, best selling author of such books as, 'The Secret Message of Jesus' and others. Brian is a leader in the Emergent community and a man Time Magazine referred to as a 'paradigm shifter'. Special guest host: Dr. Steven Miles, Professor of Theology, Loyola College of Maryland."

Posted by Alex Carpenter at 03:55 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

Rev. Jennifer Butler, Executive Director of Faith in Public Life, recently joined radio host Bob Kincaid to discuss her new book, The Christian Right Globalized. Rev. Butler reveals how the Religious Right, after decades of building an infrastructure to impact American politics, is moving to use international institutions to advance their policy agenda on a global scale and threaten gains made for women's rights, human rights, and public health across the globe.

Posted by David Buckley at 09:59 AM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (4)

The supposedly non-partisan Values Voters Summit sponsored by the Family Research Council this weekend was rife with slurs against Democrats—who had apparently been forgotten when the invitations were sent out.

James Dobson told the values voters that shouldn’t be afraid to admit that their country is at war with Muslims who are out to kill Americans. "We're in a war and it's time that we recognized it," he said.

Rep. Mike Pence of Indiana felt certain that "conservative Americans are beginning to awaken to the perils of a Democratic Congress," but seemed less certain about where his alliances lie in the immigration debate. After invoking the Bible to show that illegal immigrants ought to be treated with respect, he went on to say that they should all be expelled so as not to prove a threat to the American culture.

A certain bias was apparent even in the agenda for the summit. One workshop outlined a Get Out the Vote tactic for churches which instructed people to go through their church directory and to pretend they were pollsters from ABC News in order to find out how the members of the congregation were planning to vote. Also on the schedule was a discussion about health care titled “The Future of Health Care: HillaryCare or Values-Driven Health Care?” referring to Senator Clinton’s 1993 plan for national health care—a plan which Republicans rejected for its "socialist" tendencies.

And in an attempt to show up Chavez, Jerry Falwell informed a cheering crowd that for values voters, Hillary Clinton is a foe even greater than the devil: "I certainly hope that Hillary is the candidate. She has $300 million so far. But I hope she's the candidate. Because nothing will energize my [constituency] like Hillary Clinton. If Lucifer ran, he wouldn't."

Yet Falwell had no worries about Republicans turning out to vote even without Clinton—or the devil—in the race:"I think we're going to keep the House and the Senate," he said. "I think the Lord will take care of that."

Others were less confident. James Dobson feared that Republicans might be swayed by their dissatisfaction with President Bush: “There is disillusionment out there with Republicans. That worries me greatly.” Bishop Harry Jackson of College Park, MD echoed Dobson’s concerns saying that “if they [Christian Conservatives] don’t come to the polls, we’re in trouble.”

Rev. Don Wildmon even went so far as to critique the Republican Party, though it’s apparent he won’t be giving up on them any time soon: "We're disgusted somewhat with some of the Republicans,” he said, “but we'd be in a whole lot worse shape with the Democrats. So, if you can't get the whole loaf, take a half a loaf." Talk about a non-partisan event.

This seemingly blatant violation of church-state separation has been called “just plain wrong” by Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, who claimed that the summit “violates tax law, it damages the integrity of religion and it harms our democracy." Yet it seems strange coming on the tails of the IRS investigation of All Saints Church in California for a single sermon against the war in Iraq that this partisan display hasn’t earned more criticism.

Posted by Allison Palm at 05:09 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

Listen in as Dr. Tony Campolo talks about the Red Letter Christians and reminds Laura Ingraham about the words to the Lord's Prayer. Audio to the right...

Posted by David Buckley at 01:22 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

I saw Jesus Camp last night. Stunning!

If you enjoy:

• thoughtful documentary filmmaking
• brilliantly juxtaposed cinematography
• thinking about American religion
• understanding the political concerns of evangelical religion
• knowing how young children mix faith and adult favor

According to a review in Salon:

"Jesus Camp" has now come under attack from the Rev. Ted Haggard, the powerful pastor of a Colorado megachurch, and head of the National Association of Evangelicals, who appears in the film. Haggard's real problem may be that he comes off like a cynical, showbizzy creep, especially compared to the profoundly committed and idealistic kids at the heart of the film. . .

For another review that details some of the diverse responses to the movie from the Christian community, see here.

Here is a calendar for when it releases near you. Interestingly, they have opened the film in the midwest and south first.

A pair of new documentaries looks at injustices and self-defeating strategies incorporated in the reconstruction of Iraq. Both The Ground Truth and Iraq for Sale are worth checking out for unflinching looks at the reality of this ongoing conflict.

The Ground Truth is a personal look at the lives of young men and women who have served their country in Iraq. The story for these soldiers doesn't end with their return from the battlefield. Filmmaker Patricia Foulkrod's movie reveals the struggles that these soldiers confront on their return from Iraq.

Who's getting killed. Who's making a killing. Opening this weekend, Robert Greenwald's new film, Iraq for Sale: The War Profiteers comes out swinging and lands a few right on the biggest GOP strength: the war on terrorism. How? By documenting who really winning in Iraq.

Here's Greenwald talking about the film. Greenwald also made Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price and Outfoxed. Read the movie blog here.

On MSNBC, during a recent debate over torture between GOP military men and the corporate Republican administration, catch the film getting plugged. Apparently Halliburton giving tainted water to soldiers doesn't sit well with men who've actually served.

Check out this list of groups hosting screenings, including several churches.

The Great Warming

Finally, get the DVD of The Great Warming, the dramatic film about climate change that the next generation of evangelicals love. Narrated by Alanis Morissette and Keanu Reeves " it includes hard-hitting comments from scientists and opinion-makers as well as new scenes documenting the emerging voice of the American Evangelical community urging action on climate change.

Here's an interview with NAE Governmental Affairs head Richard Cizik about real "creation care."

Especially good for congregations and youth groups, here's info for bulletin annoucements and posters.

How politically hot is this topic? Here's Faith in Public LIVE alum Amy Sullivan reporting on its role in the Pennsylvania Senate race.

Posted by Alex Carpenter at 10:37 AM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

Faith in Public Live returns with an exchange between Dr. Bob Edgar, General Secretary of the National Council of Churches and six-term Congressman, and Pastor Dan, proprietor and blogmaster of Street Prophets. Bob opens the conversation with his take on Middle Church.

Part 9: Dr. Bob Edgar Closes with a Prayer

Dear Dan,

These exchanges have been invigorating, and I have enjoyed them. I hope readers have enjoyed them, too. (For those who’d like to keep the discussion going, may I add with disarming modesty: read my book, Middle Church.)

It seems fitting that we bring our exchanges to a close on a day celebrated by our Abrahamic camps for millennia. A new spiritual year is upon us. Let’s pray all of us children of Abraham will figure out how to embrace each new day as new beginning, starting with Rosh HaShanah.

As I scan the morning headlines, it seems we badly need a new beginning.

The common thread running through all these headlines is a relentless estrangement of viewpoints, exacerbated by the use of illogic, innuendo, litigation and violence to defend dubious positions. It all amounts to what you call the E-Bomb.

Evil has so permeated our lives that we no longer feel awkward in its presence.

We shake our heads in resignation when Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah defies the U.N. cease fire accord by proclaiming Hezbollah will not disarm.

We shrug as the IRS threatens the tax-exempt status of All Saints Church in Pasadena because it preached Jesus would have condemned President Bush’s policy of pre-emptive war.

We snicker at GOP accusations that the Democrats founded the Ku Klux Klan and Democratic assurances that Republicans want to replace democracy with an oligarchic theocracy.

We cluck our tongues as the chaos escalates in Iraq amid doubts that Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki has the competence to impose order.

We smile sardonically as hysterical threats are hurled between Christians and radical Muslims over a misunderstanding of Pope Benedict’s historical musings.

We snicker at the unintended oxymoron when a Thailand general announces a “pro-democracy coup.”

In short, we have gazed into the face of evil and yawned.

And for Middle Church, that ennui is the greatest threat it faces.

As we begin a new year, my prayer is that we will all awaken to the demons in our midst. The first goal of the Evil One, I suspect, is not to make us devils; it’s to make us bored and unresponsive when the devil sits in our pews.

But today is a new day, a new year has begun. Let’s all of us commit to using the time God has given us to hear Jesus’ sermon again, this time with our ears wide open:

“The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to bring good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to let the oppressed go free, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.” (Luke 4:18-19, NRSV).

If we can do that, what a great year this will be.

Thanks, Dan. Blessings on you. Le-shanah tovah tikatevu.

Peace, Bob

Part 8: Pastor Dan's Dirty 4 Letter Word

Bob:

You ask how we can get across the prophetic truth to people who don't care about it. That, my friend, is the $64,000 question. There are numerous barriers to communicating the prophetic truth, not least of them a corporate mass media that doesn't want to hear it.

That's a long-term challenge, and a stiff one. But there are ways to get the message out. To explain how, I'd call your attention to one of the comments at the end of this thread:

I'm not big on obsenity...meaning I'm not big on pinning specific words themselves as being obscene. I'm with George Carlin with this. It's not the words that are hurtful, it's the meaning behind the words that can hurt, it's the intention.

But I understand now wanting to drop the F-bomb. Hey, sensibilities and all that. What I don't get, is why the Middle Church, as they put it, don't want to drop the E-bomb. Another 4-letter word.

Evil.

...

Look how much people mock the Democratic party for being percieved as being weak, for using meek language and sending weak messages.

And not to open up a can of worms, it's why I see where people like Sam Harris is coming from. Even though it's going to offend and turn off most people here (including myself), there's a lot of people who respect shows of strength. A LOT of people.

They believe strength is power. And power is rightousness. And rightousness means that you might actually be right. Unless you're willing to fight for your beliefs...why should they listen to you?

I have to say I agree with this commentor. Why should people listen to folks like you and me if we're not actually willing to stand up for what we believe in? If we're not willing to call evil that which is transparently evil?

This is a problem with feet in many different areas of our nation's collective life. On a political level, the reluctance to perform basic moral evaluation in public forces elected officials to support shameful policies. Our economic and military programs get more and more insane by the day. When will someone stand up and say enough is enough?

Or, to rip an example from this morning's headlines, when will any leaders of our nation stand to declare that torture is flat-out wrong? That it is evil?

Another political consequence of the refusal to speak out is that it convinces the average person that leaders don't really believe much of anything. We hear about this most often in the context of the electoral woes of the Democratic party. Because Dems allow their position to be defined in terms of attracting swing voters, those voters conclude that there is no principal behind those positions. I can hardly blame them for that.

But this also affects our religious life, I believe. The roots of the decline of the mainline denominations are complex, but if I had to choose one reason among all the factors under our control, I'd say it was the inability to stake a clear moral vision of our life together. There's an amazing - and blessed - diversity among religious progressives, but I think there are principles that unite us as well. We believe that the poor should be taken care of before the rich get richer. We believe in the stewardship of the earth. We believe that there should never be an unnecessary war, and we regret the costs of even the necessary conflicts. We believe - I pray we believe - that torture is everwhere and always wrong.

That we are unable to communicate such beliefs is frankly a failure of mutual leadership. The appointed leaders need to lead, to take chances and to pull the people in directions they don't always want to go. And the people - the leaders we have been looking for - need to press their formal leadership to exert more moral guidance.

Part of the work of the progressive netroots has been to push the leadership of the Democratic party to actually lead the party. Many of us in fact came to the blogs exactly because we were outraged that our leaders cowered before conservative bullying. I have always thought that Street Prophets should continue that work with religious leaders.

So I'll leave you with a cordial challenge. Will you - can you - step up to the plate and say in so many words that the "compromise" coming out of the Senate on coerced interrogation is in fact evil? Can you "drop the e-bomb" on that despicable plan?

I can guarantee that if you do, people will care. They may not like it. They may not like you. But by God, they'll care.

Thank you for your time, your warmth, and your insight. This exchange has been an honor and a pleasure.

Yours, Dan

Part 7: Bob Edgar on the Difference between Prophetic Truth and Hugo Chavez

Dear Dan,

You make some interesting points. I recall President Nixon’s election night plea to “lower our voices.” The White House transcripts show how that came out.

But I agree that there are times when people have to speak plainly. Jesus called the Pharisees a “brood of vipers,” which is a harsher phrase than suggesting one’s descent from canines. His use in the temple of the phrase “den of thieves” was probably cleaned up so it could appear in family bibles. And we can only guess what he really called the fig tree that bore no fruit. There’s no question that Jesus didn’t mince words – and I don’t think he expects us to obscure our prophecy in diplomatic nuances.

Even so, non diplomatic language sometimes confuses folks. Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, after he called Bush “the devil,” walked down a Harlem street and told a group of passers-by: “Bush is an alcoholic, a sick man with a lot of hang-ups.”

“He walks like John Wayne,” Chavez added. “He doesn't know anything about politics, he got there because of Daddy.”

The first person to rise up in Bush’s defense was Rep. Charles Rangel, the liberal Democrat who represents Harlem in Congress. "You do not come into my country, my congressional district, and you do not condemn my president," Charlie said. "If there is any criticism of President Bush, it should be restricted to Americans, whether they voted for him or not." My old friend Nancy Pelosi, minority leader in the House, simply called Chavez a "thug." I’d say Chavez' rhetoric was pointless because it wasted valuable media time and missed a chance to speak the prophetic truth in a way Bush could hear it. (Well, maybe he does walk like John Wayne, but the rest was nonsense.)

The prophetic truth, as Middle Church people are increasingly understanding, is that Mr. Bush and members of Congress on both sides of the aisle led us into an unnecessary war for the wrong reasons and thousands died – 2,693 Americans according to today’s Defense Department count, and unknown tens of thousands of Iraqis including innocent children and other noncombatants.

The prophetic truth is that God’s beautiful creation is choking in greenhouse gases and about to be drowned by melting glaciers and the president and members of Congress on both sides have failed to do anything about it. Mr. Bush pulled the U.S. out of the Kyoto treaty to control greenhouse gas emissions because he was afraid it would hurt American business, and the Congress has done little to stop the steady warming of the globe.

The prophetic truth is that poverty is killing people around the world, and no one is doing anything about it. Hurricane Katrina blew away the veil of American poverty, and the government has not managed to come to grips with it.

The prophetic truth – well, you get the picture. How do we get it across to people who don’t care about it? Go on Hannity and Colmes and shout, “Damn your eyes”?

Certainly the answer is not to whisper for help. But I hope Middle Church folks will find their voice in a powerful way – and learn how to communicate God’s truth to our leaders in ways they can hear it.

Peace,

Bob

Part 6: Pastor Dan Flips a Table Over (almost anyway)

Bob:

I too have enjoyed our exchange here. But I think you and I both know there's a time for civil discourse, and a time for - well, not so polite language. What we're doing here is great. Outside this venue, it doesn't work so well.

In fact, that's been one of my greatest learnings from the blogosphere recently. Bloggers are often faulted for using profanities or insulting language directed at public figures. Sometimes that criticism is warranted - sometimes abuse is just abuse - but often, it misses fundamental points. There's nothing nice about unnecessary war. There's nothing nice about torture. There's nothing nice about corpses left for days in the hot Louisiana sun because the Federal Government couldn't respond to a crisis it had been warned of, and in fact had recently prepared itself for. There's nothing nice about any of that stuff, so why should we speak about it in "nice" terms?

I was outraged to hear Bill Clinton on NPR this morning proposing retroactive warrants for torture of terror detainees. In the name of Christ, that is an obscenity. There are already cases where innocent people have been tortured, and Clinton wants to put the US stamp of approval on that. What are we supposed to say, "Sorry, our bad"? But if I were to respond to this story with the full fury and contempt it deserves, I'd soon get an e-mail from my parents telling me my language was a distraction from my argument. I certainly wouldn't be invited on any talk shows. Why not? Well, because our mass media has decided that being civil is more important than the underlying moral issues in a debate.

Now, let's be clear. I am not advocating for Middle Church leaders to start dropping the "f-bomb" in sermons on the Sunday morning talk shows. That would be simply counterproductive.

But if I have any one criticism of the current leaders of the progressive faith movement, such as it is, it's that they're too hung up on being civil and constructive. They're too interested in finding the moral and political center (as one wag at Street Prophets put it, "I wonder if it's like a jelly donut").

Again, I don't think we have to be obscene or abusive. But there are real differences in our nation today that deserve not to be papered over. In fact, they deserve to be judged, and harshly. Pres. Bush wants the unfettered freedom to torture as he pleases. Some members of Congress are happy to go along with him, others want a slightly different measure enacted. But why are we having this "debate" at all? Why is there any question at all about whether we'll attack Iran? I think what the people in Middle Church are looking for is someone who has the prophetic temerity to step outside the bounds of polite discussion and question - sharply - the scandalous drift of our nation. They're looking for leaders, in other words. And as you noted in our last exchange, if they don't find them, they'll have to realize that they are those leaders themselves. That's all to the better, but I worry that in the meantime, we religious leaders have convinced more and more people that our faith doesn't really matter, because we don't really believe anything too strongly. That's the price of civility.

Let me close with a story I delight in telling about Woody Guthrie. It might even be true. It goes like this: Woody, along with Son Terry and Brownie McGhee, was invited to play a war-bonds dinner in then-segregated Baltimore. So he came and did his thing, and afterwords, the organizers seated him at the head table.

Where's Son and Brownie? he asked. It's segregated here, he was told. They're eating in the kitchen.

Bring them up here, he said. I want to eat with them.

You can't do that, people said. This is Baltimore.

"This fight against fascism has got to start right here!" Woody insisted, pounding on the table. Not now, the organizers responded. Don't cause a scene. We'll take on segregation after the war. Maybe in ten years.

"This fight against fascism has got to start RIGHT NOW!" he shouted. And with that, he turned over the table and walked out.

That's where we're at today.

Best, Dan

Part 5: Bob Edgar on Attention and Conflict

Dear Dan,

You’re right: Blogs are a communication oasis. And I’ve been enjoying our dialogue. You have certainly expressed your views with insight, humor and polite civility, and I have done my best to emulate that standard. I’m wondering, though, how many of our readers appreciate it.

Conflict! That’s what editors and producers say they want from us. They tell us that’s why we Middle Church folks are not news. Take the National Council of Churches, for example: 35 communions and 45 million parishioners representing the widest possible range of theological tradition: Orthodox, Anglican, Reformed, historic peace churches, evangelicals, and historic African American churches.

The media say the potential for conflict among us is overwhelming. After all, one editor mused, 500 years ago we were burning each other at the stake.

But today – for the most part, anyway, though we have some very spirited discussions – we are relatively congenial. We work together. Our Governing Board generally agrees on many issues, most recently on the need to eliminate torture as an instrument of U.S. policy, the need to rebuild the hurricane-stricken Gulf Coast with efficiency, speed and justice, and the need to maintain civil and religious liberties in the post 9/11 era.

I wish these pronouncements had attracted more media attention because I think they were important statements on controversial issues. And they represented the common wisdom of Christians of many nationalities, language groups, races, ethnicities and religious heritages.

Conflict! That would have put us at the top of the Wolf Blitzer Report. But we encountered these issues with an eye to scripture and a strong sense that by God’s grace we are members of one family, and there was little discord to report. So the media stayed home and the message was muted.

That’s a shame. Middle Church folks would have a lot to say if people were listening to us. There are so many issues that need urgent reflection: the festering war in Iraq, the genocide in Darfur, the cataclysmic Middle East, the systematic destruction of the earth’s atmosphere, the moral questions raised by advances in human biotechnology, so many more.

But make no mistake! I am not complaining about the civil way we have been exchanging ideas. I look forward to more discussion.

But I wish the media decision-makers would understand: when Middle Church people – when 35 diverse communions can work together on things that matter – that’s big news.

Peace, Bob

Part 4: Pastor Dan on Finding Leadership in the Netroots

Bob:

"We are the leaders we have been waiting for": amen, brother. I don't know if you only intended those words to be about social change, but they make a rather neat summary of the gospel in some ways. Christ was about nothing if not a people-powered movement toward God.

Like many others, I was drawn to the "progressive netroots" in late 2003 and early 2004 by that same spirit. Everywhere you turned, Republican leaders were pushing the nation in a way that seemed completely opposed to Christian social teachings, at least as I understood them. We rushed to war on transparently flimsy grounds, Rick Santorum was gleefully discussing "man-on-dog" sex, and Congress was passing raftloads of hateful, mean-spirited legislation. Through it all, Democrats were cowed by security issues and Pres. Bush's high approval ratings. The media seemed disinclined to ask tough questions of the administration or its legislative allies. There was, in short, utterly no leadership against an extreme agenda.

Except on the blogs. They were like an oasis in those days. More than that: they were like lonely prophets, questioning the moral direction of the nation, providing an alternative vision, summoning the people to action. No one else was doing that, and it was sorely needed.

My, ahem, "faith" in the netroots was confirmed by two events. In 2004, a coalition of bloggers and other netroots activists almost single-handedly stopped the proposed gutting of Social Security rather simply. They just spread the message that there was no Social Security crisis, and encouraged their readers to do the same. That translated into many calls and letters to legislators which in turn bolstered opposition to a bad idea. Eventually it killed the proposed "reform". It was people-power at its finest, in that the bloggers provided information, made a suggestion, and let people chart the course from there on out.

In January 2005, I attended a conference at the Pew Center, an examination of the so-called "moral values vote" in the last presidential election, at which E.J. Dionne was one of the presenters. After the session, I worked my way up to Dionne to ask him what role he saw for progressive faith in the coming years. His response was essentially "your guess is as good as mine." I came home elated. The experts turned out not to have any better idea of what to do than the "common folk."

Yippee!

It was liberating. For the first time, it felt like people like me could have a say in the future direction of the nation, however incremental. I had become the leader I'd been waiting for. One of them, anyway. There were many other potential leaders out there, and increasingly so, as blogs and the larger netroots continue to swell with average citizens looking for alternatives to our current social and political mess.

The Holy Spirit doesn't motivate the progressive blogosphere, of course, at least not any more than any other human endeavor. Nor should we confuse the emerging people-powered movement with the work of the gospel. No matter how nifty the new tools coming out of the netroots, it's still politics, and politics can't save our world from itself.

But what politics can do is help us take responsibility for the world. It's an imperfect device, but then, we are an imperfect people, and the world cannot afford to wait for perfection. When it really gets down to it, we need to convince Middle Church that political involvement is needed, that is possible, and that it can be done faithfully. We need to reformulate politics as a potential good, in other words, and not as an entirely sinful project. I wonder if you have any ideas as to how that might be done?

Apologies for the sketchiness of this post,

Dan
Part 3: Dr. Bob Edgar on Overcoming Political Quietism

Dear Dan,

Thanks for your insights – and for your disquieting (but so true) observation that the Middle Church folks we represent are bogged down in “political quietism.�? As you put it so well, all of us are “so taxed with the burden of being a good father or mother or assorted relative that it gets to be very difficult to consider issues much beyond that.�?

I can certainly understand that. A lot of people are attracted to church because of their spiritual desolation. As they struggle to keep their bills paid, their marriages in tact, their children normal and their bosses placated, life can get pretty hairy. Church provides a safe haven. Church provides friendly faces, helping hands, nurseries, fellowship groups, coffee hours and promises of salvation. I would not judge anyone who didn’t want to step outside the church to face the whirlwinds of our frightening world.

And the whirlwinds are so overwhelming. Folks who declare they have the ultimate solutions to hunger, poverty, war and make us suspicious and impatient. It’s hard to know whether that still small voice inside them is a call to prophesy or a paranoid delusion. And just when we suspect God is really calling us to action, we look at the enormity of the world’s problems and decide we’d be crazy to think we could solve them.

Then again, God does call individuals – flawed, uncertain, insecure individuals – to greatness. When I was young, I met Martin Luther King, Jr., a human being for whom God had a special purpose – and a human being who had the courage to hear God’s call and respond to it. Because he did, our nation and our world have been much improved.

The remaining problems, however, are frightening. For example, we know that millions will starve and die because of the crushing poverty that exists on our planet. And who among us would be foolish enough to think we had the power to eradicate poverty?

But then that still, small voice begins to nag at us. We can eliminate poverty. “Ours,�? said economist Jeffrey Sacks, “is the first generation in the history of the world with the ability to eradicate extreme poverty. We have the means, the resources and the know-how. All we lack is the will.�?

I hope Middle Church folks will listen to those words: we can do it! But will we?

There are no individuals with a magic formula to end poverty or solve the world’s agonizing problems. Yet the 45 million people who worship in the congregations encompassed by the National Council of Churches would be a powerful force for change. It might take a lot to get us out of our comfortable churches to accept God’s call to do battle with evil and injustice. But my prayer is that we will begin to do it. Even if there are no prophets, no Martin Luther Kings, on our horizon, God will raise up prophets in the most unlikely places. And we in Middle Church will see clearly what God wants us to do. And know that we are the leaders we have been waiting for.

Peace,
Bob

Part 2: Pastor Dan on the Challenge of Engaging Middle Church

Dear Bob,

I'm honored to be joining this conversation with you. You and I have a little bit of overlap in our lives: like you, I started my career in urban ministry. And like you, I know the pleasures of Pennsylvania coal country, having done long-term pulpit supply in Mahanoy City.

I must say though that it was mighty unfair of you to throw the words of Jesus at me in your opening post. How to argue with George W. Bush's favorite philosopher?

It is beyond arguing, I think, that Jesus calls us to a hard path. Love, as you rightly note, is a difficult ethic to maintain consistently. It takes courage, wisdom, and not a little shrewdness to escape the usual course of history. But that's exactly what the gospel of that "'whole' Bible" calls us to do. We are to do justice, love kindness, and walk humbly with our God, to borrow Micah's well-worn phrase. If you don't understand that, you haven't understood the Bible. It's that simple.

I do wonder how many people get that, though. You say that

Middle Church folks know there will be hell to pay when the world is judged against these standards: a world at war, a world in which millions lie dying in poverty, a world in which human beings revile and persecute one another, a world in which governments sanction abuse and torture.

But I'm not so sure. What I see a lot of, even in the denominations represented by the National Council of Churches, is what Doug Muder called Inherited Obligation families and the morality that follows from that model of human interaction. Not to bore you too much, Muder believes that for many Americans, morality is less about negotiating the ethical dilemmas of the world than it is understanding the niche one has been assigned and fulfilling that role to the best of one's ability.

That's morally consequential in that it encourages political quietism, especially in a time when the family seems besieged. Simply put, so many people are so taxed with the burden of being a good father or mother or assorted relative that it gets to be very difficult for them to consider issues much beyond that. I agree that they have a sense that something is dreadfully wrong with the world. But do they have the insight to understand the role they play in larger systems? Do they understand that they are personally called to "bringing war, poverty and injustice to an end"?

And have we, the leaders of Middle Church, done enough to make them understand?

Yours, Dan

Part One:

Dear Dan,

I'm happy to have the chance to join in this exchange with you about faith and politics in America. I'm on the road talking to people around the country about my new book, Middle Church, so I'm glad to have the chance to trade thoughts with you. When I’m asked to describe the folks who worship in “Middle Church,�? I often reply, “Middle Church folks read the whole bible.�?

I know laypersons who make it a spiritual discipline to read the Bible from Genesis to Revelation each year. That’s great, but it’s not what I mean by reading the “whole�? bible. Middle Church folks know that when they hear justice described as “an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth,�? a very important phase has been omitted.

Jesus said: “You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ But I say to you, Do not resist an evildoer. But if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also …�? (Matthew 5:38-39, NRSV).

The fact is, Middle Church people read enough of the Bible to know that the realm of God described by Jesus sets certain standards of conduct and faith that are difficult to live up to, but are nonetheless expected of us by the Creator of the Universe.

When Democratic and Republican representatives stand before one another to excoriate our enemies, their words can sound very satisfying. The words of Jesus, however, set a different standard. “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy,’�? he said. But he adds: “Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.�? (Matthew 5:43, NRSV).

Granted, the commission to love our enemies is not an easy one, and I don’t think you’re going to hear many politicians using the phrase this fall in their campaigns. But if they read the “whole�? bible, they will know what kind of dilemma they face. The Creator of the Universe expects us – commands us – to love our enemies and turn the other cheek.

Middle Church folks who read the “whole�? Bible know that the realm of God is a place where the weak are protected, the poor are helped, prisoners are treated justly and the diverse nations and peoples of the world engage one another in peace. “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to bring good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to let the oppressed go free, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.�? (Luke 4:18-19).

Middle Church folks know there will be hell to pay when the world is judged against these standards: a world at war, a world in which millions lie dying in poverty, a world in which human beings revile and persecute one another, a world in which governments sanction abuse and torture.

We would certainly rest more comfortably if we could convince ourselves that God does not expect us to play a big role in bringing war, poverty and injustice to an end.

But Middle Church people, in thousands of church schools and churches and congregations across the nation, read the “whole�? bible. And they know that. In the end, they will be held to a higher standard.

I look forward to your thoughts on Middle Church people, faith and politics.

Sincerely,
Bob

Posted by Pastor Dan at 02:30 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (7)

Last night on the CBS Evening News, Rev. Jim Wallis of Sojourners and Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council were highlighted in a report on the diversity within the evangelical community. It was a strong spot for those working for justice and the common good. Jim was his usual affable, articulate self while talking about the progressive history of the evangelical community and the diverse political priorities its members have today.

On the other side, Tony Perkins spoke with the lack of charity that one expects from Religious Right leaders out of step with mainstream America. When the interviewer pointed out that Rev. Wallis sees himself as squarely in the middle of the evangelical community in America, Tony responded:

'Well, you know what's usually in the middle, it's dead cats and skunks that have been run over.'

What's the chapter and verse on that one Tony?

This only underscores how out of touch with mainstream America the Religious Right has become. As Faith in Public Life's recent polling compilation demonstrates, most Americans consider themselves religious centrists. Hopefully Mr. Perkins doesn't plan on running us all over along with Rev. Wallis!

Posted by David Buckley at 01:06 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (19)

On a recent edition of the 700 Club, Rev. Pat Robertson again graced viewers with his nuanced interpretation of Islamic thought: "Osama bin Laden may be one of the true disciples of the teaching of the Quran ... because he's following through literally word-for-word what it says." Robertson added: "Islam is not a religion of peace. No way." Hat tip to Media Matters for the great research (as always!).

Check out the audio to the right for a much more articulate take on interfaith relations and response to Rev. Robertson from Islamoyankee of the great blog Islamicate...

Posted by David Buckley at 10:47 AM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (2)

Yesterday Amy Sullivan, alum of Faith in Public LIVE, stepped into the ring with Bill O'Reilly on the Radio Factor to talk religion and politics. Click the link to the right for audio of their exchange. We think Amy comported herself just fine in the 'No Spin Zone.'

A few highlights from the transcript:

O’REILLY: Alright. Let’s bring in Amy Sullivan. She’s an editor, contributing at Washington Monthly, author of a forthcoming book on religion in the left, and she’s a graduate of the Harvard Divinity School. Have you seen this Baylor study? Does it surprise you?

SULLIVAN: You know, there are a few surprises, including one of the things you pointed out, which is it turns out there are fewer secularist in America than we though. So, you know, I think that’s bad news for both the right and the left. I think that—

O’REILLY: Why is it bad news for the right?

SULLIVAN: Well, it’s bad news for the right because you guys are going have to find a new boogeyman if it turns out that there’s not a growing secularist scourge in America.

SULLIVAN: Well, that’s what you have to ask is when you look down this list of what people think the federal government should do, you know, distribute wealth more evenly, regulate businesses, protect the environment, affirmative action. I mean you have to ask why they’re not voting for Democrats and I think that answer is further on down with the national security stuff. And I think you throw in, not necessarily of how people think about abortion and gay marriage, because they say those aren’t the most important issues.

SULLIVAN: Some Democrats are often scared of talking about religion because they think it’s gonna drive off some folks. And I think they look at these numbers and find out, even people who say they don’t go to church often pray and they believe in God and they think religion’s important. So they’re gonna suddenly turn around and vote for, I don’t know, maybe Ralph Nader, if you start talking about religion too much.

O’REILLY: No. And I think Democrats – you’re absolutely right – would be wise to look at this study and say, “You know, if I’m gonna come out in favor of gay marriage I better clarify that. You know, and I better, I better explain to the folks exactly where I’m coming from because 89 percent are involved with a deity at some level.

Posted by David Buckley at 05:41 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (3)

Oy! Is George Allen a self-hating Jew?  Jspot posts video of "Gevalt" Allen doing an angry, sputtering discussion of his heritage. Jew lover Mik Moore supplies sharp analysis:

"This can only mean that he felt that the reporter was insulting him, or his mother, by talking about their Jewish ancestry. Coming right at the end of his remarks, it revealed that his alleged anger over the reporter's disdain for the first amendment was a cover for what he was really angry about: being outed in front of his constituents as the son of a Jew."

It's a values smackdown over at Beliefnet. Jim Wallis and Ralph Reed dialoging this week on the new God's Politics blog. Wallis states: "The Religious Right has now lost control of the evangelical political agenda  and here's why."

Chuck Currie answers the question: according to the beliefs of your religion whats sorts of electronic material should not be found on the internet?

Posting for CrossLeft, Big Daddy Weave points out that Calvinism is on the rise in the Southern Baptist Convention.

For Talk to Action, Frederick Clarkson welcomes Sen. Danforth to the fold. Apparently Sen. Danforth confesses:

"Maybe I was obtuse. . . But in my own mind, it didn't have the urgency until the Schiavo case. In the past year or so, what was maybe a general interest of Robertson and others in politics and one particular issue, namely abortion, has been transformed into something much more detailed and much more a full-fledged political agenda."

Islamicate writes on Packer's New Yorker profile of Taha. And also weighs in on the Pope's recent comment. As does City of Brass, saying: "apology accepted, but the damage is done."

Posted by Alex Carpenter at 12:18 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

Two great events took place yesterday in the Beltway world of faith and politics.

The morning started out with an event at the Center for American Progress featuring Dr. Bob Edgar speaking about his new book Middle Church. The event was moderated by Rev. Jennifer Butler, executive director of Faith in Public Life, who just came out with a book of her own titled Born Again: the Christian Right Globalized. She and Edgar had a great conversation about the state of the progressive faith movement and where it’s headed.

Edgar served for six terms in Congress and is currently the general secretary of the National Council of Churches. His book outlines his vision for what he calls the “middle church, middle mosque, middle synagogue…�? He focuses on the idea that religious Americans need to turn away from the “three F’s�?: fear, fundamentalism and Fox News, and to embrace the “three P’s�?: peace, poverty and planet. The book calls for the members of the middle church to unite to get their message out and to “reclaim the moral values of the faithful majority from the Christian Right.�?

In response to a question about his current post, Edgar spoke passionately about the rich history of the National Council of Churches, and about his hope that the NCC is headed back in the right direction. He also recounted a great story about his very spiritual experience of being arrested as part of a protest while praying on the steps of the Sudanese embassy. He spoke of the connection he felt to the many faith leaders who had spent time in jail because of civil disobedience, but at the same time he joked that while many of them had written letters from jail, he was only there for and hour and a half so all he had to show from it was a post-it.

To hear more from Edgar, check out his book—or just follow our blog for the next couple days. In a new edition of Faith in Public LIVE, Edgar will be discussing his book with Pastor Dan from Streets Prophets.

And as if that weren’t enough inspiration for the faithful progressives for one day, a media education event on re-examining the term “values voter�? was held this afternoon, co-sponsored by Faith in Public Life, Sojourners, and Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good. This event featured a panel moderated by Jim Wallis and featuring Steven Waldman, the founder of Beliefnet; Melissa Rogers, a church-state expert; and Stephen Schneck, director of the Life Cycle Institute at the Catholic University of America.

The event was organized as a prelude to the Values Voter Summit that the Family Research Council is sponsoring this weekend. The Summit will feature 35 speakers including notables like Jerry Falwell, Tony Perkins and Ann Coulter. The event this afternoon was meant to give the media some perspective about the other side of the story--about that “faithful majority,�? as Bob Edgar would put it. Faith in Public Life helped put some facts behind all the talk by putting together a polling sheet outlining the real values of the American voters (see the document attached to this post), and a rap sheet revealing the real values of some of those who will be speaking at the summit. Interestingly enough, though Jerry Falwell still doesn't believe in global warming, 63% of Americans lok favorably on environmentalists, while only 44% look favorably on the Christian conservative movement.

After some not-so-brief (but suitably interesting) remarks from the panel members on their visions of the “values voter�?—with a lot more focus on poverty and peace than you’ll ever hear from Ann Coulter—the media jumped in with questions on everything from the lack of attention given to women who work for progressive faith to the type of candidate that might appeal to these new values voters. All in all it seemed like the press got the point—and hopefully if they go to the summit this weekend, they’ll approach it with a more skeptical eye.

To learn more about the new values voter, check out the feature on our homepage and be sure to see the file below for some stats on just how big a values gap there is between Americans and the Religious Right.

Posted by Allison Palm at 09:57 AM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (7)

One of the reasons we've been involved in the blogosphere at Faith in Public Life is to promote bonds between all of the exciting voices blogging and the established faith organizations working for justice and the common good around the country. With that in mind, it's exciting to announce that Rev. Jim Wallis of Sojourners and some friends have just launched a new blog over at Beliefnet.com. Check it out now to see Jim trade posts with Ralph Reed.

For those keeping score at home, the addition of Sojourners is just the latest in a long line of religious groups using blogs to accentuate their advocacy for the common good. Dr. Bob Edgar is blogging here right now, and on his own book tour blog. The Interfaith Alliance's State of Belief podcasts and blogs to spread the radio word. Rabbi David Saperstein's Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism and the Catholic magazine Commonweal have recently upgraded their sites significantly with shiney new community blogs. Not bad progress towards our goal of integrating blogging into faithful advocacy for the common good!

Posted by David Buckley at 03:28 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

Text of Bob Casey's remarks at Catholic University (hat tip to Faithful Democrats, who have the only text of the speech I can find so far):

Bob Casey's Speech Restoring Amerca's Moral Compass

Restoring America's Moral Compass: Leadership and the Common Good"
Delivered at Catholic University, Washington, D.C.

It is an honor to be asked to speak here today in the 38th annual Pope John XXIII lecture. I am humbled to be following such distinguished lecturers, including my own father who spoke here in 1994. I would like to thank the President of Catholic University, Father O'Connell, the Dean of the Law School, Dean Veryl Miles, and the faculty and students for this invitation. I am looking forward to our discussion over the next hour...

After I graduated from Holy Cross and before I came here to Catholic University Law School, I spent a year in the Jesuit Volunteer Corps. I taught fifth grade and coached the basketball team at the Gesu School at 18th and Thompson streets in North Philadelphia. The Gesu was and is a wonderful school in a low-income, inner-city neighborhood. Kindergarten through eighth grade, the school is run by Jesuit fathers and IHM sisters, but few of the students are Catholic.

The children at the Gesu taught me more than I could ever teach them. I learned much about their struggles and the challenges their family faced everyday. During my year at the Gesu, I lived in another section of North Philly, near 23rd and Tioga Streets. You learn a lot about a city and its people by living in a neighborhood and riding public transportation. I remember riding the 33 Bus in the morning and evening and seeing working mothers get on the bus with grocery bags and their children. I was not in Scranton any more.

My short year as a Jesuit volunteer had a profound impact on my life, and the struggles of those I met in the inner city continue to inspire me. Those lessons I learned are central to what I'd like to talk to you about today.

I am here today to talk to you about an America where we are known for what unites us, not what keeps us apart; where we are better defined by our hopes, not our fears; where we measure our success as a nation not by the abundance of those who have much but by the opportunities for those who have little; and where our moral authority rather than just our military might is what maintains our superpower status throughout the world. I speak of what we all know America must be: a country dedicated to the common good.

The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops' latest publication of a Guide to Faithful Citizenship states: "Politics in this election year and beyond should be about an old idea with new power - the common good. The central question should not be, 'Are you better off than you were four years ago?' It should be, 'How can we - all of us, especially the weak and vulnerable - be better off in the years ahead?'"

That's the right question.

My understanding of our common good comes from my family and my faith. Anyone growing up in a family of eight children learns about the importance of the common good whether you want to or not. But I was especially blessed to have parents who taught me about the common good by the way they lived their lives and raised our family.

My understanding of the common good also comes from my faith: faith in God, that all things will ultimately work to His greater good; and my faith in the ingenuity, compassion, and generosity of all Americans to give their time, talent, and treasure to make this country great. There is a beautiful definition of "faith" in the book of Hebrews. The scriptures tell us, "faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." I will get into the substance of my hopes in just a minute, but the evidence of our country's potential is not so hard to see because we've been there before.

When I was growing up, most parents believed that their children would have better lives and more opportunities than they themselves had, and we all believed in the promise of tomorrow and a brighter future. A perfect example of that belief was my grandfather, Alphonsus L. Casey, who went to work in the darkness and danger of the anthracite coal mines as a mule boy when he was just 11 years old. The novelist Stephen Crane wrote about miners and mule boys "toiling in this city of endless night." And he described how mule boys would carry a lamp and "run ahead with the light" in the darkness. Only in a country like America could a mule boy go on to earn a law degree and create a new life for himself and his family, one that would inspire his son to carry a different kind of light as the governor of Pennsylvania.

But something seems to have changed in recent years. Instead of hope, fear threatens to become the pervasive feeling in this country. We now live in a country where, according to a recent Pew study, only one third of all parents expect their children to be better off than they themselves are. And around the world, America is losing the moral authority that has made us the standard for other nations to emulate. Many factors play into these changes. But at the core is something quite simple: Many of our leaders have lost their moral compass and no longer seem to believe that the purpose of government should be to promote the common good.

Justice

The common good must first be based upon a solid foundation of justice. As Saint Augustine taught us: "Without justice, what are kingdoms but great bands of robbers?" Justice cannot abide 34 million people in poverty and 8.3 million children without health care. Justice cannot ignore the suffering of millions of parents in this country who have to face the soul-crushing thought that they might have to tell their child to go to bed hungry...or who realize that they simply cannot afford the medical treatment their child needs. Justice demands our understanding that the hungry, the impoverished, and the uninsured in this country are not statistics, they are children of God. They are our brothers and sisters, our fellow Americans.

We see poverty on the rise and middle-income families struggling to make ends meet not because they lack the drive to make a better life for themselves and their families. Rather, the problem stems from mistaken priorities and failed leadership. As Franklin Delano Roosevelt stated so wisely, "It is an unfortunate human failing that a full pocketbook often groans more loudly than an empty stomach." And that is exactly what we've seen. At a time when the number of working poor in this country keeps increasing year after year, tax cuts for the wealthy should not be the price we are asked to pay for an increase in the minimum wage.

Just a few weeks ago, we remembered the anniversary of Hurricane Katrina. The inexcusable response to Katrina was not the result of malice, but of malign neglect on the part of our government. Katrina stands as a tragic example of what happens when governments are so consumed with their own agenda that they stop paying attention to the needs of their people.

Sadly, soaring deficits and mistaken priorities have also spawned a series of "slower-moving Katrinas" that threaten our schools, our environment, our economy, and our security. Devastation doesn't always come with the awful swiftness of a hurricane. Often it takes years. But neglect, fueled by arrogance, can cause problems to fester. All Americans are affected when our government does not fulfill its duties. But far too often it is the least, the last, and the lost among us who pay the greatest price for our governmental failings.

As my father once wrote: "Only government, when all else fails, can safeguard the vulnerable and powerless. When it reneges on that obligation, freedom becomes a hollow word. A hard-working person unable to find work and support his or her family is not free. A person for whom sickness means financial ruin, with no health insurance to soften the blow, is not free. A malnourished child, an uneducated child, a child trapped in foster care - these children are not free. And without a few breaks along the way from government, such children in most cases will never be truly free." When our government seeks to reward the powerful and enrich the wealthy at the expense of the average working American, it is no longer a question of economics or politics. It is a question of justice.

Integrity & Compassion

The common good must also be based upon compassion, informed by integrity, bearing witness to the truth. As many of you know, I am a pro-life Democrat. I believe that life begins at conception and ends when we draw our last breath. And I believe that the role of government is to protect, enrich, and value life for everyone, at every moment, from beginning to end.

We must unite as a country, Democrats and Republicans, behind the understanding that the common good requires us to value all life. For 33 years, this issue has been used mostly as a way to divide people, even as the number of abortions continues to rise. We have to find a better way.

There have been times when members of my party have vigorously opposed me because of my position on abortion. And those of you with long memories can recall a dark night in 1992 when the national Democratic Party insulted the most courageous pro-life public official in our party who simply asked that those who believed in the right to life be accorded the right to speak. But things have changed over the ensuing 14 years. I have been encouraged to see Democrats in this new century becoming more open to people who are pro-life. The common good can be advanced by working towards common ground.

For example, pro-life Democrats in the House are on the verge of introducing legislation that would work toward real solutions to our abortion problem by targeting the underlying factors that often lead women to choose abortion. As a public official, I will continue to work within the party to ensure that Democrats are welcoming and open to such initiatives.

Abortion is clearly an important life issue, and as a Catholic, I understand that life extends beyond the womb. In my view, neither party has gotten it right when it comes to life issues. We can't realistically expect to tackle the difficult question of abortion without embracing the "radical solidarity" with women who face a pregnancy that Pope John Paul II spoke of many years ago.

If we are going to be pro-life, we cannot say we are against abortion of unborn children and then let our children suffer in degraded inner-city schools and broken homes. We can't claim to be pro-life at the same time as we are cutting support for Medicaid, Head Start, and the Women, Infants, and Children's program. I believe we need policies that provide maximum feasible legal protection for the unborn and maximum feasible care and support for pregnant women, mothers, and children. The right to life must mean the right to a life with dignity.

Service

It is this understanding that draws many Americans to another building block for the common good: service. The Reverend Doctor Martin Luther King, Jr. said: "Everyone can be great because everyone can serve." One of the greatest paradoxes of our faith is that it is in humbling ourselves in service to others when we are lifted up, and it is in giving when we receive. This is a complicated principle, but it is clearly something most Americans understand. Just ask the priest who runs the midnight basketball league in his community; or the woman who shows up every Saturday morning at the food kitchen; or the church community that builds Habitat homes. These people understand that their interests are served through the common good when they serve others.

That is the underlying principle of another kind of service, public service. One of the best statements on public service is inscribed on the building where I work in Harrisburg. "All public service is a trust given in faith and accepted in honor." A country that seeks the common good must have leaders who understand and honor that sacred trust. Yet sadly, our government has been plagued in recent years by corruption, the abuse of power, and politicians who put personal and political gain over what is best for America. Corruption is bad enough for what it costs from a financial and policy perspective, but worst of all, it erodes confidence in government.

The common good can never be achieved if we continue to allow our country's special interests to trump our moral interests. We must wipe corruption from the halls of government. To do that, we need leaders with the moral courage to match the courage of everyday Americans.

Community

Finally, the common good is about community. The common good for the entire human community summons us to take steps to counter the effects that human activity is having on all life on earth. We are called to be good stewards of God's creation, and America should stand as an example to other nations of how we must protect Creation for future generations. The great statesman, Edmund Burke, put it well when he said, "history is a pact between the dead, the living, and the yet unborn."

We have inherited Creation from those who came before us, and it will be one of the most tangible things we leave to our children and our children's children. In the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, the connection between the environment and the common good is expressed in our State Constitution. Since this is an audience of lawyers, I wanted to be sure to give you the citation.

In Article I, Section 27, we read: "The people have a right to clean air, pure water, and to the preservation of the natural, scenic, historic and esthetic values of the environment. Pennsylvania's public natural resources are the common property of all the people, including generations yet to come. As trustee of these resources, the Commonwealth shall conserve and maintain them for the benefit of all the people." After all, what could be more in the interest of the common good than clean air, fresh water, and a healthy and sustainable environment?

Our moral obligation to the common good and to building community is based on a fundamental belief that we are all in this together, we are our brother's keeper, and a go-it-alone culture leaves us isolated, insecure, and morally bankrupt. I greatly admire the words of Pope John XXIII -- for whom this lecture series is named. As he so eloquently expressed in his landmark encyclical Pacem in Terris, we cannot fully grasp the concept of the common good without looking beyond our borders and understanding that we are all part of a global community.

Pacem in Terris focused on peace, human rights, and the concept of the universal common good. It was written in 1963 for an extremely divided world. The Berlin Wall had been erected two years earlier, and just months before the world had come to the brink of a nuclear war during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Many believed that humanity was condemned to live indefinitely in the precarious condition of "cold war," praying that neither an accident nor an act of aggression would trigger nuclear annihilation.

I believe the lessons of Pope John still apply today. As we remember the fifth anniversary of the September 11th attacks this week, my thoughts keep returning to where we were on September 12th when the world had rallied behind us and every American was ready to make the sacrifices necessary to protect the country we love. We will long remember the sacrifice of firefighters, police officers, and other rescue workers who rushed into the burning towers. To be worthy of their sacrifice, or as Lincoln said, "their last full measure of devotion," we should have united our country and the world around a common purpose. Instead, in the ensuing five years, some of our leaders continued to divide Americans from their fellow citizens, and isolate our nation from the rest of world.

As we remember September 11th this week, I believe our world is in dire need of the vision John XXIII offered for global cooperation in the pursuit of the common good. As he said: "Each country's social progress, order, security, and peace are necessarily linked with the social progress, order, security, and peace of every other country. From this, it is clear that no State can fittingly pursue its own interests in isolation from the rest."

For too long, we have failed to heed this prophetic wisdom. America's position in the world should be based on leadership, not brinksmanship; on hope, instead of fear. We will win the war on terrorism not by acting alone but in concert with our allies. As the greatest nation on earth, America's leadership in the international community must again be defined by how we unite Americans, and by how we show leadership abroad to confront the great global challenges of our time: the spread of terrorism and the need for international security; the plague of global poverty that brings suffering and death to billions of lives around the globe; stopping the spread of HIV/AIDS; and the dark threat to human life posed by global warming.

As history has proven time and again, an idea can ultimately be more powerful than any army or force of nature. As we fight the war on terror, our military must be made more robust: our troops must be better-armed, better-equipped, and better-led by their civilian leaders. We must confront the threat of terrorism with every weapon in the arsenal of democracy - military might, to be sure - and our diplomatic power, our political power, and our economic power as well. But as mighty as our military is, as efficient as our economy is, as creative as we would like our diplomacy to be, they are not what made America what Lincoln called "the last, best hope of the world." Our ultimate weapon is the moral force of America.

Although some say the war on terror will be a war without end, I disagree. We will win this war -- as we won the Cold War against Communist tyranny -- yes, because of our military might, and yes because of our economic and diplomatic leadership. But in the end, we won the Cold War, and we will win this war through moral force and by the strength of the idea that is America. Throughout our history, nations have followed our leadership abroad and our country has prospered at home because we have been a nation that has stood for and defended the common good. We must make America that place again.

I believe that we stand at a crossroads in history, much as our country faced forty years ago when Pope John XXIII wrote his great encyclical. Our nation is hungering for leaders who will call us to the service and sacrifice needed to make America what we know it can be. As Americans, we must challenge each other to give our time, talent, and treasure in service, so that we may realize the full potential of the gifts every single American has to offer this country we love, and ultimately this world of which we are all citizens.

So to the law students here today--as tomorrow's leaders--I ask you to seek the common good and help restore America's moral compass. We must recommit ourselves to affirming the human dignity of every individual and the belief that by helping those around us, we build a better world. For we can live up to our moral obligation to promote the common good only when we see the connection between our individual well-being and that of our neighbors', and the connection between our national security and the security of all nations. That is an idea worthy of our sacrifice and the proud traditions of our nation and our faith.

Pursuing the common good will not be easy. It will not be the path of least resistance. It will not be the smooth road. But I have faith that, ultimately, we will complete this journey. When I look at the students here today and when I think back on the example of my parents, the struggles of the families in north Philadelphia, the resilience of the American people, I see the substance of the things we all hope for, and the even greater potential for our nation.

Our American sense of the common good has always been nurtured by an uncommon optimism as old as our Republic. As the Constitutional Convention in 1787 was concluding its work in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania's delegate, Benjamin Franklin, wondered whether a carving of the sun on the back of the President's chair depicted a rising or a setting sun. He would later say: "Now I have the happiness to know that it is a rising and not a setting sun."

As we look to our future here in the United States, as one family, always seeking the common good, let it be said of us that we acted with justice, spoke the truth, and cared for the vulnerable in the ever-rising sun of America's tomorrow. Thank you.

Posted by David Buckley at 11:27 AM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (2)

Bill O'Reilly must not have been ready for Bob's message, because they've had to cancel for today. Hopefully Rev. Edgar will get to make his return soon.

Next week, Faith in Public LIVE will return with Rev. Bob Edgar exchanging posts with Pastor Dan of Street Prophets. Rev. Edgar has just released his latest book, Middle Church, in which he talks about the common ground religious values that unite Americans. This afternoon he'll go to one of the nation's most conservative media sources to defend his view.

Tune in at these two times to hear Rev. Edgar set out his vision of faith and politics in America.

4-5PM (ED): The Michael Medved Show (Salem Radio)

Bill O'Reilly must not have been ready for Bob's message, because they've had to cancel for today. Hopefully Rev. Edgar will get to make his return soon.

Posted by David Buckley at 03:02 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

With all the new polls lately on religion and politics it’s hard to keep up with the latest numbers. Luckily, Faith in Public Life has got you covered with a new addition to the issues section of the website: Polling on Faith and Politics. While you’re there, check out the other great resources available on everything from immigration and Darfur to the most recent best sellers on religion and politics.

Some highlights from the new page:

The Baylor Survey of Religion released just yesterday puts a new spin on things by looking at religious beliefs without regard to religious affiliation. Rather than lumping people together into categories like "Protestant", "Catholic" and "Not Religious" and assuming that everyone in those categories holds the same beliefs, this survey compares the actual beliefs and practices of Americans in these groups. Apparently, according to the Baylor stats on non-believers, the so-called atheists in America believe in a lot more than we thought.

The Pew forum has put out numerous polls over the last couple months including one in August highlighting the controversies about the role of religion in politics and one in May which took another look at the supposed “God gap.�?

Using the results of a 2004 poll by Greenberg Quinlan Rosner, Stan Greenberg outlines his plan for the effective use of religion by Democrats.

In a Center for American Progress poll from June 2006 Americans say wish for a government that is more focused on the common good.

A poll by CBS News shares some frightening statistics on American’s increasingly unfavorable perception of Islam.

Sojourners takes a look at the state of religion in America in a Zogby poll just after the 2004 election.

Posted by Allison Palm at 12:52 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

From Rev. Peter Laarman, Director of Progressive Christians Uniting and valued partner of FPL.

The Right’s appropriation of Reinhold Niebuhr’s legacy is, to me, a significant if minor footnote to the larger chronicle of a triumphant conservative resurgence over the course of four decades. What the right-wingers like about Niebuhr, it goes without saying, is his willingness, especially later in his long career, to sanction the use of U.S. military power for worthy ends. My purpose is not to apotheosize Niebuhr or to excuse his susceptibility to the blandishments of the powerful. I want simply to focus in on Niehbuhr’s core insight that Christians should see the world as it is and act ethically in the light of a clear-sighted realism. For the neoconservatives and for most other Right ideologues, “realism�? means understanding how bad they are–all the “enemies of freedom,�? “Islamo-fascists,�? etc.; yet surely a major part of Niebuhr’s realism entailed understanding our own propensity to sinning, our own capacity for self-deception and hubris. It’s this kind of Christian Realism that is in critically short supply right now.

Clear-sighted realism, whether Christian or otherwise, is a scarce commodity in all of contemporary U.S. culture, suggesting that American Christians, for the most part, are every bit as encapsulated in the corporate-media mystification bubble as everyone else. The fact that fully 40 percent of adult Americans–and a solid majority of self-described Christians–still believe that Saddam Hussein was behind the 9-11 attacks only begins to scratch the surface of Americans’ willful ignorance and credulity.

Other evidence of the advanced decay of critical faculties in this land:

• a public that seems barely aware, let alone alarmed, over the implications of Bush’s push to get his official eavesdropping, his military tribunals (which allow the use of coerced evidence), and official U.S. government torture legalized by Congress; this latest push–and this administration’s concomitant fearmongering about terrorists at the gate–amounts to nothing else than an attempted coup d’etat, but almost no one seems attuned to that reality. All the White House needs to do to advance its agenda is to bray, “Do you want to give Miranda rights to terrorists?�? Very few seem to be fazed or outraged by the depth of such villainy.
• an American public that continues to be ruled by fear. So fearful are we that it is hard for us even to imagine how the Londoners of 1940, who saw 30,000 (not 3,000) of their neighbors die, and 100,000 houses destroyed, during the first days of the Luftwaffe blitz, kept going about their business with quiet calm and courage, refusing to surrender to their fear.
• a public that may have finally turned against the Iraq war but only because that war now looks unwinnable and not because the whole premise of the invasion and subsequent occupation was profoundly immoral and illegal
• a huge majority of self-described Christians who can still judge George W. Bush to be a deeply moral and decent man despite his obvious lack of a moral compass
• almost no public agitation for the impeachment of this president for his easily-documented high crimes and misdemeanors: misleading Congress in the run-up to the Iraq war, recklessly endangering members of our armed forces, openly violating key provisions of the Constitution, etc.
• an American public that still doesn’t seem to understand how thoroughly its pockets are being picked by the set of policies that constitute what Bush and his cohorts are pleased to call an “ownership society.�?

It is this last blindness, I think, that holds the key to the rest. The heart of our collective stupor is connected to the way Americans think of themselves as consumers rather than as citizens. So we don’t care, for example, if the oil is running out or if carbon emissions are suffocating the earth itself; what we care about is whether the price of gas is going to go up to $4. We tell pollsters that we’re still doing okay because we’re still spending at a rate that makes us happy, even if our household savings are in the negative zone and we are funding our purchases on maxed-out credit cards and shaky home equity loans. We take comfort in the fact that the U.S. still has the world’s most productive economy, but we fail to see that the price of that productivity is chronic overwork, not technological innovation or wise use of productive capital.

Consumption is a lonely pursuit, but it is a pursuit that accords perfectly with the high level of small-bore anxiety that rules our culture. Shouldn’t I trade up and out of this tired-looking house? Have I bought them enough gear to make my kids feel okay with their school peers? Why can’t I take the kind of vacation my co-workers take instead of going to the same old place every year? I don’t have an I-pod or a Mac computer or a plasma TV–is there something wrong with me?

Consumerism pits me against other consuming monads. It invites me to think about how well I will fare when I’m ready for retirement, how I am going to cope with outrageous health care costs, how I will finesse getting the education I need in order to compete for material success; it definitely does not invite us to think collectively about how we will fare in retirement, maintain our health, or gain education for the enhancement of life itself rather than for purposes of workplace competition. This latter way of thinking–thinking about the “we�? and doing so with the benefit of critical consciousness–is the business of citizenship, not consumerism.

But aren’t Christians supposed to be about the “we�?? Did not Jesus teach us to pray, “Our Father, who art in Heaven�? and “give us this day our daily bread�?? Did Jesus not warn us not to “store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt and whe