Spunky Homeschool

Faith in the Public Square

Jun. 30, 2006 at 10:08 AM

Homeschooling

Barack Obama - US Senator from Illinois gave a speech on Wednesday about the role of religion in public life.

Secularists are wrong when they ask believers to leave their religion at the door before entering into the public square. Frederick Douglas, Abraham Lincoln, Williams Jennings Bryant, Dorothy Day, Martin Luther King -- indeed, the majority of great reformers in American history -- were not only motivated by faith, but repeatedly used religious language to argue for their cause. To say that men and women should not inject their "personal morality" into public policy debates is a practical absurdity; our law is by definition a codification of morality, much of it grounded in the Judeo-Christian tradition....

Democracy demands that the religiously motivated translate their concerns into universal, rather than religion-specific, values. It requires that their proposals be subject to argument and amenable to reason....

This may be difficult for those who believe in the inerrancy of the Bible, as many evangelicals do. But in a pluralistic democracy, we have no choice.

Al Mohler called this idea
"secularism with a smile -- offered in the form of an invitation for believers to show up, but then only to be allowed to make arguments that are not based in their deepest beliefs."
It could be that. But at least Senator Obama speech opens the discussion between the secular and those of faith in our society today. It is rare, to say the least, to hear a liberal leader even willing to talk about the uneasy tension between church and state and acknowledge that morality has a place in public policy.

It's not just progressive politicans that are discussing the tension but others as well. Walter Shurden gave a speech at the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Freedom where he expressed great worry over the "militancy of the right wing".

I am suggesting, however, that there are "American Christians" for whom the adjective is more important than the noun.

I am suggesting that some Christian churches in our country have been transformed into political temples and some pastors have embraced the moniker of "patriot pastors."

I am suggesting that devoted theocrats have an eye on the machinery of national and state governments, and that they make no apology for it.

He was specifically worried about groups like Generation Joshua who "turn Christian, home-schooled students into political foot soldiers to gain political power in order to subsume everything—entertainment, law, government, and education—under their right wing version of Christianity." and the Christian Coalition.

I am a Christian homeschooler who believes in the inerrancy of the Bible, but that doesn't mean I am determined to turn the United States or the world into a theocracy. I am not a Christian Reconstructionists. Nor do I belong to either group mentioned above. However, I do think it is totally within the bounds of public discourse in America to talk about my faith and how it helps shape my convictions and opinions - and to do so without having to translate them into "universal values" as Mr Obama suggests. And if that is how public policy is shaped, so be it. Further, we are raising our children that no matter what they end up as a vocation, that their faith guide their principles and decisions that could include government office. Is that so bad? Is there room in America for people like me?

Related News Stories :The Washington Post, The Chicago Tribune, ABC News, Associated Baptist Press.

Related Tags: , , , , ,

5 Comments and Trackbacks

posted by gabalot on Jun. 30, 2006 at 6:53 PM

Isn't it interesting that when conservative Christians specifically have an agenda and/or purpose, such as leading and teaching young (willing) men and women to have a place in public policy, we are spotlighted in a negative way, yet the ACLU can have an agenda and they are applauded for their efforts. I personally appreciate the efforts of those organizations like Generation Joshua and what they hope to accomplish. I can only pray that our generation of homeschoolers will rise up in areas of public policy and change the dangerous direction of our country. As for the left, they see the christian as a group to win over, just as they did women and the black vote. I worry that too many won't recognize the smoke screen.

posted by SusannahCox on Jul. 1, 2006 at 3:28 PM

Dr. Shurden! He was a prof. of mine back in college!

He gave me the snickers award for favorite paper!

I am not surprised, though, at his take on things.

posted by spunkyhomeschool on Jul. 1, 2006 at 3:30 PM

Wow is that wild. Did you like him? Was he this antagonistic toward the religious right or conservatives back then?

posted by on Jul. 1, 2006 at 3:36 PM

I wouldn't call him antagonistic. He would probably describe himself as a "moderate," I would guess (though I can't speak for him). I'm not sure of his theological views, because I was a journalism student and only had one course with him.

I took a senior capstone class called "Quest for Wholeness" in which we read Langdon Gilkey's *Shantung Compound* (which appealed to the conservative in me) as well as a book by Matthew Fox, who syncretizes (is that a word?) Catholicism with Eastern type religion, and which I considered pure silliness. We also read some Walker Percy. So we read things from a variety of viewpoints.

ETA: This is back when Adrian Rogers was heading up the Southern Baptist Convention and was "taking back" the seminaries that had begun leaning liberal on theology. It was a big stink at our college and there were cries of "academic freedom." I'm guessing Dr. Shurden wouldn't be on the inerrantist side. :)

Edited by SusannahCox on Jul. 1, 2006 at 12:40 PM

posted by SusannahCox on Jul. 1, 2006 at 3:49 PM

One more comment:

It cracks me up how ordinary involvement in the political process is seen as so "scary" when conservative Christians engage in it. Don't Christians have the right to participate in democracy too, along with everyone else? They get branded as "theocrats" when, as you pointed out, the *vast* majority of evangelicals simply want the *Constitution* to rule America...*not* OT law. (Christian reconstructionism is actually quite a limited movement.)

It all strikes me as a particular brand of bigotry. SO WHAT if young people want to get involved in the political process? It's a non-issue. If they were liberals, you wouldn't hear journalists or commentators or academicians making a peep about it. There is nothing wrong with teaching young people to be politically involved. Don't we hear calls for that in every major election? That is a GOOD thing. Unless they are conservative and you are a liberal (or vice versa, maybe).

Post a comment!