Politics, Moral Deliberations and Religion

The ELCA social statement For Peace in God’s World identifies the church “as a community of moral deliberation”. And, as I discussed here in a previous Blog entry, “moral deliberation” is the task/challenge accepted by the Northern Illinois Synod (ELCA) in Assembly on June 14, 2008!
On the surface such a challenge seems appropriate. Many within the church community believe speaking to morals and morality is one of the tasks of the church. (A task which some would argue has not been well addressed in recent decades.) Teaching youth right from wrong, correct behavior, and encouraging involvement of all ages in those charitable activities that make our communities kinder and better places – certainly those are important in addressing morals.
Yet moral deliberation on the major issues today – terrorism, poverty, hunger, war and peace, health services, global commerce – is a rarity in many of our church communities. Whether from fear or hesitation to take a stand, few parishes engage themselves in searching the resources of Scripture and/or church history relative to those issues!
I think the greater reason is our (clergy and laity) lack of education and training regarding morals and ethics and the processes whereby we come to some acceptable stances. There were no classes on either morality or ethics in my seminary days. The same was true in medicine, nursing, law and almost every other area of studies. Rather there was an assumption that the candidates would just be “morally acceptable”. Period.
Certainly such an approach began to change in the healing occupations in the 1980s. Still, even with added courses on ethics the controversy over treatment decisions for Mary Schiavo indicated there is still much to be done.
Morality as an individual is a major challenge. The right and wrong options each of us face daily are manifold – and our choices, as our Lutheran theology affirms, are never 100% “right”.
Morality in politics – that is, in the public arenas of life, is an even greater challenge. In The Moral Choice [Doubleday & Company 1978] Daniel C. Maguire (a Professor at Marquette University) said:
There is a perennial dilemma surrounding the relationship of good politics and good morals… The fact is that it is necessary and moral to do things in politics that would be unjustifiable in the circumstances of private life. In the political sphere, war might have to be waged, punishment inflicted, personal freedoms limited, properties appropriated by way of eminent domain, etc. The political order has exigencies and complexities that have no part of private life. Thus, moral behavior there will be correspondingly more difficult to judge.
The problem is that because it is more difficult, the moral dimension tends to be dropped. As a result, politics often gets done without conscience. Moral values get relegated to “questions of last resort”. Outside of last-resort matters, then, it appears that one enters a moral free zone where conscience can be dropped before entering….The tendency to create this moral vacuum is the prime problem confronting political ethics…
Questions that are important in private morality are more important in politics, because there is so much more power there. Bringing moral values to bear on the uses of power is the soul of the civilizing process and the goal of ethics. (pp. 19-21)
Pastors and congregations ought to challenge each other during the next months to truly engage in moral deliberations. The focus ought not to judge who has the “right” answer or who the “wrong”. More important is to help each other identify the process and processes whereby one arrives at her or his answer.
There are resources available to help.
Go for it – and there will be changes in which all of us can have hope because public involvement is the key to making democracy work.

Sound Doctrine

“For the time is coming when people will not put up with sound doctrine, but having itching ears, they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own desires, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander away to myths.” [2 Timothy 4:3-4]
This was one of the lessons read at the recent Northern Illinois Synod Ordination Service at which three (3) young persons accepted the commitments for service as an ordained clergy in the ELCA. I’m sure it has been reads at countless other Ordination Services – but, for some reasons, it spoke to me with impact this year.
For the time is coming when people will not put up with sound doctrine –
The HarperCollins Study Bible states that the author “regarded this prediction as being fulfilled in his time.” History suggests Paul wrote this while imprisoned, probably in Rome, Friends seemed to have deserted him and death was imminent. Understandable that any of these factors would precipitate a depression – yet interesting that he ties his misfortunate time to the thought that people were rejecting sound doctrine.
Hearing this text – and reminiscing about my 50+ years of ordination – I realized how often it is tempting to project blame for one’s struggles in ministry to the “people”:
- if only “they” were more faithful
- if only “they” were better educated
- if only “they” were not so easily duped by unsound (?) doctrine and myths.
Certainly such “projections” are frequent today as we (ELCA) strive to understand diminishing numbers or to resolve significant differences about biblical teachings or to find better ways of remaining true to values and be honest with the areas of cognitive dissonances that life in the 21st century presents.
I wondered if these young colleagues in ministry realized what challenges they face. Yet, it was no different in 1957 at my ordination. And, as 2 Timothy suggests, the challenges date back to be beginning of the Church (as well as Old Testament passages that suggest these challenges date to the beginning of time).
Interestingly, that thought was comforting.
We do not minister “alone”. Our seminary education gave us tools to use in our challenges – tools of Systematic Theology, Biblical text studies, Church History. These are not “static” resources, memorized by rote. Rather, they are to be used which includes keeping them up-dated. [The same is true for the tools in my garage workshop. Drills are still drills; hammers are still hammers; - but how they have changed over the years and how easily they rust if care is not provided.] Thus, collegiality is not just an elective. Collegiality is a necessity. We keep each other well-tuned and, where indicated, corrected.
Our real challenge is to “be persistent whether the time is favorable or unfavorable (2 Tim 4:2). Success is the responsibility of God!
Later that evening someone asked if, after all these decades, I’d “do it again?” Without hesitation my answer was – and is – YES.
Hopefully I’d make fewer mistakes; do better in honing the skills and maintaining the tools for and of ministry.
Without hesitation, I can think of no other vocation in this age that is more challenging, more needed, and more rewarding than the Ordained Ministry.
[And when I really get bogged down by “their” addictions to unsound doctrine, may the words of Pogo stay with me: I [we} has met the enemy and he is I [us]!

MORAL DELIBERATION AND NEUTRALITY

One of the Resolutions considered by the Northern Illinois Synod [ELCA] at its 2008 Assembly was a “Call for Moral Deliberation”. The many “Whereas” statements preceding the “Resolves” focused on:
The Call of the Gospel to be peacemakers, to repent and to “transform” the world, not “conform” to it.
The repeated role of biblical prophets to “speak truth in love” to the powers & principalities.
Reminder of Bonhoeffer’s instructions to the church to be an active voice for peace.
Reminder of the ELCA social statement For Peace in God’s World and our call to be a “setting of freedom and respect where believers of different perspectives may learn from one another”.
There were two (2) “Resolves”. One was for the Synod, in Assembly, encourage members to enter moral deliberation & discussion concerning our nation’s foreign & military policy. The other was to encourage persons, congregations, clusters et al to become involved in studying a document known as “The Kairos Statement: A Time to Speak and a Time to Act” as well as resources from the ELCA.
There is little doubt that the Kairos Statement takes a definite stand against the U.S. policies as they proceeded to pre-emptive war against Iraq, of the use of brutal treatment of our enemies, and of the growing military budget that necessitates a lower budget for peaceful needs.
That “lack of neutrality” exceedingly bothered some members. There were no discussions as to whether or not we were/are bothered by:
the deceit which led us into a war against Iraq
the loss of more than 4,000 lives and the injuries/trauma to over 25,000 US soldiers
the loss of as many as 100,000 Iraqi lives and untold numbers injured
a cost of billions at a time when our nation and our states are having difficulty funding programs of service to the poor, the homeless, and those in need of healthcare.
Moral deliberation will involve us in “taking sides”! Neutrality, when confronted by evil, [whether it is the evil of 9/11 or the evil of bombing Iraq pre-emptively] is the worst response a Christian can make! It is the “luke-warmness” that Jesus found offensive.
Both the Republican and the Democrat candidates for President are stating that this is a time for change.
Effecting those changes will require the involvement of all citizens in a “moral deliberation” that will be passionate! The congregations and the pastors of the ELCA could play a critical role in these deliberations – provided we are willing to risk moving beyond neutrality.
Dare to believe in your values. This will be a process during which women and men of all persuasions will come from opposing stances. Trust that we can discuss those differences and remain committed to the community of faith to which we have been called.
Let’s have no more calls for neutrality.