There He Goes Again

A while back I wrote a blog post about a letter I received from the Bishop of our local Episcopal Diocese regarding politics.  You can read it here.  Bottom line is that I just really, really don't like religious leaders weighing in on politics.  This afternoon I received another email from him and it was a bit of a doubling down.  I've copied it all below.

May 6, 2016 In the waning days of Lent, I wrote an essay about the civil discourse in our current primary season, specifically raising concerns about one particular candidate. Not surprisingly, I received a few emails from people who were not happy with my commentary. One in particular stood out.  The person had three objections. First, he asserted that this was not the business of the church. In other words, the church needs to stay out of politics. His second point was related to the first: that I as a bishop should not speak on these issues. To quote, "You should not, in my opinion, be disseminating on EDSD letterhead, with your signature as bishop, to parishioners, your advocacy or trashing of any candidate. Send out a note and sign it Jim." And finally, he was most emphatic that this was a distraction from more important issues. While I am always grateful for the critic, this one has been particularly helpful in clarifying why it is so important for me and the church to fully engage in all aspects of the world. The culture provides the context for our ministry -- including the political realm which cannot be disconnected from our care of neighbor, our stewardship of creation, our following of Jesus. Indeed, it is noteworthy that this critique of my essay was received just days before our celebration of Palm Sunday. If anyone ever doubted that the gospel of Jesus was to intersect the political realm, the events that we remember on Palm Sunday should vanquish all such doubts. As the late Marcus Borg noted, Jesus enters Jerusalem from the east just as Pilate enters from the other side. Pilate's entry is designed to intimidate through show of power and the potential for violent coercion. Jesus offers a counter ethical and political vision. That vision results in his crucifixion.   The resurrection of Jesus is God's divine answer to the politics of power. Through the death and resurrection of Jesus, God offers a different, kingdom, a different king and a different citizenship. Each of us offers our allegiance to this realm through our baptism, which brings me back to my critic. What he suggested was that I could lay aside my being a bishop like I could change my clothes. I firmly believe, as have luminaries through the ages, that when God made me a deacon, priest, and later a bishop, my whole identity and very being was changed. I am a bishop. That is my reality. But more important than that is what happened to me when I was an infant in 1960, when I was baptized in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. I was sealed and marked as Christ's own forever. Later at my confirmation, I promised to own those vows once offered on my behalf.   The same is true for each of us who are baptized into the body of Christ. We are changed. We are now in Christ. It is out of the totality of our being as a follower of Jesus that we live our lives. It is thus simply not possible to leave our Christian identity outside of the political realm. Indeed, that place of political discourse is exactly where we should be -- as Jesus so clearly demonstrated. As a bishop, I am called to "be one with the apostles in proclaiming Christ's resurrection and interpreting the Gospel, and to testify to Christ's sovereignty as Lord of lords and King of kings" (Book of Common Prayer). In these times, I believe that a faithful bishop must hold up the gospel values for those within the community of faith and offer them as the standard for those exercising civil authority or presuming to do so. And when a candidate touts their Christian faith while shaming, blaming, advocating torture, denigrating women, and the disabled, I am compelled to speak out for the integrity of the gospel and to advance God's realm. Expect to find me in that arena. Furthermore, I invite you to bring your Bible and your prayer book and join me. We have work to do. Rest assured this is not a distraction but central to the work of Christ in the world.

I continue to beleive that the Bishop has no business in the realm of politics.  But I'm sure that what I believe makes no difference to him.  Rather, from his words he is confident in his position.  Personally I'll take the words of Thomas Jefferson in this case..."erecting the wall between church and state is absolutely essential in a free society".

But even if I could accept political direction from the pulpit, it would only be acceptable if both sides were represented and full disclosure on both sides were provided.  Sure Trump is a jackass.  He has said some things in the heat of the primary that I'm sure he regrets and that were denigrating.  I don't agree that he has advocated torture.  There are a lot of ways to cut that particular piece of pie.  But if the Bisop's going to be "in the arena", then the only honest thing to do is to offer critisisms across the board.  He's happy to key on a few personality traits or failings on one side, but he doesn't comment on the criminality, the significant endangerment to national security, the lying, the cronyism, the collusion, the enabling of the denigrition of women, and the long list of despicable back room deals that she has been involved in for decades.  I've said it from the beginning...I'll take any of the Republicans over the criminal.  That she is not at least indicted and more likely in jail is purely and only because of the illegal intervention of the President and the Democrat Party.  And even if you don't think she's done anything illegal, you'd have to have your head in a hole to not recognize her as supremely incompetent.  Simple as that.  But let's just say the Bishop is feeling the Bern and for some strange reason things Bernie the Socialist would be a good alternative.  I guess he's not aware of the impact the Socialists and their very good friends and cousins, the Communists, have had on religion.  It's difficult to think of a more religiously oppressive group in the modern age, especially to Christians.   It's really not even close.  If he's "compelled to speak out for the integrity of the gospel" then he ought to have the integrity to lay bare both sides.  Until he does that, he's being very hypocritical.