National Cathedral Dean Slams “Filthy Enactment” of Voting Rights Ruling

Tags

Dean Gary R. Hall, Episcopal, Episcopal Church, Episcopal Diocese of Washington, Episcopalians, Gary Hall, Institute on Religion and Democracy, Jeff Walton, same sex marriage, Supreme Court, The Episcopal Church, Voting, Washington National Cathedral

Gary Hall, center, dean of Washington National Cathedral, recently led a delegation from the cathedral at the annual Capital Pride Parade in Washington. (Photo credit: Sarah L. Voisin / The Washington Post)

By Jeff Walton (@JeffreyHWalton)

A recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court “essentially gutted” the Voting Rights Act (VRA) and recalls the infamous Fugitive Slave Act of the 1850s, according to the dean of the Washington National Cathedral.

In a Sunday sermon celebrating recent Supreme Court decisions on same-sex marriage and lamenting a ruling on the Voting Rights Act, Dean Gary Hall sought to link the church’s public engagement with Jesus Christ’s turn towards Jerusalem in Luke Chapter 9.

Already thrusting the Cathedral into debates over firearms control and same-sex marriage, voting rights is just the latest in a string of politically charged issues championed by the activist Episcopal Church official.

Hall celebrated court marriage decisions overturning the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and California’s Proposition 8 as “victories for all of us who support marriage equality for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgendered people.”

“Those who had suffered so much discrimination savored a cultural and legal turning point in our shared march towards justice,” the Episcopal priest reported of a special Wednesday service for LGBT persons at the cathedral. Hall also noted “as we exalt in the joys of our lesbian and gay brothers and sisters, we must also weep with the pains and the losses of our brothers and sisters of color.”

“On Tuesday I found myself as dejected as I would find myself elated on Wednesday,” Hall told of the VRA and DOMA rulings. Recalling his own participation in the civil rights movement as a high school junior, Hall said it brought him into contact with Christian people and the life and ministry of the church.

Designating the VRA ruling “a filthy enactment,” Hall quoted Ralph Waldo Emerson’s declaration that he would not obey the Fugitive Slave Act, which required residents of Free states to return escaped slaves to the south.

Acknowledging his own record of political sermons, Hall insisted Sunday’s message from the pulpit wasn’t just “another instance of the Dean going all political on you” but was instrumental to following Jesus Christ.

“Jesus sets his face to go towards Jerusalem both literally and figuratively,” Hall pronounced of Luke chapter 9:51-62, in which Christ begins his journey towards the Jewish capital, the center of public life.

In going to the capital city, Jesus “is taking his critique to the heart of Roman and Jewish life,” Hall assessed. The cathedral dean termed the week’s events as “triumph and tragedy in our own capital.”

“We are a public church and public churches cannot be neutral where issues of justice are concerned,” Hall charged. Adding that Jesus went to Jerusalem “not out of anger but out of compassion,” Hall portrayed Jesus’ journey as one of solidarity “with and for those who are up against it.”

Declaring that God “loves and blesses and accepts everyone as they are,” Hall pronounced that “Jesus does not go to Jerusalem alone” and calls Christians to go with him.

“Therefore, following Jesus as he sets his face to go towards Jerusalem is part of what it means to be a Christian,” Hall interpreted. “If we are really following Jesus – and not just being personally pious in a private way – we try to care as much about the sufferings of people we don’t know as our own children, parents, spouses and friends. The only way you can care for people you don’t know is by establishing justice.”

In a call to the U.S. Congress “to rebuild what the court has taken away,” Hall insisted that Christianity has never been about only private suffering or personal joy, but rather about public social struggles. The cathedral dean asserted that Christians experience persecution “because they dare to make their private compassion a public virtue.”

“Today we both rejoice and lament,” Hall concluded. “Tomorrow we take up again the work again of standing with Jesus and God for those Jerusalem and Washington would oppress.”

Update: Full text of Hall’s sermon has been made available by the Washington National Cathedral. Access it by clicking here.

The 5th of November and Ahistorical Anarchists

Tags

anarchy, Barton Gingerich, country, election, England, Guy Fawkes, history, nation, patriotism, state, United Kingdom, V for Vendetta, Voting

The past decade has witnessed rampant Catholic absolutism. (Photo Credit: The Daily Mail)

The intrepid explorers of the internet wilds may be noticing some of their friends posting this little ditty today:

Remember, remember
The fifth of November
The gunpowder treason and plot.
I know of no reason
Why the gunpowder treason
Should ever be forgot.

This is a rather strange poem for Americans recite—it’s much more British in character. It references Guy Fawkes Night in the UK. For Yanks, however, it has become the rallying cry for supposed anarcho-libertarians, especially amongst the youth.

In the last decade, Guy Fawkes masks and other paraphernalia have become the symbols of populist revolt thanks to V for Vendetta. The brainchild of hairy leftist and comic-book legend Alan Moore, the printed series narrated a revolutionary warring against a dystopian fascist regime in Britain. The protagonist, named V, battles against authority with his knives, explosives, ideas, and penchant for alliteration. And he’s not just going to battle for your usual free markets; he wants everybody to do as they please, as long as no one else is hurt (a very common rubric for post-Enlightenment liberalism). Of course, this material didn’t gain such a level of popularity in the States by printed media alone; instead, most young Americans got their notions from the film starring Hugo Weaving and Natalie Portman.

Now wannabe revolutionaries across the nation don Guy Fawkes disguises and quote “Remember, remember the fifth of November,” whether it be a teenager’s prepubescent meditations on how no one should tell him what to do or the massed (tear-gassed) protestors of Occupy and Anonymous. The film, with its enigmatic characters and symbolic violence (including iconic fictional demolitions of Old Bailey and Big Ben to the tune of the 1812 Overture), left quite an expanse for adolescent imaginations.

Too bad it’s a historical calumny.

Guy Fawkes pretty much wanted the exact opposite of anarchism in all its various inconsistent forms. He was caught guarding gunpowder under the House of Lords, thus putting Parliament (the representative, legislative branch in British government) in grave danger. He and the other Gunpowder plotters hoped to blow up the Protestant King James I, his Privy Council, most of Parliament, and the Church of England’s bishops at the State Opening. The goal of the Gunpowder Plot was to re-instate a Roman Catholic monarch upon the throne, probably along absolutist lines.

It turns out that, after the plan was foiled, the nation rejoiced that its entire government wasn’t blown to smithereens. The people of England lit bonfires (and, later, fireworks) to celebrate that the king’s life was preserved from assassination. The Church authored a special service to the Book of Common Prayer. Unfortunately, the Gunpowder Plot also reinforced anti-Catholic sentiments in the UK, making life quite difficult for peaceable English Roman Catholics.

So yeah, blowing up the one representative body in your nation in favor of an absolutist monarch aligned with the Roman See’s Magisterium does not spring from the insoluble pillars of anarcho-libertarianism.

Therefore, when you see your young Jacobin compatriot tossing about Guy Fawkes references, here are a few helpful recommendations:

1.         If you’re Anglican, make sure he’s not plotting to blow up either your property or your person with blackpowder explosives.

2.         Remark on how you didn’t know this person was a Catholic monarchist.

3.         Warn them about the gibbet at Tyburn.

4.         Link to this post.

5.         Debate the merits of Gary Johnson as a presidential candidate.

6.         Exercise your right to participate in the electoral process tomorrow, thanking God you were preserved from pyromaniacal Papists.

7.         Remember and pray this little phrase from Evening Prayer: “O Lord, save the State.”

Discussing Paleo-Evangelicals: Affirmative

Tags

Barton Gingerich, conservatism, Luke Moon, paleo evangelical, Patheos, Politics, Republican, theology, Thomas Kidd, Voting

What follows is a dialogue elicited by a recent blog post entitled “Paleo-Evangelicals as Reluctant Republicans” by Thomas Kidd over at The Anxious Bench. Dr. Kidd’s observations proved to be quite thought-provoking in the office. Luke Moon and I conversed about “paleo-evangelicals” several times. With that reaction, we decided that others were having the same discussion or would like to join in on it. Luke’s post can be found here.

I have been pegged. Joining the various coagulated labels applied to my religious and political positions, Dr. Kidd has seen fit to brand me “paleo-evangelical.” I don’t think I’m particularly “deeply conversant with the ancient history of the church, and with the Reformation” in the way that I need to be, but I’m trying (I can differentiate all the St. Gregorys from each other). I do sympathize with certain “Catholic social doctrines and traditions”: I’m liturgical, sacramental, and am a big fan of the various social encyclicals (even the oft-hated Humanae Vitae). I guess I do “gravitate” to the scribbling of The American Conservative and Front Porch Republic, if by “gravitate” Kidd means “reads daily.”

I hold the mentioned suspicions of American civil religion, the effectiveness of political parties, and certain Republican policies. It was here that Luke Moon and I had a disconnect—a “generation gap,” if you will. These are rare occurrences, since we understand ourselves as traditional in religious matters and conservative in political ones—thus, we are otherwise bound together by tradition. I will try to account for why I believe what I do, but (even as Kidd admits) others have different stories for adopting these same positions.

Let us first address the issue of civil religion.  Although the term carries with it a history of Manifest Destiny and American exceptionalism, we don’t have time to discuss them at the moment. Instead, observe that civil religion—even in its American form—is not Christianity, borrowed elements from Protestantism aside. Indeed, civil religion exists everywhere and at all times, but my generation works hard to differentiate between true Christianity and the American civil religion. Also, when civil religion comes under attack, my generation has little-to-no desire to defend it. Religion as a social tool is a dead thing—an idol. In evangelizing or defending Christianity in an apologetics situation, the Gospel is offensive enough. We don’t need to be hauling around the baggage of Americanism when we’re trying to convey the true marrow of Christian doctrine.

Christianity should be welcomed in the public square, but we need to realize that our faith has been abused and manipulated for the sake of power. I resent it, and you should too. Thus, with this reservation in place, the emphasis of discussion, foundations of argument, and vocabulary choice has changed. Whether we’re talking about the actual Christian message or voicing one’s conscience in the public sphere pivots on context.

Yes, I am a conservative politically, but that springs from prudence, which is available to the heathen as well as the Christian. Prudence fosters my appreciation for the Founding Fathers, but it doesn’t push me to assert that they were “essentially Christian” as David Barton et al. try to propose. The “paleo-evangelical” lacks the compunction to do two things at once without differentiation. When I’m evangelizing, I’ve gone beyond the cardinal virtues and nature to the theological virtues and grace. The latter sphere is the Church’s special and unique contribution—it’s what the Church is about. The political sphere is for both the baptized and the pagan.

Next, Kidd asserts, “[T]he paleo evangelicals do not place much hope in any political party doing that much good in this world. Big political promises of hope and change typically come to naught, whatever party is making them.” This springs from the revived awareness of Christians’ dual citizenship and a sense of betrayal by movement conservatism (as embodied by so much of the Republican Party). The latter phenomenon has myriad causes. Freedoms have been threatened by the Republican-supported Patriot Act. One finds only lip service to the pro-life cause on the congressional level (a willing legislature and executive are what’s needed to overturn Roe v. Wade). The Abu Ghraib abuses, increased drones strikes, and decade-long war “over there” have cast a pall on the Middle Eastern conflicts. As for fiduciary responsibility, when Republicans come to power, they simply divvy up the budgetary pie differently rather than institute unpopular systematic changes (whether that be along capitalistic or distributist lines). Moreover, the paleo-evangelicals get squeamish when they read about the power plays, egos, and scandals of the Moral Majority movement. “Family values” has ultimately become a hollow if not ironic term.

In short, paleo-evangelicals notice that movement conservatism is an ideology, not an inclination or the principled application of prudence. Thus, they are unwilling to pull a party line at the moment.

Political skepticism, which Kidd envisions as a characteristic of the paleo-evangelicals, is a venerable habit of conservatives and Christians alike. I blame this on a revival in classical learning, since it is at this point that ancient and medieval names start getting thrown around by paleo-evangelicals. The great figure looming in the background is St. Augustine of Hippo. In his City of God, he excoriates high hopes and faith in human politics. Our nation—whether it be the Roman Empire or the American republic—is doomed to mortality and corruption since it is the City of Man. We look after her and seek her good, but we really don’t expect too much out of human leaders. No, America is not the hope of the world, and we better not be claiming that it is such. That office belongs to the Christ.

Older generations may contend that they had no idea that they were conflating the two citizenships of the Christian. If that was within their intentions, they did a very bad job of communicating that. The young paleo-evangelicals raised in the midst of their Moral Majority parents took away a very different narrative and have rejected it. These young conservatives are trying to re-establish the rhetorical discipline of distinction, much to the dread of movement conservatives who desire mobilization and activism.

On the other hand (and this point springs also from St. Thomas Aquinas), virtue is still possible on earth, including earthly politics. Indeed, America has done a lot of good in the world, especially as a model of ordered liberty for a good bit of its national life. As Edmund Burke so eloquently illustrated in his Reflections on the Revolution in France, we as conservatives shouldn’t be expecting some sort of utopia to be ushered in through human politics. On the other hand, we should seek out human flourishing. Thus, Christian conservatives have two concerns to be worried about that are coming into tension once again: “the best is the enemy of the better” vs. “the lesser of two evils is still evil.” Paleo-evangelicals have been opting for the second, since increasingly it seems as if one has to choose between two outright monstrosities.

Until Republican leaders start taking seriously the ideas of Edmund Burke, Russell Kirk, Richard Weaver, Robert Nisbet, Alasdair MacIntyre, and Michael Oakeshott; young classical conservatives will remain rather aloof. Likewise, if advocates of Christian conservatism keep propagating harmful understandings of American exceptionalism rather than good ones, paleo-evangelicals are going to keep the GOP at an arm’s length. Perhaps paleo-evangelicals deserve Kidd’s “straight ticket” dig at their electoral hipsterdom. However, these young un’s stand not as political Laputans, but rather Christians with significant reservations on a variety of fields. All too often, the call to “realism” is really a demand for materialism. I don’t know if Kidd’s particular term “paleo-evangelical” will prove sustainable if stretched and scrutinized, but he definitely has picked up on an important trend and something of which the-powers-that-be should take notice.

Sojourners Discusses Young Evangelicals and Voting

Tags

Bart Gingerich, Eric Teetsel, Evangelicals, Family Research Council, Feed the Children, Institute on Religion and Democracy, Jessica Prol, Manhattan Declaration, Sojourners, The IRD, USAID, Voting, World Relief, Young Evangelicals for Climate Action

Young evangelicals will be going to the polls in just a few weeks. (Photo credit: Juicy Ecumenism)

By Bart Gingerich

On October 16th, the progressive evangelical group Sojourners hosted a discussion panel on young evangelicals and the 2012 election. The conversation was based on recent study by Sojo that analyzed the political priorities and attitudes of evangelical Christians under age 35. The panel included Jenny Yang of World Relief, Jessica Prol of Family Research Council, Rev. Adam Taylor of World Vision, Ben Lowe of Young Evangelicals for Climate Action, Jayme Cloninger of Feed the Children, Christopher LaTondresse of USAID, and Eric Teetsel of the Manhattan Declaration.

Sojourners head Jim Wallis noted, “The thing about your generation is that you believe your faith is personal and it’s also public. I like to say faith is personal but not private.” Most of the panel interpreted the data in a more progressive light. Jenny Lang asserted, “Young evangelicals care about a wider set of issues than evangelicals are generally known to be involved in…Young evangelicals care about issues of justice…immigration, creation care, what our government does that affects the most vulnerable.” Environmentalist Ben Lowe worried, “A lot of us are disaffected politically and with how the church deals with political issues.” Yang, on the other hand, believed, “[Young evangelicals] actually advocate for better laws and policies that they care about the most.”

Rev. Taylor acted as the voice of moderation. “At the heart of the Gospel is the good news, especially the good news for the poor.” he mused, “Poverty continues to be a taboo issue for many of our elections…the discussion tends to come from the lens of the middle class, and I think we need to close that gap between where the church and young people are and where our politicians are.” Taylor declared, “Despite the polarizing effects of culture wars, we’re finding that young people are still engaged. They’re finding new wines skins for their enthusiasm and passions.”

Read more here.