By Mark Tooley on 5.27.05 @ 12:07AM
The Religious Left opposes Bush judicial nominees -- religiously.
The Religious Right was popularly portrayed as a chief supporter
for Republican efforts to curtail filibusters against President
Bush's judicial nominees. But the Religious Left was just as
outspoken in supporting filibusters, even while hypocritically
chastising Senate Republican leader William Frist for supposedly
injecting religion into the issue.
Characteristic of the Religious Left's vituperations was a
letter of protest to Senator Frist from the presiding bishop of the
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America:
"The rhetoric that some people of faith -- Republicans,
conservatives, or fundamentalists -- 'have it right' and all other
people of faith have it wrong not only is self righteous, but
inappropriately polarizes people of faith for political purposes,"
said Bishop Mark Hanson.
Hanson accused Frist of "political manipulation" for allegedly
judging the faith of some based on their politics. But only a month
earlier, Hanson was questioning the faith of President Bush and his
supporters based on the administration's budget proposals, which
reduced the rate of increase in some social welfare programs.
"The Administration's proposed federal budget priorities stand
in contradiction to the Biblical tradition," Hanson adamantly
declared in a March 8 statement. Bush's proposals must be condemned
because of the religious obligation to "name injustice and
immorality when it threatens God's mission in the world." There
could no compromise, Hanson insisted, because "the Biblical
standard is irrefutable."
Religious Left activists have wielded often harsh religious
rhetoric in their political crusades for decades, dating back to
the Vietnam War, usually without much media attention, much less
criticism. But even the mildest religious rhetoric from
conservative activists excites dread of "theocracy," as Religious
Left activist Jim Wallis described conservative religious support
for conservative judges.
NOT SURPRISINGLY, THE National Council of Churches (NCC) led the
way in excoriating the ostensible threat of theocracy posed by
President Bush, Senator Frist and conservative religious people who
support Bush's judicial nominees.
"Their attempt to impose on the entire country a narrow,
exclusivist, private view of truth is a dangerous, divisive
tactic," intoned Bob Edgar, the United Methodist minister and
former Democratic congressman who heads the chronically
left-leaning NCC.
According to Edgar, "to brand any group of American citizens as
'anti-Christian' simply because they differ on political issues
runs counter to the values of both faith and democracy." Of course,
he did not name anybody who had branded him as "anti-Christian."
Sanctimoniously, in a press release, Edgar said he would be praying
for Senator Frist and his religious allies, so that the Lord will
"change their hearts" and prevent them from committing the nation
to a "destructive path."
Edgar bemoaned that Frist's anti-filibuster campaign had
dangerously detoured through "church-state territory." He did not
explain how this differed from his own NCC activism to use religion
for a wide array of liberal causes, from anti-U.S. military
efforts, to opposing welfare reforms, to pushing for increased
environmental regulation.
So distressed were Edgar and other Religious Left organizers
about Frist's 4-minute address in April to a Family Research
Council teleconference that they organized their own conference
call with journalists. Normally, the NCC gets little media play.
But this time, it got front-page coverage on the New York
Times.
According to the Times analysis, Frist potentially was
"violating the principles of his own Presbyterian church" by
seeking support from religious conservatives. "Elected officials
should not be portraying public policies as being for or against
people of faith," the article quoted Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)
Stated Clerk Cliffton Kirkpatrick, a conference call participant,
as saying.
EVEN WHILE CONDEMNING religious conservatives, Religious Left
groups were trying to mimic their populist success. The NCC's Edgar
said his office had sent 44,000 faxes to Capitol Hill in response
to the controversy over Bush's judicial nominees. The lobby offices
of the United Church of Christ (UCC) and the United Methodist
Church also joined in.
"Most alarming has been the abuse of religious claims by those
seeking to eliminate the filibuster," complained the UCC's "Take
Action!" website, which ominously referred to the "troubling civil
rights records" of several Bush judicial nominees. "Misusing faith
in this way is reprehensible," agreed United Methodist lobbyist Jim
Winkler about Senator Frist, even as Winkler urged liberal
Methodists to lobby in favor of filibusters.
For the Religious Left, as for religious conservatives, the
judicial fight has been a political organizing tool. The NCC's Bob
Edgar told Religion News Service he wants to redefine "moral
values" to include liberal perspectives on poverty, the environment
and health care. According to Edgar, the NCC wants to reach
"middle-church, middle-mosque, and middle-synagogue," with a
message that transcends "fear, fundamentalism and Fox News."
But Edgar and other Religious Left activists resorted to fear
and religious zeal when, in March, they condemned President Bush's
budget proposals. "Jesus makes clear that perpetrating economic
injustice is among the gravest of sins," intoned their joint
ecumenical statement signed by the officers of five mainline
Protestant denominations. As words of warning to Bush, they cited
the Gospel of Luke's reference to a rich man in Hell crying out for
mercy after a life of indifference to the poor, and they urged
church members to "do justice" by "opposing this budget."
Senator Frist never implied anyone might go to Hell because of
their votes on President Bush's judicial nominees. Damnation is
apparently a penalty only for opposing liberal political
causes.
Mark Tooley is United Methodist director at the
Institute on Religion and Democracy in Washington,
D.C.
topics:
Health Care, Federal Budget, Religion, Environment, Military, NATO