|
Ground rules for religious engagement of civic life |
|
|
|
|
Written by J. Brent Walker
|
|
Tuesday, 05 September 2006 |
|
Election season is upon us. I agree with Holly Hollman's assessment
that the relationship between religion and politics will dominate our
public discourse over the next several months far more than discussions
about constitutional issues concerning church and state.
As I have said before, the institutional separation of church and
state does not compel a segregation of religion from politics or strip
the public square of religious voices. People of faith may—indeed, I
think, must—be involved in public life by speaking out, organizing,
voting and running for office.
One of the best pithy statements defining the ground rules for religious engagement of civic life is found in a document called "A Shared Vision: Religious Liberty in the 21st Century."
Originally drafted in 1994 and endorsed by more than 80 persons and six
religious organizations, including the Baptist Joint Committee, it was
revised and redistributed in 2002. It includes a variety of issues on
which the endorsers find common ground. The full statement can be read
on the BJC's Web site, but I include here the section on "Religion and
Politics."
As concerned citizens, religious people can and do seek
public office. Article VI of the Constitution wisely provides that no
religious test shall be required for public office.
As voices of conscience, religious organizations can and do
seek to express their prophetic witness by influencing moral values and
public policy. Separation of church and state does not mean the
separation of religion and politics. Nevertheless, attempts at
affecting public policy should be tempered by tolerance for differing
views and recognition that a multiplicity of voices is crucial for the
success of a democratic society.
While religious groups serve an important role in holding
government accountable for its actions, that role can be fulfilled only
when a healthy distance is maintained between religion and government.
Neither church nor state may control, dominate or subjugate
the other. The idea that America is a "Christian nation" violates the
American commitment both to democratic government and religious
liberty. In the most religiously pluralistic nation in the world, any
government endorsement of religion inevitably will make some people
feel like outcasts in their own land.
Accordingly, we must:
* Defend the right of individuals and organizations to
speak, debate and advocate with their religious voices in the public
square;
* Stand firm by the principle that government action
without a secular purpose or with a primary effect that advances or
inhibits religion violates the separation of church and state.
Similarly, we should:
* Discourage efforts to make a candidate's religious affiliation or nonaffiliation a campaign issue;
* Discourage the invoking of divine authority on behalf of
candidates, policies and platforms and the characterizing of opponents
as sinful or ungodly.
May this widely embraced statement guide our words and deeds as we
discharge this rite and right of democracy while whole-heartedly
affirming the relevance of religious convictions to that sacred
exercise.
|