Tuesday, October 25, 2016

Faith and Politics

describes Tim Kaine as "a Catholic who campaigns on the proposition that his faith
is so personal it will never influence his political positions." I stopped at that point.

how often have I run into the idea that one's faith is "personal" so not to affect
anything else? I recall reading that an actress who had become Christian said
she didn't talk about it because it was too "personal." SAY WHAT?! we are told
to share the faith. Now, maybe this was just an excuse to avoid a debate when
she knew her faith was shaky and she wanted time to become stronger and have
the answers to arguments. But taking her at her word it is real weird.

there is the idea that one should keep one's religious views in one pocket and
the rest of life in another. Someone who was talking with me about his small
time business expressed some view or intent regarding some dispute that I
reminded him wasn't Christian and he answered "this is business."

there is a saying, "if Jesus Christ isn't Lord of all then He isn't Lord at all."
This is not correct, because He IS Lord whether He is acknowledged by you
as Lord at all or not. That matter will be settled when He comes back someday.
And it is also incorrect, because usually there is some growth in Christ, He is
your Lord but you haven't entirely submitted to Him in all things, and you
haven't sorted it out yet but you are on the right track. or backsliding and
hopefully will repent and get right with Christ.

But essentially what is being said is, if you keep your faith in one pocket
and the rest of life or some segment of it in another, then you are not
treating Jesus truly as Lord.

The context I think where this started was not only morals but politics, and
a clever tapestry of threads were woven resulting in the false picture of
God is a Republican. And presidents who didn't give a damn and who
selected Supreme Court nominees who were more addicted to the legal
structure than to going back to a common sense view so insured Roe v.
Wade was safe, got elected on the anti abortion platform we all forgetting
that these otherwise monsters were not kings who could rule by decree
and overturn the evil at issue, and got conned by them.

But the issue is, like the saying What Would Jesus Do? that you should
take the faith into account in your daily and even political decisions.
Many things are shaky and unclear, some things help good in one context
and oppose it in another. Voting against abortion is always good, but
if you have an anti abortion candidate who will cut back subsidies and
welfare etc., and a pro abortion candidate who keep such or increase
such to pregnant women and post birth mothers, even when they have
a man in tow, then vote the second. Why? because the policies of the
former will give a motive for the murder the woman can't afford the
new child and keep the one cared for well who is already born, and
so forth. maybe it is just something selfish. but the motive to kill is
there if the income is cut.

and conversely, a woman contemplating abortion for economic reasons
might not do so if help or increased help is available.

Now, it is rare when a political decision has any bearing on theology.
Will this election's (local or federal or state) outcome affect the ease
of making converts to the Gospel or not? aside from that, most would
figure eh, whatever.

But "the faith" can include moral issues. And these are mislabeled
"politics" because subject to laws that are contested in the political
arena now. Well, guess what.

laws against murder and theft and even wife beating are strictly
political because they are the product of action in legislatures by
elected people, and they are the most glaring examples of forcing
your morality on others that you could ask for.

So this treating of abortion as a "political issue" or "forcing your
morality on someone" is to put it mildly inappropriate. Ditto
the gay etc. agenda. (LGBTQ is too much trouble and too weird
looking to type out, have to think twice to do it right, and sounds
like accepting them by using their lingo someone once said.)

call it the pervert agenda, that would safely and adequately refer
to anything.

And no, sex isn't just for reproduction only to be proper. And that
isn't an act of love inherently. Sex is a mode of reproduction, and
that reproduction should happen in a context that is not going to
traumatize the kid. A good relationship between the couple. Only
once in the OT does God say He wants reproduction and made
sex for that, and the context is denouncing those who betrayed
their wives and divorced them to take pagan wives, resulting in
not having a "godly seed" God said He wanted. In Genesis
the man shall LEAVE his parents (you are not supposed to be
marrying the whole family and it is not supposed to be arranged
for political or financial benefit of others) CLEAVE TO his
woman (ish translated wife which also in Old English means
woman, his old lady, his steady girl) and THEY SHALL BECOME
ONE FLESH the sex act develops as the ultimate self sharing
of your body with another, not a stage to marriage as the next
level but it IS the next level. Indeed, marriages aren't considered
final without "consummation." I Cor. 6:16 specifies on the
basis of this that the sex act is what makes the two one flesh,
even if with a prostitute, which is why a man who fornicates
sins against his own flesh.

So the contraception thing is an error in Roman Catholicism.
But the anti abortion thing is not an error. And the only reason
it is now "political" instead of common sense moral and illegal,
is because of faux scientific terminology being hijacked and
some snivel about the poor victims of botched abortions and
eugenics and other issues and enough in legislatures being
persuaded (or blackmailed by those who know the prostitutes,
gay and straight, and abortionists these two faced legislators
have used) to make it legal.

So if your faith is so personal it doesn't affect your behavior,
in business or politics or sex or whatever, then that faith is
mere make believe, it isn't real, its dead.

Read St. James Epistle.

And notice that Paul is constantly harping on the proper
vs. improper behavior and states of mind that logically
result from pistis, belief that affects action.

No comments:

Post a Comment