Religion, Politics, and the IRS -- And George Regas
With the 2006 elections in our rear view mirror and potential presidential candidates eyeing the nod to run in 2008, the question everyone wants to ask is -- how much is too much religion? Well, maybe not everyone is interested in this question, but many of us are interested.
This morning's LA Times reprints an extended portion of a sermon preached on the eve of the 2004 election by the Rev. George Regas, former rector of All Saints Episcopal Church in Pasadena. The sermon got All Saints into trouble with the IRS, when Regas, serving as guest preacher, compared the two presidential candidates to Jesus. Though Regas doesn't explicitly endorse either candidate, and though he recognizes that each is a devout Christian, in challenging the President's rationale for the war, he does raise questions about President Bush's fitness to be president -- but never explicitly.
The excerpt presents a strong anti-war statement. Consider this statement:
This is a strong, pacifist, anti-war sermon. Is it too much meddling in politics, or is it a prophetic statement? At the end of the sermon Regas says:
Is this too much meddling? Is it really a call to vote for John Kerry? Or is it a warning to John Kerry to consider the teachings of his own faith tradition? I don't know, but I would expect that Regas offered this as a challenge to both.
So again, how much is too much? Over the course of the last few years we've watched Religious conservatives use their organized strength to advocate for political positions I'm not necessarily comfortable with. My sense is that there were much more egregious statements made during that election process from the right than is expressed here. But where do we draw the line. That's what I'd like to know!
This morning's LA Times reprints an extended portion of a sermon preached on the eve of the 2004 election by the Rev. George Regas, former rector of All Saints Episcopal Church in Pasadena. The sermon got All Saints into trouble with the IRS, when Regas, serving as guest preacher, compared the two presidential candidates to Jesus. Though Regas doesn't explicitly endorse either candidate, and though he recognizes that each is a devout Christian, in challenging the President's rationale for the war, he does raise questions about President Bush's fitness to be president -- but never explicitly.
The excerpt presents a strong anti-war statement. Consider this statement:
Sen. Kerry and President Bush are engaged in a titanic battle for the White House. Central to their race for the presidency is the quest for peace. How deeply the world longs for peace. Presidnet Bush has led us into war with Iraq as a response to terrorism.
Yet I believe Jesus would say to Bush and Kerry: "War is itself the most extreme form of terrorism. President Bush, you have not made dramatically clear what have been the human consequences of the War in Iraq." . . .
This is a strong, pacifist, anti-war sermon. Is it too much meddling in politics, or is it a prophetic statement? At the end of the sermon Regas says:
When yo go to the polls on Nov. 2, vote all your values. Jesus places on your heart this question: Who is to be trusted as the world's chief peace-maker?
Is this too much meddling? Is it really a call to vote for John Kerry? Or is it a warning to John Kerry to consider the teachings of his own faith tradition? I don't know, but I would expect that Regas offered this as a challenge to both.
So again, how much is too much? Over the course of the last few years we've watched Religious conservatives use their organized strength to advocate for political positions I'm not necessarily comfortable with. My sense is that there were much more egregious statements made during that election process from the right than is expressed here. But where do we draw the line. That's what I'd like to know!
Comments