Bishop Robinson and Barack Obama?
I confess that I have here on this very blog endorsed Barack Obama for President. I have done so as a private citizen and not as a pastor -- but as I've been reminded on several occasions by my fellow blogger Michael Westmoreland-White -- AKA the Leveller -- such a distinction is not an easy one to make. I've defended my actions, but I've not convinced my blogging colleague.
That being said, I do have my issues with the decision by Bishop Gene Robinson to endorse Obama, even if he, like me, has done so as a private citizen. I may be splitting hairs here and doing a bit of casuistry as well, but I do think there is a difference between me and Bishop Robinson. Robinson is first of all a bishop in the Episcopal Church, even if his diocese is New Hampshire, I think it's more difficult for him to separate himself from his episcopal duties and persona. This is especially true perhaps in New Hampshire, where the first primary is historically held.
By and large, it appears that New Hampshire Episcopalians won't be voting for Obama because their bishop has offered an endorsement. My sense is that in all things theological or political, Mainline Protestants will think for themselves and not "follow the leader." While in my Pentecostal days I regularly heard my pastor speak of submitting to the pastor and not touching "God's anointed," it's rare to hear such rhetoric in Mainline circles. Still, in part because of the controversy surrounding his homosexuality, Eugene Robinson is a nationally recognized figure -- I'm not!
I realize I've backed myself into a corner here, but I thought it important to make that distinction -- and invite others to offer their opinions. Am I simply splitting hairs here?
Comments
Well, I'd say you are and you aren't. (How's that for an equivocal response? Heh.)
I do have major concerns with any clergy endorsing candidates in the US, and my primary bugaboo there is that partisanship makes it very hard to say only true things and to criticize endorsed candidates for their faults. We've been talking about this in the comments over at Bp Chris Epting's place. I've spoken in a lot more detail there. It's hard to say how grave a matter I think this is, and I've probably been harsher over there than I really believe.
On the other hand, you're absolutely right about Gene Robinson (whose middle name is Imogene, BTW, not Eugene) -- his episcopal office drastically changes things. Bishops are the caretakers of the whole doctrinal tradition of the apostolic church. Endorsing one particular candidate in a field of other decently progressive candidates, with all the presidential candidates displaying some negative traits and positions from a Christian standpoint, strikes me as a very questionable thing for a bishop to do.
So short answer: yes, there is a big difference between a bishop and a pastor/priest/minister. But I still have reservations about the latter endorsing candidates. :-)
To what extent this same logic applies or not to a pastor of a California church is an interesting question.
But, I will admit that the Bishop's action has made me think about what I've done. Now, I'm not ready to retract my endorsement, but it does cause me to think!!