Two Flags and a Cloud of Witnesses

Oh, and by the way, I'm no fan of this "civil religion" idea.

Are you saying we invented civil deism instead of slitting each other's throats over the question of grace?

I don't believe it for a minute.

There's little historical evidence to support that. You posit that in the U.S. there is a religion without a dogma. That is not possible. For without dogma, it is not religion, but something else.

Let us try to discover what that may be.

Your "civil religion" has a dogma and it is American Protestant. It is, in fact, an artifact of the Old American Protestant Hegemony.

The Protestant Hegemony invented it so that it could keep up its missionary zeal to put a religious cast on civil life. It designed it in such a way so that the Protestant Hegemony could say, "Now that was so vague, I don't see how anybody could be offended."

The proof of this? When anyone's been offended by what is supposed be the offense-free civil religion, critics are tarred for wanting to take away somebody's religious rights.

You also conflate your "civil religion" with ecumenism, which it is not. This civil religion has no features of Catholic practice, Judaism or Islam. It certainly does not incorporate the beliefs of those who do not believe. It is not a consensus practice.

I cite an example. Recently, at a convening of a chamber of the state legislature of a Southeastern state, the session began with a prayer offered by the House chaplain. He began, "Let us bow our heads and pray."

Civil religion, right? Is this how one prays in Islam? Is this how one who does not pray prays? What if one does not bow their head? Does their pray "not to heaven go?"

This is that artifact of the American Protestant Hegemony, which says, we'll pray as the majority prays and you'll like it. How could anybody be offended at that?

This "cleansing of the public square of all signs of God," is really a cleansing of the public square of the last features of the state-sponsored religion of the American Protestant Hegemony -- the same hegemony that used the courts and First Amendment to deny public school books and aid to Catholic schools, but required public school classes to begin with the Our Father.

Civil Religion is patently unfair -- and even more important than that -- it is patently inauthentic religious expression.

That's what your "civil religion" is -- a dried husk of religion, made bland so that no polite person would oppose it and so that the American Protestant Hegemony could go to sleep at night with the comforting thought in their heads that "my religion is the religion of the land."

Now, if Romney had shown absolute proof of god at that speech, now THAT would've gotten the atheist vote, eh????

As it is now squarely in the public arena, and since Romney has said publicly that America wants a "person of faith" to rule the land, I do think it's fair game to ask exactly what his "faith" entails.

Dr. Marty, I feel that a big part of my own de-conversion from Christianity was a result of seeing the "people of faith" be tolerant of, or even advocates for principles that pitted faith against reason, the mischaracterization of the scientific method, the enemies of Enlightenment values, the demonization of non-believers, the spawning of the ultra-right neoconservative religious zealots bent upon making this country into a theocracy.

Some may view Mormonism outside of the "Christian" realm, but I disagree that thorough readings of the Mormon religion would shed light on the fact that they are harmless in the public sphere. Having lived in Salt Lake City for many years, where the LDS faith is practically ubiquitous, I can assure you that it's no Utopia. Maybe still the only state in the union that has a large majority still supporting GWB? Am I to reflect that this is completely benign?

At least the nations leading newspapers editorial pages get it:

From the NY Times:

Faith vs. the Faithless

By DAVID BROOKS

...“But now the landscape of religious life has changed. Now its most prominent feature is the supposed war between the faithful and the faithless. Mitt Romney didn’t start this war, but speeches like his both exploit and solidify this divide in people’s minds. The supposed war between the faithful and the faithless has exacted casualties.

The first casualty is the national community. Romney described a community yesterday. Observant Catholics, Baptists, Methodists, Jews and Muslims are inside that community. The nonobservant are not. There was not even a perfunctory sentence showing respect for the nonreligious.”...

And again from the NY Times:

Editorial
The Crisis of Faith

“Mitt Romney obviously felt he had no choice but to give a speech yesterday on his Mormon faith. Even by the low standards of this campaign, it was a distressing moment and just what the nation’s founders wanted to head off with the immortal words of the First Amendment: A presidential candidate cowed into defending his way of worshiping God by a powerful minority determined to impose its religious tenets as a test for holding public office...

He was trying to persuade Christian fundamentalists in the Republican Party, who do want to impose their faith on the Oval Office, that he is sufficiently Christian for them to support his bid for the Republican nomination. No matter how dignified he looked, and how many times he quoted the founding fathers, he could not disguise that sad fact.

Mr. Romney tried to cloak himself in the memory of John F. Kennedy, who had to defend his Catholicism in the 1960 campaign. But Mr. Kennedy had the moral courage to do so in front of an audience of Southern Baptist leaders and to declare: “I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute.”

Mr. Romney did not even come close to that in his speech, at the George Bush Presidential Library in Texas, before a carefully selected crowd. And in his speech, he courted the most religiously intolerant sector of American political life by buying into the myths at the heart of the “cultural war,” so eagerly embraced by the extreme right.

Mr. Romney filled his speech with the first myth — that the nation’s founders, rather than seeking to protect all faiths, sought to imbue the United States with Christian orthodoxy...

CNN, shockingly, required the candidates at the recent Republican debate to answer a videotaped question from a voter holding a Christian edition of the Bible, who said: “How you answer this question will tell us everything we need to know about you. Do you believe every word of this book? Specifically, this book that I am holding in my hand, do you believe this book?”

The nation’s founders knew the answer to that question says nothing about a candidate’s fitness for office. It’s tragic to see it being asked at a time when Americans need a president who will tell the truth, lead with conviction and restore the nation’s moral standing, not one who happens to attend a particular church.

From the Washington Post:

No Freedom Without Religion?

There's a gap in Mitt Romney's admirable call for tolerance.

“RELIGIOUS liberty is, as Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney declared yesterday, "fundamental to America's greatness." With religious division inciting violence across the globe, he is right to celebrate America's tradition of religious tolerance. He's right, too, that no one should vote against him, or for him, because he is a Mormon. We only wish his empathy for religious minorities such as his own extended a bit further, to those who do not believe in God...

"Americans acknowledge that liberty is a gift of God, not an indulgence of government," Mr. Romney said. But not all Americans acknowledge that, and those who do not may be no less committed to the liberty that is the American ideal.

Martin Marty, that was a very good article. Thank you.

Of course, far be it from me to presume to say....

You could think about voting for someone who don't talk like that at all.

Just a wild and random idea or something.

That actually, of all things, really bothers me.

How do you *live* thinking like that.

Obviously, you *do,* as it's reflected in your politics.

But how do you *live* like that.

It's like Augustine saying the 'chief delight of those in heaven is watching the torments of the damned.'

Uhhh... What?

I can't even stand watching it on HBO, never mind keeping that company for eternity.

So...

What?

"-it's never clear what they will actually do for a million years and more"

Think we're actually talking in the tens, if not hundreds of billions, before stellar formation in this continuum stops being interesting.

What everyone's supposed to do in the Christian heaven for very long, Gods know, but I still don't see the necessity of ending the world in haste over it.

Frankly, I do see a lot of bumper stickers that say, 'When my Rapture comes, hahaha screw you when my Escalade crashes into your house'

And I still wonder why people who insist we all must believe that won't *take the train* if that's what they really believe.

Martin - apparently it doesn't worry you that Romney professed his faith in Jesus Christ as the son of God and saviour of mankind. Should all candidates do this? It smacks of a religious test to me.

Why did he do it? to pander to non-mormon christians? Does he only care about being the president of Christian americans?

Canyon Shearer,
What makes your belief in the imperfectness of men and women and the perfectness of Christ, (therefore enabling the efficacy of His sacrifice for all who will call on His name with faith) different than my belief in those same foundational understandings? The fact that I believe Christ also wants us to repent and improve day by day, not just once in our life?

You turn the Bible on its ear by showing no understanding of the writings of James, Peter, John, and even Paul, and certainly of Christ Himself. Yet, since your idea of heaven is a place where everyone stops progressing and (does what--it's never clear what they will actually do for a million years and more), then I accept and embrace the idea that I am going to a place where you will not have chosen to be (your choice), and I will keep "working" and learning and growing with all the "hellions" around me who didn't choose the emptiness of your belief system. (Yet, you'll find that the learning and growing does continue, even for you--sorry to disappoint you.) Peace and good Bible reading, my friend.

Thank you, Dr. Marty, for an informative essay and magnificent example of objectivity.

The columnist says:

"Why do we Americans, Republic and Democrat and mild agnostic and patriot settle for or choose this approach? In the back of our minds is recall of what established religion did to promote holy war in the European past of Euro-Americans or of what dominant religion does to "everyone else" in contemporary nations ruled by a religion."

I'll additionally point out what being 'the dominant religion' does to *people of the dominant religion.* Becoming a Cromwell, ...or a Canyon, are two examples that come to mind. :)

Canyon, apparently not-even cognitively-capable of distinguishing between the business of government and promoting his own religion/saving people from sin, shows why religion in political power is *so dangerous:*

"Every false religion, save Islam, in the world can be categorized into one of two ways."

You've already characterized everyone but you as 'false,' why elaborate? :)

"1. God is sinful and therefore has no business judging me. Examples of this are the Greco-Roman gods, paganism, and Hinduism."

Actually, none of these religions have anything to do with your definitions or ideas of 'God' or your 'Sin' in their definitions or theology.

"2. I am well on my way to becoming God, and/or am as close as I can get. Examples of this are evolution, Buddism, and Mormonism."

This is what *you* bring to these things, Canyon.

What does it make *you* who leaps to such conclusions and defamations?

Not someone I'd *vote* for, let me tell you.

hello, canyon shearer - the pilot shot down to whom Romney referred was Papa Bush - George H. W. Bush who flew bombers in WWII.

Who told Mitt Romney that George W Bush Jr. was shot down? If he is serious, and somehow I missed the point where this speach was from December 6th, 1992, then he may well have just lost the vote of conservative America.

That aside. Religious tolerance has destroyed this country, and this is why I will not vote for anyone who holds to tolerance. I would rather vote for Hilary Clinton who we at least know will do her best to outlaw Christianity. Christianity thrives on persecution and electing the next Diocletian will do the church a world of good.

Nextly, Romney is in a cult. It will do the world a world of bad if he is elected, because every Mormon missionary out there will instantly say, "The president of the United States is a Mormon, therefore it can't be a cult." But it is a cult, and it's one of the quickest ways to Hell.

Every false religion, save Islam, in the world can be categorized into one of two ways.

1. God is sinful and therefore has no business judging me. Examples of this are the Greco-Roman gods, paganism, and Hinduism.

2. I am well on my way to becoming God, and/or am as close as I can get. Examples of this are evolution, Buddism, and Mormonism.

Mormonism is an idolatrous, works-based religion. They think they are working their way to Heaven and thus will work their way to Hell.

Imagine a courtroom, you are on trial for kidnapping, rape, and murder. There are ten clear signs of your guilt. The Judge is about to pass judgment, and you call out, "Judge, but I've done good works! I've spent my entire life volunteering and helping people and changing flat tires for little old ladies, and I donate to charities, and besides, I've only kidnapped, raped, and murdered one person." The judge is going to look you straight in the eye and say, "Despite your good deeds, you have broken the law, and justice must be served. Bailiff, take the prisoner away."

Imagine THE Courtroom, God is the judge, you are on trial for telling lies, for stealing, for blasphemy, for lust (which is adultery of the heart Matt 5:28), for hatred (which is murder of the heart Matt 5:21), for idolatry. There are ten clear signs of your guilt. The Judge is about to pass judgment and you call out, "Judge, but I've done good works! I was a Mormon missionary, I gave money to the church, I helped the poor, I prayed daily, and I was even the president of the United States." The Judge is going to look you straight in the eye and say, "Despite your good deeds, you have broken the law, and justice must be served. Angels, take the prisoner away."

These are both real scenarios. It is appointed once for a man to die, and then the judgment. Your good deeds will not help you on Judgment Day, and the Book of your Conscience, which has recorded every deed done in darkness or in light, will be laid open.

Your only hope is the atoning work of Christ on the cross. Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the eternal 2nd Person of the Trinity, came to this broken and diseased earth, where He was tempted but He didn't sin. Your fine was due, justice had to be served, and Christ stepped in and took your place. You can be absolved because your fine is paid in Jesus Christ.

Repent and place your full faith in Him today, and He will save you. Ephesians 2:8-9 says "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast."

If you're following the Mormon jesus, you're following an antichrist, a person that sounds similar to Jesus Christ, God in the flesh, but who is not coexistant with God, and therefore was not good enough to be the payment for your sins.

You won't go to Hell for being a Mormon, you'll go to Hell for lying, thieving, blasphemy, adultery, murder, rape, fornication, disobeying your parents, and idolatry.

Only Jesus Christ, the perfect Son of God, can wash you of your sins.

Not the jesus that Mitt Romney has placed his faith in to eventually make him more than the president, but a god.