Video
Twitter
Facebook
RSS Feed
Religious Allusions, not Illusions
The Inauguration ceremony, the prayer service on Monday, and several other pre-and-post inaugural events went on without much religious controversy. Most of the conflict had occurred weeks before, over the choice of clerics who would pray. There was a flap over Pastor Rick Warren's closing his prayer with a heavy accent on Jesus, and Jesus Christ was invoked, quite naturally, by Christians in the National Cathedral, which is an Episcopal site, but one gets the impression that the Jesus-in or Jesus-out controversy is in its own way irresolvable and we are likely to live with it and move on to discuss what is in the prayers, not so much how to end them..
Happily, to people of my outlook, the days were not used to fire up the "culture wars." I did not hear or see all the events and may not have paid perfect attention, but in the parts I did see and hear, notably the swearing-in ceremony, we did not hear words like "abortion" or "same-sex marriage" or the couple of other incendiary terms for issues and, sometimes, non-issues. That meant that religious references came naturally or allusively when they came at all.
In some respects, most of the main ritual, as always, reflected the biblical ethos and language of the U.S. majorities. No one stomped out or seemed fired up when the President included references which, I presume, came naturally for him, as a literate citizen, and didn't have to be wedged in by speech writers. They reference provided nuances, not occasions for the president's "gaining points" among constituencies.
Exegetes noted, for instance, that Psalm 23 was reflected in the reference to "still waters," I Corinthians in the most nearly overt use--the injunction to "set aside childish things," King Herod in "slaughtering innocents, and reference to "the children's children," which show up on many pages of the Bible. If anyone has a problem with such references, let's just say "that they're problem" and then say to them, "get over it."
Bringing Muslims into the expanding circle of references was more than in place and may actually signal better relations forthcoming. Muslims had expressed concern that the President-elect, cautious in the face of liars who called him a Muslim, had stepped back from even recognizing that a billion of them exist. Now he treated them directly.
I've mentally scrolled back and tried to think of any time in the two-year campaign and lead up to the inauguration when anyone's prosecuting the culture wars on a presidential campaign-issue level benefited "God and country," citizens-relating-to-citizens, the quality of civil discourse or the proper role of religion. I came up nearly blank.
So now we are able to get back to religion-in-politics as opposed to "in culture wars". The president's plugging for "responsibility" provides an occasion for others to take up a theme so dear to religious people and so urgent for citizens in general. It is one which can be addressed theologically and non-theologically alike, and can lead to actual change. There are many more such, and they will help us during the years (or, oh-oh!--months before the next campaign starts, a campaign when many on all sides can again exhibit their piety or exploit religious identifications. Yes, for starters, I vote for the meanings of "responsibility,: which can mean responding to God, or neighbor, or nature, or conscience in a time when such responsible responding is urgent.
By
Martin Marty
|
January 25, 2009; 9:03 AM ET
Save & Share:
Previous: A Renewed Faith in Public Life |
Next: Obama Reaches Out to the Muslim World
Posted by: Anonymous | January 27, 2009 11:34 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Allusions, illusions, delusions.
Posted by: Anonymous | January 27, 2009 10:39 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Ode to Obama;
Through the Bushfire's
Fear not a man who sees how short, the the flames of life.
Who knows how short, all our journeys are, upon this world.
Follow that man, that sees a path made clear by the light of wisdom that burns deep ahead; and in each and everyone of us.
And whom the black smoke of doubt and uncertainty dose not blind.
Would it not be wisdom to place your feet; as his?
So know;
with confidance of thought, your way is clear?
And lay your hand upon his back, so your strength of purpose, may embolden him?
For those flame, that lick at our feet, are not the desire to follow; but our need for great leadership.
Is it not too us; the common man, the work befall, after any fire?
Is it not of us, the the soil is plowed?
Is it, not of us, the bricks are laid?
Is it, not of us, our steel and block tributes, dear to reach the heavens?
And of his reward?
For courageously Walking trough the flame ahead?
Were sombre thought of most; would ask.
Why me? Then flee; without regard for those behind.
Instead' one finds his beacon of Hope. Glows brightest in the blackest hour of our shared despair.
One find a steady hand of Certainty, and Destiny.
And for his reward? Again I ask?
It is but a mere line, in the books, that stores our history.
Ode to Obama.
by R.N.G.T
Posted by: Anonymous | January 27, 2009 9:48 AM
Report Offensive Comment
The problem with most of the worlds religions is they are exclusionary and try to promote their views no matter the damage. The unexplained and unknown are always attributed to God. Thomas Payne, a deist that knocked the Bible attributed plant growth to the hand of God not knowing of photo-synthesis. The world would be far better off if the Christian west would push the moral humanitarian aspects of Jesus teaching instead of the spirituality. Same holds true for the eastern religions. I also believe atheists share these same values, so why damn them?
Posted by: Anonymous | January 25, 2009 2:15 PM
Report Offensive Comment
*testing*
That was actually me, 'Paganplace' at 5:00 on the dot. I do not know why it came up 'anonymous.'
Posted by: Anonymous | January 22, 2009 5:07 PM
Report Offensive Comment
"Happily, to people of my outlook, the days were not used to fire up the "culture wars." I did not hear or see all the events and may not have paid perfect attention, but in the parts I did see and hear, notably the swearing-in ceremony, we did not hear words like "abortion" or "same-sex marriage" or the couple of other incendiary terms for issues and, sometimes, non-issues. That meant that religious references came naturally or allusively when they came at all."
Or that someone who equates my marriage with 'bestiality' thought he could have all the Christians recite the 'Our Father' and leave the rest of us standing there, while calling it 'tolerant'.
As I've said, it really couldn't possibly spoil the occasion, but don't make Warren's proselytizing out to be some great 'show of unity' he brought to the occasion just because he didn't *mention* how much he's been working to try and make denying me civil justice synonymous with piety and 'American Identity.'
He came to the table, said what he said. Offered nothing new. Said nothing about mending his ways, stopping his inflammatory speech, or encouraging his flock to stop hurting people over what he's said.
But.
It was not his day.
Conspicuously.
And there we are.
Posted by: Anonymous | January 22, 2009 5:00 PM
Report Offensive Comment
The comments to this entry are closed.
One can watch the National Cathedral service on their website:
http://nationalcathedral.org/
It's worth the time to see this example of inclusiveness within a Christian context.