Democracy threatened when people of faith don’t act

It seems ancient history now, as I recall the controversy of a quarter-century ago as to whether or not the birthday of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King should be a national holiday. Well, it is ... and we’re all the better for it. Its annual celebration allows us to recall his “dream” of freedom, respect for the dignity of every human being, and his hope for a society where justice prevails.

Last January, I remember being so moved by the stirring words of Sr. Anita Baird at the Cathedral, as she applied the teachings of the Rev. King to the challenges of today. Never will I forget celebrating Mass at St. Jerome in Oconomowoc and listening to an eighth grader, Max Woods, recite his famous, “I Have A Dream” speech.

Martin Luther King was a prophet, an orator, a philosopher, a civil rights leader, an organizer, and a shrewd political leader. First and foremost, though, he was a pastor, a preacher, a clergyman, a minister. I first finished reading Marshall Friday’s biography of King, and it hit me again: The title that gave King his most satisfaction was “reverend;” the document that most formed him was the Bible; the person who most molded him was Jesus; the cause for which he lived and died he saw not as political but as spiritual, not as a legislative strategy but a moral crusade. He was, before anything else, a religious leader, who believed that the demands of the Gospel were not limited to the sanctuary but had to go to the streets. As he preached, “If I can do my duty as a Christian, if I can bring salvation to a world that’s going wrong, if I can spread the message as the Master taught, then my life will not be in vain.”

Men and women of religious faith can be proud that one of the most towering figures in American history, whose birthday is a national holiday (an honor only given to Jesus, Washington, and Lincoln), is a pastor, a clergyman.

Although one would never realize it from reading the “Letters to the Editor” in our newspapers, the Rev. King, in bringing his deeply held religious convictions to a public, social, and political sphere, is part of a glorious American tradition. Historians such as Sydney Ablstrom make the case that the American Revolution itself was the result of the religious awakening that molded America in the mid 18th century. Our great national reform movements — to end slavery, to promote civil rights, to question war, and to protect life — have all been religious initiatives, led by men and women who believed that their faith, their prayer, their church, their Lord, were the normative, defining forces in their lives.

Shrill voices today tell us that “real Americans” believe in a severe cleavage between one’s faith and one’s public life. For them, there is a high “wall of separation between church and state” (a phrase not found in the constitution) which means that believers check their faith and morals at the church door on Sunday, the temple steps on Saturday, a mosque carpet on Friday. For them, religion is private, and has no right to influence the decisions we make in “real life.” These voices urge a “naked public square,” where faith, moral convictions, and deeply cherished religious beliefs have no place in business, politics, education, law, or social discourse.

To which the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King would say, “nonsense.” America is at its best when men and women of every faith, or of no faith at all, bring their deepest held beliefs to influence every decision they make, private and public. As Pope John Paul II notes, we have a duty to propose — never impose — our moral and religious convictions to the commonwealth. A value-neutral democracy, as the secularists would propose, is, according to the Rev. Martin Luther King, a contradiction. The charter of our Republic, from the Declaration of Independence, to the Constitution, to his “I Have a Dream” oration at the Lincoln Memorial, are shot-through with religiously informed moral truths that have a place — an honored, essential, necessary place — in civil society. The eloquent preacher and zealous Baptist pastor, Martin Luther King, reminds us that our civil rights are grounded, not in the changing whims of a value-neutral secular society, but on unchanging, binding moral truths, traced to the Creator, self-evident to his creatures.

Thus, Democracy is threatened, not when church leaders and people of strong faith speak, act, and lead, but when they don’t.

Remember that on Jan. 19, when we celebrate this pastor’s birthday. Remember that, too, on Jan. 22.

I can get Winstons by the carton for about 32.00 on the reservation,convenience store for 35.00,supermarket for 38.00 and drug store for 42.00.

I have been looking for a poem about the "Smoking Committee" written by one of the staff in my old Human Resource Department in 1986,she was on meds,receiving chemo and it brought out the creativity in her. I've spent the last hour looking for it to no avail. It was prophetic and brilliant,but alas and alack,it is missing.

Someone on "Politeness in Posting"thread mentioned that one of the reasons for the Sidebar Monitor's caution related to how many times people hit the abuse button. I have never been able to understand hitting it,I look at those nasty posts as an oppurtunity to know our enemies,correct some mistatements,evangelize and/or defend the Faith by using the forum to speak the truth,demonstrate true Christian charity and learn a whole lot about the nature and knowledge base of many posters as well as the religion in which they claim membership.And at this level,"Sticks and stones can break my bones,but names can never hurt me" is operative.

I believe,and maybe wrongly,that there are many lurkers who can be influenced by the back and forths on these threads.To ask that we not be picked on i,if I were a lurker would seem not courageous or meritorious but whiney,babyish and silly. What's more I think asking for a thread or comment to be removed can appear to be a defensive move with the intent of suppressing a fact or truth. There is nothing in my Catholic Faith that I would wnat suppressed,even though it might appear to be "hard" teaching.I think one can get a good idea about both the individual posters and the group or religion with which they affiliaate. This whole subject is too big and it's getting away from me.

But let me try to sum this up by pulling from another topic of discussion on this thread,Martin Luther King.Whatever I think of him is beside the point. He said in his "I Have Dream" speech, that "I dream of a world where men will be judged not by the color of their skin but of the content of their character". I thought he succinctly captured a "truth to live by".I too have that dream for it is one of the only things important in this temporal world.

So what happens,the country elevates King to hero status and concomitantly establishes all sorts of rules and regulations and laws that preclude anyone from seeing the content of anyone's character. How can one know that if free speech is suppressed and overidden with "political correctness"? What irony.

I hate to see it necessary to establish politically correct rules on the religious forum. I think it might be far more effective to leave the slurs and bashes on the board and that people just respond to clarify or correct error and/or respond with something like "thankyou for giving me the oppurtunity to see the "content of your character". That just might begin to help realize the full potential of the internet for changing the world for the good of all.

Damn, sara, I wish I lived near you (of course if it were summertime I'd be saying I wished you lived near me!)!

I have to go pick up our "stray" kitty who was spayed today, poor baby! Then off to pick up two of my nieces who are sleeping over tonight - out for dinner but back in time for the EWTN interview with Mel Gibson at 8 PM. Bill O'Reilly is having Rod Dreher on at 8 PM regarding the great e-mail caper - think I'll watch the rerun of that at 11. I like Rod Dreher and I mostly like B O'Reilly.

Lots o words to say I'll be back later to reply to the rest of this post.

And I am with you about the abuse button... never hit it even once - never even tempted to hit it. It seems from what I've seen on FR that MEN are the biggest whiney babies and have the quickest draw on the abuse button.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.