How naive. Politics "SHOULD" play no role in religious decisions? That totally disregards the fact that God made us social creatures. We are not created in isolation of others. The Church, too, being compared to the Mystical Body of Christ, is ALSO a social body of men. That is how God created us. Men have always and will continue to disagree on such things as interpretation of Scriptures and what is to be done about the current crisis, whatever that might be.
The Secular and the Religious are intertwined - though they are separate fields. Christ said "give to Caesar what is Caesar and give to God what is God's" while also saying "you are the light of the world - a city on a hill cannot be hidden". We are in the world but not of the world. As a result, politics is part and parcel of the life of men. Can anyone reading the Acts of Apostles not detect this among Christians? Have you not read the 2 letters of Paul to the Corinthians?
As to Paul's supposed "purity" from such things as politics, sorry to burst your bubble, but he was just as human as the rest of us.
"For though I should boast somewhat more of our authority, which the Lord hath given us for edification, and not for your destruction, I should not be ashamed: That I may not seem as if I would terrify you by letters. For [his] letters, say they, [are] weighty and powerful; but [his] bodily presence [is] weak, and [his] speech contemptible. Let such an one think this, that, such as we are in word by letters when we are absent, such [will we be] also in deed when we are present. For we dare not make ourselves of the number, or compare ourselves with some that commend themselves: but they measuring themselves by themselves, and comparing themselves among themselves, are not wise. But we will not boast of things without [our] measure, but according to the measure of the rule which God hath distributed to us, a measure to reach even unto you." 2 Cor 10:8-13
Paul is "politic-ing" against those "superapostles" that are in opposition to him, refering first to the authority given to him. He does not desire to terrify by letter - but he has previously threatened them to come "as with a stick to beat them". What is interesting is that no Apostle actually refers to Paul as an "Apostle". I can imagine that this gave Paul an inferiority complex and finds it necessary to defend his ministry against others.
In an earlier letter to these divisive Corinthians, he literally excommunicates the sexual deviant in 1 Cor 5. He displays his power over the community. The community understands and accepts his power to make such judgments. Thus, again, we see politics, not only his call to cut out the divisiveness, but to cast out a member of deviant sexual morals.
Since we all know that Calvinists are above such political machinations (LOL!), one can only wonder what was going through Calvin's head when he burned Servetus at the stake in 1553. Or why one group of Protestants expelled another group of Protestants out of England to the New World...
Oh, the hypocrisy. Put a man in power, and you have the potential to abuse it. Regardless of religious affiliation. Catholicism is not the cause, man's fallen nature is behind this. Politics will always have an influence on religious decisions.
regards
Yep, just checked. The word "politics" shows up 0 times in scripture.
Actually Calvin and the Reformers were very big on structuring government and their principles are credited with establishing many democracies including the United States. However, they attempted to apply God's commandments to government laws just as we are commanded to "do justice".
This is far different however, than politicing for whether to use whole wheat or raisin-nut bread in the Eucharist or saying that we'll speak out for one cause but be silent on another just so we can get 50% of our issues past. Paul could have spent his time marching against Rome (not the Roman Church btw) and their injustice. That is not where he placed his emphasis.
(I'm joking about the Eucharist-let's not have 50 posts on the recipe for the Eucharist.)
And somehow I can't picture Paul as "politicing" against those "superapostles".