I'm Lobbying to Speak the Truth in Love

It would be easy to criticize the U.S. Catholic bishops for the actions involving them in the health-care debate. I doubt that Jesus would approve of the use of lobbyists to forward His Gospel message. And yet, as a pastor in the United Church of Christ, if I point a finger at the Catholic Church for this, there are "three fingers pointing back at me". The UCC is well-known for taking positions on any number of issues.

Am I being critical of the actions taken or am I critical of the stance itself?
Religious leaders have a duty to raise concerns about the moral implications surrounding any number of issues. However, the role of religious leaders in government policymaking should be as the “prophetic voice” and not as the “coercive arm”. There is a fine line between speaking "with authority" as an "agent of Christ" and speaking or acting in ways that abuse the power of that role.

My husband and I have taken care not to abuse the power that comes from being the only pastors living and preaching in a town of 330 people. During last year's elections, while some may have suspected who we intended to vote for, only our children knew for sure. On the other hand, when there is an opportunity to preach and teach "progressive ideas" like: peace, the responsibility to care for Creation, or the worth of all people as part of God's Creation, we believe it is our duty to "speak the truth in love", as is pledged during the ordination service of the United Church of Christ.

Others, often at the level of denominations or organizations, have used more aggressive approaches. The Catholic bishops in this instance may have "pushed the envelope", but they did it legally. The same is true, just barely, of actions taken by other religious organizations and their leaders.

When one of my colleagues, both a UCC minister and a state representative, ran for re-election several years ago, a group affiliated with, but "separate from", one of the large conservative Christian organizations launched an aggressive campaign to try to ensure his defeat. Letters were mailed out to thousands of constituents, filled with half-truths about his voting record, and condemning his association with the United Church of Christ and for having performed ceremonies to bless same-sex unions, both supported and expected by his congregation.

This was "legal" because the group that pays for such activities is separate from the religious ministry, and funded by individual contributions earmarked for such. The leader who founded both organizations holds no standing in any denomination, but make no mistake, he is a "religious leader" in this nation. Perhaps if he held standing somewhere, he might be held to a "higher code".

Religious leaders, at least those in my denomination, are bound by promises made at ordination to preach and teach the gospel “without fear or favor” and to “speak the truth in love.” I would imagine the promises are similar in the Catholic church.

In the Christian faith, we look to Jesus as a model of religious leadership. Jesus had relatively little to say about the political leadership and policies of the day. “Give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar and give to God what is God’s”. Still, when one considers that the daily lives of the Jews were governed more by religious law than Roman, one sees that Jesus did, indeed, speak out against injustices and in support of God’s love.

As a pastor, I have the duty and honor to speak out against injustice and in favor of God’s love.