Musings of a Maverick Methodist on Christian Nationalism

By Rudy Barnes, Jr., September 23, 2023

Most of the Founding Fathers of America were deists who believed in God, but not traditional Christians.  None asserted that Jesus Christ was their personal savior, but they considered the altruistic teachings of Jesus as inspired by God.  They detested the Anglican Church as an extension of an oppressive power, and rejected its 39 articles of faith.

At the nation’s birth most Americans were Christians who believed in Jesus Christ as their personal savior; and little has changed since then.  Most Christians continue to profess faith in the ancient Apostles’ Creed with church doctrines never taught by Jesus.  The Gospels portray Jesus as a maverick rabbi who called his disciples to follow him, not to worship him.

In both America and Russia a moral vacuum in Christianity has allowed charlatans and demagogues to hijack churches to promote unprincipled politics.  Trump’s America First policies and Putin’s aggression in Ukraine to restore the ancient Empire of Peter the Great are examples of policies that conflict with the teachings of Jesus but have been supported by many churches.

No nation, no matter how religious, can credibly claim to be a Christian nation.  In 2016 a majority of white “Christians” elected Donald Trump as their political messiah and President, despite his narcissism and egregious immorality.  And in Russia the Russian Orthodox Church supports Putin’s unprovoked aggression in Ukraine to restore the ancient Russian Empire.

The dilemma for people and nations that profess to be Christian and support policies that promote national prosperity and power is that those priorities conflict with the teachings of Jesus.  The altruistic teachings of Jesus are summarized in the greatest commandment to love God and our neighbors, including those we would rather ignore, as we love ourselves.

America is a materialistic and hedonistic nation that has long asserted its exceptionalism and unabashed nationalism.  American values came close to the altruistic values taught by Jesus during the Depression, but in good economic times they have more closely resembled those of Ayn Rand and the Prosperity Gospel than those taught by Jesus.

Politics and Wall Street illustrate that in America selfish values prevail over the altruistic teachings of Jesus.  That’s just human nature.  As long as  popularity is the measure of success in politics and for the church, it's unlikely that the altruistic teachings of Jesus will be given primacy by Christians who seek wealth and power over humble service.

 The church has hoisted itself on its own petard by making popularity its measure of success and a form of cheap grace in Christianity. That doesn't mean that nationalism is always a bad motive in politics. It's only when nationalism conflicts with the universal and altruistic teachings of Jesus that it becomes a problem for Christians.

Notes:

Hoist with his own petard is from Shakespeare’s Hamlet, and it has come to mean being a victim of one’s own immoral schemes.  See Wikipedia at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoist_with_his_own_petard. 

David French served as a military lawyer in Iraq and has written extensively on religion and politics (see My Decision to Serve: A Veterans Day Reflection, at  https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/11/veterans-day-us-military-iraq/672081/).  I’m also a retired JAGC officer who served in Special Action Force Asia in the 1960s, and I have written on the importance of law and as a standard of legitimacy in military operations. See Military Legitimacy: Might and Right in the New Millennium.  A copy of the manuscript and other writings on military legitimacy are provided in Resources at http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/p/resources.html.

On the Taming of White Christian Nationalism, see https://progressivechristianity.org/resources/on-the-taming-of-white-christian-nationalism/.

On Christian nationalism in America and Russia, see  http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2022/03/musings-on-civil-religion-christian.html.

Other commentary on Christian nationalism:

(3/29/15): God and Country: Resolving Conflicting Concepts of Sovereignty

http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2015/03/god-and-country-resolving-conflicting.html

(5/6/17): Loyalty and Duty in Politics, the Military and Religion

http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2017/05/loyalty-and-duty-in-politics-military.html

(6/23/18): Musings on the Separation of Church and State and Christian Morality in Politics

http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2018/06/musings-on-separation-of-church-and.html.

(4/12/19): Musings on Religion, Nationalism and Libertarian Democracy

http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2019/04/musings-on-religion-nationalism-and.html.

(7/13/19): Musings on Sovereignty and Conflicting Loyalties to God and Country

http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2019/07/musings-on-sovereignty-and-conflicting.html.  

(8/10/19): Musings on Christian Nationalism: A Plague on the Church and Democracy

http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2019/08/musings-on-christian-nationalism-plague.html.

(8/31/19): Musings of a Maverick Methodist on the Politics of Christian Zionism

http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2019/08/musings-of-maverick-methodist-on.html.

(1/16/21): Truth and Reconciliation in Politics and Religion in a Maze of Conflicting Realities

http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2021/01/truth-and-reconciliation-in-politics.html.

(4/30/22): Musings of a Maverick Methodist on the Obsolescence of Christianity in Politics

http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2022/04/musings-of-maverick-methodist-on.html.

(6/25/22): Musings of a Maverick Methodist on the Church and the Greatest Commandment

http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2022/06/musings-of-maverick-methodist-on-church.html.

(11/5/22): Musings of a Maverick Methodist on Jesus, the Church and Christian Nationalism

http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2022/11/musings-of-maverick-methodist-on-jesus.html.

(12/10/22): Musings on the Evolution of  Christianity into the American Civil Religion

http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2022/12/musings-on-evolution-of-christianity.html.

(3/11/23): Musings of a Maverick  Methodist on the Future of Christianity and Democracy

http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2023/03/musings-of-maverick-methodist-on-future.html.

(3/26/22): Musings on Civil Religion, Christian Nationalism, and Cancel Culture

http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2022/03/musings-on-civil-religion-christian.html.  

(4/15/23): Musings of a Maverick Methodist on Christian Nationalism and Democracy

http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2023/04/musings-of-maverick-methodist-on.html.

Musings on the Constitution, Elections, and Providing for the Common Good

By Rudy Barnes, Jr., September 16, 2023

The Chicago newscaster Paul Harvey once said, You can’t have rights without responsibilities.  The Constitution is the foundation of our rule of law and political system, but it cannot hold the fabric of democracy together unless most Americans are committed to promote the common good.  And today the common good seems lost in polarized partisan politics.

In The Federalist Papers James Madison described the U.S. as a democratic republic with “the delegation of government to a small number of delegates elected by the rest.”  But Madison was naive in thinking that Congress had the “wisdom to best discern the true interest of their country and [was unlikely] to sacrifice it to temporary or partial considerations.”

Madison understood the danger of political factionalism, or tribalism, in America’s polarized Congress.  He noted that a political party can become a dangerously divisive faction “when united and actuated by some kind of common impulse of passion like that of race or sex, or of any interest, adverse to the rights of other citizens” or to the common good.”

Thomas Jefferson considered the teachings of Jesus “the most sublime moral code ever designed by man.”  Those teachings are summarized in the greatest commandment  to love God and our neighbors, including those of other races and religions, as we love ourselves.  It’s a universal moral imperative to provide for the common good in a democracy and a common word of faith for Jews, Christians and Muslims.

The Constitution was ratified and became effective on May 29, 1790; and just 70 years later South Carolina seceded from the Union, followed by Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Texas, Virginia, Arkansas, Tennessee, and North Carolina.  The resulting Civil War cost 620,000 American lives--more than in all the wars since then.

In 1865 the 13th Amendment ended slavery, and in 1870 the 15th Amendment gave all citizens (except women) the right to vote.  Women would have to wait until the 19th Amendment gave them the right to vote.  It took a while, but by 1920 free and fair elections without discrimination by race or sex were finally affirmed as the lifeblood of American democracy.

Elections are largely controlled by state and local governments, but the Constitution provides some important provisions relating to elections, including a provision in the 14th Amendment that limits those who can run for public office: No  person who swore an oath to the Constitution and then engaged in an insurrection is qualified to hold office.  

A number of U.S. officials, including former President Trump, have been indicted for inciting the Capitol Insurrection of January 6, 2021.  While the Constitution provides the legal foundation for free and fair elections, unless Americans look beyond their polarized partisan politics and seek to provide for the common good by electing those who support and defend the Constitution, the fabric of America’s democracy could once again come apart at the seams.

Notes:

The election qualification in Section 3 of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution provides: No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as a an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.  But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability. 

“Noah Bookbinder, president of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), which helped file a suit on behalf of six Republican and independent voters in Colorado says he equated the provision to other qualifications for running for office. “The 14th Amendment says that anybody who swore an oath to support the Constitution and then engaged in insurrection is disqualified to run for public office.  This is just another constitutional qualification.” 

“While Trump has railed against the effort as “another ‘trick’ being used by the Radical Left Communists, Marxists, and Fascists,” the renewed look at the little-used provision was sparked by a law review drafted by two conservative law professors. “It disqualifies former President Donald Trump, and potentially many others, because of their participation in the attempted overthrow of the 2020 presidential election,” William Baude and Michael Paulsen wrote of Section 3 of the amendment. But the rarely cited provision leaves open questions about how Trump would be removed from the ballot — or if proactive measures are even needed to do so.

While some legal experts and lawmakers have argued the clause clearly applies to Trump over his role in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol, others cast more doubt and note any challenges are likely to be tied up in court.  Michael Luttig, a former federal judge appointed by former President George H.W. Bush, and Harvard law professor Laurence Tribe have argued in recent weeks that Trump is barred from being on the ballot again because of the 14th Amendment clause.  The two wrote in a piece for The Atlantic that Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election and the resulting attack on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 place him “squarely” within the scope of the clause. “The most pressing constitutional question facing our country at this moment, is whether we will abide by this clear command of the Fourteenth Amendment’s disqualification clause,” the two wrote. However, Michael McConnell, director of the Constitutional Law Center at Stanford Law School, expressed doubts that efforts to remove Trump from the ballot would be successful.  He said “This is uncharted territory. Any lawyer or scholar who tells you one thing or the other is making it up. No one really knows.” McConnell said. “I think it’s pretty unlikely that these challenges will succeed.” He was skeptical that the Supreme Court would ultimately throw a candidate with widespread support off the ballot. That was also a concern of Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, who has been a central figure in both a federal and state indictments brought against Trump for election interference.” See https://thehi0ll.com/homenews/campaign/4195050-trump-ballot-14th-amendment-eligibility/.

In early July 1776, delegates from the 13 colonies were far from agreeing to form a “more perfect union.”  July 4, 1776 has been likened to the celebration of a shotgun wedding. See https://time.com/6291967/american-independence-july-1776-was-a-shotgun-wedding/?utm.    

Musings of a Maverick Methodist on Conflicting Concepts of Jesus

     By Rudy Barnes, Jr,

         

             Christians have conflicting concepts of Jesus: Is he the maverick Jewish rabbi described in the Gospels who called his disciples to follow him, or the divine Jesus Christ that church doctrine claims is the only means of salvation.  Jesus never claimed to be divine and never advocated a new religion, but more Christians believe in Jesus Christ than in following Jesus.

Christians who are not committed to follow Jesus are easily distracted by false beliefs.  A majority of white Christians ignored the egregious immorality of Donald Trump and elected him President in 2016.  Since then partisan political preferences haven’t changed, yet the white church has failed to hold Trump’s supporters accountable for rejecting the teachings of Jesus. 

 Until recently I naively believed that the church could be a moral steward of American democracy, and I promoted the altruistic moral teachings of Jesus as America’s standards of political legitimacy.  Partisan politics proved me wrong.  Among Christians partisan politicians have created a more popular Jesus than the morally demanding Jewish rabbi of the Gospels.

There have been exceptions.  John Wesley was a maverick 18th century Anglican priest who promoted discipleship by emphasizing the altruistic teachings of Jesus through service in English hospitals and orphanages.  It’s too bad that Wesley’s moral priorities have been lost in the disaffiliation meltdown of America’s United Methodist Church.

The universal and altruistic teachings of Jesus are summarized in the greatest commandment to love God and our neighbors, even those of other races and religions, as we love ourselves.  Its universality has been acknowledged by its acceptance as a common word of faith by Jews, Christians and Muslims.

There are good people in the church, but the church has failed to be a moral steward of American democracy.  If the church can’t promote the teachings of Jesus as moral imperatives of Christianity, there is little hope for the moral legitimacy of the church or of our democracy.  It seems that America’s standards of political legitimacy are now provided by partisan politics.

As long as politics continue to shape America’s standards of political legitimacy, the church will have little relevance, other than as a large social institution like a country club with a cross on its roof.  If partisan tribalism and nationalism remain dominant, America could begin to look like Russia, which is a putative democracy that claims to be a Christian nation.

Do most Christians believe in a Jesus Christ shaped by politics or in the Jesus of the Gospels?  Pope Francis has lamented that radical politicians are now corrupting the church.  In America Trump’s supporters have shaped a Republican Jesus; and in Russia Putin has gained the support of the Russian Orthodox Church for his invasion of Ukraine.  It seems that the church has become just another social institution manipulated by unprincipled demagogues.

Notes:

On the greatest commandment as a universal common word of faith, see 

http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2015/01/the-greatest-commandment-common-word-of.html.

The contest between the Church and politics over moral authority has come to a head.  Pope Francis has warned of “a very strong, organized reactionary attitude within his Church, and letting political ideologies replace faith” as standards of morality, especially in the U.S.”  See Ruth Graham on the Popes’ remarks on ‘reactionary’ U.S. Catholics that rankle and resonate at https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/01/us/pope-francis-conservative.html.  See also,  https://apnews.com/article/pope-francis-vatican-conservatives-abortion-us-bbfc.

As I noted in my commentary last week, David French has opined that virtue (another word for morality) in political Christianity “bears little resemblance to the teachings of Jesus on discipleship.  “When you combine theology and ideology but subtract virtue, you’ve created a formula for viciousness and strife. Raise the stakes to an existential or eternal level, remove the restraints of kindness and self-control, and watch the worst of humanity emerge.  One of the most fascinating aspects of the Christian faith is the way Scripture treats both theology and virtue.  Jesus said, “every good tree produces good fruit, but a bad tree produces bad fruit.”  The conclusion is simple — beware the hateful, the people drawn to strife; embrace those who are kind and peaceful.  Those who follow Jesus should be marked by those virtues. Do those virtues mark the most prominent political Christians today? Do those virtues characterize political Christianity in the age of Trump? The answers are self-evident. At a time of extraordinary partisan polarization, a Christian message should demand that we love our enemies. As we learn in Corinthians, “Love is patient, love is kind. Love does not envy, is not boastful, is not arrogant, is not rude, is not self-seeking, is not irritable, and does not keep a record of wrongs.”  Moments of political conflict such as this one should cause the church to blaze forth with countercultural radiance — a soothing balm in a sea of strife. But the dominant tone of contemporary American political Christianity is close to the opposite. It’s angry. It’s punitive. In many ways it positively delights in strife. The Christianity it embodies isn’t so much Christianity at all, but rather a religiously flavored authoritarianism that is proving to be red in tooth and claw, a political and cultural movement that embraces the “works of the flesh,” supposedly to accomplish the will of God. Political Christianity …sees threats to American faith primarily outside the church, creating a sense of siege. It casts kindness as weakness, creating incentives for aggression. And since it casts conflicts in the most existential of terms — its political opponents are not misguided fellow citizens, but literally demonic — it raises the temperature to the boiling point. If theology minus virtue can equal violence, then perhaps theology plus virtue can enable justice. Look again at the fruit of the spirit. Love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control are incompatible with oppression. And while exhibiting that fruit does not guarantee that others will love or respect you, it does help us obey one of our highest calls: to love our neighbors as we love ourselves.  See Political Christianity Has Claws at  https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/24/opinion/political-christianity-has-claws.html.

Also, Musings of a Maverick Methodist on The Virtues and Vices of Christian Morality at http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2018/04/musings-of-maverick-methodist-on.html.

Musings on How Christianity Has Corrupted American Democracy

By Rudy Barnes, Jr.

Thomas Jefferson considered the teachings of Jesus “the most sublime moral code ever designed by man.”  In 1820 at the age of 77, Jefferson completed The Jefferson Bible: The LIfe and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth “to extract the teachings of Jesus from the crustaceans of the church;”  but The Jefferson Bible was not published until the next century.    

The church has never acknowledged Jefferson’s Jesus, probably because Jefferson never acknowledged the divinity of Jesus.  But Jefferson was praised by a distinguished group of Biblical scholars known as The Jesus Seminar who have focused on separating the authentic word of Jesus from church doctrine on Jesus Christ that was never taught by Jesus.

There has been more interest in rediscovering the real Jesus since a majority of white Christians elected Donald Trump in 2016.  Trump’s narcissistic immorality is the antithesis of the universal and altruistic morality taught by Jesus.  David French has said that “There is something particularly painful and puzzling when expressions of hatred come from people who claim to follow Jesus.”  The white church lost its moral compass in 2016.

The biggest problem with the American church and democracy is not Donald Trump or the wanna-be demagogues seeking power.  The real problem is with white Christians who support those demagogues, and their pastors who are unwilling to chastise them for failing to be moral stewards of American democracy.  The result is a lack of political legitimacy in America.   

America is whatever its voters choose it to be in our elections.  We can’t blame political corruption on others in our democracy.  We’re masters of our own political destiny, for better or for worse; and when we ignore the altruistic teachings of Jesus we’re no better than those in other nations, even if we claim to be Christians.

The church, like democracy, is only as moral as its members,  and most white Christians sacrificed Jesus on the altar of partisan politics when they abandoned his altruistic teachings and supported Trump in 2016.  Since then polls indicate that even with four criminal indictments Trump’s supporters in the Republican Party remain loyal to him.

White American Christians and their pastors have corrupted the church and democracy by ignoring the moral teachings of Jesus in politics and promoting exclusivist church doctrines never taught by Jesus that claim that Christianity is the only means of salvation.  Can Americans reclaim the moral high ground of the universal and altruistic teachings of Jesus?

 Those teachings are summarized in the greatest commandment to love God and our neighbors of other races and religions as we love ourselves.  It’s a common word of faith for Jews, Christians and Muslims, and it’s the only way to reconcile America’s polarized partisan politics.  It may seem impossible, but remember that with God anything is possible.         

Notes:

See The Jefferson Bible: The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth, Beacon Press, Boston, 1989.  It provides the universal teachings of Jesus on morality as taken from the Gospels.  While Thomas Jefferson had great admiration for the moral teachings of Jesus he had no use for the doctrines of the institutional church.  He wrote Henry Fry on June 17, 1804: "I consider the doctrines of Jesus as delivered by himself to contain the outlines of the sublimest morality that has ever been taught; but I hold in the utmost profound detestation and execration the corruptions of it which have been invested by priestcraft and kingcraft, constituting a conspiracy of church and state against the civil and religious liberties of man."  Thomas Jefferson, The Jefferson Bible, edited by O. I. A. Roche, Clarkson H. Potter, Inc., New York, 1964, at p 378; see also Jefferson’s letter to John Adams dated October 13, 1813, at pp 825, 826; Jefferson's commentaries are at pp 325-379.  See also, Introduction to The Teachings of Jesus and Muhammad on Morality and Law: The Heart of Legitimacy, at page 10, note 2, posted at https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3gvZV8mXUp-aTJubVlISnpQc1U/view.  They are compared with those of Muhammad in The Teachings of Jesus and Muhammad on Morality and Law: The Heart of Legitimacy, an interfaith study guide based on Jefferson’s Jesus and is posted in the Resources at  http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/. The Introduction (pp 10-15) provides an overview of the study guide, and reference to Jefferson’s 1804 letter to Henry Fry is at end note 2 at p 425.  Like many of the Founding Fathers, Jefferson was a deist, a spiritual but not religious, agnostic or heterodox Christian.  The terms have overlapping meanings that distinguish them from orthodox Christians.  In a world of increasingly pluralistic religions, non-orthodox truth seekers will likely determine the future of religion and the moral standards of political legitimacy that shape the American civil religion. 

On Thomas Jefferson and Alexis deTocqueville and their views on the moral values of religion in American politics, see Religion, Moral Authority and Conflicting Concepts of Legitimacy (July 1, 2017) at http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2017/07/religion-moral-authority-and.html.

A distinguished group of biblical scholars has recognized Thomas Jefferson as a pioneer in The Search for the Authentic Words of Jesus in The Five Gospels, New Translation and Commentary by Robert W. Funk, Roy W. Hoover, and The Jesus Seminar, at pages 2 and 3.   A Polebridge Press Book, McMillan Publishing Company, NY, 1993.  “The book is dedicated to Galileo Galilei, who altered our view of the heavens forever, Thomas Jefferson,  who took scissors and paste to the gospels, and David Freiedrich Strauss, who pioneered the quest for the historical Jesus.”     

David French has opined that  virtue (another word for morality) in political Christianity “bears little resemblance to the faith as described in the Bible. It seems as if there’s an almost mathematical equation at work — when you combine theology and ideology but subtract virtue, you’ve created a formula for viciousness and strife. Raise the stakes to an existential or eternal level, remove the restraints of kindness and self-control, and watch the worst of humanity emerge.  One of the most fascinating aspects of the Christian faith is the way Scripture treats both theology and virtue. The Bible is of course a complex theological book. But when it comes to identifying whether a person is in the grip of the “flesh” (i.e., worldly sinfulness) or exhibiting the influence of the Holy Spirit, it doesn’t emphasize theology but rather something much more simple: virtue and vice. In other words, even the most impeccable theological understandings are meaningless if they don’t result in Christian character.

Jesus said, “every good tree produces good fruit, but a bad tree produces bad fruit.” The conclusion is simple — beware the hateful, the people drawn to strife; embrace those who are kind and peaceful. Of course none of us are perfect, but those who follow Jesus should be marked by those virtues. Do those virtues mark the most prominent political Christians today? Do those virtues characterize political Christianity in the age of Trump? The answers are self-evident. At a time of extraordinary partisan polarization, a Christian message should demand that we love our enemies. (And what is love? Among other things, as we learn in Corinthians, “Love is patient, love is kind. Love does not envy, is not boastful, is not arrogant, is not rude, is not self-seeking, is not irritable, and does not keep a record of wrongs.”) Moments of political conflict such as this one should cause the church to blaze forth with countercultural radiance — a soothing balm in a sea of strife. But the dominant tone of contemporary American political Christianity is close to the opposite. It’s angry. It’s punitive. In many ways it positively delights in strife. The Christianity it embodies isn’t so much Christianity at all, but rather a religiously flavored authoritarianism that is proving to be red in tooth and claw, a political and cultural movement that embraces the “works of the flesh,” supposedly to accomplish the will of God. Political Christianity …sees threats to American faith primarily outside the church, creating a sense of siege. It casts kindness as weakness, creating incentives for aggression. And since it casts conflicts in the most existential of terms — its political opponents are not misguided fellow citizens, but literally demonic — it raises the temperature to the boiling point. As the popular Christian author Eric Metaxas told Donald Trump in November 2020, in the midst of the president’s efforts to overturn the election: “ God is with us.”

I spoke not long ago at a small gathering Christian pastors. When I asked for questions, I was struck by the fact that the first few were all about legal and cultural issues surrounding transgender Americans. I was happy to do my best to answer them, but I was struck by the immediate turn to that issue, beyond any other. It was impossible to miss the fact that so many minds were preoccupied with challenges to traditional Christian teaching from outside the church that seemed more distant and theoretical; and so few were focused on responding to immediate, near-universal challenges within its walls.

If theology minus virtue can equal violence, then perhaps theology plus virtue can enable justice. Look again at the fruit of the spirit. Love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control are incompatible with oppression. And while exhibiting that fruit does not guarantee that others will love or respect you, it does help us obey one of our highest calls: to love our neighbors as we love ourselves.  See Political Christianity Has Claws at  https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/24/opinion/political-christianity-has-claws.html.

See also, America Is Losing Religious Faith, https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/23/opinion/christianity-america-religion-secular.html.

Also, Musings of a Maverick Methodist on The Virtues and Vices of Christian Morality at http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2018/04/musings-of-maverick-methodist-on.html.

Pope Francis has said some “backward” conservatives in the US Catholic Church have replaced faith with [political] ideology.  See https://apnews.com/article/pope-francis-vatican-conservatives.By Rudy Barnes, Jr., September 2, 2023