I hear a lot of talk about this “unjust war” and that the military men and women don’t want this war. Well, that is not the truth. I am in the military and I support this war 100%. I guess it is only the ones that leave the military that are speaking out against it. The media, in general, only shows the “bad” side of the war and not the good that is going on over there. I will support the candidate that has the vision to see the long term effect of our actions and not the short term. I will not advocate the candidate who is merely looking to get into office and does not want to actually affect the good of the people, and I would ask all of you who are not in the military to not make assumptions on what, we who are serving, think or care about. I do not know one person, who I serve with, who is going to vote for Obama. You should think about that for a while.

My two cents,
Brian

when did God say it was ok to bear false witness? And why do we believe someone’s abortion stance when they are on youtube every other day saying something different than what they said yesterday?

Answer me that and I’ll withdraw my objection. Imo it both supporting neither side is what God wants, both are doing things that can be objectionable because they are human.

Excellent perspective Father Jonathan! I appreciate your analogy of the excessive use of the WWJD inquiries. As a committed follower of Jesus Christ, I do my best to deny myself, take up my cross and follow him as He said to do in Luke 9:23. I don’t think people fully want to know the answer to that question when they flippantly pose it. I think they use it as a copout rebuttal instead of actually pondering how Christ would handle circumstances of today. They might be shocked to hear the real answer. I myself may be humbled. I have been in past confrontations.

It seems clear that the difference is what we believe the role of the government is…

Non-Secularist = govt.’s job is to determine and define what is “common good” for it’s citizens

Secularist = govt.’s job is to protect human rights and liberties of it’s citizens

Interesting how such a small difference in definition amounts to such a big difference in social policy beliefs.

Father Johnathan:

Here’s my $.02. I wonder if Jim and Jill know the numbers of abortions done. Worldwide it is approximately 42 Million a year/approximately 115,000 a day. In the US alone, there are about 1.37 million a year and approximately 3,700 a day!!!! If you add up all the people who died in all the wars on all sides it won’t even come close.

And maybe they should pick up a bible and read it Ecclesiastes 3:1-8 for starters….. A time to love, and a time to hate; a time of war, and a time of peace.”

Many will stand in front of the Lord and He will say “get away from me you sinner, I do not know you.” If you take your eyes away from God, choose to follow only certain things in the bible that fit you and follow man’s law instead (ok to abortions, homosexuality, etc..) you may be the one that Jesus will not know, because you did not take time to know Him or His Father’s words. To know Jesus is to know God’s words. We are to take the cross and follow and God said that if you are lukewarm He will spit you out of his mouth. Follow God or follow man, your chose. Just leave the ones alone who choose to follow God.

Last time I checked, America is still a representative republic. As such, I am inclined to vote my representative to represent the values and ideals closest to my own. It is the responsibility of all American citizens to do the same. To decry someone else’s opinion with a personal attack simply because it differs from your own violates the representative ideal. Let’s disagree but keep it to the issues.

Fr. Jonathon has as much a right to express his opinions as anyone. I agree that the CHURCH should not, as an organization, endorse anyone, but, as an individual, one should speak their mind if they are so inclined. Me, I am not so thin skinned as to be offended if you disagree with me.

The way I see it, the separation of church and state is that concept that the government will not impose religion, any religion including global warming, on me as an individual. Goverment, being a secular institution, must still maintain the moral code for her citizens. In that, it is the responsibility of the government to maintain laws to keep us safe, equally applied to all to ensure opportunity and freedom, maintain the security of the borders and our freedoms we enjoy by employing the military in the best possible way.

It is the responsibility of the church to provide for the spiritual well-being of her members and provide a conduit for the care of the poor and infirm.

I will vote for the person that best reflects those beliefs, regardless of color, religion, race, creed, gender or party affiliation.

John

Secularists believe that everyone should have and opinion, but only if your in agreement with their opinion.

FATHER JONATHON,

WE LIVE IN A COMPLEX WORLD MADE MORE COMPLEX BY PEOPLE WHO LOVE TO TELL OTHERS WHAT TO DO, BUT THEN COMPLAIN WHEN SOMEONE TRIES TO GIVE THEM ADVICE. YES OUR GOVERNMENT WAS FOUNDED ON THE PRINCIPLE OF SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE, BUT NOT WITHOUT RELIGIOUS BELIEFS. THE FOUNDING FATHERS DEFINED A MORAL COMPASS FOR US IN TERMS OF HOW TO TREAT EACH OTHER, SOMETHING TODAYS ATHEISTS DON’T PRACTICE. UNLESS YOU HAVE A HIGHER PURPOSE IN LIFE, WHY SHOULD WE CARE ABOUT ANYONE BUT OURSELVES. MY COMPASSION FOR MY FAMILY, EXTENDED FAMILY AND OTHER INDIVIDUALS WAS PASSED DOWN FROM MY PARENTS, WHO ENCOURAGED US TO HELP OTHERS BECAUSE GOD WOULD WANT US TO AS A WAY OF SHARING THE BLESSINGS THAT WE HAVE BEEN GIVEN. WE DO NOT LIVE IN A PERFECT WORLD, AND EVERYDAY IS A CHALLENGE FOR ALL OF US. I JUST DON’T UNDERSTAND WHY PEOPLE (BOTH SUPER RELIGIOUS AND ATHEISTS) USE RELIGION AS A TOOL OF EVIL RATHER THAN GOOD. WE CAN LEGITIMATELY ARGUE THAT ORGANIZED RELIGION HAS BEEN MIS-USED BY INDIVIDUALS (I.E. THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AND SEX SCANDELS OR JIM BAKER AND HIS ISSUE), BUT WHY IS THAT USED AS A CLUB FOR THE ATHEISTS TO CONDEMN ALL RELIGIONS AND RELIGIOUS PEOPLE? MY DADDY USED TO SAY ‘IF YOU GET LEMONS, MAKE LEMONADE’. IN MY MIND, THAT MEANT THAT YOU AS AN INDIVIDUAL ARE NOT JUDGED BY WHAT HAPPENS TO YOU, BUT HOW WELL YOU RESPOND TO THOSE CHALLENGES.

OUR COUNTRY IS IN DIRE STRAIGHTS BECAUSE NO ONE IS AN AMERICAN FIRST. THEY ARE ____-AMERICANS, RELIGIOUS ZEOLOTS, AGNOSTICS DEMOCRATS, REPUBLICANS ETC. IF WE COLLECTIVELY SPENT MORE TIME WORKING TOGETHER, WE WOULD BE A LOT HAPPIER AND CERTAINLY BETTER INDIVIDUALS.

Jill - Jill - Jill,
The statistics clobber you on your point.
Iraq War - 5 yrs - 4,000+ casulaities
Abortions in just the US - same 5 yrs - knocking on 5,000,000 lost souls (at least).
Nobody wants to lose lives, but just remember there is a big difference when someone volunteers his life for his country, including for your freedom to have those abortions. Please tell me which one of the aborted children was given that same opportunity or that same choice?

Father John,

That was a good rebuttal to “Jill’s” comments. I enjoy reading your column every week. Please keep up the good work.

I’d also like to add that this country was founded by christian men that had no intention of separating church and state - in fact I would aruge that they wanted exactly the opposite of that. I’m not saying that we should/need to have a state supported/sanctioned church. But I am saying that life, in general, and more specifically a society, can not function without some sort of foundation based on good moral prinicples and governed by people who believe in the same. Look at all of the countries and governments that were not based on this and failed - communist countries are a good example of this - countries that either serverly limited or criminalized religion.

I would also agree that we should not vote for any candidate that does not support life. This one stand by a politican speaks volumes to their character and how they will conduct themselves and make decisions while in office. No real christian can say that abortion is right and anyone with any common sense and good moral values can either. I don’t want anyone in office that can’t realize something so simple.

War is always terrible, but I do not believe the Bible forbids war. Actually, I think that the Bible teaches us to free those who are oppressed, which is what the United States did for the oppressed people of Afghanistan and Iraq who were being raped and murdered by their former leaders. Those who died in these wars are not murderers, but heroes, who freed these oppressed people.

“Is not this the kind of fasting I have chosen: to loose the chains of injustice and untie the cords of the yoke, to set the oppressed free and break every yoke?” Isaiah 58:6

Father Jonathan,

I am saddened that anyone who considers themselves to be pro-life would retreat from the abortion debate and hide behind the mantra of personal choice. This thinking is cowardly. I’ve heard a thousand excuses for it, but in the end, we are as a society responsible for our moral choices, and I believe will be held accountable. I admire your courage in speaking out on these issues. Unfortunately, since 1973, the sanctity of life has become a political issue, and no moral or religious person should in good conscience absent themselves from the debate. If there is a conflict there, a lack of separation of church and state, and we should disengage on that basis, then we should not as a nation engage in acts of charity, acts of compassion or civility and we should not commit to justice, as these principles are all rooted in religion and faith, and therefore violate the “concept” of separation of church and state. Any cursory study of the law in this land reveals the DNA of Judeo-Christian values, and the moral and religious basis for our constitution.

John Adams said it best:

“Our constitution was made for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

May God bless you for your courage.

Wendy

Well, a Happy Father’s Day to you Fr. Jonathan from 1 of God’s children. The 2 “J’s” that e-mailed you have tremendously distorted view of the role of religion and the individual responsibilty we all have to vote our conscience for the good of society.. As a Vietnam era veteran when McCain says he hates war..I believe he does. However, wars are fought for moral reasons as well as immoral ones. Particularly in this era. I’m Catholic, proud of it and I try not to change my faith to fit my needs but rather in a less than perfect way try to live my faith. Pro- choice Catholics conveniently remove the fact that life begins at conception…no doubt about it and the killing of an unborn or as Obama supports even partial born child is not what Jesus would do. I used the term purposely and as someone else said who really knows what Jesus would do (although on this issue I think we can guess w/certainty.) Also, interesting how now it is pro-life and not anti-abortion or it is pro-choice and not abortion. The secular aspect of women’s rights has created a dilemma in our society far greater than war and led us into a greater level of moral decay. I have 3 very successful daughters who incidently are good people and are doing things for society that are positive for this world and country and a wife who was just a “mother” for all these years and now volunteers in a hospital doing chores there. This is a woman who was nominated for a Fulbright Scholarship and turned down her chance to study English History at the University of Reading in England in order to support me in my efforts to support our daughters. Perhaps the rambling about us does not fit well in the context of your theme but it might. After hearing Michelle Obama telling a group of students how we’ll all need to roll up our sleeves and work and change things from the bottom up and that Barack will DEMAND that we do that along with all of the socialized programs they want I am more supportive than ever for a McCain Presidency. We do not need the Marxist society that the U of Chicago radicals want that I saw 1st hand in 1966 and on in that area. This does not mean all of the area but the few Obama’s have determined to be associated with are radical, not just liberal. We need people like you Fr. Jonathan to keep us level and I appreciate you more than you can imagine. While I need to pray for myself and family I’ll pray for all who are on this Forum..whether I agree w/them or not. Peace, K

Fr. Jonathan,

Martin Luther King had a quote that I have on my wall, and it seems particularly appropriate here. “The Church must be reminded that it is not the master or the servant of the state, but rather the conscience of the state. It must be the guide and the critic of the state. If the church does not recapture its prophetic zeal, it will become an irrelevant social club without moral or spiritual authority.”

Vivat Jesus!
LeRoy Zacher
GySgt USMC Retired

Priceofliberty,

I’m sorry sir, check your hebrew. The comandment is not “Thou shalt not kill.” In the hebrew it is “Thou shalt not MURDER.” There is a difference. Next, check your biblical history. The Philistines, Cananites, et al were justly warred upon by God’s people. God is not against war, read Isiah 38, 39 too. Read the book of revelation, Jesus himself will lead the greatest battle the world has ever seen in the last days.

What is so upsetting about this is so-called righteous christians that are always refering to Jesus as the suffering servant. He was that, to be sure, but he is also the “Lion of the Tribe of Judah.” (Revelation) He is the God of “Sword and shield” (Psalms) and that image of God doesn’t sit well with the Christ-hippies & Sunday-service-peace-niks. I’m sorry, but God doesn’t care if you don’t want to see him that way. His self-proclaimed, “man after God’s own heart” King David, was a man’s man and a great WARRIOR who KILLED a lot of people in war, this was after the writing of the 10 Commandments mind you, and the ‘thou shalt not murder’ commandment too.

You cannot pick and choose, God is not one or the other. He is both the Prince of Peace, and the Lion of the Tribe of Judah. He’s not coming back to earth to wrap us in a big hug and talk about his differences with the people who chose to reject him, and hopefully convince them that He is God. When God comes back, he’s coming back to make war (Armageddon), and set up his Kingdom for all time. Finish reading the bible and get out of the Beatitudes and the suffering servant Jesus.

Finally, ‘thou shalt not bear false witness’ is not equal to ‘thou shalt not lie.’ False witness is making up testamony which convicts an innocent man. The terrorists, and Saddam are not innocent men and we have plenty of history for that conclusion. And furthermore, trusting in bad intelligence does not. I REPEAT, DOES NOT equal lying.

Fr. Jonathan, you’re a good debater! Yes, as you pointed out, there are minimum standandards. No, I would not vote for a holocaust denier either, because that would indicate an irrational point of view. I will have to think about this. I am not sure what my minimum standards are.

Father,

You are indeed correct that our church should participate in politics where biblical principles are at issue. Endorsing a candidate, however, can be accurately construed as being judgemental (or hypocritical), which mocks Jesus Himself.

But the church must stand on principls of right and wrong, setting the example for us to follow in our own personal lives with help from the Holy Spirit.

And whichever candidate endorses these beliefs… falls on the conscience and ultimate responsibility of each voter entering the booth, not the church.

Simply, render to Caesar that which is Caesar’s…

Very Respectfully,

Joe Starbuck
Maryville, TN

The founding father’s of this nation did not completely divorce their religious convictions from their politics. It’s against human nature to do so (or else you really don’t live what you believe).
There is so much ‘polical correctness’ these days it makes it very difficult to talk about anything (It’s no wonder we don’t know our neighbors- were afraid to speak for fear of offending!) .
The art of discussion doesn’t seem to be taught. Instead they have sensitivity training which in my opinion, amounts to telling us what we’re not allowed to talk about a kind of censorship I guess. Don’t get me wrong, there is certainly a right and a wrong way to talk about things, but instead of teaching us to ‘walk on eggshells’ about certain subjects, we (as a nation) need to learn about self control, discretion and respect.
Father, thank you for sharing your opinions. I’m grateful to hear what member’s of my church have to say about politics, including the priests. With all the information that’s thrown our way in this world it’s easy to lose sight of priorities like the hierachy you spoke about

I read with interest your comments on moral hierarchy. For a while at our church, we were hearing about the ‘culture of death’ in which were lumped the death penalty, abortion, euthanasia, stem cell research, and war. Our priests were adamant that these were all equally bad in God’s eyes.

As a catholic which has mixed views on some of these issues, namely the death penalty and stem cell (not embrionic) research, this put me in a difficult place. Thank you for your candor on this subject. Not all research is sinful, not all war is unjust, not all penalties are cruel and unusual. The ‘greater good’ sometimes needs to be considered when weighing our judgements.

Good weekend, God bless!

John

Happy Father’s Day Father Jonathan!

It amuses me how, as you pointed out, even Catholics use Jesus as a weapon. Obama had so-called Catholic advisors, who William McGurn of the Catholic League pointed out as frauds. As far as my Pro-Life stance, that is first and foremost how I vote. At least we are giving the fetus the chance to leave the womb. A responsible stance would also include providing as many opportunities as possible for the mother to be able to go full term and keep the child or send to a loving family for adoption.

You know yourself the conflicts faced today with the war. As McCain’s ad pointed out yesterday, he hates war. The Holy Father in his visit to the states did not chastise Bush on the war as many American journalists hoped he would. Instead they focused on the protection of Christians in Iraq and the Middle East, where this was impossible before we entered Iraq as well as human rights for all.

Properly handled from the beginning, there would not have been as many casualties. However, the threats issued by Saddam Hussein, his abuse of the Oil for Food, grievous human rights issues, etc. set his expiration date as a leader of a nation in this post-9/11 world. This could not have been rectified by dialogue or sanctions.

What frightens me about the fervor here in the states is that I am expected to vote against this president, regardless of whether I’m Pro-Life or not. I agree with much of what the Democrats stand for: better environmental consciousness, more support for the arts, better social programs, but it starts with conception.

Peace.

Father ,, stick to your guns,,any christian should be voting for pro-life canditate’s,,It can’t be any other way, You don’t have to mention party or canidate, just pro-life

Thank you Jay

I enjoy reading and thinking about your opinions concerning the upcoming presidential election. This helps me to make an educated decision. I don’t like the mantra WWJD either, to me it implies you can interpret his thoughts, actions, etc. I don’t think this is right for of any us. We have moral obligations and choices to make each and every day and if you keep the “Church” in your heart it will help steer you in the right direction. Happy Father’s Day to you and all of our Father’s who love us, protect us, enlighten us, and keep us from harm. God bless.

I am consistently disappointed when individuals make the claim that religious devotion must remain outside of public fare. The current premise for the separation of church and state flies in the face of the U.S. Constitution’s obvious interpretation.

I do not believe the founders intended for the written word of the Constitution to be redefinable in interpretation on a whim. A change or redefinition of the constitution is only possible by amendment and amending the constitution takes an incredible amount of support and forces a good balance so that no group can easily impose new definitions upon the citizenry without representation and consent.

To treat the non-amended text therefore as a breathing document capable of being reinterpretted outside of its obvious definition, to base new policy and practice on that premise without an amendment, and by doing so impose new definition of what is unconstitional upon the citizenry is contrary to the intent of the amendment process and is ironically a genuinely unconstitutional in action itself.
With that abuse being clearly obvious I am consistently down hearted at how little this glaring error in judgement is exposed and how little the general population actually seems to know or care about how their government is intended to work.

The separation of Church and State is not a constitutional guard. It involves both a broad reconstructionist misinterpretation of the first amendment and the improper use of Thomas Jefferson’s private “wall of separation” letter to the Danbury Baptist Association in 1802 as precedence to support the broad reinterpretation and “establishment clause” which is used today to limit public displays of religious belief.

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. ”

The Danbury letter reemphasizes the language of the amendment regarding religion, and then Jefferson as a private person gave his interpretation of “the wall”.
First, a private letter outside of the constitution, written by a founding father, is still a private letter and separate from the constitution language.
Second, Jefferson’s desire to separate Church and state is well known as so is his disagreement on the matter with other founding fathers who did not adhere to his ideal of a “wall” so his personal preference cannot be used as a trump over the intent of the other founders or of the final written product.
Third, an establishment clause has no authority to supercede the intent of the written language of the constitution without amendment.
Permitting such a clause to dictate and define the powers granted by the Constitution outside of the written constitutional language and outside of its clearly defined process of amendment is a usurpation of the legislative powers and denies the proper representative intent required for an amendment to the constitution.

Without the incorrect introduction of the “establishment clause” and without the use of “Broad Interpretation” as a weapon of limitation on the rights granted in the first amendment that precious portion of our freedom clearly reads that the government will set no one religion up as a state sanctioned religion but also that they will not limit the free exercise thereof.

This new broad interpretation uses the first portion of the amendment along with the establishment clause to wish away any religious person’s rights to practice publicly by ignoring the qualifier that permits free exercise. Can the government declare a state religion? “No”! Does this mean that the government is in violation if displays of religious belief are public? “No”! Is there any constitutional qualifier that defines government employees as non-religious during work hours or any other time? Also No!

There are a great many details that do remain in need of “hashing out” to fully define this premise. There must be understandable boundries for those in power, and a more equal floor given to all religions to avoid hypocricy. If these and other points can be qualified and adhered to though, there is no legal breech of the law in any way by permiting the free exercise of religion. There is in fact a greater breech of law in the denial of rights to any U.S. citizen who seeks to exercise their religious freedom in any way they see fit. And yes this can also go into a tangent on how such thinking would free up murderers, etc. There is time enough to think through those and I believe answers as well, just not right now as I have captilized to much on space in this comment. I would welcome free, open, and polite discussion.

To Roy

Every person’s journey to God is different. Religion provides a path instead of hacking through the jungle. You get out of it what you put into it - study.

Finally a voice of reason! If people knew the history of this country, they would be aware that at the beginning it was not uncommon for clergy to be invited to contribute their thoughts when issues were being considered. The purpose of the separation was not to keep the church from influencing the nation, but to keep the government from interfering with religious freedoms. I love the article. God bless you, Father Jonathan.

Stop revisionist history, like this country was founded by people escaping religious persecution. It wasn’t that was only a small community. It was started by rich countries and entrepreneurs forming a colony in order to make money by sending goods and products back to their home countries for purchase and trade. Then a bunch of people got angry over taxes and not having a say in their government. That’s it.

Are our public schools really to the point of teaching this garbage?

Father Jonathan,

As always, thank you for your voice. I think you must be very brave to put yourself out there week after week and stand up to the scrutiny. You are a wonderful man of God.

A thought I had on the idea “Jill” was using is that she seems really upset about the pain and suffering our soldiers go through from being in a war. And, as you point out, she seems to think that Obama is “pro-peace” and McCain is “pro-war”, which I am assuming makes McCain somewhat of an evil in her eyes. But she strongly expresses herself as a strong, practicing Catholic, so I wonder how she can feel that Americans are being so mistreated, when we have a freedom that Iraqis have never even tasted. As Christians, I believe it is our largest duty to help others, through prayer and acts. Protecting the innocent. And whether people agree on if we should have gone into Iraq in the first place or not, the fact remains that we ARE there, and have a job to finish. Trying our best to protect the people of Iraq and helping to create the freedom there that we have always had the leisure of here in America. I think it is human nature to want the best for yourself and to retain a bit of selfishness, but to be a person of God, you have to practice the act of humbling yourself and your own needs for others. In this case, I think our duty lies in helping the people of Iraq. It is the most heartbreaking fact of life that human suffering exists. And while all battles can’t be won, or even fought, this is a battle we are in, and a battle we have an obligation to fight.

I wonder how “Jill” would feel about our government if she were a woman living in Iraq right about now.

Thanks Father Jonathan!

God bless you!!!! I pray for your continued strength!

Amendment I “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abidging the fredom of speech, or the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to etition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

Now that the First Amendment has been read in its entirety (probably for the first time for many people), please let me know how it can be read to bar any religion from speaking on political issues. The framers of the Constitution did not accidentally include “free exercise” and “freedom of speech” in the same section. Father Jonathan, please continue to speak with your usual moral clarity and strength. The American Catholic Church has not had so influential a spokesman since the days of Bishop Fulton J. Sheen. And, yes, I use the word “influential” purposely, because our clergy is ordained for the purpose of influencing.

Please note that the phrase “separation of church and state” is not utilized. The government is only prohibited from establishing a state religion and barred from prohibiting the free exercise of religion. No limitations are placed upon religion.

God bless and protect you, Father. (Happy “Father’s” Day!)

Good grief! A surprising number of people took the time to read this column in order to tell Fr. Jonathan to shut up and go away! There is a simple solution to their problem — don’t read Fr. Jonathan’s future columns. At least not until you’ve developed some maturity.

Comment by fred
June 12th, 2008 at 4:22 pm
“All I want to say is that anyone who calls themself a Christian and votes for a Democrat is not a Christian. I’m not saying that they should vote Republican, but don’t try to convince me that you can support homosexuality and abortion and still be a Christian.”

Fred can’t one vote Democrat as a Christian for peoples right not to be a Christian?

I often wonder if when someone writes ” What would Jesus do ” it wouldn’t be more appropiate to state ” What will Jesus say and do to me for what I have said and done”. God bless

Good Article, Father!

SC, I completely agree with you.

I have some problems with the abortion issue. The more I learn about it the more I find that it applies to a variety of circumstances. What about the mother who has to make the choice of her child dying slowly and painfully days after birth or getting a partial birth abortion to spare her child the pain? What about the rape victim (especially a pre-teen one)? It just seems that saying it’s always right or always wrong over simplifies it. Any thoughts? Thanks!

Father Jonathan,

I am grieved by the emails that use use in your comments. I am not surprised by them.

Pastors are shepherds. Anyone who considers the word shepherd and what it means in practice will unavoidably discover the obligation of the shepherd to protect the flock from perceived danger. To think for a moment that a shepherd should or could stand aside silently whilst a threat to the spiritual or physical well being of their flock lacks understanding. Further, it saddens me to think that anyone could be born and raised in the church and even contemplate that the clergy does not have an obligation to speak on issues that affect their flocks.

I appreciate your insights and the courage that it takes to express them.

Fr. Jonathan - your columns are a true light in an otherwise murky miasma of opinions. I find in them as honest a presentation of relevant facts in a real, moral, and spiritual context as I have seen: i.e., you present Truth to the best of your ability. May God bless you richly with His Wisdom as you continue to do this.

Your opening statement (”The growing trend by some secularists of trying to silence all moral voices (with the exception of their own) in relation to social policy is tantamount to a new strand of fascism…”) particularly struck home after reading about the suppression of truth in Canada (http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/06/11/america/hate.php). That is a deeply concerning situation.

Father Johnathan, i wrote you an email some time ago explaining my husband was a soldier in Iraq. You offered much support to my husband for serving our country. So all these negative people are full of balony and dont know what there talking abot. God Bless you Father….Keep up the Good Lords work. Best Regards from Vermont. Leslie

Bev,

You deserved it. Let me tell you a little bit of truth that you’re not going to want to believe. Being homosexual is NATURAL. We’re born this way. I didn’t decide, I didn’t choose. I’m just what I was made. Every time you say that being born gay is a sin, like lying and adultery, you should be attacked. That’s a contemptible vulgar LIE. You christians are so quick to use your ‘morality’ to justify your hatred of us aren’t you? This article wasn’t even about the evils of us homos, and yet look how many of you took the opportunity to proclaim how much a sin it is to be born gay. I suppose that means I get to say that being a woman is a sin if I want to then? Or black? Oh no, because it’s simple to see that difference and if it’s not simple enough for you to see it, well then it must be ok to hate. Does that about sum it up. Want to know what’s immoral and a sin? How about ostracizing and hating people you don’t understand just because they’re born differently. Smells more like a sin than how much in love I am. You people are sick.

d

Father Jonathan and other interested readers,

It’s refreshing to see such candid talk of the election and it’s repercussions regarding religion. I was raised Catholic, however now I do not affiliate myself with any specific denomiation of Christianity. Instead, I simply consider myself a follower of the teachings of Jesus Christ.

Having said that, it is tough being Christian (or a member of any religion for that matter) and having a voice in the political world. I think many people forget that even as Christians we have as much a right to include our faith in the political world as people who choose to leave faith or believe in a god out. Might I remind people of the first amendment which delcares that we have the right to our expression of beliefs, the ability to meet in assemblies to express those rights, and therefore the ability and right to include them in the voting process. If we were to do anything less it would be against everything that America was founded on (including freedom of religion and speech).

I agree that churches should not declare who they thing their congregations. I also believe that the leaders of their individual churches should encourage their members to actively voice their opinions through voting because of their faith. To do anything less would be slander of the Constitution which separates the church government from the federal government, but encourages the individual person to explore their beliefs and exercise those beliefs through freedom of speech.

I am still not certain who I will vote for this November, but I will DEFINITELY be seeking God to help me decide who will be the best candidate to lead our country for the next four years.

In Christ,
Brett from VA

“For God so loved the world that He gave His one and only Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life.”
John 3:16

“Provide purses for yourselves that will not wear out, a treasure in heaven that will not be exhausted, where no thief comes near and no moth destroys. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.”
Luke 12: 33 - 34

Thank you, Father, for this very well thought out and well written essay. As a lay-speaker in the Methodist system (a system that seems to be leaning futher and further left of center) I must say that what you have touched on has been one of my sticking points for years.
“Jim’s” letter smacks of a double standard. As Christians we’re told that we must check out beliefs at the door, forgetting everything that has shaped us into the people who Christ wants us to be while those who hold no belief in the One True God aren’t told to do the same. I’m not supposing that “Jim” is aetheistic, but I have always found it interesting that aetheists say they have no belief in God. Aren’t they taking that supposition on faith? I have the evidence that our God exists and so far they have no evidence that He doesn’t. Aetheism, therefore, at it’s root is a faith, yet they aren’t told to check their beliefs at the door of any debate concerning government. Nor are those of other religions or belief systems. This standard only works for Christians. John Wesley told us not to demonize our enemies, and I don’t believe “Jim” to be anything other than ignorant of his own argument, but who truly benefits from oppressing the Truth, Jesus being that Truth? Is that the real reason Christians are the butt of these rants and not other religions or beliefs?
As for “Jill” so much is wrong with her argument from a theological stand point, especially the compartmentilzation of the whole “WWJD” ideology. What would Jesus do? Taking the Bible as a whole (as it should be) we see that Jesus, son of God and One True God, would do what is righteous, not what we would have Him do. “Jill’s” argument is to put Jesus in a box that fits her beliefs, putting Jesus into a nice little context that she can wrap herself around, holding Him to her own narrow view point that would make her feel comfortable about herself.
I have been in churches and met my Brothers and Sisters who would be like “Jill.” In their prayers they demand things of God as if He was some giant vending machine who would give us what we want. Insert prayer, push a button, and voila, He answers our prayer. Even as they say the Lord’s Prayer and “thy will be done.” We can’t have it both ways. We can’t compartmentilize God by treating Him as if He owes us something and then turn around as say “thy will be done..”

Father Jonathan, Pro Life views may be important to the church, but I feel that ignoring McCains stance on the war ignores 2 parts of God’s Commandments:

You shall not kill. — I’d think that God would want us out of Iraq, because we aren’t helping the issue. Whe are making it worse by staying. Our troops and Iraqis are getting killed. Staying there incourages it. We should not overlook this because of our stance on abortion.

You shall not bear false witness. — Where do we start on this… This is why I won’t vote for McCain. McCain frequently will say one thing one day and say something different the next day and get you tubed. Several “conservative” sites have been making less than truthful statements about his opponent and treating them like the truth.

Then there is also the refusal to give communion to an Obama supporter. From my understanding of canon law that priest should be repremanded. There is the Double Standard Doctrine which allows for you to support someone even if you don’t completely agree with them. At worst it would be material not actual which means the person had no way of influencing Obama’s opinion on Abortion. We lutheran’s would say that this is in the Left Hand Kingdom and its not perfect.

I think as long as the church(roman catholic, lutheran, etc) over looks these other issues they should stay out of politics.

I cringe to think of where this country would be if our founding fathers were not men of strong moral leaning and good conscience. Without it there can be no self governance, such as democracy. And the dignity of the individual (life) is paramount for a self governing people. We fall into uncivilized behavior without it. John Paul II wrote much about this, as Did George Weigel and others.

As much as you may hate to admit it, Jill, you are criticizing the very foundation of what makes a man or country great. There is no better place for formation of conscience than the teachings of Christ and the Church. Any great theologian who is honestly searching for the truth will acknowledge this. The evidence is everywhere if you stop to look and really see.

Wisdom comes with faith. They go hand-in-hand. It is the tool that is paramount to creating a just and civil society. Obama is so very far from being a competent leader of this great nation that it is frightening.

Dear Father Jonathan,

What really scares me is that our country’s leaders are going to be chosen by people like Jim and Jill who do not take the time to fully learn and understand the issues facing our nation today.. Let’s start with Jill. Before we invaded Iraq, Saddam Hussein had; Used Chemical weapons against Iran in the Iraq-Iran war, Invaded and looted Kuwait, Used Chemical weapons on his own people, Repeatedly violated United Nations Resolutions and by his own account, portrayed to the world that he was still in possession and developing Weapons of Mass Destruction in order to remain a powerful force in the region. How can Jill define the War in Iraq as Un-just? The United Nations authorized the use of force against Iraq for Iraq’s non-compliance. What other justification does Jill think was needed?
Apparently, St Francis High School should re-evaluate its History program, as Jill does not see how Obama’s immediate withdrawal of troops will leave Iraq in disarray much like Germany was after WW I. Compare this to McCain’s vision of remaining in Iraq until it has a stable government, military and ecconomy like the Marshall Plan did for Europe after WW II. Your comments about the war Father are absolutely correct. Regardless of if you believe getting involved in the war is Right or Wrong, we are there and we have a responsibility to leave Iraq in a stable state.
Now let’s turn to Jim’s comments. I suggest that Jim sit down some night and carefully read the Declaration of Independance. The terms ‘equal station to which the Laws of Nature and Laws of God entitle them’ and ‘endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights’ clearly indicate that government cannot be separated from Religious morals. Far too often in this country is this notion of a ‘Separation between Church and State’ used to try to pry religious ideas from our society.. Jim should also read the Constitution of the United States of America. Nowhere in that document will you find the term ‘Separation of Church and State’. All you will see is that the Goverment shall not support nor restrict the practice of religion.. Our Founding Father’s clearly believed that a supreme being existed and that the morals that stem from religion are the foundation of good government. What the founders did not want was the ‘Church of America’ that was a political post where people could be arrested if their beliefs differred from the Church’s whe way that the Church of England and the Archbishop of Cantebury did back in Britian.

God Bless The United States of America

Mike In CT

When standards of absolute right and wrong are lacking, any otherwise unthinkable behavior becomes possible. If there is no absolute right and wrong, who is to say that murder is wrong? Maybe murder under certain conditions will become OK some day. Who is to say that abuse of a child is wrong? After all, we have groups in this country now who are pushing for sexual activity with children to be legalized, or at least accepted.

If the ultimate standard is to be what society views as right and wrong, eventually every perversion of human existence will make its way through society with the blessings of government. After all, look at the “rights” granted by the highest court in the land. Who would have thought in 1900 that abortion on demand would be accepted generally and even encouraged by some? Who would have thought that the discomfort of a few would be able to rule the values and lives of many?

Evolution teaches that humanity is its own self-determiner. Christ taught that man is subject to higher law, whether acknowledged or not. As Christians, we MUST interject ourselves into the world beyond the church doors, including the political arena, or the very influence that Christ, to show the world that the higher law exists and consequences are profound for those who do not follow, sought to have on the world is nullified.

No, we cannot save humanity for God’s kingdom through politics, but Christians who are active in politics and the propounding of political ideas that support the kingdom can certainly shine a light for Christ on this earth. Absolute right and wrong must not only be acknowledged, but also must be propogated into the public square in all its arenas.

Why don’t my comments get posted on here? I have posted twice today praising Fr. Jonathan and adding a postscript. Am I chopped liver?

It appears that Jim has drifted through live unable to form intelligent decisions in his mind. His thought of church on Sunday leds one to think that he thinks this is the only day for following the Lords words. As for Jill. She states she is a Catholic, yet, she is in denial of her faith or else does not understand the choice she made to become a Catholic. From my limited understanding of most all the religions on earth - abortion is a sin!

How anyone could vote for a person who supports abortions is beyond my understanding. Rule number one for any voter is to ask the question - What does this candidate really and truly stand for and belive in. I am afraid that Senator Obama is seriously lacking in many areas to get my vote.

The American public has been led down a wild goose chase by the Democrat Party over the Iraq war and the underlying reasons for it to happen. This was all about them getting elected into office so they could aid their sponsors in what is well known as pork spending. This is quite plain for all to see as they added billions on the funding for the military that has nothing to do with the military at all. However, the average voters never real or listen to anyone who explains as the main stream media in America is for the Democrats. This is all about having power to control the people and raise taxes higher as it has already been stated.

As for how Jesus would handle this is really a terrific question. From the scriptures He never seem to handle things the way his disciples thought he should, but, then he was answering to a higher authority than us morals and his rules are absolute truth.

Keep up the good work and I certainly enjoyed reading the comments made from others as it gives me items to reflect on as I go about my daily living.

What would Jesus do? In thinking along those lines maybe voters should start asking what would Obama do? What would McCain do? If we were in dire straits such as those people who are experiencing floods in the Midwest, who do we want to depend on in a time of crises? Who has a reputation for getting things done? In dealing with oil producing countries, whose expertise do we need? In dealing with food shortages, high fuel costs, home foreclosures, who has a plan? If he who can, won’t or he who can’t would if he could…we would be in no better position with either. Do we need to follow an uncharted course? Do we need the inexperienced charting their own course? Regardless, we need to know exactly what the plan is. I have found in my experiences that when people don’t talk, it is usually because they have nothing to say…and that’s not always a good thing. It may be a good time for a strong independent candidate to launch his candidacy is my thought at the moment.

Fox News is just as guilty. Why have they not apologized for this slander? The nominees are set. I’d like to see members of the media (particularly Fox because I used to like them) go back and apologize for the hurtful and ignorant things they side while pushing their favorite candidate. If the media was so right about their opinions, Guiliani and Clinton would be nominees.

here is an example of the lies they told and perpetuated until they became “issues”.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bFYqtDL50AM

The question is not “What would Jesus do?” The question is “What does Jesus want me to do!”

I would like to add that I am glad that you became a priest too, as did another poster. When I worked at a major hospital, I had to transcribe many abortions, against my will naturally, and they were horrific. Anyone with any sort of humanity could not in good conscience vote for someone who is for abortion.

Good for you, Father Jonathan

I am glad someone like you is promoting moral values; I was in a real quandary regarding who to vote for; I have a big problem with scrupulosity and was hoping I wasn’t being racist in not voting for Barry Obama. I am pro-life, anti gay marriage and immorality and even though I do not like war, have got to either abstain from voting or if push comes to shove, vote for John McCain, whom I believe is a moral man and reflects what we were taught in school (and yes, I am a convert).

Thank you for your insightful thoughts on this matter. You have lifted a big burden from my shoulders. I have to vote with my conscience. I did not do this the last time and am sorry for it.

“The United States now has special obligations to the Iraqi people, regardless of the decision to invade the country” , I am getting really confused here : a large section of AMericans believe the US troops are there for the good of the Iraqis and on the other hands I read the Iraqis do not want the US troops in their own country.
What about getting the Iraqis to vote to get rid of or keep US troops in their own countries ? This will definitely clear up my mind .
Yes I agree with JIM , the Church,Mosque or Synago