Bringing Faith and Understanding to Mother Jones

It was really hard for me to figure out what to make of the Mother Jones’ article on Clinton and The Fellowship that has been generating some recent buzz.  (It’s not online, but some assessments of the piece are here and here. – Ed.)

I couldn’t help thinking of what Joseph said to his brothers when they reconciled:  “you meant these things for evil, but God meant them for good.”  I’m not in any way saying God had a hand in this article coming out, but I think for most of America, the article will have the opposite affect than what the authors intended.

Just look at the closing line of the article:  “When Clinton seeks guidance in prayer…she is not so much triangulating…as honoring her convictions.  In her own way, she is a true believer.”  The Clinton campaign couldn’t buy validation like that, but it is clear from the tone of the article that the authors think they are being critical of her (and it is very clear that this article is intended to hurt her through insinuation and guilt-by-association).  That is what I found both intriguing and troubling.  This article demonstrates how the fear of the unknown can lead to accusations that are nothing short of surreal.  It shows how completely clueless some on the left are about people of faith…and it shows how badly damaged we have allowed the witness of the Church to become where the mere mention of Christ’s name can generate such fear.

But let’s look at some of the things this article “outed” Hillary on. (1) She sponsored and passed legislation to fight human sex trafficking.  (2) She supported the Workplace Religious Freedom Act, which is a bill so popular that it is hard to find a religious organization from any faith perspective that hasn’t endorsed it (The Interfaith Alliance — hardly a Republican lapdog or opponent of separation! — has a page on their website explaining the bill and why they support it)  (3) She meets with 40 other Senators (including, gasp, a Jew!) every week to drink diet coke and read the Psalms.  (4) And she helped Mother Teresa set up an orphanage in DC.

I could actually see a Clinton campaign ad touting all those same accomplishments, but believe it or not, the authors used these things as proof that Hillary has sold out her liberal principles.  To me, the moment I realized these authors had moved several miles beyond the Democratic or American mainstream was when they start attacking Mother Teresa and used Hillary’s association with her and Hillary’s willingness to help her establish an orphanage in DC as proof Hillary has sold out to “Mother Teresa’s conservative Vatican order”!  I mean, come on…how many people have lived a life more dedicated to liberal principles of helping the poor and caring for the outcast than Mother Teresa did?  And what have we become if talking with and helping Mother Teresa is proof someone is not one of us?

Sadly, the reason for these attacks is made quite clear:  Hillary supposedly did these things based on her desire to follow Christ and be “led by God,” and some of the people she worked with to achieve these ends also participate in prayer groups that meet in private.

It is perfectly valid for reporters to question what is going on in more “secretive” groups on the Hill, but to assume something sinister because these groups aren’t praying in public is ridiculous.  For those who don’t know, the term “prayer cell” is common parlance in many Christian circles and has strong Biblical and historical roots.  But what I find remarkable about this critique is that those making it want to have it both ways.  You cannot argue that it is wrong for politicians to wear religion on their sleeves and pray from the street corners and then also turn around and criticize them for praying privately and not sharing everything that happens in a prayer meeting with the public…at least not, if you’re going to allow politicians to pray at all.

But I think that is the root issue.  We have reached a point where there are Democrats who are so scared of Christians that they fear anyone who would say they want to be led by God or who believe (as the authors say The Fellowship does) that politicians should seek to “transcend left and right with an ecumenical faith that transcends politics.”

We need to get past the politics of division, fear, and hate.  And sadly, this article exemplified the worst ways we use those tactics on the left.  It may take a while to mend some of the wounds that have been caused by the judgment and abuse of faith by the extreme religious right in the last few decades, but we can’t become a Party that blacklists people because they associate with “sinners” and others who don’t think exactly like us.  And we need to speak out against those within our ranks who do, lest Democrats become nothing but a different version of that which we fear.